how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | reply to alchav
Re: Works for me.... said by alchav:said by wifi4milez:said by state:As long as they provide the speeds I'm paying for, I don't care if it's delivered with shoestrings tied together hanging from the pole. I tend to agree with that statement. A lot of people (here specifically) get a little too excited by the term 'fiber', when at the end of the day it really doesnt mean anything. Assuming the provider can give you solid service, the delivery medium is rather pointless. Well Fiber is the ultimate connection, that will give you the most bandwidth. People here tend to look at the small picture, and only care about Internet Speeds. They forget or don't understand there is a lot more information out there that will use that Last Mile Connection, and when more Bandwidth is needed everyone will be crying for Fiber! I am not arguing that in the future there will be a benefit to a 100% fiber connection, however right now when comparing a like-for-like service there is no discernible difference. Frankly, assuming HFC (and other technologies) can keep updating their offerings there could conceivably be no reason for people to opt for fiber.
Let me point out that I am a FIOS customer, so my above viewpoint has nothing to do with me not having enough fiber in my life!
--
God bless America, God bless our troops, and God help us destroy the Islamic terrorists.
»www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html
| |
rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·Verizon FiOS
| said by wifi4milez:I am not arguing that in the future there will be a benefit to a 100% fiber connection, however right now when comparing a like-for-like service there is no discernible difference. Frankly, assuming HFC (and other technologies) can keep updating their offerings there could conceivably be no reason for people to opt for fiber. I can agree to a certain extent. As simultaneously both a coax and fiber customer (Road Runner and FIOS), it's easy for me to make A/B comparisons. Aside from the futureproofing advantage of fiber, there is also somewhat lower latency on similar distances. For example, locally both FIOS and Road Runner aggregate their traffic into Tampa, where the regionally backhauled traffic reaches transit.
On Road Runner, I'm 12 ms from their core in Tampa. On FIOS, I reach Tampa in 3 ms. I suspect the added latency at least in part comes from the coax-to-fiber media conversion, not to mention the head-end aggregation strategy of cable.
Speed-wise, 20 Mbps is 20 Mbps, regardless of the media on which the packets ride. As long as the provider delivers the speed I pay for, I'm less concerned with HOW they do it. However, one day when Gig-E connections to the home are common, you can bet it won't be on coax.
Reliability-wise, my Road Runner connection has been flawless in the nearly 8 years I've had it-- with the exception of a defective board in the tap outside which needed replaced. I don't hold that against them.
Where the cable company fails, is in what it can realistically offer on upstream speeds today, due to the limitations of the technology used. Locally, Road Runner Lightning is 40/5. For a lot less money, I get more than 20 Mbps upstream on FIOS.
If I was forced to drop one of my connections, I would drop Road Runner-- but NOT from a lack of reliability. The deciding factors would be lower latency, higher speeds (especially upstream), and more a favorable price per megabit. | |
wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | said by rebus9:On Road Runner, I'm 12 ms from their core in Tampa. On FIOS, I reach Tampa in 3 ms. I would suspect that has more to do with hops to the respective sites you are pinging than anything else. | | |
|
rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Verizon FiOS
1 edit | said by wifi4milez:I would suspect that has more to do with hops to the respective sites you are pinging than anything else. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I'm speaking of latency reaching each provider's core in Tampa, from a neighborhood just outside of Tampa. This is where each provider aggregates their traffic for the region.
This makes for a reasonably fair comparison, because I am only comparing latency in the backhaul-- not latency to destinations reached via their transit. | |
|
