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.

said by Eat Me :

If they go 1GHz they will have 140MHz beyond what Verizon currently has for the TV service.

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.

said by NetAdmin :

FiOS uses a completely separate lamba, or wavelength, of TV service.

said by cdru :

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.

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.

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

said by waiting4fios :

Meanwhile Verizon has posted successful trials of 100 Gbps on fiber already.

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.

said by Eat Me :

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.

said by Eat Me :

The infrastructure for last mile coax with 32 subscribers each is pretty much there.

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.