eherot
join:2006-09-03
Cambridge, MA | Yeah but...."Required??" I'm not under any delusions here about the usefulness of copper phone lines. I know that they're inferior to fiber in every measurable respect. I also agree that, all things being equal, fiber infrastructure should completely replace copper infrastructure.
What gets me here is that Verizon has made it a *requirement* of getting fiber installed. It seems to me that there is exactly one reason why they're interested in taking down the copper lines, and that's regulation. Verizon enjoys far more monopolistic ownership over the fiber than the copper, so it seems to me that it would be in their best interest to get rid of as much copper as possible, as quickly as possible.
Given that copper is currently the ONLY platform on which the government mandates that the little guys be allowed to compete, I'm extremely suspicious of any deliberate attempts to diminish its usefulness.
Of course the right thing to do here would be to make the same mandate for fiber optics and other next generation distribution systems, but until that happens I think Verizon needs to leave the copper alone. |
|
| "litte guys compete" ?
You're the reason there's still modems in pc's. And the whole competition argument is flying out the window with this sitting congress! |
|
|
|
 sivranBack to Opera againPremium
join:2003-09-15
Arlington, TX
kudos:1
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to eherot
Except during an extended power outage. 
FIOS BBU: 4-8 hours.
The CO's generators: As long as they have some diesel.
I don't live in VZ land, but if I did, I'd keep my copper line. If I was to get fios, it'd be net only and an ethernet install, thank you. None of this MOCA crap.
--
Think outside the fox...Seamonkey |
|
Time4aNAPPremium
join:2007-04-09
Des Plaines, IL | reply to eherot
said by eherot:(Copper phone lines are) inferior to fiber in every measurable respect. The cost of deployment is measurable. Copper's already-amortized zero-cost is clearly superior to that of fiber. Other factors, like the benefit to the consumer of capitalism (as in allowing competition) is more complex, but copper emerges on top there as well.
So how can you claim that copper is "inferior to fiber in every measurable respect", when clearly that is not the case? |
|
Time4aNAPPremium
join:2007-04-09
Des Plaines, IL | reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer:You're the reason there's still modems in pc's. Those kind of ad hominem attacks serve nobody.
It's a losing argument to attack the person. The only people who you will impress are idiots; not a very notable achievement. And evading the issue just allows it to fester longer.
Not a good move. |
|
| reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer:You're the reason there's still modems in pc's. And the whole competition argument is flying out the window with this sitting congress! No the market place is why there are still modems in pc's.
Simple economics dictate their continued use.
Let's say I just want to go on-line to check email.
My choices are $10-$15 dial up access or $50 cable/FiOS.
Not everyone has the cash to burn like yourself.
These people don't waste their money on a High Speed Internet connection just to check their email/spam.
 |
|
