wierdo
join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK Reviews:
 ·Cox HSI
 ·T-Mobile US
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
Re: so much said by MyDogHsFleas: If you can conserve capital and still get 90% of the customers you would have, you survive to grow and participate in the next round. AT&T's plan to spend about 1/3 of what Verizon does per passed home, make service available, and also lay the groundwork for eventually running FTTH from the VRADs, is looking smarter and smarter. What they're doing is increasing long term opex for a short term reduction in capex. That's just dumb. In the long run, they'll be spending far more money than Verizon, even if only because they have to pay the power bill and maintenance on those VRADs for absolutely no benefit. Additionally, in power outage situations, their service will be dead in the water unlike Verizon, whose customers can make the choice to install a bigger battery backup or even a generator and still have phone/internet service.
My clients are seeing the impact of this first hand. Cox's active infrastructure in the field has their Internet service out thanks to widespread power outages that aren't affecting the customer. Same with DSL on remote terminals.
There's just no way to spin having powered electronics in the field as a good thing from an engineering standpoint when it's possible to avoid. It may not be terrible, but it's better not to have them.
--
It's wierdo, not weirdo. Yes, I know that's not the 'proper' spelling of the similar english language word.  |
