Cox: Our Non-Fiber Network Is In Fact Fiber Cable industry somewhat ashamed of coaxial use Yesterday Cox announced that they were launching 50 Mbps broadband service in Las Vegas. In the announcement, local Las Vegas Cox executive Marilyn Burrows did something strange: she explained the Cox network in reasonable, realistic terms -- addressing its "non fiber" aspects and plainly exploring how DOCSIS 3.0 allows coaxial based infrastructure to achieve new heights. Why was this strange? To combat Verizon FiOS, the cable industry has been engaged in an industry-wide advertising campaign that tries to confuse customers into thinking last mile and core network fiber are essentially the same thing. The claims have been at the heart of several truth in advertising debates. The National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureau recently urged Cablevision to change a number of their ads claiming they offer "America’s most advanced fiber optic network." Apparently, Burrows didn't get the memo that the cable industry isn't in the business of describing their networks as anything other than cutting edge fiber. In a follow up statement to the media, Cox spokesman David Deliman suggests that Burrows "wasn't very clear" when she very clearly, in fact, explained that Cox's network (gasps) actually uses coaxial: Unfortunately, one of our statements wasn’t very clear about the architecture of our network, which is fiber based. We used the term ‘non-fiber’ to describe only the last-mile connectivity of an advanced network that allows Cox customers to experience some of the fastest broadband speeds in the marketplace. To be clear, Cox’s Las Vegas system, like all of our cable systems, is built around an extensive network of fiber, and more than 90 percent of the path between the customer and the Cox headend is fiber. Via DOCSIS 3.0 technology and our network investments, we are delivering among the fastest speeds in Las Vegas and the nation. We’re very proud of our fiber networks across the country." Hopefully Burrows learned her lesson and won't make the same mistake of accurately describing Cox's HFC (hybrid fiber-coax) network again.
|
 | | You shook the tree... You know who is going to fall out off it now arguing that the marketeers are absolutely right. | |
|  | | | Re: You shook the tree... Why is Cox spamming these (and other) forum(s)? Getting a little desparate Cox? Can't handle a little competition from FIOS.
My connection has always been crap and I'll be headed to Verizon FIOS ASAP.
You're doomed Cox. Face it. | |
|
| | Works for me.... Would be nice to have FTTH from Cox, but their current service works just fine for me.
Have the Cox Bundle and have experienced only one outage with the phone (which was area-wide), but other services have been rock solid at my location. | |
| |  statestress magnetPremium,Mod
join:2002-02-08
Purgatory
kudos:6 | Re: Works for me.... As long as they provide the speeds I'm paying for, I don't care if it's delivered with shoestrings tied together hanging from the pole. | |
| | |  wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Works for me.... said by state:As long as they provide the speeds I'm paying for, I don't care if it's delivered with shoestrings tied together hanging from the pole. I tend to agree with that statement. A lot of people (here specifically) get a little too excited by the term 'fiber', when at the end of the day it really doesnt mean anything. Assuming the provider can give you solid service, the delivery medium is rather pointless.
--
God bless America, God bless our troops, and God help us destroy the Islamic terrorists.
»www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html
| |
| | | | | | Re: Works for me.... said by wifi4milez: I tend to agree with that statement. A lot of people (here specifically) get a little too excited by the term 'fiber', when at the end of the day it really doesnt mean anything. Assuming the provider can give you solid service, the delivery medium is rather pointless. Yea, yea.....enjoy your non fiber internet as over here fiber can actually mean 100/100MBps speeds which cable can't even achieve! | |
| | | | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Works for me.... said by Wa Resident :said by wifi4milez: I tend to agree with that statement. A lot of people (here specifically) get a little too excited by the term 'fiber', when at the end of the day it really doesnt mean anything. Assuming the provider can give you solid service, the delivery medium is rather pointless. Yea, yea.....enjoy your non fiber internet as over here fiber can actually mean 100/100MBps speeds which cable can't even achieve! I have fiber internet, and its no better than HFC based internet to be honest.
--
God bless America, God bless our troops, and God help us destroy the Islamic terrorists.
»www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html
| |
| | | | | | | | Re: Works for me.... said by wifi4milez:I have fiber internet, and its no better than HFC based internet to be honest. Ok, well you may have fiber that has a decent speed but around here the cable companies just can't match the speed of the fiber providers.
Heck, around this little area the cable company doesn't even offer any internet but there is an all fiber network that the Public Utility Disctrict (electric power company) built which provides residents with internet, tv programming and phone service (depending upon the ISP).
The PUD can't sell any internet services directly to customers (state law) so therefore they sell acces to whatever ISP wants to offer their services to PUD customers. | |
|
| | | |
1 edit | said by Wa Resident :said by wifi4milez: I tend to agree with that statement. A lot of people (here specifically) get a little too excited by the term 'fiber', when at the end of the day it really doesnt mean anything. Assuming the provider can give you solid service, the delivery medium is rather pointless. Yea, yea.....enjoy your non fiber internet as over here fiber can actually mean 100/100MBps speeds which cable can't even achieve! The irony of this is that the only provider delivering 100Mbps speeds to the home is not a FTTH provider. It is a cable company. | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Works for me.... said by fifty nine:The irony of this is that the only provider delivering 100Mbps speeds to the home is not a FTTH provider. It is a cable company. Wanna bet?..........100/100MB residential fiber has been available here in WA state for years now!
These fiber internet providers also offer phone and tv service. So no, it's not just verizon or cable companies offering such services. | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Works for me.... said by WA Resident :said by fifty nine:The irony of this is that the only provider delivering 100Mbps speeds to the home is not a FTTH provider. It is a cable company. Wanna bet?..........100/100MB residential fiber has been available here in WA state for years now! These fiber internet providers also offer phone and tv service. So no, it's not just verizon or cable companies offering such services. OK so you'll find it in some small pockets here and there. No big deal.
Most people on FTTH are seeing much less. Verizon doesn't even have a 100Mbps planned deployment to home users yet.
Right now, FTTH is cutting edge and it remains to be seen whether it will be mainstream or not.
If cable companies need to upgrade to FTTH, it is not that difficult for them since most of the way has already been covered by fiber. | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Works for me.... said by fifty nine:said by WA Resident :said by fifty nine:The irony of this is that the only provider delivering 100Mbps speeds to the home is not a FTTH provider. It is a cable company. Wanna bet?..........100/100MB residential fiber has been available here in WA state for years now! These fiber internet providers also offer phone and tv service. So no, it's not just verizon or cable companies offering such services. OK so you'll find it in some small pockets here and there. No big deal. Most people on FTTH are seeing much less. Verizon doesn't even have a 100Mbps planned deployment to home users yet. Right now, FTTH is cutting edge and it remains to be seen whether it will be mainstream or not. If cable companies need to upgrade to FTTH, it is not that difficult for them since most of the way has already been covered by fiber. Yea, cable companies in rural areas like this one really have it that easy when they can't even provide that much tv let alone provide internet....meaning, there is no fiber at all.
I believe that FTTH is the future as there's many fiber networks being built. The county that i live in is still building out their network in order to reach more rural residents. Heck, even cows, goats and pigs have access to fiber around here since it runs along the farms, i could even take pics of the goats with the fiber lines overhead in case you wouldn't believe me. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Works for me.... I live in a rural area and most people use satellite for TV.
The cable company has a decent HFC network though. | |
|
| | | | | | |  ericn32mehPremium
join:2009-09-23
Costa Mesa, CA
 ·Time Warner Cable
| said by fifty nine:said by WA Resident :said by fifty nine:The irony of this is that the only provider delivering 100Mbps speeds to the home is not a FTTH provider. It is a cable company. Wanna bet?..........100/100MB residential fiber has been available here in WA state for years now! These fiber internet providers also offer phone and tv service. So no, it's not just verizon or cable companies offering such services. OK so you'll find it in some small pockets here and there. No big deal. Most people on FTTH are seeing much less. Verizon doesn't even have a 100Mbps planned deployment to home users yet. Right now, FTTH is cutting edge and it remains to be seen whether it will be mainstream or not. If cable companies need to upgrade to FTTH, it is not that difficult for them since most of the way has already been covered by fiber. I think we will see fiber to the last amp (FTTLA) before we see FTTH. It has practically identical capabilites if the system is 1GHz. On my street, that could work out to 10 QAM channels (380 Mbps using DOCSIS) per house passed | |
|
| | | | | | | Here's an article from early 2002 about one of Washington's PUDs which offers fiber to the home.
"Residents and businesses in Grant County can make Voice Over IP telephone calls, order Video On Demand movies and access the Internet over their 1 gigabit fiber-optic connections. Each Zipp connection to the home or business is capable of two-way service at 1 gigabit per second speeds."
»www.bizjournals.com/seattle/stor···s12.html | |
|
| | | | ericn32mehPremium
join:2009-09-23
Costa Mesa, CA Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
| said by Wa Resident :said by wifi4milez: I tend to agree with that statement. A lot of people (here specifically) get a little too excited by the term 'fiber', when at the end of the day it really doesnt mean anything. Assuming the provider can give you solid service, the delivery medium is rather pointless. Yea, yea.....enjoy your non fiber internet as over here fiber can actually mean 100/100MBps speeds which cable can't even achieve! Technically speaking, this could be achieved. | |
| | | | | | | said by Wa Resident :said by wifi4milez: I tend to agree with that statement. A lot of people (here specifically) get a little too excited by the term 'fiber', when at the end of the day it really doesnt mean anything. Assuming the provider can give you solid service, the delivery medium is rather pointless. Yea, yea.....enjoy your non fiber internet as over here fiber can actually mean 100/100MBps speeds which cable can't even achieve! Can't achieve??? Docsis 3 allows speeds up to 343 mbps. »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS#Speed_Tables
--
»Please check out my friend's band | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Works for me.... So why aren't we seeing any cable operators offering 343Mbps speeds?.........They don't even offer 100MBps symmetrical.
Fiber networks have been offering residents 100/100MBps speeds since 2001 in Washington state. They offered Tv programming with video on demand and phone service since 2001 as well.
| |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Works for me.... said by WA_Resident:So why aren't we seeing any cable operators offering 343Mbps speeds?.........They don't even offer 100MBps symmetrical. Fiber networks have been offering residents 100/100MBps speeds since 2001 in Washington state. They offered Tv programming with video on demand and phone service since 2001 as well. And how much a month are they charging for 100/100? Comcast charges over $100/month for 50/10. True can offer much higher speeds, but the price would be so high that no one could afford it.
--
»Please check out my friend's band | |
| | | | | | | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Works for me.... said by fonzbear2000:said by WA_Resident:So why aren't we seeing any cable operators offering 343Mbps speeds?.........They don't even offer 100MBps symmetrical. Fiber networks have been offering residents 100/100MBps speeds since 2001 in Washington state. They offered Tv programming with video on demand and phone service since 2001 as well. And how much a month are they charging for 100/100? Comcast charges over $100/month for 50/10. True can offer much higher speeds, but the price would be so high that no one could afford it. In case it isnt clear that guy is clearly shilling for his own company. You can check the domain from before he signed up to be a full member.....
--
God bless America, God bless our troops, and God help us destroy the Islamic terrorists.
»www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | said by wifi4milez:In case it isnt clear that guy is clearly shilling for his own company. You can check the domain from before he signed up to be a full member..... My own company?.....Do you mean my ISP provider which i haven't even mentioned once?
I'm praising public utilities (PUDs) that offer high speed fiber optic connections in rural areas. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | said by fonzbear2000:said by WA_Resident:So why aren't we seeing any cable operators offering 343Mbps speeds?.........They don't even offer 100MBps symmetrical. Fiber networks have been offering residents 100/100MBps speeds since 2001 in Washington state. They offered Tv programming with video on demand and phone service since 2001 as well. And how much a month are they charging for 100/100? Comcast charges over $100/month for 50/10. True can offer much higher speeds, but the price would be so high that no one could afford it. A cool $40 (39.95) in my county, $45 in another county for supposedly 114MBps per month and no caps from this particular ISP.
Don't believe me?....Take a look!
Read it and weep! 
»seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/t···p_h.html | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: Works for me.... WOW! I'm a bit jealous! I still can't complain about my 12/2 connection with a 250GB/month cap which I'll NEVER come close to going over though. That just shows you the greed of the big, giant companies such as Comcast and Verizon who could offer more speed for less, but we'll never see it because companies who offer the same type of internet don't compete with each other so it's almost a monopoly. Hell, the competitor here is Qwest DSL which prevents any other phone company from offering FTTH. Oh well, better than living where there's no internet and having to get satellite with 200MB/month caps(PUKE!).
--
»Please check out my friend's band | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Works for me.... said by fonzbear2000:WOW! I'm a bit jealous! I still can't complain about my 12/2 connection with a 250GB/month cap which I'll NEVER come close to going over though. That just shows you the greed of the big, giant companies such as Comcast and Verizon who could offer more speed for less, but we'll never see it because companies who offer the same type of internet don't compete with each other so it's almost a monopoly. Hell, the competitor here is Qwest DSL which prevents any other phone company from offering FTTH. Oh well, better than living where there's no internet and having to get satellite with 200MB/month caps(PUKE!). Well, it's kinda of weird with prices and caps around here because in my county there's 8 ISPs that offer internet through the Public Utility District's fiber network and only 2 of them offer the 100MB connections with no caps, one charges $39.95 while the other one is $35.95. Another ISP also offers 100MB connection with a 25G per month cap for $39.95. The rest of them offer lesser speeds (down to 2mb), some have caps and some don't and they all cost $40 per month with the exeption of one ISP (which is a bit expensive).
The next county over also has a fiber network and none of the ISPs provide anywhere close to 100MBps. IFiber which offers the 114Mbps connections (mentioned in the article) only offers 6mb/768k for $35 and 12MB/768k for $40 in that particular county. Seems like the county PUD is throttling/regulating the speed.
Grant county (mentioned in the article) also has some ISPs with
lower speeds and caps. Out of the bunch there is a couple with no caps and truely high speed.
The ISPs can offer low priced internet because they don't have to maintain any of the fiber network since that is owned and maintained by the Public Utility Disctrict which even takes the fiber
right to the outside of your home.
Telecommunication companies tried to stop the PUDs in WA state from offering fiber optics to residents but they failed. Still, the PUDs can't offer any services (internet, TV, Phone) directly to their customers, this is why they contract out to ISPs. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Works for me.... said by WA_Resident:said by fonzbear2000:WOW! I'm a bit jealous! I still can't complain about my 12/2 connection with a 250GB/month cap which I'll NEVER come close to going over though. That just shows you the greed of the big, giant companies such as Comcast and Verizon who could offer more speed for less, but we'll never see it because companies who offer the same type of internet don't compete with each other so it's almost a monopoly. Hell, the competitor here is Qwest DSL which prevents any other phone company from offering FTTH. Oh well, better than living where there's no internet and having to get satellite with 200MB/month caps(PUKE!). Well, it's kinda of weird with prices and caps around here because in my county there's 8 ISPs that offer internet through the Public Utility District's fiber network and only 2 of them offer the 100MB connections with no caps, one charges $39.95 while the other one is $35.95. Another ISP also offers 100MB connection with a 25G per month cap for $39.95. The rest of them offer lesser speeds (down to 2mb), some have caps and some don't and they all cost $40 per month with the exeption of one ISP (which is a bit expensive). The next county over also has a fiber network and none of the ISPs provide anywhere close to 100MBps. IFiber which offers the 114Mbps connections (mentioned in the article) only offers 6mb/768k for $35 and 12MB/768k for $40 in that particular county. Seems like the county PUD is throttling/regulating the speed. Grant county (mentioned in the article) also has some ISPs with lower speeds and caps. Out of the bunch there is a couple with no caps and truely high speed. The ISPs can offer low priced internet because they don't have to maintain any of the fiber network since that is owned and maintained by the Public Utility Disctrict which even takes the fiber right to the outside of your home. Telecommunication companies tried to stop the PUDs in WA state from offering fiber optics to residents but they failed. Still, the PUDs can't offer any services (internet, TV, Phone) directly to their customers, this is why they contract out to ISPs. Can you give direct links to the ISP's and their pricing plans? That almost seems too good to be true.
Also, is there a forum for them on this site?
--
»Please check out my friend's band | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Works for me.... That's wild! This country needs local ISP's EVERYWHERE! They would put the big giants out of business with those prices and speeds!
--
»Please check out my friend's band | |
|
| | |  alchav
join:2002-05-17
Palm Desert, CA | said by wifi4milez:said by state:As long as they provide the speeds I'm paying for, I don't care if it's delivered with shoestrings tied together hanging from the pole. I tend to agree with that statement. A lot of people (here specifically) get a little too excited by the term 'fiber', when at the end of the day it really doesnt mean anything. Assuming the provider can give you solid service, the delivery medium is rather pointless. Well Fiber is the ultimate connection, that will give you the most bandwidth. People here tend to look at the small picture, and only care about Internet Speeds. They forget or don't understand there is a lot more information out there that will use that Last Mile Connection, and when more Bandwidth is needed everyone will be crying for Fiber! | |
| | | | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Works for me.... said by alchav:said by wifi4milez:said by state:As long as they provide the speeds I'm paying for, I don't care if it's delivered with shoestrings tied together hanging from the pole. I tend to agree with that statement. A lot of people (here specifically) get a little too excited by the term 'fiber', when at the end of the day it really doesnt mean anything. Assuming the provider can give you solid service, the delivery medium is rather pointless. Well Fiber is the ultimate connection, that will give you the most bandwidth. People here tend to look at the small picture, and only care about Internet Speeds. They forget or don't understand there is a lot more information out there that will use that Last Mile Connection, and when more Bandwidth is needed everyone will be crying for Fiber! I am not arguing that in the future there will be a benefit to a 100% fiber connection, however right now when comparing a like-for-like service there is no discernible difference. Frankly, assuming HFC (and other technologies) can keep updating their offerings there could conceivably be no reason for people to opt for fiber.
Let me point out that I am a FIOS customer, so my above viewpoint has nothing to do with me not having enough fiber in my life!
--
God bless America, God bless our troops, and God help us destroy the Islamic terrorists.
»www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html
| |
| | | | | | rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Works for me.... said by wifi4milez:I am not arguing that in the future there will be a benefit to a 100% fiber connection, however right now when comparing a like-for-like service there is no discernible difference. Frankly, assuming HFC (and other technologies) can keep updating their offerings there could conceivably be no reason for people to opt for fiber. I can agree to a certain extent. As simultaneously both a coax and fiber customer (Road Runner and FIOS), it's easy for me to make A/B comparisons. Aside from the futureproofing advantage of fiber, there is also somewhat lower latency on similar distances. For example, locally both FIOS and Road Runner aggregate their traffic into Tampa, where the regionally backhauled traffic reaches transit.
On Road Runner, I'm 12 ms from their core in Tampa. On FIOS, I reach Tampa in 3 ms. I suspect the added latency at least in part comes from the coax-to-fiber media conversion, not to mention the head-end aggregation strategy of cable.
Speed-wise, 20 Mbps is 20 Mbps, regardless of the media on which the packets ride. As long as the provider delivers the speed I pay for, I'm less concerned with HOW they do it. However, one day when Gig-E connections to the home are common, you can bet it won't be on coax.
Reliability-wise, my Road Runner connection has been flawless in the nearly 8 years I've had it-- with the exception of a defective board in the tap outside which needed replaced. I don't hold that against them.
Where the cable company fails, is in what it can realistically offer on upstream speeds today, due to the limitations of the technology used. Locally, Road Runner Lightning is 40/5. For a lot less money, I get more than 20 Mbps upstream on FIOS.
If I was forced to drop one of my connections, I would drop Road Runner-- but NOT from a lack of reliability. The deciding factors would be lower latency, higher speeds (especially upstream), and more a favorable price per megabit. | |
| | | | | | | wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | Re: Works for me.... said by rebus9:On Road Runner, I'm 12 ms from their core in Tampa. On FIOS, I reach Tampa in 3 ms. I would suspect that has more to do with hops to the respective sites you are pinging than anything else. | |
| | | | | | | | rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Verizon FiOS
1 edit | Re: Works for me.... said by wifi4milez:I would suspect that has more to do with hops to the respective sites you are pinging than anything else. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I'm speaking of latency reaching each provider's core in Tampa, from a neighborhood just outside of Tampa. This is where each provider aggregates their traffic for the region.
This makes for a reasonably fair comparison, because I am only comparing latency in the backhaul-- not latency to destinations reached via their transit. | |
|
| |  exocet_cmBuckle up, it's the lawPremium
join:2003-03-23
New Orleans, LA
kudos:2 | said by state:As long as they provide the speeds I'm paying for, I don't care if it's delivered with shoestrings tied together hanging from the pole. Exactly.
Fiber, copper, wireless, I don't care as long as I get the speeds I'm paying for.
--
"I have measured out my life with coffee spoons..." - T.S Eliot
"I have often regretted my speech, never my silence." - Publilius Syrus
Ma blog: »www.johndball.com | |
| | | | | Excellent post. Agree 100%. There's way too much weight given to "fiber". So long as I get a fast, reliable internet connection I could give a rat if that is coax, fiber, or some hybrid derivative (as most cable systems are.) | |
|
 HpowerRoflmao
join:2000-06-08
Glendale, CA | hah This gave me a nice laughter to start my day haha. OMG wow coaxial? Really? Noway!
--
The Internet is about to go down....it is actually. | |
| TavokkPremium
join:2009-05-05
Smyrna, DE | Hybrid Eventually, it all turns to coaxial or something other than fiber if you want to connect it to your cable box, tivo, pc tv card, etc. All networks are hybrid at some level, good luck at getting the companies to admit that fact. | |
| | | | Re: Hybrid I see your point but it's not a genuine comparison.
Imagine if Clear had a network manager that said:
"we're so happy that we've found technologies that allow us to use wireless to adequately address customer demand for last mile"
Then some PR dude from Clear says later: "Actually the connection is 90% fiber based therefore clear sells essentially a fiber or equivalent to fiber connection"
And then you say::"heck yeah that PR guy is right, i mean after fios gets to your house you convert it to wireless for you laptop so he is basically right in saying that they are essentially fiber just like fios" | |
| | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | said by Tavokk:Eventually, it all turns to coaxial or something other than fiber if you want to connect it to your cable box, tivo, pc tv card, etc. All networks are hybrid at some level, good luck at getting the companies to admit that fact. Not for long
»www.youtube.com/watch?v=khPx1dEIPnA | |
| | | Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Hybrid said by patcat88:said by Tavokk:Eventually, it all turns to coaxial or something other than fiber if you want to connect it to your cable box, tivo, pc tv card, etc. All networks are hybrid at some level, good luck at getting the companies to admit that fact. Not for long (youtube clip) Sooner or later the last mile WILL be fiber.. it's just a matter of what STANDARD for termination will be utilized. USB 3.0 is already terminating in a FIBER/copper hybrid system and it will only be a matter of time before SATA goes fiber as well (not that hard drives need that kind of bandwidth, even in raid configs).
However, leave it to the cable & telcos to milk what they have for as long as the consumer is stupid enough to buy below 1 megabit dsl from companies such as qwest . Those major cities in the southwest should throw qwest overboard and build their own fiber network out (don't care if it's muni or anything other than the big 3 telco/cablecos). There is absolutely no reason why in the 2000s that part of the usa should have 1980s infrastructure... equivalent to fractional t1 lines (or worse, nothing at all). | |
|
dtyree
join:2000-10-07
Valdosta, GA Reviews:
 ·AT&T Southeast
| almost fiber? didn't somebody say something about a chain is only as strong as its weakest link?
if that last little bit of connection from your house to the pole isn't fiber then it doesn't matter much that the rest of your infrastructure is fiber.
fiber like speeds isn't the same thing as fiber speeds. close but not quite. | |
| | | | Re: almost fiber? said by dtyree:didn't somebody say something about a chain is only as strong as its weakest link? if that last little bit of connection from your house to the pole isn't fiber then it doesn't matter much that the rest of your infrastructure is fiber. fiber like speeds isn't the same thing as fiber speeds. close but not quite. So I assume you have fiber going all the way to your PC? If not, then you have some weak link in the chain.
I heard that Verizon used MoCA in a lot of the FiOS installs, which means that their last 10'- 30' or so is coax, not fiber. | |
| | | | | Re: almost fiber? said by fifty nine:So I assume you have fiber going all the way to your PC? If not, then you have some weak link in the chain. I heard that Verizon used MoCA in a lot of the FiOS installs, which means that their last 10'- 30' or so is coax, not fiber. Shhhh... many here will be crushed if they find out! | |
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Fiber network... difference is the demark FiOS = Fiber to the demark. Basically, whatever is in your house is copper.
Cable = Fiber to the node. Basically the last xxxx' is copper.
Uverse = Fiber to the node. Bascially the last 3000' is copper.
While the 'core' network may be fiber, the last mile for everything else is not fiber. Personally, it wouldn't matter to me if they used microwave vs. fiber for parts of the network... as long as the results are what I expect. This is marketing.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|  SYNACKJust Firewall ItPremium,Mod
join:2001-03-05
Venice, CA
Networking
Virtual Private Ne..
Netgear
ZyXEL
1 edit | Let's be honest Historically, the network connection is always named after the last mile.
Using the Cable industry argument, we could call POTS and dialup "fiber", because that's what is is for 90%+ of the data path. 
Marilyn is right. They should call it what it is and focus on what it can do and not try to compare it with a completely different technology.
People on the street do not know the difference between cable and fiber anyway and the word fiber does not have any magic connotations to them. Those who know the difference also know the difference between FTTH and FTTN and they might be offended by the perceived dishonesty of the cable ads. | |
| | rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
·Verizon FiOS
| Re: Let's be honest said by SYNACK:People on the street do not know the difference between cable and fiber anyway and the word fiber does not have any magic connotations to them. Well, it kinda does because the marketing machines have been hard at work for 20 years promoting the virtues of fiber. Remember the Sprint "pin drop" ads from the 1980's? The message was loud and clear: fiber is superior.
If fiber was not the magic word, cable operators running HFC networks wouldn't try so hard to emphasize the 'F' and downplay the 'C'.
said by SYNACK:Those who know the difference also know the difference between FTTH and FTTN and they might be offended by the perceived dishonesty of the cable ads. Every time I hear Brighthouse advertise themselves as "the fiber leader" or talk of their "advanced fiber network" it makes me angry. But in Joe Sixpack's brain, their strategy works. I told my dad he should switch to FIOS and his response was, why should I switch? Brighthouse and FIOS are both fiber optic networks, so what's the difference.
So, the cable company's marketing strategy worked on my dad, and I'm sure millions of others, too. | |
|
| | The real question is who shares the line If it's FTTN and then using DOCSIS over coax to the homes, then you're sharing that coax bandwith with your neighbors. If you all want to stream netflix at 7pm, then it grinds to a halt ....regardless if it's fiber or shoes strings in the middle mile.
Now if it's FTTH, then no DOCSIS is involved and you're only sharing bandwidth at the middle-mile level. The in-house wireless/copper/coax "hybrid" portion of FTTH is irrelevant because that bandwith isn't shared with anyone other than you. You have possibly Gb/s worth of bandwidth in the non-fiber portion of your in-house network. | |
| |
See 14 replies to this post | |
 SLDPremium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA
1 edit | First it was... The 70's had "Jet"
The 80's had "Turbo"
The 90's had "Networked"
Now we have "Fiber"! | |
|  jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA | Sustained Uploads I just separate the pretenders from the contenders by the sustained upload performance. Right now FiOS is provisioning new service as symmetrical 25/25 Mbps, while the DOCSIS guys are pushing around 10Mbps at best, after any "speed boost" has run its course. | |
| |
See 8 replies to this post | |
bgraham
join:2001-03-15
Smithtown, NY Reviews:
 ·Verizon VoiceWing
·Verizon FiOS
·VOIPo
| Who Believes Anything Said in Advertisements Anyway. As someone else said, "just give me the advertised speed". I don't care about the depths of the technology, just give me what I pay for.
Truth in advertising seems to be a zero out of ten here in the USA (on television ads at least). Cablevision here in NY advertises their internet as "4 times the speed of telephone company internet". Verizon and ATT bash each other with maps of cellular coverage.
US fidelis, or whatever it's called has some pretty hefty claims in it's flashy TV ads and on the last screen the fine print says something like, "we just broker extended warranty insurance for many different companies" | |
| | |
See 6 replies to this post | |
| | If.... If your WHOLE network isn't fiber, it is fraudulent to claim anything contrary. Stop trying to compare. All vz has to do is upgrade 10% of its back end equipment and i could be getting 400 mbps. In fact, since i'm not using the tv part of the provision, they could open it up and give me a gigabit connection. Can't say that about coaxial, since the signal is radio over copper vs light over glass.
- A
--
LETS GO METS! | |
|
| |
|
|
