Bogged Down In Committee

Even if it does get settled in a couple of years, (yeah I'm doubtful..) you can't expect the Telco's to adopt/use the technology to its full potential(S. Korea as the example, 40Mbits for around $34.99 USD) because the companies are having a grand time charging you so much for so little right now..

Exactly, why even bother looking at VDSL. Ordinary DSL is and has been capable of 6-8 Meg and the Telcos have had it capped at 1.5 and less since deployment.

It would seem that in a capitalistic society such as ours in the US and other such countries, not only do you have the development of vdsl and the emerging speeds, but also price. This is great. I know that this creates competition but as long as there is not a government standard and WE as the consumers dictate the outcome, ( yes the companies are most interested in what they will get for what we will pay for ) this should benefit us. I hope that more than one standard ( or shall I say speed )is adopted and we get to chose price as per speed. As per the article, I quote "some companies are tinkering with 150Mbps VDSL" what is the UPLOAD and DOWNLOAD? If that is both ways then that would be a SWEET deal, albeit a little pricey tho.

And Im guessing that the cost of VDSL is over $2000/mo??

I doubt, maybe 49.95 to 99.95. Hell yea more speed = more pay but well worth it!

Again, it doesn't matter how long this standards debate lasts, the RBOCs are perfectly happy giving us slow speeds for more than what is charged in most other developed countries.

This VDSL that they speak of is over copper, right?? What about all the "fiber promises" being put out by the telcos? Which is it going to be? I say it's all a bunch of crap. Just blowing smoke.

Distance is the real problem for VDSL. max distance is 4,000 feet from the CO. Qwest has already scrapped further deployment of VDSL because they found its not the lucrative cash cow they thought it would be.

said by dvd536:

---

Distance is the real problem for VDSL. max distance is 4,000 feet from the CO. Qwest has already scrapped further deployment of VDSL because they found its not the lucrative cash cow they thought it would be.

---

VDSL is awesome, gimme gimme!!! Kudos to technology getting better all the time! :D:D

well if vdsl is deployed in an area logically that area might be the last to get ftth.

vdsl has great pottential in big citys such as new york, chicago, la, ect. but definetly not on the smaller citys. with a distance of 4000 ft the company is gonna want to get most peopl it can and that can only be acheived in big cities.

with the robust cable systems and wifi and power lines, this stands littel chance.

said by PhragX:

---

well if vdsl is deployed in an area logically that area might be the last to get ftth.

---

What kind of a dumb logic is that? Learn how to capitalize and spell right!
BTW, please stop trolling!

Maybe my logic is dumb, but a quick spell check failed to find any spelling errors.

No comment on trolling.

If a provider has invested significant capital in upgrading a network, in order to achieve ROI (return on investment) they are -obviously- going to attempt to keep that network in operation until it has paid for itself, and god forbid.. become profitable.

This is precisely why I hope that when the networks *are* upgraded, it is done with a 'future proof' solution: a well-implemented all-fiber network.

VDSL is just another barrier in the way of real progress.
[text was edited by author 2003-08-31 14:47:32]

You know what pisses me off? They keep trying to make new technology when they havn't even perfected the old. Hell I still cant get broadband, and there tinkering with sompthing thats not even worth it. Why not make a broadband that everyone can get no matter what. There has to be away, I wish I could get a 500 down 128 up and you people are screaming 42mb we want we want, when some people dont even have anything, pitiful. God damn be happy with what you got.... I would pay 100 a month for a 500/128 thats how bad I need it, just makes me mad seeing the telcos do this.

Im in the same boatload of crap your in Bob. I've got the money and I know they want to get their grubby paws on it. So what is the problem. I dunno.

Can they deploy VDSL RT's?
Erik

said by armyrebel4:

---

Can they deploy VDSL RT's?
Erik

---

The current RT's would have new cards deployed, and the fiber reprovisioned for higher speeds. So in essence your RT can also be any version you want... ADSL RT, VDSL RT, SDSL RT. You name it, it is built to do it. From what I have heard on this side of the fence.

The CEO's of the Baby Bells arrive at the latest committee
meeting ready for battle
[text was edited by author 2003-08-30 00:11:14]

You can't have VDSL without V-bigger pipes to the end user! There is no way it will work over garden variety POTS lines. Who is going to upgrade the last-mile pipes to Vee-Diesel grade... Cry Baby WaWa Bell? Not bloody likely! At this juncture the future of Vee-Diesel in the USA looks bleak.

We've had rate-adaptive DMT modulation over ADSL/SDSL lines for several years now... yet these bozos want to use CAP/QAM? If there's one lesson we've learned via the school of hard knocks, it's that CHEAPER IS NOT BETTER!

All of you are missing the point. If a telco deploys VDSL they will be able to offer voice, video, and data. They will probably cap your data rate at 2MB/sec or whatever the competing cable company is running. With the remaing bandwidth they will be able to offer cable tv service. Which is the golden fleece the telco's have been long dying to reach.

I agree. Frankly if they give me lets say 2 Mbps up and down, a tv signal and as many phone lines as I want. (probably up to 6 would be the norm.) then yes I will be happy. VERY VERY happy. As alot of people in the "know" would be. Although there will still be people who would refuse to use that service simply because its on a twisted pair. Huh. I thought those old phone lines were antiquated and good for nothing. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!

All I ever hear is people complaining. They want more bandwidth but they want it for $10. Oh, and Qwest has not scrapped the idea of VDSL, they just realized that it is too expensive for the average user. They are going to go for ADSL2 and/or ADSL2+. VDSL has been used for the last 3-4 years, just ask your friendly NLC representative. At high throttle it is going to be used in appartment buildings, major metropolitan areas, mdu, etc. For the regular customer it might be feasible for video on demand, but I doubt it, since there will have to be many RTs deployed. One great thing about the T1 committee is that they are trying to make the VDSL standard similar to the requirements of the ADSL standard. This means that ADSL will eventually become a subset of VDSL. The final solution will be fiber to the premise, but it is too expensive. Cripes!! just 4 years ago we were complaining that 56 kbps was not fast enough. Enjoy your ADSL if you can get, because it is a great solution for our present needs.

Prior to today I knew nothing about VDSL.

I am moving to Richardson, TX (aka the Telecom corridor) and discovered SBC is offering VDSL. 30 bucks a month for dynamic IP, including the lease of a $1500 vdsl RT. Does it really cost that much? They said it might be faster than my current ADSL. From what I've been reading here and elsewhere I see it has the potential to blow ADSL away.