Cost of Laying Fiber vs Copper
A lot of us think the solution is to lay fiber to the home to the entire country--to which the immediate response is that it is too expensive.
But copper to the home was laid to virtually the entire country when America was a great deal poorer. So does anyone have any information on the cost of laying fiber vs the cost of laying copper? (my own guess is there would not be that much difference as the majority of the cost would be labor...)
What difference does that make to anything? Who cares how much it took, long ago, to lay the initial copper runs?
Thank Judge Greene for breaking up the Bell System.
If the Bell System still existed today, we probably would have FTTH in most population centers, and VDSL in smaller areas. The massive resources of the old AT&T (Western Electric, Bell Labs, Long Lines, Operating Companies) made what investors would scorn normally, possible.
Instead, we have a bunch of penny pinching Baby Bells and independents. The "Competition" created by the breakup is largely false - its CableCo vs TelCo. And often times one side is incompetent, leading to no real competition.
|reply to PastTense |
Fiber is cheaper but the electronics are more expensive.
Last time I heard the cost to place fiber to every att customer
was around 800 billion.Thats why they claim they are a wireless Co.