FTTH Council's '100Mbps Nation' Is it more than just a pipe dream? The FTTH council renewed calls yesterday for a "100Mbps Nation" by 2015 (pdf). The outfit, which is comprised primarily of hardware & telecom vendors eager for a sale, is pushing hard for any and all new laws that would make such speeds "universal" in less than a decade. Like we said the first time the FTTH council mentioned this push, most of their ideas (USF as rural broadband fund, laws allowing muni-broadband nationally, etc.) have been brought up already -- they've simply been mired in political debate of one form or another. The end result has been no U.S. national broadband policy to speak of.
|
 Asmodeus
join:2004-05-26
Spring Valley, CA | yeah, but... at what cost...? it's nice they want to implement all of this stuff, but how much am i going to get dinged for it...? not to mention by 2015 anything could happen... it's just to far out in the future to matter at this point... | |
|  |  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: yeah, but... How about we get off the download side and look at UPLOADS which have been lacking for years!
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
| | | | | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | Re: yeah, but... That $2000 can easily be reduced. Have courts invalidate key patents to "spur" competition, grandfather copper networks/take down, switch USF to ONLY pay for fiber, pull money out ones ass (print it, bond it, depreciate it, loan it, etc) or just pull some more money out of national debt. Oh, and we can increase the War On Drug, and War On Wifi Theft, to get more prison labor to install FTTP, they are cheaper than mexicans. | |
|
| | umm, define univeral. If it's TRULY universal, then sure, I would support subsidies. But only if it's classified as a utility, and provided to every homeowner that wants it, at a reasonable price. Otherwise, this is just pork spending for the megacorps.
--
Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 100mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs. | |
| | | | | | | Re: umm, define univeral. Terrible, incredibly subjective cite. Even Wikipedia says so at the top. Much more of a bromide than a Wikipedia entry.
Consider: If General Electric isn't as fine an example of a "megacorp" as has ever existed, I'll defecate in my hat and wear it. And there are many others. | |
| | |  LokerPremium
join:2004-07-11
Fargo, ND | What about GE?
--
"While preceding your entrance with a grenade is a good tactic inQuake, it can lead to problems if attempted at work." -- C Hacking | |
|
|  batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| said by karlmarx:If it's TRULY universal, then sure, I would support subsidies. I don't want to subsidise anybodies porn. | |
| | Asmodeus
join:2004-05-26
Spring Valley, CA | said by karlmarx:If it's TRULY universal, then sure, I would support subsidies. But only if it's classified as a utility, and provided to every homeowner that wants it, at a reasonable price. Otherwise, this is just pork spending for the megacorps. of course you would advocate another new series of wealth redistributions in the form of subsidies... what more should people around here expect from you other than the fact that you hate commerce and worship government intervention into the lives of it's citizens at nearly every level... in other words, when will you stop being a boy and grow into a man...? | |
| | | | | Re: umm, define univeral. Well commerce has left large chunks of the population unserved. Many of those unserved, pay rates to cablecos and or telcos for other services which helped fund the rollout of broadband to those, like yourself, who were lucky enough to be served. You didn't pay all the costs of broadband rollout to yourself. Your broadband rollout was funded by profits from rates paid by other customers. Granted this isn't a government subsidy but it isn't you paying your own way either. If others aren't going to get the same opportunities you had then maybe you could understand why they might feel cheated, especially after many of them helped pay for broadband rollout to people who, now that they have theirs, tell those who have been left out to piss off and die. | |
| | | | | | Re: umm, define univeral. Great argument.
I like to call it the post office or fritos argument.
The price of a letter is averaged (arguably subject to competitive pressures). The average jane pays their 39 cent regardless of location and length to deliver.
Fritos. Wherever I go, a bag of Fritos seems to cost the same. The cost of delivering them certainly is not the same.
Telcom and cable differ, to an extent, due to regulatory constructs. The difference between the former two and the latter two is the "line iteming" of "pass throughs". It sure would be nice if I could send my letters locally for 15 cent and see a fee of 24 cent "federally mandated rural delivery
costs". 
Then again, if I were the postmaster, I'd get into this action as well. | |
| | | | | batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: umm, define univeral. That is the Teletruth B.S. argument. If you think your USF subsidised POTS line in your hog pen is paying the $1500 pre home to run FIOS past it you have lost touch with reality. | |
|
 ansarSearch for HighSpeed
join:2004-12-10
Utica, MS | I agree I would support subsidies and tax incentives for the expansion of broadband to rural america. If the government is going to get involved, I agree it should be in catagorized as a utility and provided to everyone. | |
| | | | Re: I agree--NOT! Or should it be crammed down everybody’s throat even if one has no need or desire to use the service and then get sent the bill compliments of Uncle Sam. When I see mega corporate network getting by with a lot less speed 100Mbps broadband is unnecessary toy! | |
| | |  RR ConductorHappy 40th AmtrakPremium
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA
kudos:1
2 edits | Re: I agree--NOT! It's called promoting the general welfare (Preamble, US Constitution), whether you personally need or use it is irrelevant, some do and will. Think outside yourself 
I agree it should be a utility, if the US Government had not pumped money into things like the electrical grid in programs like the TVA, I bet a lot of those areas would still be without power. If it helps the country prosper and grow, then let's do it...oh wait, we have that mess in Iraq we'll be fighting for the next century, well..suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck there goes the money. | |
|
| | No its not IF cablevision can do it with the narad tech that they are testing then ftth can do it easily.
The problem is not the technology both Verizon,Cablevision, and the isps that do ftth have the tech. The problem is are these companies willing to spend the money to roll it out and upgrade their backbones to handle all that data?
| |
| Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA | 25 for Metros, 2 for Rural, Maybe Three cheers for the FTTH Council trying to exercise some leadership. Don't expect anymore than 25Mbs for most metropolitan areas and 2Mbs for rural areas in 2015 (if we're lucky) if you oppose such leadership. Of course some places in our country and the rest of the world will have much faster speeds. Those lucky areas will get to use the internet in ways we haven't even thought about yet. | |
| | dynodbPremium,VIP
join:2004-04-21
Minneapolis, MN | Re: 25 for Metros, 2 for Rural, Maybe Leadership? It's a group of vendors pushing for taxpayer funding of a network that would significantly benefit them financially. Visionaries they ain't. | |
|
 joebarnhartPaxio evangelist
join:2005-12-15
Santa Clara, CA | FTTH is the real deal I doubt anything will change at the federal level. And that's too bad. For those who have FTTH, the fast connection enables you to use the Internet much more effectively. The only bad thing is that everyone doesn't have it yet. At least FTTH is going into some new construction now, and is being deployed in some communities. My homeowner's assoc. just got »www.paxio.com and it is incredible.
 | |
| | Zoder
join:2002-04-16
Miami, FL | Re: FTTH is the real deal How come you haven't upgraded to the gigabit service?  | |
| | | | said by joebarnhart:I doubt anything will change at the federal level. And that's too bad. For those who have FTTH, the fast connection enables you to use the Internet much more effectively. The only bad thing is that everyone doesn't have it yet. At least FTTH is going into some new construction now, and is being deployed in some communities. My homeowner's assoc. just got » www.paxio.com and it is incredible. For the most part, all ftth deployments are new construction. There are certainly overbuilds, but you won't typically find them in a BELL network or Cable network.
Curious, how does the ftth make anyone "use the internet more effectively"? What do you mean?
What's your PC setup to sustain the transfer throughput?
I think I max at 66mb but haven't had a chance to test in "slowsky" territory (and MDU - 600 units in a city block go figure).
If paxio has an exclusive arrangement..be careful long term...though that upload is worthy of selling my soul...unless you are subbing to an hdtv service, what are you doing with that speed (pricewise it sure beats a t1 or ds3!)?
»www.xchangemag.com/articles/492/···036.html
Frankly, I fight any effort of my association to get into the telco business or sign off on long term commits...I still prefer to keep my business between myself and a provider, not an association.
Haven't read all of the details, but it looks interesting.
1.5 meg is sorta a ripoff...but it depends on your needs  | |
| | patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | Jesus, sweet Jesus. How are those rates possible, thats not even 1/10th the real world cost? Are datacenters and backbone carriers really ripping off business customers that bad?
And oh BTW, with those speeds, have fun maxing out your HD's read speed. You will never hit 100mbit in real life unless you have RAID. | |
|
 alchav
join:2002-05-17
Palm Desert, CA |  Here we go again......Muni Fiber!
So talk to your Communities and Cities, because nothing will get done unless you ask for it. | |
| | | | Re: Here we go again......Muni Fiber! said by alchav:The FTTH Council said 2015, because they want to stir people up. Nothing will get done unless the Masses want it. Verizon is the only Telco that sees the need for FTTH, even some of you guys think of it as extra service and not a necessity. FTTH should be more like a utility, since it will handle everything digital into your home. The only thing I see as a future for Copper, is a path for back-up diversity. So talk to your Communities and Cities, because nothing will get done unless you ask for it. Why ask for something without a value proposition? Most people seem quite happy with 1.5 mb until spam infects their machines.
Until people are doing something other than email, uploading pictures to wally world and grandparents, and downloading pictures or cheap movies that they can eventually watch on their TV why upgrade? There is a reason DSL is pricing low... dial up at same price and less cost to the provider.
FTTH will be the end game methinks, til something better comes along. Wireless will be a contender if more wireless spectrum becomes available and is sold off to non incumbents. | |
|
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC | This exists already It's called "Sweden" | |
| |  scrummie02BentleyPremium
join:2004-04-16
Arlington, VA
 ·Comcast
| Re: This exists already and you pay a substantially higher amount of taxes in Sweden as well. With the inefficiency in which our government runs, no thanks. I'd rather have private companies run the lines, it will get done quicker and correctly.
Besides, with most people here distrustful of the government wanting to keep it out of their lives, do they seriously think the same government that taps At&T's lines won't tap their own?
--
"I hate conservatives, but I really hate liberals." - Matt Stone
»www.reason.com/ | |
|
| |
|
|
·
