not worth it
to shove an elephant through a straw.
One has to wonder - could money spent on such research have been better spent on actually deploying something that works, such as coax, or fiber, or both?
Yes, however, the people doing the research aren't the ones who need to run the fiber.
Since it isn't available - who cares.
If it 'was' available, and as cheap or cheaper (for me ) than Cable or Uverse, then I'd use it.
|reply to amungus |
No, coax loses signal at longer distance too, it's just more resistant to noise (thanks to shield) so it can run little longer with more bandwidth. But I had a real world experience, where just putting too many feet in house with coax inside my house made my cable modem not picking/sending up enough signal. So instead I used shorter coax cable and longer UTP Ethernet to my router.
PashuneCaps stifle innovationPremiumReviews:
How lengthy was your coax?!
I would have to run at least an extra 300 ft. of RG6 or so to my modem before I started having signal loss problems, assuming 16 db loss at that distance.
Hm, maybe you have a lengthy drop or you're at the end of the tap or something else.
ISP: CableOne 10 mbit/1 mbit
yeah it was very long cable which my family that watched tv used it to connect to set up box and hid behind counter. I used two-way spliter and another standard long cable from comcast kit box (that can go through the whole living room). But that very first long cable could run through multiple rooms.
|reply to Pashune |
He was running RG6 instead of RG11 probably.