iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
 ·Comcast
 ·Qwest.net
 ·magicjack.com
 ·BeeCreek Communica..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| 38 Mbps x 8
= 308 Mbps per node, but with a huge tax on availability of other services due to how much space eight downstream channels would take up. To top it all off, BPON is still 2x that speed, and GPON is about 700% faster.
So even if cable operators deploy the tech, they'd have to do a ridiculous amount of node splitting in order to compete with fiber. Goshdarnit, you just can't win, can you? |
|
imrf
Premium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| said by iansltx  :So even if cable operators deploy the tech, they'd have to do a ridiculous amount of node splitting in order to compete with fiber. No they don't. If they went pure IP, meaning they dump all legacy analog channels, they would have 107 open channels on a 860mhz system. Add up those numbers and see what kind of bandwidth you have there without needing to split or upgrade.
Goshdarnit, you just can't win, can you? While FTTP is great on paper, in reality it isn't quite there yet. Cable can do some upgrades and make their current network as fast, if not faster than what Verizon has deployed and is deploying. |
|
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
| reply to iansltx
said by iansltx :To top it all off, BPON is still 2x that speed, and GPON is about 700% faster. ...and in Verizon's FiOS case, none of that 2-7 times the speed is dedicated to providing television services except VOD. |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ | reply to imrf
This is what I've been saying.
Cable can do a lot more with coax. It's not dead yet.
I would prefer to have fiber to the home, but if that's not possible, HFC can do a lot more than it is doing today. |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ | reply to cdru
Verizon's TV service is the same as an 860MHz cable system. If cable companies go to 1GHz and make the nodes smaller, they can provide an equivalent service offering. |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
·PHONE POWER
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to iansltx
said by iansltx := 308 Mbps per node, but with a huge tax on availability of other services due to how much space eight downstream channels would take up. To top it all off, BPON is still 2x that speed, and GPON is about 700% faster. So even if cable operators deploy the tech, they'd have to do a ridiculous amount of node splitting in order to compete with fiber. Goshdarnit, you just can't win, can you? Not if they go 1ghz. That's what Time Warner is doing in SoCal. Existing cable boxes and cablemodems can't utilize that space, but DOCSIS 3 gear can. |
|
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
| reply to Eat Me
said by Eat Me :Verizon's TV service is the same as an 860MHz cable system. If cable companies go to 1GHz and make the nodes smaller, they can provide an equivalent service offering. Cable cos have to split the 860MHz of bandwidth between television, internet, and telephone service. Verizon has a dedicated lambda for television service and another for telephone/data/VOD. It's NOT the same. |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
·PenTeleData
·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
1 edit | If they go 1GHz they will have 140MHz beyond what Verizon currently has for the TV service. That 140MHz is is 23 channels. at 38Mbps per channel, that's 874MBps. That's a lot of bandwidth.
Throw in MPEG4 or IPTV transport for the TV portion and Cable will have plenty of room to be competitive with what FiOS is offering.
With 1GHz They certainly can offer what FiOS is offering today, and with higher frequencies and smaller nodes, what Verizon is offering 10 years from now.
Fiber may be sexy and all, but coax isn't dead yet by a long shot. |
|
pende_tim
Premium
join:2004-01-04
Andover, NJ | reply to Eat Me
And what do we need to get Service Electric to upgrade their outside plant?
--
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. |
|
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| reply to Eat Me
said by Eat Me :If they go 1GHz they will have 140MHz beyond what Verizon currently has for the TV service. So? FiOS uses a completely separate lamba, or wavelength, of TV service. It doesn't matter if Fios TV is 850Mhz or 1Ghz, it has no affect on the bandwidth available for data, like in an HFC setup.
With 1GHz They certainly can offer what FiOS is offering today, and with higher frequencies and smaller nodes, what Verizon is offering 10 years from now. Currently, yes. In 10 years, no. When you add in telephone, VoD, HD and data altogether in that 1GHz of spectrum, you have at best, maybe five years of parity, but definitely not ten unless you start shrinking nodes down to less than 32 subscribers, at which point FTTH is more cost effective.
Fiber may be sexy and all, but coax isn't dead yet by a long shot. I agree that HFC has a lot of mileage left, but its ability to keep up with FTTH is going to become an increasingly uphill battle over time.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online
| said by NetAdmin :FiOS uses a completely separate lamba, or wavelength, of TV service. Or for those on this forum who are technically challenged to various terms, they can add more colors of light to their fiber, each color running at capacity. So I could run TV on blue, Internet on red and Voice on green. If I want more TV capacity I could add orange, yellow and violet. Of course the granularity is much greater than this but the concept is the same. Fiber has much more growth potential.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. |
|
etaadmin
join:2002-01-17
Dallas, TX
| reply to cdru
said by cdru :said by Eat Me :Verizon's TV service is the same as an 860MHz cable system. If cable companies go to 1GHz and make the nodes smaller, they can provide an equivalent service offering. Cable cos have to split the 860MHz of bandwidth between television, internet, and telephone service. Verizon has a dedicated lambda for television service and another for telephone/data/VOD. It's NOT the same. It actually is »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency People tend to ignore the real definition of the acronyms. Lambda or wavelength is defined by the speed of light in vacuum divided by the frequency λ=c/f
DOCSIS1~3 have different lambdas for VOD/VOIP TV and internet. 5-42MHz or if you wish lambda 60-7 meters for upstream 88-1GHz for downstream (3 meters-30 centimeters) for internet any 6 MHz segment (DOCSIS1-2) or multiple 6 MHz segments (DOCSIS3) and for VOIP any KHz segments.
In fiber optics you have 1490 or 1310 or else nM (nano meters) λ's
Lambda and lambada are not the same thing  |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
·PenTeleData
·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
| reply to n2jtx
said by n2jtx :Or for those on this forum who are technically challenged to various terms, they can add more colors of light to their fiber, each color running at capacity. So I could run TV on blue, Internet on red and Voice on green. If I want more TV capacity I could add orange, yellow and violet. Of course the granularity is much greater than this but the concept is the same. Fiber has much more growth potential. You should know about techncially challened. Doesn't sound like they covered a lot of theory in the technician test... *snicker*
Colors are simply different frequencies. RF or light, it's still the same concept.
There is equipment available today to push cable to 3GHz, which is triple the bandwidth it has today. This is more than enough to offer what FiOS can offer. |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
·PenTeleData
·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
| reply to pende_tim
said by pende_tim :And what do we need to get Service Electric to upgrade their outside plant? Their outside plant is upgraded in many areas. The Sparta system is DOCSIS3 capable. I'm running their 30/2 service at home with the DPC2505 modem.
To get them beyond that what they need is competition. Embarq seems to be happy just deploying DSL and nothing else. FiOS has had the effect of forcing cable companies to explore plant and wiring upgrades where previously they didn't even bother. Maybe Embarq needs to do the same, but it seems unlikely given their business model. |
|
pende_tim
Premium
join:2004-01-04
Andover, NJ
·ProLog
·ViaTalk
·Verizon Online DSL
| I knew they offered the 30x2 tier on my street but I ass/u/med it was a DOCIS 2.x base. At $80/mo + tax/fees I will pass. Like you say, speed is only good for bragging rights when the cap is 50GB.
I am in a Verizon ILEC area so maybe some day I will see fiber.  I will see pigs fly before that however.
--
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
·PenTeleData
·Future Nine Corpor..
·VOIPo
·Vonage
1 edit | I actually do have a legit use for the speed, and it's not P2P. I work from home sometimes and have to download/upload large files. I mainly got the upgrade for the upload.
Work pays for my home internet connection, up to $100/month so might as well make of use of it eh?
Maybe one day Embarq will wake up and smell the coffee, but right now they are happy overcharging for local phone service and DSL. Given that a lot of consumers in my neck of the woods are on satellite, it is likely that they are also on DSL. |
|
waiting4fios
join:2005-04-08
Howell, NJ
·Verizon FIOS
| reply to Eat Me
Your argument has a few flaws.
1)If cable can switch to a 1 GHZ plant, then couldn't Verizon do the same thing? Also that 1 GHZ plant would ride entirely on the 1550nm video light stream right? That means the 1310 and 1490 still dedicated to voice and data correct? So Verizon still wins. (Same applies to 3GHZ)
2)DWDM = Dense wavelength division multiplexing. Verizon can fit a lot more wavelengths of light onto the fiber but currently it is cost prohibitive to do so in a residential/consumer application, but if consumer demand requires such a route, the fiber has a lot more capacity left in it.
3)If cable were to split their nodes down to 32 subscribers like Verizon has with their FiOS, then why not just go fiber to the home, it couldn't really be that much more expensive right?
4)Doing the math on a 3GHz cable plant with 38 Mbps per channel yields a theoretical max speed of 19Gbps using the entire bandwidth for ip/data (correct me if my math is wrong) Meanwhile Verizon has posted successful trials of 100 Gbps on fiber already.
5)Cable attenuates faster than fiber especially when you get into the higher frequency ranges.
6)In the real world (not lab tests) fiber will work better than coax.
Btw, I do agree however that cable has plenty of legroom left for the needs/demands of today's consumer. But it will never have the same capacity as fiber. |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ | reply to etaadmin
Not only that but the TV portion of the service is almost identical to an 860MHz cable plant. |
|
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
| reply to etaadmin
said by etaadmin :It actually is » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency People tend to ignore the real definition of the acronyms. Lambda or wavelength is defined by the speed of light in vacuum divided by the frequency λ=c/f DOCSIS1~3 have different lambdas for VOD/VOIP TV and internet. 5-42MHz or if you wish lambda 60-7 meters for upstream 88-1GHz for downstream (3 meters-30 centimeters) for internet any 6 MHz segment (DOCSIS1-2) or multiple 6 MHz segments (DOCSIS3) and for VOIP any KHz segments. In fiber optics you have 1490 or 1310 or else nM (nano meters) λ's What I meant when I said that they weren't the same thing is as you pointed out, BPON uses 3 different wavelengths while cable essentially uses a single block of frequencies. With BPON, the 1310nm wavelength is used for upstream traffic and the 1490nm wavelength is used for downstream traffic. The television portion of the service (excluding VOD) is transmitted over the 1550nm wavelength in the form of a RF overlay. In layman terms, it's broadcasing the same 54-860MHz block of frequencies that cable companies use, using only a single wavelength of fiber.
With all digital channels and compression, BPON-based cable plants don't have to jump through the same technologies that cable companies are having to turn to. Switched digital video (SDV), IPTV, etc isn't necessary (and likely won't be for a long time). That RF overlay is for television, only television, and nothing but television.
For cable companies that are limited within the node to the old 54-860MHz cable plant or the extended 1GHz range, that block of frequencies must be split up between all the services. It's still a finite amount of bandwidth and you can only divide it up so many different ways...and no matter what way you divide it up, it's not getting any bigger.
Fiber has it's costs to deploy a whole new infrastructure, but cable TV companies have signifant costs involved with switching to SDV, IPTV, and/or DOCSIS3 as well. FTTP installations seem to be more ready for the future but cable definitely isn't at it's end of life either. Each side will tell you there technology is better then the other for reason XYZ. There really isn't a "right" or "wrong" technology except one that doesn't work. |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to waiting4fios
said by waiting4fios :Meanwhile Verizon has posted successful trials of 100 Gbps on fiber already. That was a long distance backhaul, not to the customer premise. Comcast and Time Warner have successfully trialed the same thing over fiber. |
|
