dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1597
share rss forum feed

maxboha

join:2012-05-12
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable
·Bell Sympatico
·Cooptel

Cooptel Fiber to the home

Cooptel deploit présentement du Fiber to the home dans la région ou que j'habite !

»www.lapensee.qc.ca/papier/pensee···dex.html

Page 19 en bas de la page

Enfin de la compétition a bell !


julienvf

join:2008-12-30
Verdun, QC
kudos:1

Rien de quoi s'énerver avec un cap de 75go!



Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to maxboha

10 megabit per second
75 gigabyte cap

That's a joke. You don't need fibre to deliver slow speeds like that. Cable internet 10 years ago could do that.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org



HiVolt
Premium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:21

ROFL... le joke.



HiVolt
Premium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:21
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to Guspaz

said by Guspaz:

You don't need fibre to deliver slow speeds like that. Cable internet 10 years ago could do that.

I had Shaw cable in 1996-97 that had 10mbps...


EUS
Kill cancer
Premium
join:2002-09-10
canada
Reviews:
·voip.ms
reply to Guspaz

said by Guspaz:

10 megabit per second
75 gigabyte cap

That's a joke. You don't need fibre to deliver slow speeds like that. Cable internet 10 years ago could do that.

Maybe things are different in Orford than Mtl?
Things are different in the West Island than d-town Mtl (lower speeds, etc.), I don't know what Orford is like in terms of services/suppliers....
But I agree that 75gigs is a joke.
*Presently on 10meg/900Kb videotron service on the island.
--
~ Project Hope ~


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to maxboha

Pretty much the entire west island of Montreal has identical offerings to downtown Montreal. They do not have lower speeds. Pointe-Claire, for example, qualifies for DOCSIS 3.0 services (up to 60 megabit). So does Senneville, the westernmost city on the island, as well as one of the poorest. There may be isolated *house* that have sufficiently bad lines that they have issues, but I don't believe there are any areas on the island that are not theoretically covered by DOCIS 3.0.

I can't speak to availability in Orford; they're in Cogeco's territory, as most of Quebec is outside of a few major cities. It doesn't really matter what the available service is, though, there's no good reason to run fibre to the home and offer 10 megs with a tiny cap.

It's not a backhaul issue either; assuming they rent a fibre line back to Montreal for backhaul, the price difference between 100 megabit and 10 gigabit is minor, since the majority of the cost is the physical connection, not the transit.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org



EUS
Kill cancer
Premium
join:2002-09-10
canada
Reviews:
·voip.ms

You're certainly better versed in this topic than me, but I want to point out that in pt claire, I cannot get any fib service higher than 25/10, so no, I cannot get d-town speeds where I live.
Maybe OP is just happy to have one more supplier choice.

I agree that 10meg fibre w/75g cap is not great at all.
However looking at the competition, the offerings are crap too.
Unless the point is to say a big FU to bell......
--
~ Project Hope ~


Cyborg994

join:2005-04-18
Montreal, QC
reply to Guspaz

Historically Cooptel always had very low caps on all their services, and from what I have seen with some people I know that had service with them, thy were severely underprovisionned when it comes to aggregated bandwith. They could not max out a 5 mbit dsl line at peak time, there were major slowdowns without any plans to fix it.



Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to EUS

said by EUS:

You're certainly better versed in this topic than me, but I want to point out that in pt claire, I cannot get any fib service higher than 25/10, so no, I cannot get d-town speeds where I live.
Maybe OP is just happy to have one more supplier choice.

I agree that 10meg fibre w/75g cap is not great at all.
However looking at the competition, the offerings are crap too.
Unless the point is to say a big FU to bell......

I live in the heart of downtown in a 250-unit highrise smack dab in the middle of the most densely populated neighbourhood in Quebec (Shaughnessy Village, AKA New Chinatown, in the Ville-Marie burough, which is so dense because it has incredible numbers of highrise apartment buildings), and I can't get any faster than 25/10 either.

That's the fastest's Bell's DSL services go. Everything above that is fibre-only, which has an extremely limited deployment (most or all new deployments are fibre, conversion of existing network is slow). You should still qualify for the faster cable speeds, although sadly Videotron has nothing but crappy upstream options.

The thing is the cost of building out all this infrastructure and then saddling it with slow speeds and tiny caps doesn't really make sense. It makes me wonder if CoopTel aren't all that competent.

-----

For reference, Shaughnessy Village has a population density of about 27,000 per square kilometer, which is almost double the density of Hong Kong Island's 16,000, but less than Kowloon's 44,000. This is because the neighbourhood is a bit under half kilometer square with a population of 13,000 people.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org


EUS
Kill cancer
Premium
join:2002-09-10
canada

I didn't know the higher tiers relied on fibre. For some reason I thought there was one more dsl tier out there.
--
~ Project Hope ~



XoX

join:2003-08-19
Qc, Canada
reply to Guspaz

said by Guspaz:

10 megabit per second
75 gigabyte cap

That's a joke. You don't need fibre to deliver slow speeds like that. Cable internet 10 years ago could do that.

¸

hum... you forgot about TV and phone. They install it mainly to provide IPTV. at least read the whole thing.

oh and if the other provider around does not offer the same at equal or lower price with offer at lot more for less... the price and speed are setup for that...


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
reply to Guspaz

said by Guspaz:

For reference, Shaughnessy Village has a population density of about 27,000 per square kilometer, which is almost double the density of Hong Kong Island's 16,000, but less than Kowloon's 44,000. This is because the neighbourhood is a bit under half kilometer square with a population of 13,000 people.

»www.globalnews.ca/pages/topicNew···42578231

St. Jamestown in Toronto is one of the densest in all of North America - 60,000 per sq km. Parts of the upper East Side in NYC are denser, but not by much.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to maxboha

I realize that they also use it for telephone and TV, but those can be delivered just as easily and more cheaply by a traditional copper solution that is already in place. Both Bell and Videotron already provide a triple play over a single wire using exactly that technique. So IPTV and VoIP aren't a good reason to need fibre to the home.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org



XoX

join:2003-08-19
Qc, Canada

3 edits

said by Guspaz:

I realize that they also use it for telephone and TV, but those can be delivered just as easily and more cheaply by a traditional copper solution that is already in place. Both Bell and Videotron already provide a triple play over a single wire using exactly that technique. So IPTV and VoIP aren't a good reason to need fibre to the home.

Hum... yes since they will own the fiber but if the use the existing copper they have to deal with the owner of the cable like TSI has to kiss Bell ass and Rogers and the like because they rent the cable and the CO. You have a lot more control when you own from point a to z... You should know that.

VDSL is not that great for TV and it's limited in range and capacity. Very limited.

Since they do not use copper like Videotron they do not have the equipment for it and if you have the choice of renting from Bell, posing your own fiber what do you chose?


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to maxboha

I assumed that they own at least one of the sets of copper going into houses. Otherwise their venture is doomed to failure, because they'd be a third wire and would be paying to pass houses using a competitor's service. GPON fibre only works if you're the incumbent telephone company in the area, because you can forcibly convert your existing customers.

VDSL2 works fine for IPTV. The range is not that different from where you'd have to put your optical splitters, and the aggregate capacity is similar to fibre since you're using similar uplinks from the DSLAM or OLT) in either case. It still comes out cheaper than fibre. If Cooptel was taking advantage of the larger bandwidth they get from fibre over copper to individual end-users, that might matter, but they're not. And since they're not taking advantage of it, the connections will get aggregated to the phat pipes before the differences between optical or copper would matter.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org



Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

said by Guspaz:

VDSL2 works fine for IPTV.

IPTV over VDSL is limited by the number of televisions it can simultaneously serve while also delivering net access over that same line. In a one TV house it may not be an issue, but get a 3-5 TV house (like many homes with teenagers have) all trying to simultaneously watch a 7-10Mbit HD feed combined with an Internet connection and you're going to run into serious headaches - if not outright impossible to deliver on marginal connections - that you won't experience with something fibre or coax fed.

Sure, what I outlined is an extreme situation, but that outline pretty much shows that there are some real limits with television over VDSL that do not apply to any other delivery medium.


XoX

join:2003-08-19
Qc, Canada

said by Gone:

said by Guspaz:

VDSL2 works fine for IPTV.

IPTV over VDSL is limited by the number of televisions it can simultaneously serve while also delivering net access over that same line. In a one TV house it may not be an issue, but get a 3-5 TV house (like many homes with teenagers have) all trying to simultaneously watch a 7-10Mbit HD feed combined with an Internet connection and you're going to run into serious headaches - if not outright impossible to deliver on marginal connections - that you won't experience with something fibre or coax fed.

Sure, what I outlined is an extreme situation, but that outline pretty much shows that there are some real limits with television over VDSL that do not apply to any other delivery medium.

it's not extreme. Many people have more than one TV like you for the kid or him and her because they like to watch different show.

We must also include pvr function that take at least one stream by recording so if you have 2 pvr in HD recording at the same time with 2 people regarding another show in HD you need 4 stream for about 28 mbit without internet...


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

I never even stopped to consider PVRs. A home with two televisions with two PVRs and two regular receivers is going to use 42Mbit/s *just* for television. What's left over for Internet? 8 at most, and only with perfect line conditions?

Either way, IPTV over VDSL while functional and a "cheap" way for the telcos to get onto the content delivery bandwagon is a kludge at best compared to any of the television delivery methods that existed before. When it comes down to it, coax is an outright elegant solution compared to VDSL, and fibre/RFoG is functionally identical to coax.



XoX

join:2003-08-19
Qc, Canada
reply to Guspaz

How do you know what they have in reserve for the coming month? A fiber network have better room to upgrade i think and i still believe VDSL with high speed and many TV suck. You must be very close to a remote or CO for a good speed. Do not forget to allow for speed increase for Internet. Right now they only offer 20 Mb but who know.

If they chose that place it's because they must have done some calculation before doing it.

I think if they can offer service at a lower price than the one already there they will get client and not fail.

Also since they are not incumbent if i remember correctly they can offer service only where they want. They do not have to provide service everywhere... They can pick the best spot and go from there.



XoX

join:2003-08-19
Qc, Canada
reply to Gone

said by Gone:

I never even stopped to consider PVRs. A home with two televisions with two PVRs and two regular receivers is going to use 42Mbit/s *just* for television. What's left over for Internet? 8 at most, and only with perfect line conditions?

Either way, IPTV over VDSL while functional and a "cheap" way for the telcos to get onto the content delivery bandwagon is a kludge at best compared to any of the television delivery methods that existed before. When it comes down to it, coax is an outright elegant solution compared to VDSL, and fibre/RFoG is functionally identical to coax.

Many people do not think about that part.. the pvr and speed increase for internet.

I think the same way. it's very limited and if the customer is close to 1km (3000 feets) you can not even consider 3 TV with PVR and 20 Mbit internet.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to XoX

said by XoX:

Also since they are not incumbent if i remember correctly they can offer service only where they want. They do not have to provide service everywhere... They can pick the best spot and go from there.

That's not how GPON deployments work. You have to at least pass every house even if they don't subscribe, so that you can service them if they DO subscribe. The only way Verizon could afford it is because they forced people to upgrade when they did it. Google can afford it because they got people to sign up in sufficient quantities in advance.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org


XoX

join:2003-08-19
Qc, Canada

1 edit

said by Guspaz:

said by XoX:

Also since they are not incumbent if i remember correctly they can offer service only where they want. They do not have to provide service everywhere... They can pick the best spot and go from there.

That's not how GPON deployments work. You have to at least pass every house even if they don't subscribe, so that you can service them if they DO subscribe. The only way Verizon could afford it is because they forced people to upgrade when they did it. Google can afford it because they got people to sign up in sufficient quantities in advance.

i did not mean jump a house and go to the next one. i mean a zone like downtown area with lots of business where Bell charge you more for the same or say the east sector of the town because it has the most customer possible and wait for the sector with the lowest number of possible customer. They do not have provide the service to the whole town if they chose.

They can also chose to provide a whole building with one or 2 fiber connection and sign up deal with the owner.

maxboha

join:2012-05-12
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable
·Bell Sympatico
·Cooptel
reply to maxboha

My neighbor have cooptel result:

VoIp phone no ata, its VoIp on pots

Iptv on VDSL1 , not vdsl2 , result, crappy mpeg-4 codec and 2 hd tv 2 sd tv for total 4 tv limited

Internet: Major slowdown (3-4 mbps) or totally cut during peak hour

I called yesterday, 10 mbps is for vdsl1 and 20 mbps is for fiber to the home neigboorhood ( some small village of 400 populations received ftth last year)

fiber to the home for 20 mbps ... I would even better like running on docsis 3....