 
fewbuyersforthis
@verizon.net
| not a cheap upgrade not all cablemodem node infrastructures have been upgraded with fiber deep enough for this new switching. probably only cablevision would be a buyer of such technology, as others can't justify the cost given their current marketshare vs. benefits.
BTW, it would be a "monopoly provider" as well, have you seen an "off the shelf" 100/100 cablemodem lately? | |
|  | 
LiamJunket
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Ocean City, NJ
 ·Comcast
| Re: not a cheap upgrade said by fewbuyersforthis :
not all cablemodem node infrastructures have been upgraded with fiber deep enough for this new switching. probably only cablevision would be a buyer of such technology, as others can't justify the cost given their current marketshare vs. benefits. That is true. Comcast mostly has done fiber to the neighborhood implementations. To extend fiber to the pedestals or the poles outside of houses would mean a major upgrade that would take billions of dollars and many years.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
My Web Page | |
| | | 
phattieg
join:2001-04-29
Winter Park, FL
 ·Verizon Wireless B..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Re: not a cheap upgrade said by LiamJunket  :said by fewbuyersforthis :
not all cablemodem node infrastructures have been upgraded with fiber deep enough for this new switching. probably only cablevision would be a buyer of such technology, as others can't justify the cost given their current marketshare vs. benefits. That is true. Comcast mostly has done fiber to the neighborhood implementations. To extend fiber to the pedestals or the poles outside of houses would mean a major upgrade that would take billions of dollars and many years. No, not true. Considering Verizon is deploying it in only a matter of a few months for an entire city, the fiber is already there on the cable tv side, all the way to the neighborhood. This can easily be extended.
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. | |
| | | |
wrongagain
@verizon.net
| Re: not a cheap upgrade On the contrary, MOST providers are not FTTC (curbside) or for that matter "DEEP FIBER" under 5 miles to 100% of the homes passed. You need to check with the deployment maps of major service providers outside of cablevision land!
There are specific map locations of where the FTTX switches are deployed.. as they need to know EXACTLY where their equipment is in the field or you might have a bunch of mexicans-ahem- illegals walk off with your equipment and sell it for scrap (ahem, cough, cough, Miami)... Shameless electric fence shock for the mexicans out there, appologies in advance..
Look there are TWO sides of the coin here... upgrade for 95% of the cost now....... or make it completely fiber for the extra 5% and be able to sleep at night, knowing that you will just need to change nodes, end-user ont's and headend modulation equipment, or you can buy the complete upgrade package from narad later, seeing as it will be proprietary (one provider) that's a single edged sword cablevision is swollowing, and what happens if they get greedy down the road? Verizon is 3 off-the-shelf rfp's supporting ont, fiber lines, and head-end equipment. So unless they collude(illegal), that won't happen. | |
| | pabster
join:2001-12-09
Waterloo, IA
·Mediacom
| That all depends. Most have deployed FTTN. So it really depends how far off that node connection is. Where I live it isn't very far at all. Extending it to each house will involve costs, but not as much (nearly) as what Verizon is enduring with FiOS. | |
| | | 
sporkme
drop the crantini and move it, sister
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-01
Morristown, NJ
·Optimum Online
| Re: not a cheap upgrade said by pabster :That all depends. Most have deployed FTTN. So it really depends how far off that node connection is. Where I live it isn't very far at all. Extending it to each house will involve costs, but not as much (nearly) as what Verizon is enduring with FiOS. Exactly. Cable has the advantage of being able to do lots of things incrementally, whereas something like FiOS is a complete rebuild - that's obviously going to cost more.
--
Day dreaming days in a daydream nation | |
| 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ | in U.S.A? I'll take 100mbit upload!
-
unfortunately probably wont happen in my lifetime.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
| | 
Noah Vail
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA | Re: in U.S.A? Naa. Sorry.
It's only 256k up.
NV
--
Abortion: Improves the Gene Pool! | |
| | | sircyro
join:2000-08-24
Baltimore, MD
| Re: in U.S.A? Yea, that would suck. You'd could download and entire service pack in 2 minutes, but still not have enough bandwitdh to effectively talk on the phone via VOIP, play an online game, and send pictures via email at same time (assuming u have more than 1 PC). | |
| GhostDoggy
join:2005-05-11
Duluth, GA | $100 GigE media converter works, too But then again, you have to be 'willing' to deploy fiber. This is something The New Deathstar is unwilling to do. | |
| TheOtherPete
join:2001-06-28
Boyds, MD | Unveiled this week??? I thought CV was touting this service/technology last year : »Cablevision 100Mbps
How could the hardware just be available now, one year later? | |
| | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO | Re: Unveiled this week??? Because it is like the processor industry: Even though we have the technology and working models, only release minor upgrades at a time that will demand an additional fee for a short period of time. | |
| | | EngineerDave
join:2001-08-27
Hattiesburg, MS
| Re: Unveiled this week??? You, Sir, are ignorant about product development. New products have higher prices because the producer of the product has to recoup their R&D costs.
For example, when the Motorola Razr was first released it was priced at $200 ($300 maybe?). Now you can get one for less than $100. Also, as the product life cycle continues, we see different variations of that product. In this example it is different colors.
So, my point is that you are incorrect to assume that a company arbitrarily sets a high price because they just feel like it. The price is higher initially because of the costs involved with developing that product. | |
| | | | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| Re: Unveiled this week??? Though I appreciate your attempted insight I disagree with your personal attack, nor did I claim anything to the contrary to what you say.
I understand R&D perfectly, along with the price associated with it. However, if you think they just happen to get that extra 100mhz or 300mhz to release that next process through some amazing development discovery you my friend are the ignorant one. Though I do not believe you are making that claim, but if you are then I call a duck a duck.
My claim is simply that Intel knows what each new processor is fully capable of at the time of development. They CHOOSE to release that new processor in slight increments to aide in the recovery of that R&D. Which is contrary to releasing the best product they can at a price the market will bear. | |
| | 
Tzale
Proud Libertarian Conservative
Premium
join:2004-01-06
upstate NJ
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
| said by TheOtherPete :I thought CV was touting this service/technology last year : » Cablevision 100MbpsHow could the hardware just be available now, one year later? Because not until now did they perfect the technology required to provide this service to all in a large geographic area.
It's going to be a year or two until we see this really start rolling out in some places in CV's territory. Reason? FIOS rollouts need to catchup and put some more heat on CV. CV just finished their rollout of free 15/2 to everyone, so now Verizon needs to do something to counteract that.
-Tzale
--
»www.hello-radio.org/
| |
| | | TheOtherPete
join:2001-06-28
Boyds, MD
| Re: Unveiled this week??? said by Tzale :It's going to be a year or two until we see this really start rolling out in some places in CV's territory. Reason? FIOS rollouts need to catchup and put some more heat on CV. CV just finished their rollout of free 15/2 to everyone, so now Verizon needs to do something to counteract that. VZ has already countered by raising the FIOS speeds (at no additional charge) from 15/2 to 20/5 in the areas it competes with CV. | |
| | | | grandpinaple
join:2006-01-03
New York, NY
| Re: Unveiled this week??? Yeah Cablevision will probably deploy this in places where there is 20/5 FIOS for 45$ per month. Does this mean Verizon may crank up speeds to as much as 100/100? Does this mean Verizon may actually be at a disadvantage with their upload being 155 per node? or is the new Cablevision technology also shared. | |
| | | | | TheOtherPete
join:2001-06-28
Boyds, MD
| Re: Unveiled this week??? said by grandpinaple :Yeah Cablevision will probably deploy this in places where there is 20/5 FIOS for 45$ per month. Does this mean Verizon may crank up speeds to as much as 100/100? Does this mean Verizon may actually be at a disadvantage with their upload being 155 per node? or is the new Cablevision technology also shared. CV fiber has the same limitations as VZ.
VZ has up to 32 users per fiber backhauled all the way to CO. How many CV customers are there per fiber strand? I bet its more.
My point being, if CV doesn't have the network infrastructure to provide the bandwidth end to end then providing a 100/100Mbps connection to a user is pointless. | |
| bogey780
join:2004-03-19
Here | FTTC VDSL2 can do the same using FTTC. Just an FYI. | |
| majortom1981
join:2004-08-26
Lindenhurst, NY
1 edit | hmm The narad whitepapers stated it depends on how you want it.
It did not say anything about wiring fiber to the curb.
the whitepapers stated that was an option.
What would have to be done is put equipment at the node/tap and home.
Not a singe thing of laying fiber clsoer has to be done.
notice how the article states "For high-capacity residential broadband, the switch can be used in fiber-to-the-curb network designs, imitating passive optical network (PON) systems but at a lower cost, according to Narad. For fiber-to-the-curb applications, the Narad switches can be placed at existing coax cable taps where the fiber meets the coax connection to the customer. "
Notice CAN BE USED FOR FIBER TO THE CURB
It can also be done without replacing the existing coax with fiber.
Think of this equipment like you are replacing a hub with a Switch | |
| | 
brooklynman4
join:2004-09-07
Brooklyn, NY | Re: hmm I bet cablevision will the first one sine they got the connection with them | |
| | TheOtherPete
join:2001-06-28
Boyds, MD
| said by majortom1981 :The narad whitepapers stated it depends on how you want it. It did not say anything about wiring fiber to the curb. the whitepapers stated that was an option. What would have to be done is put equipment at the node/tap and home. Not a singe thing of laying fiber clsoer has to be done. notice how the article states "For high-capacity residential broadband, the switch can be used in fiber-to-the-curb network designs, imitating passive optical network (PON) systems but at a lower cost, according to Narad. For fiber-to-the-curb applications, the Narad switches can be placed at existing coax cable taps where the fiber meets the coax connection to the customer. " Notice CAN BE USED FOR FIBER TO THE CURB It can also be done without replacing the existing coax with fiber. If they dont do fiber to the curb then they can't offer all customers anywhere near 100Mbps/100Mbps.
If coax is used to backhaul multiple customers to the point in the network where fiber meets coax (e.g. not implement fiber to the curb) then all the customers downstream of that fiber/coax point are going to be sharing that coax segment.
Narad can only squeeze so much additional bandwidth out of coax, I believe they quote 100Mbps.
You can't have X customers running @ 100Mbps/100Mbps sharing a 100Mbps backhaul segment (unless you want really unhappy customers). | |
| | | tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Floral Park, NY
| Re: hmm Narad would seem to sell cablecos a version of the sun, moon and stars fttx switches that can cook dinner, babysit your kids and make you look younger at the same time!
Its not rocket-science and is technically old technology (5+ years). The point is that cablecos have NOT had a REASON to buy the stuff. Losing 40% penetration of their markets in broadband is a good reason (to the tune of a few million per year revenue).
Unfortunately, both cablecos and telcos are looking VERY carefully at 'the issue of' ramping up speeds *cautiously* to allow leveraging their last mile for CONTENT they SELL to the consumer "PRE-LOADED" like a holodeck simluation in the consumer's minds. **see net-neutrality debate**
Despite cableco upgrades that take 18-30 months depending if you count the 2 towns they deployed and opened within the first 3 months of deployment.
Telco nodes can give 30/5 as the basic package without breaking a sweat. Beyond that, telcos have to upgrade ONT's to generation 2 and utilize gigabit ethernet for CPE interface. This is due to the fact that to properly deploy 100/100 you need 1000/1000 ethernet segment to properly get 80-99% of the bandwidth throughput due to overhead. Cablecos are not immune to giving customers *NEW* equipment for the increased speeds. Some analysts in the industry would say they haven't paid off the investment in the old equipment. Which is a plus for telcos, as DSL has a second halflife for customers who are on dialup. Show me a docsis 1.0 modem and I'll show you a door-stop.
FYI, my MOBO has 1000 ethernet and cat5e can do 1000/1000 decently in the range of 100/100. So, I'm ready! Just upgrade the ONT and send me that sweet 1000/1000 wanport router..
| |
| patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| FIOS/FTTH for Cable Companies!!! Let me think, if NARAD is saying "tap" that must mean the grey box where the rg-6 coax from my house plugs into »www.sciatl.com/customers/Source/7006343.pdf . Well if there is a single fiber strand going into each tap, sounds like FTTH to me. Sounds like the only thing non-fiber is the drop into the house. If there will be a fiber termianted at each house or tap (tap=4-10 houses), why doesnt the cable co just go 100% FTTH, whats the difference between puting a FIOS terminal box and a FIOS ONT the pole, then running the coax, phone, and ethernet to the house? Sounds like FTTH with a TOKEN amount of coax so cable co can say "We arent copying FIOS FTTH" and regulatorily still can be a "cable co". I think NARAD is the closest to FTTH that can be done without a fiber cable touching a customer's house. I dont see the point of this, wouldnt it be cheaper to put a Fiber terminal box which is passive on the pole than a multi user ONT? Actually no, since 1 multi user ONT that only spits out coax is cheaper than 5 single house ONTs that have to spit out POTS and Ethernet too. Also carefully note that this 100mbit per user is FTTC, not FTTN, with every tap replaced, not FTTN. I think cable companies will only impliment FTTN, since its cheap, and FTTC is practically FTTH in this case. Also if cable co impliments the FTTN variant, why dont they replace the CMTS with a DOCSIS 3 1ghz node and get the same thing? NARAD will be dead in 1/2-2 years if its just a competitor to DOCSIS 3. NARAD seems to be snake oil. Has anyone seen NARAD equipment in the field in CV territory yet? Also is CV actually TESTING in the field or WILL BE TESTING narad? | |
| | SeekHelp
join:2006-05-27
New York, NY
| Re: FIOS/FTTH for Cable Companies!!! ???????
First of all docsis 3 has not been released yet. 2nd What makes you think Narads product wont be compatible with docsis ? 3. Channel bonding is a mathematical concept design.
The big difference you are asking about is price. Replacing coax with fiber optic cabling is very expensive as shown by Verizon's clumsy attempt. Where it doesnt make financial sense to do so it should not be done, its just not necessary right now for cable co's like cablevision.
Verizon is spending 50% of their revenue on fios upgrade, its going to be a long road, hopefully shareholders wont bail before and shut your hopes down... | |
| | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| Re: FIOS/FTTH for Cable Companies!!! said by SeekHelp :??????? First of all docsis 3 has not been released yet. 2nd What makes you think Narads product wont be compatible with docsis ? 3. Channel bonding is a mathematical concept design. 100mbit per hardline coax shared among all users, docsis qam256 40mbit a channel. NARAD is 2.5 DOCSIS channels. Whats the improvment? Unless NARAD is a partner in developing DOCSIS 3, why would it be it be compatible? Its obviously a proprietory solution that is a competitor to DOCSIS 3 since DOCSIS 3 wont be out for a while. | |
| | | |
|
|
Narad Flips Switch on 100Mbps Service