| reply to waiting4fios
Re: 38 Mbps x 8 said by waiting4fios:Your argument has a few flaws. 1)If cable can switch to a 1 GHZ plant, then couldn't Verizon do the same thing?
Theoretically they can. What's your point? quote:
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)
Voice and data are a still very small portion of the cable spectrum used for the last mile. quote:
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.
As we've seen, consumer demand drives nothing, at least in America. You aren't going to see what FTTH is fully capable of, at least not within the next 10 years. Verizon will have to get a return on its initial FiOS deployment first. quote:
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?
The infrastructure for last mile coax with 32 subscribers each is pretty much there. They probably won't even need a truck roll for most subscribers. It would be transparent and not an 8 hour install for most subscribers. Less cost per subscriber to deploy. quote:
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.
Safe to say, you're not going to see 100GBps for a residential internet connection anytime soon, at least not in America. Today's computers would be lucky if they could even use 100 MBps of bandwidth. Most computers still come with 10/100 ethernet adapters, and most gigabit adapters don't even achieve half of gigabit speed under Windows (or Linux for that matter) with desktop hardware. quote:
5)Cable attenuates faster than fiber especially when you get into the higher frequency ranges.
Smaller nodes will overcome this. quote:
6)In the real world (not lab tests) fiber will work better than coax.
I never denied that. quote:
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.
True. But as we can plainly see, the FiOS fanboys on DSLR just LOVE to play "my provider can beat up your provider." |
|
1 edit | reply to cdru
Re-doing an entire cable network in fiber only will cost more than changing headend gear for DOCSIS3. FiOS' infrastructure deployment costs are already more than the shareholders and investors want to see.
What I am saying in a nutshell that while FiOS can deliver worlds upon worlds of things, you are not bloody likely to see it unless there is a return on investment.
And until you are prepared to pay $1000/month for an internet connection, you will not see much beyond the speeds you are seeing today.
quote:
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.
Likewise, with cable upgrades, 54-860MHz will be used for one way TV services, 860-1GHz (and beyond) for data and advanced video services. 5-42MHz is used for the upstream.
There are your three wavelengths. It's the same concept as fiber, except that the medium (and modulation) is different.
Throw in MPEG4 compression for the video portion and you can deliver the same amount of video programming in less bandwidth, freeing up more of it for internet access or other advanced services. |
|
|
|
Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | reply to fifty nine
"Today's computers would be lucky if they could even use 100 MBps of bandwidth. Most computers still come with 10/100 Ethernet adapters, and most gigabit adapters don't even achieve half of gigabit speed under Windows (or Linux for that matter) with desktop hardware."
I do not know what you have been smoking but 100 meg Ethernet is only 12.5megabytes/s most current hard drives are capable of sustained 70megabytes/s with many of the newer(non scsi) drives breaking 100. The vast majority of new computers come with GigE(125Megabytes/s) with a lot of them coming with dual GigE connections. I run both Linux and windows(only when I have to) and have both doing 70megabyte/s transfers without doing anything special. You should also be aware that the vast majority of new machines come with Raid chipsets and that a significant portion of the population is using them( two 70MB/s drives in a Raid0 array will match GigE). Todays desktop hardware is very much capable of handling even GigE speeds. |
|
| You are still NOT going to see gigabit to the home speed in America anytime soon. |
|
Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | That may very well be, but do not try to use the hardware(user's) as an excuse for not providing it. |
|
| reply to fifty nine
said by fifty nine: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. Here's the problem with that... There is no equipment that supports 3Ghz HFC yet. And for the foreseeable future, there won't be. If you are talking about Vyyo (or another vendor), their equipment is proprietary, which is a huge barrier to wide scale deployment. Not to mention all the plant work that needs to be done to get it 3Ghz capable.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
1 edit | reply to fifty nine
said by fifty nine:The infrastructure for last mile coax with 32 subscribers each is pretty much there. Name one provider that is close to having node densities of 32 homes? The average node size is about 500 homes/node.
»www.networks2008.org/data/upload···agen.pdf
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
| reply to NetAdmin1
I don't see it as that much of challenge once they decide to get rid of their analog channels. Just doing that gives cable plants quite a bit of bandwidth. Then they can start seriously looking at switched digital video. That would free up even more bandwidth. Enough to let them keep for quite some time without shrinking node sizes or moving to 1GHz or higher spectrum usage. |
|
 Jafo232You Can't Spell Democrat Without Rat.Premium
join:2002-10-17
Boonville, NY | reply to Lazlow
said by Lazlow:"Today's computers would be lucky if they could even use 100 MBps of bandwidth. Most computers still come with 10/100 Ethernet adapters, and most gigabit adapters don't even achieve half of gigabit speed under Windows (or Linux for that matter) with desktop hardware." I do not know what you have been smoking but 100 meg Ethernet is only 12.5megabytes/s most current hard drives are capable of sustained 70megabytes/s with many of the newer(non scsi) drives breaking 100. The vast majority of new computers come with GigE(125Megabytes/s) with a lot of them coming with dual GigE connections. I run both Linux and windows(only when I have to) and have both doing 70megabyte/s transfers without doing anything special. You should also be aware that the vast majority of new machines come with Raid chipsets and that a significant portion of the population is using them( two 70MB/s drives in a Raid0 array will match GigE). Todays desktop hardware is very much capable of handling even GigE speeds. Your argument is partly true. However, do not forget to consider that most homes now have more than one appliance using the Net.
My home may not be average when it comes to net usage, but I have 8 appliances connected to the home. If I hooked everything up, it would be 10. I can download movies via my DTV on demand, or get them via the xbox 360. Each member has their own laptop, one appliance basically plays music all day, and then there is my office with it's servers and a desktop.
I honestly can see a use for much larger bandwidth TODAY, much less what I will probably need 10 years from now.
--
Custom PHP/Perl Development. Vbulletin And Wordpress Mods Too! |
|
| reply to fifty nine
said by fifty nine:Re-doing an entire cable network in fiber only will cost more than changing headend gear for DOCSIS3. That is true, to a point. To keep up with the capabilities of Fios, you have to do node splits to the point where it becomes more cost effective just to run fiber.
FiOS' infrastructure deployment costs are already more than the shareholders and investors want to see. Most investors are idiots. Any investor that does not see the long term potential of Fios and what it does for Verizon is better serve by sticking their money under a rock.
Likewise, with cable upgrades, 54-860MHz will be used for one way TV services, 860-1GHz (and beyond) for data and advanced video services. 5-42MHz is used for the upstream.
There are your three wavelengths. It's the same concept as fiber, except that the medium (and modulation) is different.
You completely missed the point here. Yeah, HFC spectrum can be split into different bands for different services, but that is not the point. What you are missing is that I can take the entire spectrum available on coax and represent it as one lamba. When you run out of bandwidth on coax, that's it, you are screwed. With fiber, I light up another lambda when the existing lambda is 100% utilized. With some very expensive and very precise equipment, you can turn up as many as 64 lambdas, though no FTTH equipment supports that yet.
You are right, 1Ghz HFC upgrades extend the lifespan of the existing coax networks, but with current technology and even some of the stuff in development, you can't extend the life of coax forever. At some point, upgrading the plant is going to be more expensive than replacing it with FTTH.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
| reply to fifty nine
Youre the cable fanboy trying to convince yourself.. and others .. that coax is just good as FTTP.
Tell that to the thousands of people out there having internet slowdowns during peak hours.
LOL |
|
| reply to Lazlow
he said 100 MB not 100mb. So 100MB= 100 MEGABYTES. |
|
Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO
1 edit | Frustrated
If you go back and read the thread you will see that he was replying to 100Mbps and Gbps. The natural assumption would be that his use of MB and GB in his reply was a typo(confirmed by his use in the later reply of gigabit). If it is not, then his initial reply is irrelevant anyway. |
|
Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | reply to Jafo232
Jafo
I assume you are replying to the quote of EatMe and not to me. My point was the todays desktops are more than capable of handling even GigE speeds, so we can handle (in house) much more bandwidth than the ISPs provide. |
|
| reply to NetAdmin1
said by NetAdmin1:said by fifty nine:Re-doing an entire cable network in fiber only will cost more than changing headend gear for DOCSIS3. That is true, to a point. To keep up with the capabilities of Fios, you have to do node splits to the point where it becomes more cost effective just to run fiber. FiOS' infrastructure deployment costs are already more than the shareholders and investors want to see. Most investors are idiots. Any investor that does not see the long term potential of Fios and what it does for Verizon is better serve by sticking their money under a rock. Likewise, with cable upgrades, 54-860MHz will be used for one way TV services, 860-1GHz (and beyond) for data and advanced video services. 5-42MHz is used for the upstream.
There are your three wavelengths. It's the same concept as fiber, except that the medium (and modulation) is different.
You completely missed the point here. Yeah, HFC spectrum can be split into different bands for different services, but that is not the point. What you are missing is that I can take the entire spectrum available on coax and represent it as one lamba. When you run out of bandwidth on coax, that's it, you are screwed. With fiber, I light up another lambda when the existing lambda is 100% utilized. With some very expensive and very precise equipment, you can turn up as many as 64 lambdas, though no FTTH equipment supports that yet. You are right, 1Ghz HFC upgrades extend the lifespan of the existing coax networks, but with current technology and even some of the stuff in development, you can't extend the life of coax forever. At some point, upgrading the plant is going to be more expensive than replacing it with FTTH. did you forget something NetAdmin and the rest ?....
the WORLDS cable HFC stands for something.....
ohh thats right, Hybrid Fibre Cable......
that means its been using FTTC all this time, and gets split off around 500meters away from the farthest cable coax point....
so all the talk of how FTTC/FTTP/FTTP etc is better how so ?, the new DOCSIS 2.0B/3.0 uses another totally seperate light source end to end just as the FTTC does, gets split locally to the nearest street cab (at most 500 yards away in the UK Virgin Media cable for instance), boosted were needed, and passed directly to the house with that short cable coax part of the hybrid network.
but appart from that ,why hasnt anyone here actually posted about the original story thread and its slight problem, and its a REAL problem unlike the pure FTTC is better than HFC
hypatheticals here, rememebr the world is not just the USA, we have HFC and FFTC/FTTH as well.
that slight problem, Ohh yes, these so called 8x4 banded cable modems SOC chipsets DO NOT HAVE better than "Bronze" certifcation, and not liely to get "silver" or "gold"/fianal certification.
and lastly incase peoples still want to talk up the potential top speeds,rather than the story subject matter, Docsis3 is speced to a limit of upto 125 36Mbit+ bonded channels, thats 5 Gigbit/s down and better than 3 gigabit/s up. and dont forget Euro DS3 gets you even more bandwidth. |
|
 GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:16 | reply to Lazlow
Most older onboard/offboard GigE solutions used the PCI bus, and topped out between 400-600mbit/s.
This hasn't been a problem for onboard chipsets for quite some time, nor is it a problem for modern PCIe network cards. PCIe 1.0 1x provides 250MB/s of aggregate bandwidth after overhead, so you'd have to saturate your NIC in both directions to consume all the bandwidth.
PCIe 2.0 (which has been shipping for some time now) of course doubles that to 500MB/s per lane (and PCIe 3.0 doubles it again), but I've not heard of anything but graphics cards that support it to date; anything that needs more than 250MB/s just uses a 4x slot (rare on desktops, more common in workstations and servers), which currently provides 1-2 GB/s of bandwidth (depending on version). |
|
| reply to pip
said by pip :
the WORLDS cable HFC stands for something.....
ohh thats right, Hybrid Fibre Cable...... Yeah, your point?
that means its been using FTTC all this time, and gets split off around 500meters away from the farthest cable coax point.... That depends on the size of the node.
so all the talk of how FTTC/FTTP/FTTP etc is better how so ?, the new DOCSIS 2.0B/3.0 uses another totally seperate light source end to end just as the FTTC does, gets split locally to the nearest street cab (at most 500 yards away in the UK Virgin Media cable for instance), boosted were needed, and passed directly to the house with that short cable coax part of the hybrid network. Tell us something we don't know.
that slight problem, Ohh yes, these so called 8x4 banded cable modems SOC chipsets DO NOT HAVE better than "Bronze" certifcation, and not liely to get "silver" or "gold"/fianal certification. That will get addressed once DOCSIS 3 actually gets finalized.
and lastly incase peoples still want to talk up the potential top speeds,rather than the story subject matter, Docsis3 is speced to a limit of upto 125 36Mbit+ bonded channels, thats 5 Gigbit/s down and better than 3 gigabit/s up. and dont forget Euro DS3 gets you even more bandwidth. You mistakenly assume that any cable operators is going to dedicate 750Mhz of spectrum just to cable modem service. I can assure you, that won't happen.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
| reply to Lazlow
said by Lazlow:That may very well be, but do not try to use the hardware(user's) as an excuse for not providing it. The hardware and software combo is. Most people are using Windows, and with a gigE adapter on a PCIe bus, Windows barely passes 100MBps.
Maybe if more people used Mac or Linux, but their numbers are still small. |
|
| reply to Jafo232
said by Jafo232:said by Lazlow:"Today's computers would be lucky if they could even use 100 MBps of bandwidth. Most computers still come with 10/100 Ethernet adapters, and most gigabit adapters don't even achieve half of gigabit speed under Windows (or Linux for that matter) with desktop hardware." I do not know what you have been smoking but 100 meg Ethernet is only 12.5megabytes/s most current hard drives are capable of sustained 70megabytes/s with many of the newer(non scsi) drives breaking 100. The vast majority of new computers come with GigE(125Megabytes/s) with a lot of them coming with dual GigE connections. I run both Linux and windows(only when I have to) and have both doing 70megabyte/s transfers without doing anything special. You should also be aware that the vast majority of new machines come with Raid chipsets and that a significant portion of the population is using them( two 70MB/s drives in a Raid0 array will match GigE). Todays desktop hardware is very much capable of handling even GigE speeds. Your argument is partly true. However, do not forget to consider that most homes now have more than one appliance using the Net. My home may not be average when it comes to net usage, but I have 8 appliances connected to the home. If I hooked everything up, it would be 10. I can download movies via my DTV on demand, or get them via the xbox 360. Each member has their own laptop, one appliance basically plays music all day, and then there is my office with it's servers and a desktop. I honestly can see a use for much larger bandwidth TODAY, much less what I will probably need 10 years from now. I actually have a lot of things hooked up to my internet connection too. I have a couple of TiVos (the genuine ones, not the knockoffs), game consoles (Wii and XBOX360), Vonage, BD-Live player and slingbox. Even when I was on 10MBps I was able to use everything with no problem. Online gaming? No problem. Slingbox? No problem. Netflix HD on TiVo or XBOX360? No problem either. I've used some of these simultaneously while my better half was on her computer using her work's VPN.
In fact my whole house is wired with Cat6, from the basement to the attic. 30 ports total with a 48 port GigE switch in the basement. The firewall I use is my old P4 machine with pfSense.
I still barely use a 30 meg connection. A GigE connection would still be hardly used.
In fact, let's go even further. At work I manage a small server farm, roughly 150 servers. At the firewall, total usage up/down barely reaches 300MBps. We have 2GBps fiber from the server room to the internet. The vast majority of my servers are internet facing and serve public internet customers. Some through a caching service, but some directly. Some of the traffic is video, some html and static images. I'm even serving HD video now. Currently we're doing around 300MBps outbound, and 100 inbound.
So even if commercial users don't use a full gig, why would home users? |
|
| reply to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:Youre the cable fanboy trying to convince yourself.. and others .. that coax is just good as FTTP. Tell that to the thousands of people out there having internet slowdowns during peak hours. LOL I never said that coax is as good as FTTP. I am saying that they can offer what Verizon is offering today and well into the future with no big infrastructure outlay.
To that, the FiOS fanboys like to crow "no!!! cable sux! FiOS rules!" |
|
