 |
 | | | Re: RE:Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant Because I really want to rely on the low and probably lower caps/higher overages model while being restricted as to what types of devices I can use on it while adding $20-30/month for a hotspot on top of it. Wired internet will always be the better deal with low latency, more consistent speed and reliability. | |
|
| |  LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: RE:Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant said by kickass69:Because I really want to rely on the low and probably lower caps/higher overages model while being restricted as to what types of devices I can use on it while adding $20-30/month for a hotspot on top of it. Wired internet will always be the better deal with low latency, more consistent speed and reliability.
What you want probably doesn't matter a whole lot to the telcos. What they want is what matters and will determine the future.
--
I will be perfectly happy if the budget cuts specified in the Budget Control Act go into effect. 3 cheers for the sequester. Take the money from the drunken federal spenders. | |
|
| | | elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | Re: RE:Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant What you want does matter, and both telco and cableco pay strict attention to consumer demand.
But they're only going to sell what you're willing to pay for.
Which means the overhead of wired service will be challenged by wireless, and in low-density settings, the copper will disappear. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: RE:Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant If you have At&t or Verizon it will disappear. If you have anyone else, it won't. None of the other telcos have wireless, so they are not going to kill off their only revenue source. | |
|
| | | | | elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | Re: RE:Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant said by silbaco:If you have At&t or Verizon it will disappear. If you have anyone else, it won't. None of the other telcos have wireless, so they are not going to kill off their only revenue source.
Many "other" telcos will disappear altogether when they go bankrupt, unable to compete with LTE invading their franchise. | |
|
| | |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | said by Linklist:What you want probably doesn't matter a whole lot to the telcos. What they want is what matters and will determine the future. Yes, because what the Telcos want is what America wants. NOT.
But since our Government has been bought out and will be bankrupted by special interests, I see no viable alternate route developing.
It's kind of an interesting footnote on the failure of our economic system when the statement "What the customers want doesn't matter, they will take what we want to give them" is the Corporate mantra, don't you think?
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| | | | LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: RE:Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant Seems that Australia is rapidly giving up their well advertised FTTH initiative. Not that it went anywhere so far.
»www.telecoms.com/111302/australi···r-life-2
--
I will be perfectly happy if the budget cuts specified in the Budget Control Act go into effect. 3 cheers for the sequester. Take the money from the drunken federal spenders. | |
|
|  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | My concern is that I think we’re on the cusp of something similar in internet access. Mobile keeps getting faster and faster: to the point that I suspect that in a very few years then mobile will be the method of choice to connect. So why would we spend billions (even tens of billions) on a soon to be outdated technology like fibreoptic broadband? Better, surely, to simply install mobile instead?
Um because for example Verizon offers Homefusion but it costd $60 for 10 measly GB per month and $10 per GB overage. For $120 a month you can get 30 GB. For the record 1 Netflix movie can be in excess of 4 GB. That's why. Charter for example charges $50 for 250 GB. And many people that's too low. Until mobile can at least do that then sorry mobile broadband is FAIL. | |
|
| JTR
join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL | Doesn't a single pair of fiber strands have more bandwidth than the ENTIRE wireless spectrum? | |
|
| | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
| Re: RE:Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant Yes and no.
Wireless spectrum is a slippery term; technically you've got the whole electromagnetic spectrum to play with on "wireless" (heard of Free Space Optics?) while in a fiber you "only" have certain wavelengths that the fiber is optimized for.
Now the better question is which method is more efficient at delivering large quantities of data per user. The answer there is, undoubtedly, fiber as long as you're unicasting stuff (i.e. everyone is looking at something different). You can shove a terabit per second in each direction over a fiber pair without much issue. Trying to do that with wireless, over any sort of distance, is a heck of a lot harder. | |
|
| Gami00
join:2010-03-11
Mississauga, ON | haha I agree,
since wireless is so fast and is Fiber is already obsolete.
they need to dig up all the Fiber lines they use right now that connects to every cell tower site... they should only be linking themselve via wireless..
all fiber infrastructure that the telcos use needs to be given up to the cable guys, since the telcos don't need fiber.. they have wireless which is the future.. | |
|
| | LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: RE:Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant said by Gami00:haha I agree,
since wireless is so fast and is Fiber is already obsolete.
they need to dig up all the Fiber lines they use right now that connects to every cell tower site... they should only be linking themselve via wireless..
all fiber infrastructure that the telcos use needs to be given up to the cable guys, since the telcos don't need fiber.. they have wireless which is the future..
Very sarcastic, but also irrelevant. Wireless will be the new last mile. Nothing in that news item or in my earlier post said backbone fiber is going anywhere.
--
I will be perfectly happy if the budget cuts specified in the Budget Control Act go into effect. 3 cheers for the sequester. Take the money from the drunken federal spenders. | |
|
| | | | | Re: RE:Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant Wireless can't be the new last mile in densely populated areas at this time or even in the foreseeable future. There just isn't enough capacity. Although still fast, Verizon's LTE network is already slowing down in many areas. That's happening from only half of Verizon's user base (a single carrier) using LTE with tiny caps. It is nowhere near ready for landline replacement in dense areas where there are currently usually only 2 providers with massive caps. I'd say maybe in 5 or more years, but not in the near future. Assuming data usage continues to skyrocket, I'd say more like 10 years. | |
|
| | | | KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | Re: RE:Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant said by silbaco:Wireless can't be the new last mile in densely populated areas at this time or even in the foreseeable future. There just isn't enough capacity. Although still fast, Verizon's LTE network is already slowing down in many areas. That's happening from only half of Verizon's user base (a single carrier) using LTE with tiny caps. It is nowhere near ready for landline replacement in dense areas where there are currently usually only 2 providers with massive caps. I'd say maybe in 5 or more years, but not in the near future. Assuming data usage continues to skyrocket, I'd say more like 10 years.
Exactly why wireless will be the future(per the telcos and apparently Forbes.) They will just keep putting up cell sites and use keywords in advertising such as "Improving the customer experience."
Naturally as I am sure you know it will all be bullshit.
funny thing is if they push FTTH they can push people onto using more and more wifi. Getting more bandwidth out to homes and businesses and promoting wifi will lower the data needs of the cellular network.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| | | | openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | said by silbaco:Wireless can't be the new last mile in densely populated areas at this time or even in the foreseeable future. Nor is it. But for rural, sparsely populated areas, wireless absolutely makes sense for the last mile. | |
|
| KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | Fiber will always be superior to wireless in capability.
However investors cream their pants at the cash cow that is low cap high overage wireless.
Wireless cannot and will not be the future in its current business model and the laws of physics prevent it from giving the low latency needed for what is coming in entertainment.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
|  dib22
join:2002-01-27
Kansas City, MO | said by Linklist:Looks like someone at Forbes agrees with me:
Yes lets get everyone on wireless, then take them all down with a 9 volt battery and 99 cents worth of parts 
Hardline features greater reliability and security... wireless is very convenient while on the go, however  | |
|
| KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Yes, someone at Forbes who ignores the future our providers wish for us--- Expensive capped wireless. Or maybe he has a lot of stock in said Wireless companies.
For consumers, Fiber is vastly superior to wireless in every way.
For profiteering, wireless is clearly the future. Since there's no evidence the US market is going to become competitive or diverse, I have no interest in seeing networked, wired or fiber connections replaced by wireless.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| | Host:
Time Warner Intern..
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: RE:Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant Yes, someone at Forbes who ignores the future our providers wish for us--- Expensive capped wireless. Or maybe he has a lot of stock in said Wireless companies. | |
|
| | | LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | Re: RE:Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant said by Karl Bode:Yes, someone at Forbes who ignores the future our providers wish for us--- Expensive capped wireless. Or maybe he has a lot of stock in said Wireless companies. Tim Worstall is a Fellow at the Adam Smith Institute in London. Guess where the Adam Smith Institute gets a significant chunk of its money? Worstall may be a Libertarian, but there are no sources on the Internet I could find that says ASI gets money from US telcos. In fact ASI heavily protects the source of its contributions and that info is not available.
--
I will be perfectly happy if the budget cuts specified in the Budget Control Act go into effect. 3 cheers for the sequester. Take the money from the drunken federal spenders. | |
|
| | | | Host:
Time Warner Intern..
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: RE:Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant Worstall may be a Libertarian, but there are no sources on the Internet I could find that says ASI gets money from US telcos. In fact ASI heavily protects the source of its contributions and that info is not available.
waves hand for Jedi mind trick
You don't need fiber. Wireless is enough. All regulation is always evil. The performance of the private sector is fantastic in terms of meeting consumer needs. | |
|
| | | | | KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Re: RE:Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant These are not the Androids you are looking for. | |
|
LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5
1 edit |  RE:The Pirate Bay Moves to North Korea, Gets Virtual Asylum
--
I will be perfectly happy if the budget cuts specified in the Budget Control Act go into effect. 3 cheers for the sequester. Take the money from the drunken federal spenders. | |
|
| LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5
1 edit | Re: RE:The Pirate Bay Moves to North Korea, Gets Virtual Asylum said by Linklist:Talk about irony - The Pirate Bay moves to North Korea(home of the most internet unfriendly nation on earth) to stay online. Access to North Korean networks are blocked in much of the world. TPB moved because no one could get to them. This won't help them out much.
The Pirate Bay move to North Korea may be some hacking of routers. TPB may actually be in Cambodia:
»www.theverge.com/2013/3/4/406441···han-fact
--
I will be perfectly happy if the budget cuts specified in the Budget Control Act go into effect. 3 cheers for the sequester. Take the money from the drunken federal spenders. | |
|
| KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | Somewhere deep down I support TPB. Simply because they keep the MAFIAA in a great run around and prove that stopping piracy is about as effective as stopping booze was during the prohibition.
I mean when you think about it, They are similar. the feds shut down one gin joint and two more pop up. Same thing with TPB. One node gets blocked or raided and two more pop up.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| | Why High Speed Broadband Fiber Is Becoming Irrelevant Wireless better than Fiber?
True - for my Cell Phone
False - for my home
True - For ISPs
False - For MOST consumers
Hardline access at home will always be Faster and Cheaper (long term) from a technology standpoint.
LTE is fast, but not as fast as fiber.
Wireless isn't as consistent for bandwidth or ping
Fiber feeds the tower that provides the LTE, if wireless is better what's with all the fiber?
in fact, I could get LTE at my home right now, it'd be faster than the DSL I have right now. BUT, there is no way I'd move my home internet connection to LTE.
Can't Game - Erratic Ping
Can't Download - Low CAP
Can't Stream - Low CAP
Less secure also, while hardline access can be hacked, snooped at least somebody has to DO something to gain access not just be in the area. | |
|
|
|
