how-to block ads
|
lml2000
Whazzup
join:2000-08-17
Los Angeles, CA
 ·RoadRunner Cable
|  Some Interpretation
First, the general consensus is correct; the map is not 100 percent accurate; its just an estimate.
More importantly, I think before one jumps to immediate conclusions, what would be real interesting to see is these green/red dots laid over a similar map that is solid, but varying in color, that indicates of relative concentrations of population, residential and commercial. I cite commercial because commercial, more than residential population drives installation of DSLAMs in a CO.
I would also question how current this map is. Telcos are outfitting COs every week with DSL equipment. In California, PacBell has a clear priority of which COs were to be outfitted with DSL equipment before others. Obviously, COs serving more rural populations were placed at the bottom of the list, and this is understandable. Nevertheless, the installations in PB COs continues in the backdrop behind the much more focused-upon Project Pronto.
It all boils down to concentrations of population. In larger populations centers, you have higher concentrations of people who don't have DSL because they're more than 18 K-ft out along the loop, than you have in small populations centers such as El Central, where some in that community can access DSL if they live close enough to the CO. But it is the more remote locations, service by more remote COs, where population concentration really does not exist, that IMHO distort the immediate conclusions presented by the map.
You look at NM, UT, WY, ID, WY and you certainly don't see much green. Well, outside of the larger cities in these states, where is there any significant concentration of population to warrant immediate deployment of DSLAMs in the switching office. These demographics are why many believed that USW would be the last of the RBOCs to find a partner. Surprising, Qwest took the nut.
IMHO, most of the areas will be prime markets for fixed wireless providers. It just doesn't make sense to invest is new technology is many of these small remote COs just to service a potential market of no more than 100 subscribers, where penetration might not exceed 50 percent (50 subs). The economics of fixed wireless lends itself to less dense markets, but obviously these providers are focused in the larger metropolitan markets right now. In later years they will turn to under-served markets.
--
Regards,
lml | |
justin
Australian
join:1999-05-28
Brooklyn, NY
Host:
IPv6
Business Connectiv..
Home/Office setup ..
Console/Handheld g..
Console Tech
| Good summary.
The data is three months old, by the way, although we can and should do a more uptodate one. Certain telcos (verizon for example) are also not interested in providing dslreports.com with availability, so we rely on what few partner ISPs they do have that are brave enough to input availability correctly.
Perhaps a more public and permanent availability map might shame some of these guys into getting off their butts and providing easier availability information to the public, rather than, like SBC, requiring people enter their telephone account number over a 128bit encrypted browser session, before being told whether or not they can get DSL.
How else can people plan where (not) to move to if availability is such a closely guarded secret?
One of the big shames of the DSL industry is they have completely failed to promote their own technology by providing a free public and correct combined availability resource.. instead they regard this information rather like microsoft regards its operating system source code. | |
lml2000
Whazzup
join:2000-08-17
Los Angeles, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
|  Thanks for the commentary, justin.
I would also raise the same criticisms of the cable industry as they are no different, and if different, much less forthcoming than the telcos. I have a much more difficult time obtaining reliable information from my MSO: (1) what kind of upgrade my neighborhood will receive; (2) when; (3) where's the fiber; (4) how many subs will be on the node; etc.
I can't comment on VZ as I live in So. Calif., but I will agree that SBC seems to have a much better handle on their DSL effort than VZ. Here in CA, I just speculated in 1998-99 that GTE sat on its hands not really knowing what they were gonna do with DSL until the merger with BEL rec'd FTC, FCC approval and the merger finally closed, allowing new management to take over. PB, as you know, tried to push DSL technology here in CA in the early 90s, but the entire program just collapsed. So, in some respects, PB was able to hit the ground running in 1997-98 when it came to what they had to accomplish, administratively, with their DSL rollout. I dunno what experience, if any, the folks at GTE or BEL had in DSL. My guess is little, next to none.
--
Regards,
lml | |
|
