ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | reply to ftthz
Re: but but it is about the bandwith
Pair bonding.
Fibre is not always needed. Cable is delivered with a single copper strand  |
|
robbob340
K.U. Sweet 16
Premium
join:2001-02-15
Wichita, KS | For the last many thousand feet only. Fiber to the node.  |
|
Enlightener
join:2006-01-28
Cedar Park, TX | reply to ninjatutle
You are joking right? Saying a star topology with an individual bandwidth of 12MHZ can do the same thing that a bus topology with a bandwidth of 2GHZ can just because they both share the element copper is insane. |
|
Mactron
el camino Real
Premium
join:2001-12-16
CM94sv | reply to ninjatutle
ROFL !!!!  |
|
jimbo2150
join:2004-05-10
Youngstown, OH
| reply to ninjatutle
said by ninjatutle  :Cable is delivered with a single copper strand Isn't cable something like 10x thicker than a phone wire? Exactly why a cable connections can continue pretty long distances and phone lines can only get... what? 3 miles max? |
|
RIRWIN1983
join:2005-08-30
Columbus, OH | reply to robbob340
Exactly, so can that per read as you supporting at&t's design? |
|
RIRWIN1983
join:2005-08-30
Columbus, OH | reply to jimbo2150
The lines themself arnt the issue, its the technology sending it down the line. |
|
robbob340
K.U. Sweet 16
Premium
join:2001-02-15
Wichita, KS | Tell that to people with 60 year old lines, that wont hold a dsl connection.
--
Join #dslr unofficial chat! |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
1 edit | reply to ninjatutle
said by ninjatutle :Pair bonding. Fibre is not always needed. Cable is delivered with a single copper strand That can provide up to 1Gbps of bandwidth conservatively... Phone cable can't provide anywhere NEAR that.
--
Prove it... |
|
robbob340
K.U. Sweet 16
Premium
join:2001-02-15
Wichita, KS
1 edit | reply to RIRWIN1983
No, not at all. Fiber to the home is the only way to go. If ATT was doing this now, they would not be "talking" about bandwidth upgrades, or "talking" about multiple HDTV streams. They would be doing, just like Verizon is.
EDIT=I was just using the example of Fiber to the node as a response to "fiber is not always needed"
--
Join #dslr unofficial chat! |
|
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | reply to bmn
What provider is going to give you 1Gbps? And you want that at DSL prices right |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here
1 edit | reply to bmn
double post |
|
bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | reply to bmn
But the frequency limits of cable are spread across multiple users back to the node. That's why FTTC is quite promising. All the benefits of FTTP without the premise issues. |
|
ShadezeRO
join:2006-04-24
Fort Lauderdale, FL | reply to ninjatutle
I thought I read about a company in California that was doing it.
Started with a 'P'
They offered like 100mb symmetrical also. |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | reply to ninjatutle
Pair Bonding = Band aid solution, which may or may not be available. Just start bringing the fiber all the way, at&t. |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
 ·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
 ·Cox HSI
| reply to ninjatutle
said by ninjatutle :What provider is going to give you 1Gbps? And you want that at DSL prices right Er. Remember this is about Video as well as Internet. Those video channels need space too.
That's why cable is superior to phone in this application because you could get 100mbit Internet and still have plenty of bandwidth left over for video channels.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| reply to ninjatutle
said by ninjatutle :What provider is going to give you 1Gbps? And you want that at DSL prices right You missed the point entirely, so double for you.
Making the point that coax has more bandwidth that traditional copper pairs... Even pair bonding can't match it.
--
Prove it... |
|
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | So coaxial cables uses magic copper?
|
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| reply to bogey780
said by bogey780 :But the frequency limits of cable are spread across multiple users back to the node. Indeed, that has always been one of the weakest points of cable. However, with SDV and some of stuff in the pipe, the ability to manage that bandwidth will improve.
That's why FTTC is quite promising. All the benefits of FTTP without the premise issues. That's where node splitting comes in. Currently, cable operators have nodes and several repeaters. The task, over time, will be to replace the repeaters with more nodes. It is different, however, for the cablecos though... They have the luxury of having a physical network that can support enough bandwidth to put off fibre for probably a decade. Traditional phone pairs, even bonded, don't have anywhere near enough bandwidth to dick around that long. In ten years, demand for bandwidth and content is going to stretch the last mile of the telcos thin if the aren't on fibre.
--
Prove it... |
|
bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
| reply to ninjatutle
You are the only one who seems to think that some how a single pair of unshielded twisted pair wiring (the wiring that your telephone and DSL comes over) has the same bandwidth capacity as shielded coax. I respectfully submit that you should take yourself over to Google and do some research before you continue to look like an ass.
--
Prove it... |
|
