|reply to silbaco |
Re: Actually, I have to agree with Time Warner and At&t for once
Lets see businesses deploying copper still. Lets look at those facts shall we?
1.) Copper is still capable of 1gbps (even 10gbps) at such short Ethernet lengths, are easily terminated and dont really require any special skills like fiber. 2.) Switches above 10gbps are not so common place yet and thus are still very expensive and not worth the added cost for a vast majority of businesses out there. 3.) Fiber for such short runs would be expensive because a major cost in fiber is the splicing and short runs totaling into the hundreds or even thousands for even an office of 500 people is not worth it when you consider #1 and #2 above. 4.) ISP's do not provide WAN links that would be usable at an affordable price for said speeds (reason we are here discussing this). 5.) Few servers are capable of utilizing even bounded multi-gigabit cards, especially servers that a vast majority of the businesses you are lumping together would use. Should I go on?
And I am calling BS on you knowing a company that deployed fiber to the desktop and went back to copper. Not that there arent some out there that did that and then during a remodel went the cheaper route (see #1-5 above). I just think you personally are full of crap and if it is a true statement, then it was probably to 3-5 workstations and a server. Your argument that it is more costly to maintain and is slower than copper shows your lack of knowledge, yet again. If you are truly going to tell me that running copper for a a quarter mile, mile or many miles is more reliable and faster than fiber you truly need to exit from this conversation. Or is it that you have been defeated on the ISP side so now you are attempting to bring this to a local level?
Fiber in the business doesn't really require many skills either. Fiber is not difficult. It is a bit pricey if you don't have the proper equipment.
1. But don't business want to be future proof by 15 years? Is that not what you are incompetently arguing for? I never said it was realistic. You did. Gigabit WANs are not very hard to come by just so you know. They just take money.
2. Call BS. Actually it was 3 floors and several hundred workstations and probably around a dozen servers. And actually, it was far more expensive to maintain. The cost of the hardware that failed at a pretty high rate was the main reason for installing copper. Again, you don't know what you are talking about.
When did I ever say running copper long distances was more reliable than fiber? Man you just keep making things up.
Fiber terminations require much more skill then copper. I am not talking about running a 3 foot patch cord that simply plugs in with an SC connection. I am talking about running the lines through the walls to the workstations period at length. You dont just cut and punch-down fiber.
1.) A non-isp business going 15 years out would be shear stupidity being that they will do 1 of 2 things within that time period A. Complete remodel or B. move locations. You brought in non-isp businesses to the argument concerning fiber, not me.
2.) Still calling BS on your part, but thanks for playing.
Lastly you are the one claiming copper is the way to go in an ISP conversation, did you not say that?