RideRed
Vista needs a popup blocker for Vista
Premium
join:2005-06-18
USA
| Looks to me that...
...telcos were able to grab more customers (compared to cable during the same time period) NOT by faster speeds but by lower prices.
Speed isn't everything contrary to Brian "BMW" Robert's claims.
--
There's only 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't. |
|
CLEVELTECH
join:2006-12-21
02107 | REPONSE
I agree that speed isn't everything. If this is true, then it's a matter of time before Verizon FIOS comes into my area. SO LONG Comcrap. |
|
Defcon888
Premium
join:2003-07-22
San Bruno, CA
 ·AT&T Yahoo
·DSL EXTREME
| I was recently...
...looking into switching over to Comcast HSI... but the prices drove me away. I will switch back to at&t DSL (currently using DSLExtreme) because it's cheaper.
--
defcon888@gmail.com
send me spam! |
|
DSLupload
| Upload
Not the upload war(hope there will be one). |
|
NOCMan
Verizon Fios User
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Flower Mound, TX | Bottom Line On This Arguement
Who owns the circuits that ties your network together?
Telco...
There you go.
--
Ubuntu Tips »www.ubuntutips.org |
|
bamabrad
join:2006-01-27
Port Orange, FL | Speed is already in place
I think the next upgrade needed will be the ability to handle traffic loads-and which model now handles that situation? |
|
plk
bo may sleep in loft
Premium
join:2002-04-20
Ogden, IA
| guessing what he said
I'm going to guess what he is saying.
The phone company is a day late and a dollar short. Fios aside, the Bells answer (vdsl flavors) will fall short of what cable already has. In 2009 when analog TV goes bye bye, the cables will find it easy to do away with analog and at the same time shift the blame. This will free up a ton of bandwidth with little to no costs. They will need to shell out some digital converters. Something they have wanted for years.
So then cable will have some added bandwidth for HDTV and more bandwidth for HSI before even rolling out DOCSIS 3.0.
Meanwhile, the Bells solution is half azzed just to try and keep up. ie VDSL etc. Many folks have mentioned this method will not cover multiple TV homes and still allow a fast Internet connection. FTTH, the only real solution for the Bells will be in short supply and take years for the Bells to deploy. Like I have said for years, if the Bells don't deploy FTTH or some serious innovation saves them, they are done. The fools should of went balls to the wall deploying FTTH in 2002 before VoIP took off. Now they are offering DSL at a discount to just say in the game. This isn't going to solve a damn thing but keep the shareholders happy until the bottom falls out of it.
From my prospective, the Bells are damn near doomed. If they don't deploy FTTH and damn soon, they will have little cash flow or capital left to really do so in a meaningful way to save their butt. TV isn't going to be a saving cash cow especially the way they are doing it. ie half azzed technology with lack of bandwidth. Poor lines and all the work involved to share a hand full of homes. Its just not worth trying to milk a old copper system for no real gain and more then likely a business failure. Unless they come up with 100mbps via copper fast.
Like others have mentioned, the Bells will get their heads out of their ___ and see "its fiber or die". And it maybe to late. FIOS is going to save one company if shareholders tough it out for the ride.
--
Thermaltake 2000a/Asus P4C-e/p4 3.4/ocz3500 2x512/WD.2x200g/raptor2x74 raid 0/ATI 9600/APC sua 1500/Logitech z-680/ Samsung 213t LCD/MX 1000 |
|
smcallah
join:2004-08-05
Home
| reply to NOCMan
Re: Bottom Line On This Arguement
That's becoming less and less the case all of the time. The 2 largest cable companies own their own dark fiber, and light it with their own equipment.
They are not totally independent of telco circuits at this time, but they're working towards that. Just about the only telco circuits that they have are circuits for external peering. |
|
richardpor
Fur it up
join:2003-04-19
Portland, OR | All So True
As long as Fiber to the Home means fiber to ONLY to single occupancy homes cable will have the edge. The only saving grace will be DSL on the low end for those who do not need faster speeds. |
|
bigjimc
join:2003-04-21
Middleboro, MA
| FTTH by AT&T
I thought AT&T is now considering FTTH in the next 12 to 18 months.
Wait is AT&T a phone company or a cable company or a a wireless company?? I keep forgetting .
Using copper to the home and in the home will definitely limit bandwidth but it will keep the internet from filling all of their "tubes" (will that tubes thing ever die?).
--
Just my 2 cents...Flame Lightly... |
|
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
 ·Verizon FIOS
4 edits | reply to plk
Re: guessing what he said
The problem with your analysis is that DSL is just fine for most internet users. Which explains why the telco's continue to sign more customers than the cable companies every quarter. I do agree that in 5 - 10 years telcos had better have FTTH to all the major MSA's, but they're far from "damn near doomed".
DSL is the voip of HSI. It's the cheap alternative, that works just about as good. You wouldn't want to run a small business multi line customer service center off HSI voip, just like you would want to serve online software sales off of a 3mb DSL line when a 8mb HSI line is available. (actually that's a terrible analogy because their U/L are probably the same, but I'm sure you could think of something that greater DL is useful for) Sure you COULD do either, but one is definitely superior to the other under limited, power-user, circumstances.
As for TV, well as you said, there's no money to be made here.  |
|
Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
clubs: 
| reply to Defcon888
Re: I was recently...
I fail to see how DSL is the better value versus cable.
If someone subscribes to AT&T's 3000k service, (that is really 2.4 in disguise factoring in the overhead)..
they're going to pay 25.00 per month for it.
Add to that the 20.00 per month phone line that someone HAS to have in order to get the service..and you are now at 2.00 more per month than Comcasts 6000/384k standard service (that with powerboost gives up to 12,000 +/- at times).
You are getting over twice the speeds..and many times up to FIVE times the speed of that DSL connection for less money.
Take that same scenario up to AT&T's 6,000k dsl (5200k in disguise) connection (for those that would even qualify)..and you are now at 34.95 + the phone line...or MORE than Comcasts standard tier pricing.
The telco's dsl is only cheaper because their required, way overpriced..landline business is subsidizing it.
And, it's only cheaper because people are in most instances, getting far less speeds than they would with cable.
By using Vonage and dumping AT&T and their traditional landline/long distance service..I now save 50 to 60.00 per month just on that alone.
This savings single handedly pays for my entire Comcast 8000/768k connection each month (52.95 for this level of service).
And so now, for this price, I get speeds with powerboost of up to 20,000k on the download side.
This package simply blows away any dsl/telco/long distance package you want to throw at it in terms of speeds and pricing.
I think that the majority of cable customers today have thought this whole thing through and have found that cable really does provide the speeds..and value overall..particularly when packaged properly with a voip service as well.
I realize that there may be some who don't subscribe to cable tv for whom cable HSI would be more and, other variations to the above that might make dsl make a little more sense, but overall when you factor in the required pots line..dsl just comes out to be one expensive service for the speeds compared to cable most of the time.
I think the telco's could stand to gain quite a bit more business if they would just drop the phone requirement.
Undoubtedly some cable customers would then migrate to dsl and find that a 3,000k 25.00 connection was sufficient for them.
And, conversely, I really don't understand why most cable companies don't venture off into the lower speed tiers and compete more effectively with the slower speed dsl tiers.
They could undoubtedly take many customers from the telco's.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
 ·Comcast
| El Cheapo
While some people are into the cheapest line available, I'm more into "Bang-for-buck".
*HERE*, at this point in time, Comcast is providing me with the most for my internet dollar.
Per month outlay is more than say, SBC/AT&T DSL, but what I get per dollar spent is WAY better than anything SBC/AT&T can dream about!
You do the math!
$52.95 - 8mbps
$14.95 - 1.5mbps(if I'm within distance limitations)
Even if I were still on the basic package @ $42.95, that is 6mbps... and I could get it!
I pay the $10.00 extra per month for 8mbps... ask anyone here - I get all of it!
DSL? Uhm, no! No Thanks!
Of course, YMMV.
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
WiseOldNerd
De gustibus non est disputandum
Premium
join:2001-11-25
Phoenix, AZ
·Cox HSI
·Qwest.net
·Charter Pipeline
| DSL STill Serves A Major Need
As long as cable companies restrict servers and block ports (except on the very expensive business lines)DSL will continue to be the choice of small to medium businesses, and the technically oriented user. It enables the use of Small Business Servers, it provides adequate speed for virtually all needs, and it allows for the use of static IP addresses. It is not perfect but it just works and works well.
--
Promote the radical middle |
|
markopoleo
join:2003-04-02
Bonne Terre, MO | reply to Rick
Re: I was recently...
You also forget that cable providers also charge for NOT having cable TV from them, with Charter its $10 extra a month on top of HSI, I heard with some its $15-20. |
|
Chuckles
Premium
join:2006-03-04
Saint Paul, MN | Yahoo!
CABLE! CABLE! CABLE! |
|
Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
clubs:
| reply to markopoleo
Re: I was recently...
said by markopoleo  :You also forget that cable providers also charge for NOT having cable TV from them, with Charter its $10 extra a month on top of HSI, I heard with some its $15-20. I didn't forget. I did mention that.
"I realize that there may be some who don't subscribe to cable tv for whom cable HSI would be more "
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! |
|
kyramilan
join:2006-11-26
Pensacola, FL
| reply to dadkins
Re: El Cheapo
That's the problem with DSL. Unless you are close, you don't even get the "up to" speeds.
I had 1.5 DSL once with VZ. I was getting 1.1 down so that is only a little over 2/3rds of what I was paying for. I still had to pay the landline.
This is the issue: it depends on the person. But, as apps require more speed I think DSL loses out in the long run.
Eventually, I really don't think Cable is going to be scared of FIOS with the new standard Cable is coming up with.
And, I really doubt FIOS is charging a real price yet just a "get onboard" price. |
|
kyler13
Is your fiber grounded?
join:2006-12-12
Arnold, MD
| Huh?!?
Wait a minute, I thought FIOS was getting slammed for ignoring the urban/city areas (AKA where DSL works best). Now this report says they're delpoying fiber where DSL works best? That doesn't make any sense. FIOS was deployed in my neighborhood and much of suburban MD where too many people don't have good proximity to their CO. That is where FIOS works best, not DSL. |
|
oldduke
join:2001-06-15
Gulf Breeze, FL
·AT&T Southeast
| Cable NOT
It's reliability for me. After hurricanes, the Bellsouth land lines are the only thing working -- no power, no cell, no cable, no water, no sewer. I'll trade a little speed (which I'll never notice anyway) and a couple of bucks for the Bellsouth guys out on the street while the wind is still blowing.
--
Cogito ergo sum, I think. |
|
