 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Williamstown, NJ
kudos:5 | Welcome to the WIRELESS 21st century Looks like the lawmakers get it, even if the consumer advocate groups don't. Wireless is replacing wired connections. The under 30's group gets it. They have pretty much abandoned wired POTS and DSL. But just like radio hung on after TV debuted, POTS is quickly degrading in to irrelevancy. It will be around for a long time, but with fewer and fewer users as the older generations die off.
If the telcos weren't putting their infrastructure capital expenditures in to wireless, their shareholders would be looking to invest for the future elsewhere.
And fiber's future is in the backbone(where the US is already very strong and getting stronger) and not in the last mile - that last mile will be wireless.
--
I will be perfectly happy if the budget cuts specified in the Budget Control Act go into effect. 3 cheers for the sequester. Take the money from the drunken federal spenders. |
|
brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | Please stop making me laugh. This is such a joke. Wireless isn't even close to replacing wired connections (as in Internet, not voice traffic) with the useless caps and ridiculously high prices. If wireless was rolled out to replace wireline the network would collapse. |
|
| reply to Linklist
said by Linklist:The under 30's group gets it. They have pretty much abandoned wired POTS and DSL. Sorry, but wired connections aren't going anywhere. At current $/GB rates, if I switched to wireless my monthly bill will be over $15,000.
The reason DSL died is it's SLOW. Really, really slow. The absolute best, topmost tier around here is only ~2 mbps more then the slowest cable plan you can get, and you can only get that if you're practically next to the central office.
/M |
|
 The LimitPremium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2
 ·Windstream
| reply to Linklist
As an individual under 30, I'd have to say that apparently I don't get it because I'm definitely not a proponent for wireless last mile.
I hope that you honestly don't believe this.
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010) |
|
|
|
WHT
join:2010-03-26
Decatur, TX
kudos:5 | reply to Linklist
said by Linklist:Wireless is replacing wired connections. Correct..but with inferior and much more costly service. |
|
Reviews:
 ·DIRECTV
| EXACTLY.
But the pay off of the so called "public servants" is so pervasive that these companies can do as they please without any fear of penalty.
Anyone who things wireless is a "practical" solution for broadband only works for companies like Verizon or ATT.
The cost to consumers for these wireless service is OUTRAGEOUS! |
|
| reply to Linklist
Hahahahah. I have never seen some much nonsensical statements in one place. Wireless is replacing what? You made the under 30's look like fools. |
|
DolganPremium
join:2005-10-01
Sun Prairie, WI Reviews:
 ·Charter
| reply to Linklist
You really need to stop drinking the Telco Kool-Aid as Wireless is not even close to being able to handle the loads we place upon our wired infrastructure. Wireless can't even meet the total need that consumers have, so how do you expect it to also meet the needs of Businesses as well? How well would an all wireless call center work out for ATT and Verizon when you have to handle thousands of calls and meet data transport needs for all of the information the CSRs are typing in throughout the day? That's right--wireless would be an utter failure in that situation...it would be the same for most business that rely heavily upon Telecommunications and Data transport. We are many decades away from wireless even coming close to being ready to take over from wired networks...if they ever can. |
|
 NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:6
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to Linklist
said by Linklist:And fiber's future is in the backbone(where the US is already very strong and getting stronger) and not in the last mile - that last mile will be wireless.
Sorry, but the price of Last Mile wireless is beyond my budget. There must be a lot of 30-somethings earning in excess of $75,000 a year if current data plans and prices are going to be The Great DSL Killer.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
| reply to Linklist
said by Linklist:And fiber's future is in the backbone(where the US is already very strong and getting stronger) and not in the last mile - that last mile will be wireless. As some who knows way more about this than the original poster, I can tell you that is false. Fiber depth into the middle mile is slowly increasing. I've seen the presentations and attended a number of technical discussions on this topic from within two of large MSOs operating in the US. Once node sizes fall below a certain point, the cost of the electronics and equipment exceeds just running fiber right out of the node directly to the consumer. |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | reply to Linklist
The lawmakers get the checks, you mean.
A couple of years ago AT&T did this in Oklahoma. Wireless is a bad joke. On us. |
|
tkdslr
join:2004-04-24
Pompano Beach, FL Reviews:
 ·T-Mobile US
·Speakeasy
| reply to brad
said by brad:Please stop making me laugh. This is such a joke. Wireless isn't even close to replacing wired connections (as in Internet, not voice traffic) with the useless caps and ridiculously high prices. If wireless was rolled out to replace wireline the network would collapse.
I gave up on aDSL when my service deteriorated to 384Kb(D) of less for much of the evening(Uverse deployments). I went wireless for both data and voice, but NOT with AT&T.
I figure that's 50 to $60 a month AT&T will never see again.. 
As long as there are four major wireless providers, AT&T & Verizon are making a big mistake by dumping customers..
Once bitten twice shy.. |
|
| reply to saneblane
said by saneblane:Hahahahah. I have never seen some much nonsensical statements in one place. Wireless is replacing what? You made the under 30's look like fools.
I agree with the first 2 sentences 100%
As far as that third sentence, I'd have to say most of the under 30 crowd is so uneducated about almost everything, it's not even funny. They've had their faces buried in cell phones, games, and just generally being so spoiled rotten and given so many hand outs, the world is only going to CONTINUE to go down the tubes FASTER than any rock has ever sunk!!
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/ |
|
The LimitPremium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Windstream
| Sadly, this is the case. I see it everywhere I go, but I wouldn't limit it to the under 30 group. Almost everyone is like this. I can't talk politics with anyone unless it's during election season, and even then the scope of that conversation is very limited. People just don't care anymore.
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010) |
|
LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Williamstown, NJ
kudos:5 | reply to brad
said by brad:Please stop making me laugh. This is such a joke. Wireless isn't even close to replacing wired connections (as in Internet, not voice traffic) with the useless caps and ridiculously high prices. If wireless was rolled out to replace wireline the network would collapse.
Seems someone at Forbes agrees with me and spells out why:
»www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall···elevant/
--
I will be perfectly happy if the budget cuts specified in the Budget Control Act go into effect. 3 cheers for the sequester. Take the money from the drunken federal spenders. |
|
NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:6 Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by Linklist:Seems someone at Forbes ...
Is looking expectantly at wireless Internet which will offer 50 Mbps, with a 10 GB cap, and $10 for each GB over, for $65 a month. Good news for investor dividends, but I'll be damned if I am going to pay $915 per month for Internet!!! 
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
| reply to Linklist
This idea that wireless will replace fiber requires some snooping around for some ridiculous bandwidth numbers, so I went hunting on google and wikipedia for some statistics and specifications.
Google turned up that according to an article from Cisco, the global mobile data traffic at the end of 2012 was 885 petabytes per month (or 927,989,760 gigabytes per month). So we divide that by 30 days in a month, then 24 hours in a day, then 60 minutes in an hour, then 60 seconds in a minute and we arrive at an impressive 358 gigabytes per second.
According to wikipedia, in 2011 NEC achieved a data rate of 101 terabits per second on a single optical fiber 165 kilometers long. 101 terabits divided by 8 bits in a byte is 12.625 terabytes, multiplied by 1024 gigabytes in a terabyte is 12,928 gigabytes per second.
In other words on average you could fit the mobile traffic of the entire planet through a single optical fiber and still have over 35 times more bandwidth to spare. And from the looks of it, they aren't even beginning to approach the physical limits of data rates through fiber. I would say that fiber is in no danger of becoming outdated any time soon, it remains orders of magnitude faster than any other mode of long distance communication available. |
|
