 IowaCowboyWant to go back to IowaPremium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA
 ·Comcast
 ·Verizon Broadban..
| A better idea A better idea would be cable TV overbuilders that are less focused on the TV business and more focused on broadband and VoIP offerings. An ideal company would build an HFC network using DOCSIS 3.0 with each node serving 500 customers maximum and offers a TV package that has only the most popular channels (such as Fox News, Weather Channel, the Disney Channel, Nickelodeon, Cartoon Network, local broadcast stations, discovery channel, etc) and about 100 channels maximum on their TV offering but would focus its core business on broadband and VoIP. The ideal company would have caps that allow for normal residential use and business grade plans with no caps. The ideal company would also treat all packets equal on a first come first serve basis and offer speeds that are generous but throttled to ensure that all users get full enjoyment of their connection (in other words, prevent a few bandwidth hogs on the node from ruining the experience of the majority of users on the node). The ideal company would also offer VoIP services that are competitive with other VoIP users but offer carrier grade reliability (like Comcast Digital Voice) and works with alarm dialers and fax machines. As for TV, the ideal provider would have a choice of set-top boxes that would either be full featured or no-frills (for the older generation). |
|
| The problem is cable overbuilders tend to fall behind because they don't have deep enough pockets. Even Imon, while having great service, is falling behind in speeds compared to Mediacom. Hopefully they will be able to catch up this year, but it is a constant battle. |
|
 FBGuyPremium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL | reply to IowaCowboy
I really don't know what TV has to do with Google Fiber. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Youre right, it has NOTHING to do with it at all. Google only provides TV service over their fiber. sigh.
I know all you cord cutters are in denial, but fiber would NOT sell without TV service. Youre all a very small percentage of subscribers going internet only.
Verizon FioS performs poorly in areas where they dont have signed TV franchises. |
|
FBGuyPremium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL | I would pay whatever the real price was without TV. Many of us would. |
|
| reply to ITALIAN926
FiOS performs poorly in many areas, even with TV. Despite the common opinion around here, many people are simply happy with what they have. Verizon DSL performs for what they need. Why change? |
|
| VZ FIOS uses GPON, it appears Google is using Active Ethernet, so doesn't have the GPON issues...
»www.gfiberforum.com/forum/thread···-or-GPON |
|
IowaCowboyWant to go back to IowaPremium
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon Broadban..
| reply to silbaco
One of the problems with ImOn (which I think may have bankrupted their predecessor McLeod USA) was they built both a PSTN and an HFC network. When I lived in Cedar Rapids, I had McLeod for a while and the line they ran to my house was a twin lead wire with one lead being an RG11 coaxial cable and the other being a twisted pair POTS line on the other lead coming from the pole. The system they have is too cumbersome to maintain. What I think ImOn should do is abandon the PSTN portion of their network and migrate their voice customers to VoIP using Arris or Cisco EMTAs so they could cut their outside plant costs in half. When they built their network (I remember them running their lines through our backyard in 1998), cell phones were a luxury and cable modem service was in its infancy so their network was an early design for triple plays. Now with VoIP being common and a PSTN sunset being the big telco's dream, they can deliver a triple play using an HFC plant and no longer need the PSTN part of the plant. Comcast (where I live) has been selling VoIP since 2005 or so.
A dream come true would be Verizon upgrading my area to FiOS but that is not going to happen in the near future. |
|
| reply to silbaco
Define "poor". They are approaching an overall 40% adoption rate, and thats not too shaby. |
|
| reply to xenophon
But neither GPON nor Active Ethernet will make a difference to the end user. They don't know the difference. To them, fiber is fiber. |
|
| reply to ITALIAN926
That's not very good considering how long many of these markets have had FiOS. Even with the help of Sandy.
In the markets near me with fiber (not FiOS) the adoption rate over DSL is more than 40% and the fiber has been active for less time. The TV service is a major driving factor. The other being faster speeds for the same price. |
|
mattmac
join:2011-03-27
West Palm Beach, FL | reply to silbaco
I don't understand the huge need for large amounts of bandwidth the house?I have 12 Mb with AT&T uverse it works fine for all my needs more bandwidth would be a waste! |
|
|
|
| reply to silbaco
With 3, sometimes 4 TV providers, I think 40% is pretty good. |
|
| reply to FBGuy
Personally, I despise TV of any kind; I'd rather run out to the nearest Interstate and "moon" the traffic than watch TV! But most people do NOT feel that way, and that is that. I'm just happy that TV addiction makes the wonderful Internet possible. |
|
| reply to mattmac
Bandwidth isn't like water, or electricity. It isn't "wasted." In fact, in most cases, newer and faster equipment uses less power than old antiquated versions.
Any time you do an update, any time you upload a video, or download a large file, you're wasting seconds, minutes, or even hours waiting for this to happen.
Nothing is wasted by having more bandwidth, only less. The faster the internet gets as a whole, the more productive we can be at work, and the more fun we can have at home. Nobody likes waiting, and there's no reason we should have to. ISPs are currently making way more money than they should from the amount of bandwidth they give us. |
|
