|reply to iansltx |
Re: This could get intresting....
said by iansltx:I'm not sure "scalability" is the right word here -- the capacity potential was there the day they deployed the physical infrastructure.
For Verizon, they can just use existing equipment in GPON areas. That's scalability for ya.
If you want to talk about scale, look at the deployment footprint of DOCSIS systems vs PON systems.
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon Online DSL
Scalability = the ability to scale. In this case I was talking about VZ's ability to scale up advertised...and provided...speeds as time went on without truck rolls to update nodes. So I stand behind my choice of noun
As for Cable vs. PON deployments, congratulations, you're comparing cablecos (who have Much newer plant that was engineered for more capacity from the outset) with telcos (who deployed twisted pair until recently...and some still do). One has a decent upgrade path because it's newer. The other doesn't. Verizon realized this and took the appropriate measures...going to a massively upgraded infrastructure. AT&T on the other hand didn't. Still doesn't, in fact. But since there is no universal service requirement for FTTh (versus franchise agreements for cable or UsF requirements for telephone) you aren't seeing the deployments everyone wants.
Would a brand new wireline operator at this point roll out a coax network? Nope...they'd go with GPON or gigabit active fiber. Just like no new operator would roll out a GSM only network today, at least in the US.