 MJB
join:2012-01-29
 ·ACN DSL
 ·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Canada's Internet in 2100 LOL **** Canada's internet in 2100 still 5 - 10 mbit connections with dsl lines.. congested cable nodes. aggregated cable connections with tek/rogers one source of failure but congestion... canada is lacking while bell/rogers rape us to death.. at least they got unlimited but the price and the speed is **** third world countries have better internet than this ****.
what do you guys think canada's internet would look in the future.. opinions
slower speed or faster speed
data caps or no data caps
throttling or no throttling
high prices or lower prices...
ftth or no ftth. just dsl and cable
bell ands rogers deserve to be crushed by google fiber period...**** internet companies that can't do ****. |
|
 GuspazGuspazPremium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:19 | I have 50 meg DSL today, why would we only have 5 meg in 2100? Don't be stupid. The speed of internet in Canad has been steadily increasing over time. When I first got broadband, it was only 1 megabit, now I've got 50 megabit for about the same price.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org |
|
| reply to MJB
said by MJB:Canada's internet in 2100 still 5 - 10 mbit connections with dsl lines.. congested cable nodes. aggregated cable connections with tek/rogers one source of failure but congestion... canada is lacking while bell/rogers rape us to death.. at least they got unlimited but the price and the speed is **** third world countries have better internet than this ****.
what do you guys think canada's internet would look in the future.. opinions
slower speed or faster speed
data caps or no data caps
throttling or no throttling
high prices or lower prices...
ftth or no ftth. just dsl and cable
bell ands rogers deserve to be crushed by google fiber period...**** internet companies that can't do ****.
The situation is not as bleak as you would have us think. In certain provinces there is a massive FTTH program particularly with the following companies:
1. Telus (BC/AB)
2. SaskTel (SK)
3. MTS (MB
4. Bell Aliant (NB/NS/NL and a few others)
Bell Aliant Fibre Op coverage is already at 670,000 Households and the program was launched in 2009. That's quite an impressive coverage which is roughly 5% of Canada's population.
SaskTel began their program in 2011 after Trials and are planning to bring it to 8 Major city centers by 2017-2018.
MTS began in November 2012 and have already began construction and coverage in certain parts of Manitoba.
Bell is focusing currently on Greenfield housing subdivisions and areas for FTTH deployment (began in Q1 2012). I've heard that Brownfield with Aerial deployments is planned but I am not sure about Brownfield with buried copper drop. I'm sure their focus for Brownfield with buried copper drop is FTTN by 2015.
In terms of downtown Toronto FTTH is more accessible through Beanfield , Cityplace @ Telus and Bell however it is mostly through lofts/condo's that are located near the waterfront.
The situation is improving but other provinces are taking the lead in terms of FTTH Deployment primarily while Bell is focusing on mixed FTTH/FTTN in Ontario and Quebec. |
|
yyzlhr
join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| reply to MJB
Although FTTH is fantastic it's not the only way to get super fast speeds. Much of Europe and Asia is still using DOCSIS and VDSL2 technology. The speeds that most Canadians enjoy in urban centres is on par with other developed countries. Pricing and caps are another issue though.
As other have eluded to, Bell and also Rogers are deploying FTTH to the vast majority of new developments. In addition, coax has a lot of life left in it. Cable MSOs can also take advantage of future technologies such as DOCSIS 3.1 and EPON over Coax instead of going the more expensive route of overlaying fibre in existing developments. |
|
| reply to MJB
By that time it's all going to be wireless anyway so ftth will be something of the past. |
|
| reply to yyzlhr
said by yyzlhr: Cable MSOs can also take advantage of future technologies such as DOCSIS 3.1 and EPON over Coax instead of going the more expensive route of overlaying fibre in existing developments.
Not true necessarily. This isn't 2004 when the cost per house for FTTH was on average $4000. Verizon's Fios figures have shown that in 2010 they were able to get the figure down to roughly $600-650 per house. That's quite reasonable and not as expensive as you claim. |
|
|
|
| reply to Micha3615
OH ya lets forget about FTTH and the massive bandwidth usage we could get from it when we could get Wireless be allotted 10gigs of bandwidth and have to pay massive overages. great future to look forwarded to. |
|
 HiVoltPremium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:15
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
| reply to MJB
I just wonder how they will do a street like mine... everything is underground, and NOT in conduits... its buried raw about 5-6 feet down. I saw it when they were fixing my phone line a couple years back.
House power wires, cable tv, phone copper just laying next to each other...
--
|
|
yyzlhr
join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| reply to FTTHTechie
said by FTTHTechie :said by yyzlhr: Cable MSOs can also take advantage of future technologies such as DOCSIS 3.1 and EPON over Coax instead of going the more expensive route of overlaying fibre in existing developments.
Not true necessarily. This isn't 2004 when the cost per house for FTTH was on average $4000. Verizon's Fios figures have shown that in 2010 they were able to get the figure down to roughly $600-650 per house. That's quite reasonable and not as expensive as you claim. Verizon can rationalize that as they had nowhere to go with their copper infrastructure. Coax still has a lot of life in it, and there is no point spending that kind of money when it really isn't necessary yet. It makes sense for cable MSOs to wire new developments with a fibre last mile, and the vast majority are already doing that, however an overlay in existing areas doesn't make sense. |
|
| said by yyzlhr:said by FTTHTechie :said by yyzlhr: Cable MSOs can also take advantage of future technologies such as DOCSIS 3.1 and EPON over Coax instead of going the more expensive route of overlaying fibre in existing developments.
Not true necessarily. This isn't 2004 when the cost per house for FTTH was on average $4000. Verizon's Fios figures have shown that in 2010 they were able to get the figure down to roughly $600-650 per house. That's quite reasonable and not as expensive as you claim. Verizon can rationalize that as they had nowhere to go with their copper infrastructure. Coax still has a lot of life in it, and there is no point spending that kind of money when it really isn't necessary yet. It makes sense for cable MSOs to wire new developments with a fibre last mile, and the vast majority are already doing that, however an overlay in existing areas doesn't make sense. That's just one example. However Copper has a limited lifespan and eventually copper will have to be replaced. Considering that copper has an average lifespan of roughly 30 years whereas Fiber has about 100 it's obvious that fiber makes more sense to install.
Fiber is also easier to upgrade and doesn't require any major changes or upgrades for bandwidth upgrades. The same cannot be said of coax/copper which would require further amplification and repeaters and the very limited download/upload ratio it offers.
While both Fiber and Coax have shared bandwidth the difference in the field is how many users are connected to a node. For Cable it can be 100-200 roughly whereas Fiber can go up to 96 per node although typically it has 50-75% of that users per node.
It also does make sense to overlay an existing subdivision depending on whether it is buried or aerial. Coax proponents will claim that DOCSIS 3.0 has alot of life in it and DOCSIS3.1 and so forth but it's an attempt to milk the technology and stagnate deployment of FTTH. |
|
| reply to HiVolt
said by HiVolt:I just wonder how they will do a street like mine... everything is underground, and NOT in conduits... its buried raw about 5-6 feet down. I saw it when they were fixing my phone line a couple years back.
House power wires, cable tv, phone copper just laying next to each other...
They'll probably do directional boring similar to that shown in this SaskTel infiNET Youtube Video:
»www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi6bnluP4Ao |
|
 GonePremium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:3
·Start Communicat..
| reply to FTTHTechie
said by FTTHTechie :While both Fiber and Coax have shared bandwidth the difference in the field is how many users are connected to a node. For Cable it can be 100-200 roughly whereas Fiber can go up to 96 per node although typically it has 50-75% of that users per node. There is absolutely nothing stopping a cable company from deploying node sizes of 32-64 homes just like GPON. |
|
| reply to HiVolt
said by HiVolt:I just wonder how they will do a street like mine...
here's what you need
Google TiSP (BETA) |
|
HiVoltPremium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:15 | yea yea har har
--
|
|
HiVoltPremium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
kudos:15 Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
| reply to FTTHTechie
said by FTTHTechie :They'll probably do directional boring similar to that shown in this SaskTel infiNET Youtube Video:
(youtube clip)
O yeah, ditch witch... i saw them use it on the main road here... maybe that was phase 1, to run it along the main road, then sideways onto the small street...
still would be challenging as they'd have to basically dig everyone's lawn... i wonder if they will do it, if they will prepare the entire street with conduit first.
Anyway, I think i'll be stuck with VDSL for a while...
--
|
|
yyzlhr
join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| reply to FTTHTechie
said by FTTHTechie :It also does make sense to overlay an existing subdivision depending on whether it is buried or aerial. Coax proponents will claim that DOCSIS 3.0 has alot of life in it and DOCSIS3.1 and so forth but it's an attempt to milk the technology and stagnate deployment of FTTH.
It would make sense if technologies like DOCSIS 3.1 and EPON over Coax were not emerging. Overlaying fibre at this time or even in the next fe years, for most Cable MSOs would be costly, time consuming and intrusive. It's not just the construction costs that need to be factored in. All the back end provisioning and billing systems, and the CPE would need to be modified to support a PON based last mile. DOCSIS, when managed properly can effectively compete with FTTH for consumer applications. |
|
Reviews:
 ·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
| reply to MJB
I've seen designs for wifi on street lights etc. So it may be easier in the future to wire up the lights and poles (they need wires anyways) and provide super fast, low range home connections. Who knows... maybe we will be powering houses wirelessly by then too....
Imagination gone wild time:
It's not too hard to imagine a highly monitored and logged internet. The interfaces / hardware we use to connect may be designed to reinforce this. (think of an iphone experience designed by big brother).
Perhaps we are so interconnected it is seen more as a public service and delivered as such.
I wonder if we will see a split of "nets". While we may call the whole thing the internet. We might find sections are more regulated than others. Some websites might act more like TV channels. You need to subscribe to the rogers net to get to their content. Perhaps there will be a Cana-net accessible to only Canadians for civic responsibilities (voting?). There's the great firewall of China already. Getting data from certain geographical areas may require your computer to use certain routes to avoid censorship or monitoring as they travel through several different country's firewalls. I may need to tell my computer or use an ISP that avoids routes through China even if it means slower access. Perhaps routing control will be a premium paid service.
Just random ideas:
1. Everything is wired because we realized Wi-Fi and cell phones give us cancer
2. Most things are wireless because its convenient for home use. (2b. Wi-Fi gives us cancer. But we found the cure for that so no biggie.) |
|
| reply to Gone
said by Gone:said by FTTHTechie :While both Fiber and Coax have shared bandwidth the difference in the field is how many users are connected to a node. For Cable it can be 100-200 roughly whereas Fiber can go up to 96 per node although typically it has 50-75% of that users per node. There is absolutely nothing stopping a cable company from deploying node sizes of 32-64 homes just like GPON. Except costs/profits. They would need more links and that would cut into their costs and profits. |
|
TypeS
join:2012-12-17
London, ON Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
| reply to Micha3615
said by Micha3615:By that time it's all going to be wireless anyway so ftth will be something of the past.
Ya because business relying on dedicated internet access or private WANs are going to have that all go over wireless in the future.  |
|
GonePremium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
| reply to FiberToTheX
said by FiberToTheX:Except costs/profits. They would need more links and that would cut into their costs and profits. ... and this is different from the telcos how, exactly?
For what it's worth, RGoF neighbourhoods typically have "node" sizes and layout identical to a telco that is doing GPON FTTH. |
|
