 BitPremium
join:2009-02-19
00000 | Instead of nit picking how about asking... ..."Where is Verizon with their 102Mb response? Let VZ put up or shut up." |
|
 Chris 313Come get somePremium
join:2004-07-18
Houma, LA
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·Comcast Digital ..
 ·Comcast
| said by Bit:..."Where is Verizon with their 102Mb response? Let VZ put up or shut up." Indeed! Instead of political mud slinging, etc, VZ should put up and shut up and debut their own 100Mbit offering.
Compete, you idiots. Though, all this name calling does make for a good laugh.
What's your take on it? Do you believe CV has the balls in their network to keep 101 meg going among all users in the footprint since they're offering it to all?
I certainly hope so and will be crossing my fingers and cheering for them. |
|
 JeffreyWilpon please sell the MetsPremium
join:2002-12-24
Long Island
kudos:3
·Vonage
·Optimum Online
| reply to Bit
said by Bit:..."Where is Verizon with their 102Mb response? Let VZ put up or shut up." I'm sure it'll come. Not today, or the next day. Maybe not even on May 11th. But it's a competitive area, and you know Verizon will do something.
I'm curious if it's going to be of a more symmetrical offering, or not. I tend to think that a consumer thinks a 101/15 connection is way, way, waaaay better than a 50/50. I'd disagree, but then again, marketing can go along way if done properly. Additionally, and maybe Docsis 3 will fix this, some Optimum Online subscribers's connections have a tendency to really slow down in the evening/peak times. With Fios, I never experieced that slowdown at any time.
--
"Honesty may be the best policy, but it's important to remember that apparently, by elimination, dishonesty is the second-best policy." - George Carlin
[my ramblings] |
|
| reply to Bit
said by Bit:..."Where is Verizon with their 102Mb response? Let VZ put up or shut up." or... 101Mbps for $98/mo? |
|
Draganta
join:2004-12-16
Oakland Gardens, NY | reply to Bit
Honestly I think Verizon shouldn't offer anything higher now for the time being. They should however lower their prices as a response. Seriously, we are in a recession and people will react more to price than some "penis size" contest.
This is coming from a VZ FiOS Customer who has the 50/20 service. I don't mind paying the $89 monthly fee. But from a business sense, they should lower their prices. |
|
| reply to Chris 313
I think you hit on a point here.
Verizon is scared that there will come a day when they can't continue the one upmanship, and that they can't just throw one death blow and keep Cablevision down.
The truth is that HFC and FTTH only differ in the last (less than a) mile (in some cases) and cable can very easily upgrade to FTTH since their core is already fiber. Furthermore they already have the staff that is trained to run and splice fiber, and the agreements with companies to provide fiber gear.
Why you are seeing DOCSIS3 instead of fiber is that it can provide "good enough" speeds to keep up with FiOS for the time being until it becomes necessary to move away from coax.
And by the way, while FiOS is fiber to your home, they are still coax between your TVs and even coax (MoCA) between the ONT and your router, so they aren't all that different from what cable has to offer. |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | reply to swhitney2003
No, 100m for $95. and 50m for $60-ish and 75m for $80-ish. |
|
 aaronwtPremium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
·Verizon FiOS
| reply to Jeffrey
said by Jeffrey:said by Bit:..."Where is Verizon with their 102Mb response? Let VZ put up or shut up." I'm sure it'll come. Not today, or the next day. Maybe not even on May 11th. But it's a competitive area, and you know Verizon will do something. I'm curious if it's going to be of a more symmetrical offering, or not. I tend to think that a consumer thinks a 101/15 connection is way, way, waaaay better than a 50/50. I'd disagree, but then again, marketing can go along way if done properly. Additionally, and maybe Docsis 3 will fix this, some Optimum Online subscribers's connections have a tendency to really slow down in the evening/peak times. With Fios, I never experieced that slowdown at any time. It depends on what you need. For a person that does mostly downloading, obviously they would prefer faster download speeds. I'm happy with my current 20mbs upload speed, but I would certainly want faster download speeds than my current 50mbs. Most of my bandwidth is used for downloading. And the times when i do upload alot of data, the 20mbs is sufficient for now. |
|
| reply to fifty nine
Also since cablevision is using a lot of cisco equipment they very well could be using the new d-pon cisco stuff.
This si equipment that does docsis 3 over coax and can have the last mile converted to fiber and still use cablemodems since it would emulate a docsis 3 network over fiber.
VErizon is scraed because they probably realised this is what cablevision could be doing and would be very bad news for verizon. |
|
|
|
| reply to fifty nine
Are you suggesting that verizon use cat5 or fiber to the TV set?
Coax is a standard there, probably will be for some time, this does not diminish their capacity as that coax in your house is significantly less burdened than the coax coming from the cable plant. |
|
| said by delusion ftl :
Are you suggesting that verizon use cat5 or fiber to the TV set?
Coax is a standard there, probably will be for some time, this does not diminish their capacity as that coax in your house is significantly less burdened than the coax coming from the cable plant.
True enough but on the actual outside plant they can only do 480ish Mbps (400 with overhead) before they have to oversubscribe the last mile, just like cable. This is with GPON, not BPON.
They can upgrade, but so can cable.
This is why the "wars" are meaningless. Cable, especially Cablevision, has an advanced fiber network in place that can be easily upgraded. So does Verizon now. They are more or less on equal ground. |
|
| Where does this leave AT&T?  |
|
2 edits | reply to fifty nine
Shorter copper distances is a HUGH factor over long runs. There is a reason Cat5/6/7 and coax cable is quite limited in feet that it service a desktop from a switch.
Coax can never compete with fiber on long runs and having copper as the last 200 feet is irrelevant in the world of networks even at 10gb speeds.
Unless there is an issue with distance or outside interference, running fiber to your desktop and using a fiber card is nothing more than a waste of money in a local network. |
|
| reply to vinnie97
have no clue but here they're promoting their VDSL service as their FTTH product. |
|
 IgnitePremium,VIP
join:2004-03-18
UK | reply to fifty nine
said by fifty nine:True enough but on the actual outside plant they can only do 480ish Mbps (400 with overhead) before they have to oversubscribe the last mile, just like cable. This is with GPON, not BPON. They can upgrade, but so can cable. This is why the "wars" are meaningless. Cable, especially Cablevision, has an advanced fiber network in place that can be easily upgraded. So does Verizon now. They are more or less on equal ground. I'm not sure what you're referring to here. Of course both oversubscribe their networks, that's how it goes, however there's rather a lot of difference between oversubscribing 2.4Gbit / 1.2Gbit 32 ways (75Mbit / 37.5Mbit per home) and oversubscribing 152Mbit / 27Mbit 100+ ways absolute best case it's likely to be more. Even with bonded upstreams you're still only dealing with 152/108, and even on 8/4 the best available right now 304/108.
Cable can't flick a switch and be GPON or close in terms of unicast bandwidth per home passed. It'll be a very long time before they are.
I also don't understand the comments about oversubscription, networks are oversubscribed, it's about if people see actual contention.
Incidentally if you think every node will have dedicated to it 4 downstreams and 4 upstreams you're kidding yourself. They will be spreading the bonded group across multiple nodes and likely only have room on the return path for a single upstream per node. |
|
| Well if cablevision is using cisco equipment they only have to upgrade last mile to fiber.
Cisco i think is now selling d-pon equipment. When ready all you have to do is replace the last mile with fiber. Even the cable modem can stay.
So if cablevision is using this new equipment they might be set for a long time. |
|
 jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA | said by majortom1029:Well if cablevision is using cisco equipment they only have to upgrade last mile to fiber. Cisco i think is now selling d-pon equipment. When ready all you have to do is replace the last mile with fiber. Even the cable modem can stay. So if cablevision is using this new equipment they might be set for a long time. If they already have widely distributed this Cisco DPON equipment, then they have spent a considerable amount of money to make this happen. Running fiber the last mile is not something to take lightly, otherwise everyone would be doing it with smiles on their faces. In the end, if Cablevision is not able to keep their costs down, they can't hope to outlast Verizon in a lengthy pricing war. They just aren't big enough to keep up, and Verizon has their wireless business to supplement things until the smoke clears.
Hopefully for Cablevision this new 101/15 package is not just a last, desperate attempt to keep their heads above water. |
|
| reply to Ignite
They can absolutely "flick a switch." D3 is a simple headend upgrade in most cases. Furthermore, core fiber is already there and with expansion to 1GHz and node splits there is plenty of bandwidth to compete.
As for D3's speeds, it specifies 8 bonded channels now but the spec is open ended. As for shared bandwidth, CVC already separates customers on the same node. Boost subs are on a separate set of QAMs from regular OOL.
Furthermore, when it is time for FTTH, cable can implement it with much less expenditure in the cable plant than VZ had to do with fiber.
One thing you fanboys seem to forget is that modern cable systems are already MOSTLY fiber. The remaining coax can easily be replaced with fiber at a moment's notice. That wasn't the case with the copper pairs that VZ had/has in its wireline business. VZ had to build a whole new network from scratch, and it took them years after much foot dragging. Cable can do this in a fraction of the time and still end up with a wider footprint. But why would they right now? There's really no need for most home users past 10Mbit or even 5 Mbit for many. You guys keep talking about gigabit, but a lot of top websites don't even use a gigabit of bandwidth during their daily traffic peaks, except for big, unusual spikes. The average home user has NO use for a gig internet connection. Maybe in the next 5 years but not now. |
|
| reply to jmn1207
It's still more cost effective to use an existing coax plant than to run fiber, especially given that no one is really offering more than 101Mbit in the US.
Remember that any business is all about the shareholders, not the fanboys at DSLR. |
|
| reply to fifty nine
You really have no idea!!! what cost the most money is the last mile. Also so are they going to tell everyone in a specific neighborood you are going to be out of service for a few weeks while the fiber is ran. Cable companys will have to maintain two cable plants during the cut over. |
|
