Mactron
el camino Real
Premium
join:2001-12-16
CM94sv
| DOA
"It was never even an also-ran technology, because it didn't run much."
Technically flawed, economically impossible, this "Pipe Dream" never had a chance. 
Good bye, good riddance. 
--
If only the Verizon CSRs worked this well. |
|
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| It was worth a try
Technologies always look impossible at first. Who would have thought that unlicensed WiFi would be so popular and useful? Besides us DSLR people of course ;p
The important thing is that BPL didn't get past the trial stage, once all the problems with it was clear. It took a lot of protests and complaints, but things turned out right this time. |
|
titoyay222
Premium
join:2005-04-27
Cincinnati, OH
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| I have BPL here in cincy (current communications). It has been a great service but I also subscribe to TWC RR service. That's my main connection. I only used my BPL service when RR was down or inconvenient for me to hook up to my switch.
It's a good service whenever I used it. Pings were usually low in the mid 30's. On occasion it would have lag spikes up to 80 or so. I'm not sure what was up with that.
I'm not sure what they mean by failed though... according to the current site they are expanding to Texas. It's a new section they added recently. So is the FCC going to be stopping this tech. or what? |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| never a serious contender
BPL was never a serious broadband alternative and was only pushed by the FCC for political reasons.
In that respect, it appears to have served it's purpose of masking the non-competitive nature of the U.S. broadband market and fooling congress into believing the FCC and incumbent's pronouncements of a "competitive market".
it didn't do so well at providing affordable broadband to the public. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| reply to titoyay222
Re: It was worth a try
said by titoyay222  :... So is the FCC going to be stopping this tech. or what? It's not up to the FCC to stop or allow BPL, they (really Powell, then Martin) were just pushing this as proof there was "competition". BPL simply seems to be failing in the marketplace, except for a few existing deployments.
the FCC touted BPL as the "third broadband provider" to compete with telco and cable; it never was and never will be anything other than a niche product in a few markets. |
|
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA
1 edit | Next Autopsy Will be for Mobile WSDs!
The FCC has already chosen unlicensed mobile white space devices as their next impossible dream to be the elusive third pipe. Fixed WSDs will help very rural areas but unless television broadcasting goes away it will never work in congested urban and suburban areas. As long as the government allows there to be no real competition over the existing copper infrastructure a broadband duopoly is the best we will have in the USA. |
|
SierraRob
join:2007-01-10
Prather, CA | reply to nasadude
Re: never a serious contender
I don't understand why FCC needs BPL for this purpose, as they can always point to satellite "broadband", which covers 100% of the country. "See? Everyone has broadband! The free market rocks!" |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ | Good riddance
We need to be pushing fiber, not BPL.
Even terrestrial wireless is better.
BPL was like building an 8 lane highway out of horse manure. |
|
jay_rm
join:2002-04-12
Netville | BPL
Where is Amigo_Boy ?
You'd think he'd be here bashing amateur radio for helping bury his favorite technology !
--
3500/512 5.7 GHz Motorola Canopy Wireless; FoxValley.net
"Peace through superior firepower" |
|
T1 Rocky
join:2002-11-15
Dallas, TX
·Time Warner Cable
1 edit | reply to titoyay222
Re: It was worth a try
said by titoyay222 :I'm not sure what they mean by failed though... according to the current site they are expanding to Texas. It's a new section they added recently. So is the FCC going to be stopping this tech. or what? They sold the Texas network in Dallas to a power company who is now going to use all of the millions of dollars of fiber to.....read meters remotely. Yep that's right. 100 Mbps of how many watts people are using.
So while I have 100 Mbps to my power meter, I have the awesome choices of $50 per month for 784Kbps from Time Warner or $90 per month for 784Kbps dsl from AT&T (and they throw in a phone line so I can call my cell phone and find it when its lost inside the house.) Free enterprise rules!!!
We'll miss you pipe dream BPL. You were our only hope. |
|
shindig
@munet.com
| it ain't dead.....
bpl isn't dead by a long shot. it already has and will continure to morph into a technology that is specifically geared to smart grid and advanced metering applications....with some ip applications in tow. it will never compete with fttx, but it dosen't have to. utilities who are interested in having ethernet connectivity on every inch of their grid for internal applications will drive next generation bpl. book it. |
|
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC | reply to titoyay222
Re: It was worth a try
Now I feel silly, I didn't know they were actually allowing it to run. Got any static on your TV? |
|
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| reply to shindig
Re: it ain't dead.....
said by shindig :
bpl isn't dead by a long shot. it already has and will continure to morph into a technology that is specifically geared to smart grid and advanced metering applications....with some ip applications in tow. it will never compete with fttx, but it dosen't have to. utilities who are interested in having ethernet connectivity on every inch of their grid for internal applications will drive next generation bpl. book it.
BPL has been there for many years, only at a low data rate and has been used for many control functions (PLC or power line controller/communication). Now with the higher data rate, they can poll all the meters and track your usage and perform billing actions without paying a meter reader. And a side affect that many folks forget or do not know, the utilities want to implement a tiered charge system, one where if the demand is high, you pay a higher rate, if the demand is low, you pay a lower rate, and the faster BPL will allow that. Plus, compared to Internet usage, that data rate is still MUCH lower with less losses and interference.
As far as true Internet access using BPL type technology coming around for the masses, not until the physical item called a power transmission line changes from what it is today. It was never designed to work at data frequencies and even at the power frequencies of 50/60 Hz you still get interference under certain conditions. And I will not get into skin effect, impedance, resistance, and other transmission issues and why power is transmitted the way it is and why we have coax and twisted pair lines for higher frequencies (plus our favorite, fiber). So your point on "ethernet connectivity on every inch of their grid for internal applications" is probably why BPL was the holy grail, get it built out under a different account and not take a hit on the utility side financial's.
And yes, I know that the last paragraph is a bit run on, but it is dinner time. CHOW!
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| what does FiOS and U-verse have to do with BPL?
BPL was seen as a hope for rural broadband. FiOS and U-Verse will NEVER serve rural areas.
While some are appearantly enjoying a perverse pleasure in BPLs death, the fact is the 20% of Americans that live in rural areas will still only have dial-up for internet in 2020. Sorry mobile internet and it's 5 GB caps and $256 per GB overage charges and satelite and it's $60 1 Mbps tiers with 10 GB caps and high latency are not REAL solutions. |
|
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| said by BF69 :BPL was seen as a hope for rural broadband. FiOS and U-Verse will NEVER serve rural areas. While some are appearantly enjoying a perverse pleasure in BPLs death, the fact is the 20% of Americans that live in rural areas will still only have dial-up for internet in 2020. Sorry mobile internet and it's 5 GB caps and $256 per GB overage charges and satelite and it's $60 1 Mbps tiers with 10 GB caps and high latency are not REAL solutions. BPL was never going to be used in the sticks, it required too much infrastructure (many repeaters to delouse and amplify a signal that is sent over a medium that was not designed for the frequencies in question to propagate uniformly both in phase and in amplitude, and full of other noise that could corrupt the information).
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. |
|
EG
The wings of love
Premium
join:2006-11-18
Union, NJ
| reply to SierraRob
Re: never a serious contender
said by SierraRob :I don't understand why FCC needs BPL for this purpose, as they can always point to satellite "broadband", which covers 100% of the country. "See? Everyone has broadband! The free market rocks!" Ask the typical hardcore online gamer if satellite based "broadband" is their preferred solution.. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to RayW
Re: what does FiOS and U-verse have to do with BPL?
said by RayW :said by BF69 :BPL was seen as a hope for rural broadband. FiOS and U-Verse will NEVER serve rural areas. While some are appearantly enjoying a perverse pleasure in BPLs death, the fact is the 20% of Americans that live in rural areas will still only have dial-up for internet in 2020. Sorry mobile internet and it's 5 GB caps and $256 per GB overage charges and satelite and it's $60 1 Mbps tiers with 10 GB caps and high latency are not REAL solutions. BPL was never going to be used in the sticks, it required too much infrastructure (many repeaters to delouse and amplify a signal that is sent over a medium that was not designed for the frequencies in question to propagate uniformly both in phase and in amplitude, and full of other noise that could corrupt the information). I CLEARLY remember reading in 2000 as this was the MAIN reason for BPL, to service people who live in the boonies. People in the cites already had access to cable and DSL. You don't see Wildblue and Hughesnet go after cityfolk. In my county for example 2/3 of the people live in areas where neither DSL or cable internet is offered. So any company providing broadband to those peole could have TWICE the customers that At&t and Charter have in my area COMBINED. |
|
a333
A hot cup of integrals please
join:2007-06-12
Rego Park, NY
 ·Cingular Wireless
·Verizon Online DSL
1 edit | Can't beat the laws of physics dude... EVEN DSL, which uses twisted-pair phone lines, has a 3 mile limit due to interference being beyond the limits of any error correction. Do you HONESTLY expect BPL, running over crappy high-voltage lines, to do ANY better? Most high voltage lines have WAY too many spikes, hums, surges, and all sorts of interference that make it hard for BPL to work even within a mile or so without repeaters. Not to mention, BPL doesn't work through transformers, meaning that you'd have to install pass-throughs to make it work.
The whole point of BPL (at least according to the FCC) was to be "competition" for cable/DSL in existing covered areas. If you can't get DSL or cable in your area, trust me, BPL is a "pipe dream", hate to bust yer bubble.
Peace,
a333 |
|
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| reply to BF69
said by BF69 :I CLEARLY remember reading in 2000 as this was the MAIN reason for BPL, to service people who live in the boonies. People in the cites already had access to cable and DSL. You don't see Wildblue and Hughesnet go after cityfolk. In my county for example 2/3 of the people live in areas where neither DSL or cable internet is offered. So any company providing broadband to those peole could have TWICE the customers that At&t and Charter have in my area COMBINED. 1. Yes you did see that, and it was a lie....as has been shown several times.
2. And if you can not get DSL out past 3-5 miles on TWISTED PAIR, how do you expect to get BPL out on a STRAIGHT WIRE with no shielding? And past transformers designed for 60 Hz? (BPL is a much worse scenario since BPL's bandwidth is shared and has to have higher frequencies while DSL's is not and can run at lower frequencies.)
3. And yes, if someone can come up with an economical method that works and is not a bunch of hype for political purposes (and maybe the power company getting someone to build them a better PLC system under the guise of the BPL hype), then you are correct, and they will be rich.
Physics still dictates what happens and economics dictates what is done.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to RayW
said by RayW :said by BF69 :BPL was seen as a hope for rural broadband. FiOS and U-Verse will NEVER serve rural areas. While some are appearantly enjoying a perverse pleasure in BPLs death, the fact is the 20% of Americans that live in rural areas will still only have dial-up for internet in 2020. Sorry mobile internet and it's 5 GB caps and $256 per GB overage charges and satelite and it's $60 1 Mbps tiers with 10 GB caps and high latency are not REAL solutions. BPL was never going to be used in the sticks, it required too much infrastructure (many repeaters to delouse and amplify a signal that is sent over a medium that was not designed for the frequencies in question to propagate uniformly both in phase and in amplitude, and full of other noise that could corrupt the information). Backhaul of the traffic was a big issue and costly one as well. You need some way to get the traffic to and from the BPL feedpoints to the Internet. Due to the limited range of BPL, the feedpoints needed to be placed in the neighborhoods. Unless the power utility had fiber in the area already, they would have to use good old T-1s or wireless to backhaul the traffic.
The infrastructure and backhaul costs were a hidden gotchas that I think many people who were bullish on this technology didn't take account. "Power lines everywhere, BPL Internet everywhere" was a common train of thought, even within the FCC. |
|
