bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
1 edit | reply to ninjatutle
Re: but but it is about the bandwith 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... |
|
| What provider is going to give you 1Gbps? And you want that at DSL prices right |
|
1 edit | reply to bmn
double post |
|
| 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. |
|
|
|
| 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. |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| 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... |
|
| 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... |
|
| You don't get it do you
Aren't you the one screaming for fibre in other post |
|
bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | said by ninjatutle:You don't get it do you Aren't you the one screaming for fibre in other post Yeah, because of the bandwidth limitations of single and even bonded sets of traditional phone pairs.
UVerse = nowhere near the bandwidth or long term viability of DOCSIS because the physical layer is the limiting factor.
--
Prove it... |
|
