dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
236
share rss forum feed

Kamus

join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX

I continue to be an optimist on this issue.

For now it does suck that we have these people getting lots of money for simply being the only game in town. But this can't stay like this for too long. Technology advancements will make sure of that. I think we only need to hold tight for 5 years or so before we see some real alternatives to these clowns.


djrobx
Premium
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VOIPO

1 edit
said by Kamus:

For now it does suck that we have these people getting lots of money for simply being the only game in town. But this can't stay like this for too long. Technology advancements will make sure of that. I think we only need to hold tight for 5 years or so before we see some real alternatives to these clowns.

How do you figure? The real competition we've had up till now is cable vs. DSL. DSL had a lot of "internal" competition amongst ILECs and CLECs, and third party ISPs. That internal competition is being gutted as ILEC's lock them out of next-gen networks.

Pushing data over old copper phone lines appears to be reaching its limit. The only real solution is to run fiber, but the ILECs seem to be being lured away by more profitable wireless. That's threatening to leave cable in a true monopoly position for wired broadband.

Your statement about "technology advancements" seems to be the bet that AT&T was banking on with U-verse, which so far, doesn't seem to be working out in their favor. They're now unable to keep pace with cable upgrades.

Wireless won't be a substitute for wired broadband in heavily populated areas. Whatever capacity we get from LTE will be gobbled up by the ever-increasing appetite for mobile data.

That leaves what, Google Fiber? Areas blessed by FiOS and people in Kansas City are in good shape. The rest of us are probably SOL for quite a while.
--
AT&T U-Hearse - RIP Unlimited Internet 1995-2011
Rethink Billable.

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA
At&t could push 100Mbps over U-verse if they wanted. Even more if they bonded. But they have been slow to do anything. I wouldn't say that is the technologies fault as much as it is At&t's.

Eventually they will have to roll out the fiber. But their copper could be putting out a lot more than it is.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
You are on crack.

AT&T could push 100mb to a extremely small % of their users. They can't even provide 24mb to a majority of their users now. That is in no way competition to cable.

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA
Doesn't matter how many they could reach. Point is VDSL2+ can push over 100Mbps and they do it quite often in other countries. Use bonding and you can increase the amount of people able to get 100Mbps substantially.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
Doesnt matter?

You are going to come here and claim they can do this as though it was just a flip of a switch when in fact it would require a major investment by them.

While we are living in the land of fairies and unicorns we could just say why dont they just ball up and run FTTH to pretty much eliminate 95% of their next 50 year of expansion cost while providing real speeds that copper will never provide.

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA
How does using a technology they are already using with the necessary infrastructure already in place require major investments? They already plan to start pushing out 75Mbps next year without spending much of an investment. They don't even need to use bonding to reach 100Mbps.

However they might as well use bonding, as they have many unused pairs available. Of course they are already doing this for IP-DSLAM and plan to make much more use of it, so it looks like the additional investment needed is pretty small or they wouldn't be doing it at all.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
Do you have any clue what you are talking about?

DSL is very distant limited. They provide such piss poor speeds because that is pretty much all they can provide with their current infrastructure without deploying fiber deeper into the neighborhoods. At that point, they might as well do it right and do FTTH.

There is only so much you can do with 2 pair of poorly shielded copper running hundreds if not thousands of meters. Even cat5 has issues beyond 100 meters and it is designed and installed to run at 100MB. How much blood do you really think they are going to squeeze out of this VDSL turnip?

Let's say they defy all logic and overcome every hurdle and get VDSL2 to work for lets say even 70% of their customers. Then what? Are the going to turn around and start deploying fiber just a little bit closer to accommodate some other makeshift DSL flavor that comes out?

silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA
I don't disagree with you. FTTH is the best way to go. But they are not going to do that before they absolutely have to. And they are going to do everything they can to make that as late as possible.