dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
13
share rss forum feed

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to canestim

Re: Nothing strange about this objective.

Wireless can replace as long as the caps are raised. And users need to realize that caps are here to stay weather you want them or not.


canestim

join:2012-01-20

I don't think anyone is really disputing that, of course it can replace it. If it's done right. But you're trusting monopolies/oligopolies to raise caps with government oversight? Doesn't sound like a winning combination to me. The way it's playing out we will only have two providers, less competition is not good for the consumer. And look at how great the government has been at regulating it thus far.


WernerSchutz

join:2009-08-04
Sugar Land, TX
reply to hottboiinnc

Monopolies and shills should realize that customers do not like them and WILL get rid of them whether they like it or not.


hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to canestim

and this is why unlicensed WiMax is available. Anyone is free to launch their own ISP. Why does it always have be to be on the ILEC and the major MSOs? Why can't some every day Joe launch the company that competes? Oh wait, DSLR doesn't believe in that.


hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
reply to WernerSchutz

as long as you have 2 or more choices you no longer have a monopoly.


WernerSchutz

join:2009-08-04
Sugar Land, TX

Because a duopoly is so much better when collusion and regulatory capture occur. My bad.


viperlmw
Premium
join:2005-01-25
reply to hottboiinnc

3 words: Middle Mile prices.


Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

1 recommendation

reply to hottboiinnc

Wireless will never match the speed, the latency nor the efficiency of a fiber network.

It simply is not possible based on sheer physics of wireless wave lengths compared to light.



Desertisp

@verizon.net

I have to disagree with this statement. I work for a wireless ISP in a underserved area and we routinely push 200mbit+ over our backhauls and customers see no more than 5 - 10ms on all hops within our network before it hits our backbone to the Internet. So it's entirely possible to keep up at least with latency and coax or fiber, speeds to the customer is entirely dependent on distance, line of sight and how much of the airwaves are saturated on that frequency which admittedly means speeds may not be up to par to the end user but we still can push 20mbit easily to each CPE on our network.


axus

join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
reply to hottboiinnc

Not if a democratic majority of the people demand a regulation saying otherwise


CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:2
reply to Desertisp

Is it your opinion then that the backbones could also be replaced with wireless?


Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Sure, if you can put all the waves in a vacuum.


rahvin112

join:2002-05-24
Sandy, UT
reply to viperlmw

Who needs the price them out at the middle layer, just use the monopoly to undercut prices till they go under then raise them back up. No investor in their right mind would overbuild because of that.

Look at what is happening to Utopia? Both Comcast and USworst (Now centurylink) both offer sweetheart deals to everyone that can get Utopia service, in fact prices are less than half the rest of the state. No one can reasonably compete against an entity that can simply price service below cost to drive you out of business.



Desertisp

@verizon.net
reply to CXM_Splicer

In my opinion? No. You can't reach the throughput of fiber over the air, however for places that's its physically impossible to run fiber I feel microwave is viable as a backbone, yes. Concerning wired connections such as cable, DSL, FTTH then there really is no replacement for a fiber backbone to the distribution point whether its a node, DSLAM or (obviously for FTTH) the optical splitter in the neighborhood. Seeing how AT&T and others refuse to go this route (upgrading backbones, removing caps due to increased capacity) I think they have no business doing wired connections and their wired customers should be handed over for pennies on the dollar to companies who will upgrade and maintain these networks since they won't.


Bob61571

join:2008-08-08
Washington, IL
reply to viperlmw

Sir, you are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT on the problem being the Middle Mile!

After talking to some small town Telcos, they blame the high prices of their Middle Mile suppliers for not going to fiber as quickly as many would like.

In my area, the finger was pointed to AT&T as the WORST offender. One small Telco finally just installed their own 70 mile fiber line, to get around the Death Star and their high costs!


Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
reply to Desertisp

I have family that is pretty damn country and you will drive for a long time before seeing a single house or evidence of another home somewhere and yet they all still have phone service over copper wires and they all have electricity. Even in very mountainous places they have these services. So it is possible and it was economically feasible then, just as it is now.

Can you name one city/town/community that does not have copper ran to it in one form or another?

I would agree with you about them handing over their assets as part of imminent domain, being they are unwilling to serve the people themselves.