nunyaLXI 483 MVM join:2000-12-23 O Fallon, MO ·Charter
|
to alchav
Re: [HSI] Coax vs Fiber -- What's in the futreOnly time will tell, but I can see the writing on the wall. I'm confident that the reason no new fiber networks of significance are being built is that most providers have already decided where things are going. The ILECs and RBOCs have made it perfectly clear that they intend to exit the wired "last mile" business. Fios was a drop in the bucket. U-Verse was a joke. Google fiber is a publicity stunt hardly worth mentioning because of it's relative small scale in the grand scheme. UTOPIA has failed miserably and is only being kept afloat with taxpayer money.
A lot of people keep post that wireless can't do this, or wireless can't do that. So far I haven't seen one example that's correct. Even current WISP customers using old wi-fi technology can stream HD Netflix. |
|
3 edits |
said by nunya:A lot of people keep post that wireless can't do this, or wireless can't do that. Wireless just doesn't have the capacity for true broadband. Many people simply don't understand the scope of wired infrastructure. Just through my wire center we pass terabytes per minute. Also the fact that fiber splicers and equipment is starting to get VERY cheap, combined with the relatively cheap upkeep compared to copper I just don't see this happening. |
|
nunyaLXI 483 MVM join:2000-12-23 O Fallon, MO ·Charter
|
nunya
MVM
2012-Oct-25 10:22 pm
Wireless just doesn't have the capacity for true broadband.
Why? Because you say so? It most surely does. And, it's only going to get better.
I've place a "span or two" of cable in my days. FO cable isn't coming down in price like it was supposed to. That's not the main issue. For that matter, placement isn't even the main issue. Although the cost of placement far exceeds the materials. The problem is upkeep. When fiber first came to fruition, the mindset was "set it and forget it". We quickly learned that wasn't reality. It required maintenance and repairs, just as copper cables do. Squirrels still chew on fiber. Backhoes still rip it up. Tornadoes still knock it down. Weekend gardeners till up fiber drops just the same as copper. Any one still placing cable in easements is a fool not to be placing all green field projects as FO. It may be their last bastion of income 10 years from now when wireless rules. |
|
|
1 edit |
said by nunya:
Wireless just doesn't have the capacity for true broadband.
Why? Because you say so? I think your confusing max speed with capacity. There is no way given today's wireless spectrum you could offload even a fraction of wired data to wireless. |
|
nunyaLXI 483 MVM join:2000-12-23 O Fallon, MO ·Charter
|
nunya
MVM
2012-Oct-26 8:58 am
No. I'm not confused at all. I have a pretty thorough understanding of the big picture. Carriers today (remember the guys I said to "forget" in my first post?) use the spectrum in a very inefficient manor in order to utilize mobile client equipment nationwide. Now we are talking fixed PTMP. The box on the side of someones house won't be traveling. That means that you can re-use that "chunk" of frequency in another site only a few miles away. EG, do more with less. |
|
|
While more efficient use of the available spectrum is happening, I don't think it can compensate for the insane increase in bandwidth demand that has been trending over the last few years. If it keeps going at this rate, 300Mbps won't even make people think twice in 3 years time. Unless there are some new advances in OFDM/LDCP or similar modulation and FEC schemes, wireless will hit the proverbial brick wall, just like DSL is. |
|
|
to nunya
said by nunya: The box on the side of someones house won't be traveling. That means that you can re-use that "chunk" of frequency in another site only a few miles away. EG, do more with less. no, no it doesn't. |
|
NormanSI gave her time to steal my mind away MVM join:2001-02-14 San Jose, CA |
to cablegeek01
Given the prices I have seen for 100mb/s, and faster, I don't see a lot of people going there in the next decade; unless the economy turns around, or the price for the speed comes down to $20 per month. |
|
nunyaLXI 483 MVM join:2000-12-23 O Fallon, MO |
to prairiesky
Yes it does. |
|
alchav join:2002-05-17 Saint George, UT |
to nunya
said by nunya:No. I'm not confused at all. I have a pretty thorough understanding of the big picture. Carriers today (remember the guys I said to "forget" in my first post?) use the spectrum in a very inefficient manor in order to utilize mobile client equipment nationwide. Now we are talking fixed PTMP. The box on the side of someones house won't be traveling. That means that you can re-use that "chunk" of frequency in another site only a few miles away. EG, do more with less. Okay, this is what I envision for the future, and you guys decide the Pipe into our homes. Providers like TWC, Red Box, Netflix, Amazon, and the like. Will have massive Servers and store Movies, Games, Software, and Data. The most recent Movies will be in 4k, then 8k, and 16k and who knows. Movie Theaters, Homes, and Business will be able to access Stream or Download this Data. So what Pipe has the biggest reliable consistent Bandwidth? The answer could only be Fiber! For today's Average Person that only uses their iPhone or iPad, Wireless seems sufficient, but for the Home Theater of Today and the Future, Fiber is the only way to go! |
|
|
to nunya
care to explain how? The micro cell tech only works so far. IE, look at an apartment block with wifi.
Don't worry, you can use big words and complex arguments. I understand the wireless industry |
|
nunyaLXI 483 MVM join:2000-12-23 O Fallon, MO |
nunya
MVM
2012-Oct-26 4:46 pm
I already explained why. Pretty clearly. |
|