NormanSI gave her time to steal my mind away MVM join:2001-02-14 San Jose, CA TP-Link TD-8616 Asus RT-AC66U B1 Netgear FR114P
|
to cramer
Re: Recovering POTSsaid by cramer:Everybody loves to trot out that straw man. Just because the gov didn't "write a check" does not mean they didn't get money from them. (i.e. by not paying various taxes, fees, rents, etc. ...) Good luck getting them to repay those tax breaks. I think the courts generally frown on ex-post facto actions by the government; i.e., they can't sanction you for doing something last year, when it was legal, just because it was outlawed this year. |
|
|
Jtchadwell to NetFixer
Anon
2015-Jan-20 7:51 pm
to NetFixer
That's not true at all quit making up lies and false rumors!!! |
|
skjWelcome to the far side of reality Mod join:2002-04-04 Gone South |
skj
Mod
2015-Jan-20 7:54 pm
said by Jtchadwell :That's not true at all quit making up lies and false rumors!!! It is true. -------------------------- At decade's end, the trusty landline telephone could be nothing more than a memory.
Telecom giants AT&T and Verizon Communications are lobbying states, one by one, to hang up the plain, old telephone system, what the industry now calls POTS--the copper-wired landline phone system whose reliability and reach made the U.S. a communications powerhouse for more than 100 years. ------------------------------- » www.wsj.com/articles/SB1 ··· 38954500 |
|
|
to NormanS
said by NormanS:Actually, the "fake" AT&T is a relation of Ma Bell; the bastard daughter, so to speak. And what an ugly and nasty biatch she is too. LOL quote: You do realize that the amount returned under that stipulation would be $0.00, yes? Verizon and AT&T cashed no government checks. They didn't cash checks but they did take billions on taxpayer funding to build all those long lines over many decades.
So Norman what do you think my idea of having Ma's long lost cousin (Bell Canada) purchasing the long lines (fiber too) when they are spun off from ATT and Verizon in the near future?
Bell Canada is far from perfect, however they do seem dedicated to building a totally fiber long lines network in Canada. |
|
your moderator at work
hidden :
|
|
to ham3843
Re: Recovering POTSSo you're okay with the caps they have right? After all if you take one part you take another? And the whole Canadian thing with the open networks is a mess. A regulated bell system solves nothing, POTS is a thing of the 19th Cent and going away. It's time to move on and see that IP is now here. Even in Canada you get VOIP for phone if you want FTTH. Kill the useless PSTN and move on. Hell, the networks have been converting for IP for over 10years now once your call hits the CO. |
|
96964493 |
to mackey
Actually those 18meg connections are the IP DSL service. NOT the VDSL service. There is a difference. One is ADSL2+ the other is VDSL. Many areas only have aDSL2+ over the VDSL product. |
|
|
mackey Premium Member join:2007-08-20 |
mackey
Premium Member
2015-Jan-20 8:46 pm
said by 96964493:Actually those 18meg connections are the IP DSL service. NOT the VDSL service. There is a difference. One is ADSL2+ the other is VDSL. Many areas only have aDSL2+ over the VDSL product. No duh. at&t still calls it "Uverse" though. |
|
|
to 96964493
said by 96964493:So you're okay with the caps they have right? After all if you take one part you take another? And the whole Canadian thing with the open networks is a mess. A regulated bell system solves nothing, POTS is a thing of the 19th Cent and going away. It's time to move on and see that IP is now here. Even in Canada you get VOIP for phone if you want FTTH. Kill the useless PSTN and move on. Hell, the networks have been converting for IP for over 10years now once your call hits the CO. Not a fan of those kind of caps but perhaps they might change certain elements when operating in the USA. I agree that copper must go and that is why Bell Canada seems to be a good fit, they are basically only installing new fiber lines and gradually removing the copper when they overlay an area with fiber. They really do seem dedicated to fiberline services. |
|
NetFixerFrom My Cold Dead Hands Premium Member join:2004-06-24 The Boro Netgear CM500 Pace 5268AC TRENDnet TEW-829DRU
1 edit |
to Jtchadwell
said by Jtchadwell :That's not true at all quit making up lies and false rumors!!! I strongly suggest that you take your head from the dark moist area where it seems to reside, and start reading a newspaper, or perhaps visit a few on-line news sources occasionally. Even this site's front page news might be a good place to start: » FCC Approves Frontier Acquisition of AT&T's CT Networks» Union Boss Now Approves Frontier Takeover of AT&T in CT» Regulators Balk at Frontier's Acquisition of AT&T's CT Network» Frontier Buys All AT&T Landline Operations in Connecticut» Connecticut Users See DSL, TV Outages in Switch From AT&TToday, Connecticut -- tomorrow, the remaining 21 AT&T states. |
|
NormanSI gave her time to steal my mind away MVM join:2001-02-14 San Jose, CA TP-Link TD-8616 Asus RT-AC66U B1 Netgear FR114P
|
to ham3843
said by ham3843:So Norman what do you think my idea of having Ma's long lost cousin (Bell Canada) purchasing the long lines (fiber too) when they are spun off from ATT and Verizon in the near future? Actually, I'd be happy if my current ISP (Sonic.net) could run fiber to all of their current Fusion customers before AT&T pulled the plug. |
|
DMS1 join:2005-04-06 Plano, TX |
to NetFixer
People who don't understand why AT&T, and I presume Verizon too, want to get rid of regulated POTS service just don't understand how the communications infrastructure is going to change in the next decade. We are going to end up with: * Virtually everything will have data connectivity - and by everything I mean anything with a power source. This is the Internet-of-Things. * Almost all this connectivity will be wireless as far as end-user devices are concerned. * The current distinction between local wireless (Wifi) and cellular wireless (LTE) will go away. The currently ongoing 5G work already addresses this. * There will be a hierarchy of wireless access points, each with different ranges, bandwidth and ownership models - hotspots, EnodeBs, small cells, smart meters, peoples own handsets etc. * There will probably be a shift to a billing model whereby a user just pays a monthly rate for a data tier, regardless of how that data actually gets to them. For example, you could move from a local hotspot when at home to a small cell when roaming. * Voice will become just another service (a very low bandwidth one at that) on this universal dataplane.
With all that in mind, why would any sane network operator want to be tied to providing late-19th century copper loops for a few Luddites? |
|
|
biotech
Anon
2015-Jan-21 12:25 pm
said by DMS1:With all that in mind, why would any sane network operator want to be tied to providing late-19th century copper loops for a few Luddites? My reasons: 1. Dedicated connection for voice (VoIP must work in tandem with an internet connection) 2. Reliability over 100 years because of "sane" people caring for the PSTN 3. Power over copper (both RT and C.O) 4. Screw the internet of things. End. |
|
kenn10 join:2003-09-10 Highlands, NC |
to Craiger
Of course they want everyone on LTE wireless data. Let's see, you get about 2Mb of data for $55. Imagine those who currently use around 150Mb of data over their cable, Uverse or DSL service. Wireless isn't regulated like fixed line services and the sky will be the limit on pricing. |
|
silbaco Premium Member join:2009-08-03 USA |
to mackey
But can LTE reliably deliver 18 Mbps? The caps would likely have to be extremely low (Home Fusion style) to prevent people from using it. |
|
mackey Premium Member join:2007-08-20 |
mackey
Premium Member
2015-Jan-21 2:19 pm
said by silbaco:But can LTE reliably deliver 18 Mbps? Depends. In a crowded area then maybe not, but in a sparse area it should be doable. |
|
DMS1 join:2005-04-06 Plano, TX |
to silbaco
said by silbaco:But can LTE reliably deliver 18 Mbps? LTE as it stands today - not so much, but with a wide-scale LTE-A deployment of small cells, techniques such a CoMP and eICIC will allow for much higher speeds than this. |
|
|
hyphenated to biotech
Anon
2015-Jan-21 4:06 pm
to biotech
A lot of people have like .5-1M upstream. You can't talk on that very much with it shared between all devices on a LAN these days, on top of that a crappy modem. Etc |
|
rtfm join:2005-07-09 Washington, DC 1 edit
1 recommendation |
to DMS1
said by DMS1:* Virtually everything will have data connectivity - and by everything I mean anything with a power source. This is the Internet-of-Things. Where are my flying cars? They promised flying cars. said by DMS1:* Almost all this connectivity will be wireless as far as end-user devices are concerned. Maybe on the refrigerators & door openers, but far from sure on real users..... said by DMS1:* The current distinction between local wireless (Wifi) and cellular wireless (LTE) will go away. The currently ongoing 5G work already addresses this Never in a million years. Bandwidth shall always be scarce; the laws of physics ain't going away. Further, the cell carriers paid billions for their near-monopolies; and they will get lot$ from them. said by DMS1:* There will probably be a shift to a billing model whereby a user just pays a monthly rate for a data tier, regardless of how that data actually gets to them. Sure!!! |
|
|
ham3843
Member
2015-Jan-22 12:45 am
I wonder if DSM1 is the CEO of Verizon Wireless or one of his underlings? LOL
He is deluded LTE will never, ever, be a substitute for the consistency, reliability, and practicality, of wired fiber lines. Not only that the consumer will not take being bent over on paying for LTE any more than they are with the rising cost of pay TV services. |
|
|
to cramer
said by cramer:I've seen their attempt at LTE-B. The amount of RF spectrum it would take to do this for more than a few fad ESPN events is insane. "Wireless Cable" has been tried many times before -- and failed every time.
How well is your cell reception? How about traditional OTA broadcast stations? (and they operate at many orders of magnitude more power) ~ 8 720p "channels" in h.265 in 5Mhz is what I keep seeing demoed. The demand for live TV is pretty dead so I would imagine most information would be sent during off peak times. LTE-B would be for fixed devices with larger antennas. |
|
smk11 |
to silbaco
said by silbaco:But can LTE reliably deliver 18 Mbps? The caps would likely have to be extremely low (Home Fusion style) to prevent people from using it. Yes, up to 1Gbps for fixed. Price? Your first born. Caps? Unbelievably low. But the important thing would be cost for telco. Feed one tower and profit or fix the copper mess that is regulated. Tough one. Rural areas would likely see the highest bandwidth because of how few users. Cell towers may be future "water holes" as people search for fast internet. |
|
rtfm join:2005-07-09 Washington, DC |
rtfm
Member
2015-Jan-23 1:08 pm
Factual question:
When you have U-Verse over POTS; is there a POTS line card in the VRAD;
or
does the feed come from the CO line card, go through the VRAD's card, and on the subscriber? |
|
gadawg join:2006-01-27 Louisville, KY |
to smk11
The government should make the telco and cable co's run fiber to existing areas and require fiber in new construction. |
|
|
Yes, because there are certain elements of infrastructure that have not, will not, and cannot be implemented correctly unless there is sufficient regulation requiring it be done. This is the reason why the old Bell System created the best phone system that was the envy of the world, until things were deregulated. If we want a highly functional, reliable broadband pipeline for all citizens the gov't needs to re-regulate the system. |
|
|
to rtfm
said by rtfm:Factual question:
When you have U-Verse over POTS; is there a POTS line card in the VRAD;
or
does the feed come from the CO line card, go through the VRAD's card, and on the subscriber? No, POTS continues coming from it's original destination (ie CO or RT). I believe they attach a jumper to the VRAD and it passes through a filter and then back out another jumper to the F2 side in the crossbox and off to the customer premise. Uverse techs correct me if I'm wrong. |
|
|
to DMS1
said by DMS1:People who don't understand why AT&T, and ... Verizon ... want to get rid of regulated POTS service ... don't understand how the communications infrastructure is going to change in the next decade. ... Wow, this all sounds fabulous. It might rival the Russian Revolution, the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, in the improvements it brings to the life of Josef Sixpack, or maybe even Ivan Denisovich. It's a good thing telekom isn't part of the unregulated capitalist system, or this might end up benefiting mostly managers and stockholders instead! |
|
rtfm join:2005-07-09 Washington, DC |
to GusHerb
said by GusHerb:No, POTS continues coming from it's original destination (ie CO or RT). So a VRAD does not qualify as a RT? Or a RT would be next to it? When I think of such, it's a SLC-96 or SLC-FO..... but I'm in Verizontal-land... |
|
mackey Premium Member join:2007-08-20 |
mackey
Premium Member
2015-Jan-23 8:54 pm
said by rtfm:So a VRAD does not qualify as a RT? Correct, a VRAD does data (DSL) only. said by rtfm:Or a RT would be next to it? Depends on where the phone signal is coming from. If from a RT then the RT may or may not be close to the VRAD. If from the CO then it could be anywhere. |
|
cramer Premium Member join:2007-04-10 Raleigh, NC |
cramer
Premium Member
2015-Jan-23 9:16 pm
True. But they could stick a softswitch/mini-SLC in there to provide voice. ('tho I cannot fathom them going to the expense.) |
|