 | | No choice really FiOS is always going to play an endless game of "one upmanship" with TWC, Comcast, Cox et al. So they have no choice. Competition is good!!!
I do hope other cable providers follow suit, and I also hope they go beyond just greenfield developments. | |
|
 |  baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI | Re: No choice really "Generally Less Expenise"
FIOS FTTh - $4000/customer
DOCSIS 3.0 Upgrade - $50 per customer.
Generally..... | |
|
| | Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | Re: No choice really What is the price difference on doing a complete install rather than just upgrading an area?
The D3 modems cost a lot more than $50 ea and the D3 CMTS are not free either. | |
|
| | | | | Re: No choice really It's cheaper than laying last mile fiber. D3 modems are also cheaper than ONTs. | |
|
| | | | Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | Re: No choice really I have no doubt that is cheaper, but by how much? If it is only 30% cheaper then it would be more cost effective to go with fiber (again for fresh areas). | |
|
| | | | |  espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Clear Wireless
1 edit | Re: No choice really said by Lazlow:I have no doubt that is cheaper, but by how much? If it is only 30% cheaper then it would be more cost effective to go with fiber (again for fresh areas). With no home visits required for D3 upgrades I'd wager that the costs could be 50-60% cheaper overall, even if you have to upgrade all of the amps and nodes in the HFC plant.
It really only makes sense for cable MSOs to do fiber in new infrastructure installs where they will already be trenching to individual homes anyway. | |
|
| | | | | | Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | Re: No choice really Here in Charter land in the areas that they have upgraded to 60Mbps(very limited) they have had to replace a lot of lines (and presumably other hardware). Now admittedly a lot of that probably should have been replaced years ago just for general maintenance. That is why I was asking for the price difference ON FRESH AREAS(no upgrades), so that we could see apples to apples. There is no doubt that limited upgrades would be significantly cheaper. | |
|
| | | | | | | | said by espaeth:With no home visits required for D3 upgrades I'd wager that the costs could be 50-60% cheaper overall, even if you have to upgrade all of the amps and nodes in the HFC plant. What about D3 modems? I'm sure 90% of customers are not going to know how to install it. I may know that all it takes is hooking in a few wires, but most are not technically inclined. Also, my co uses a line filter that I am sure is designed for D1 or 2 and will need replacing. No home visit? Think again.
--
- "Techie" Jim | |
|
| | | | |  maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·DIRECTV
| said by Lazlow:I have no doubt that is cheaper, but by how much? If it is only 30% cheaper then it would be more cost effective to go with fiber (again for fresh areas). Fiber cable by itself is a lot more expensive to produce then copper cable. Also with deployment you need to be sure that fiber can never bend at more than a certain degree corner, which makes turning the corner at a pole a little more challenging. Doable no problem, but deploying copper is cheaper by far.
The only reason to deploy fiber now to those new areas is so that they don't have to in 10, 20 years from now and incur the costs twice. | |
|
| | | | | |  Anonymous_AnonymousPremium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2
 ·RoadRunner Cable
·Comcast
 ·Time Warner VOIP
| Re: No choice really said by maartena:said by Lazlow:I have no doubt that is cheaper, but by how much? If it is only 30% cheaper then it would be more cost effective to go with fiber (again for fresh areas). Fiber cable by itself is a lot more expensive to produce then copper cable. Also with deployment you need to be sure that fiber can never bend at more than a certain degree corner false
ever noitce the fiber that is coiled up on power poles | |
|
| | | | said by baineschile:"Generally Less Expenise" FIOS FTTh - $4000/customer DOCSIS 3.0 Upgrade - $50 per customer. Generally..... It hasn't cost that much for FiOS FTTH in years. | |
|
| | | | | Re: No choice really said by MrSpock29:It hasn't cost that much for FiOS FTTH in years. I agree... last I heard years ago was ~$1000/home. I got a quote from a local company years ago that put it at ~$3000 install. I'm sure it depends on the area they are deploying in as well as current fiber install pricing. While it may cost that much in some areas, $4000 in general seems high.
--
- "Techie" Jim | |
|
| | Reviews:
·Comcast
| your forgetting maintenance cost. it would and will be cheaper in the long run to deploy the fiber, also once more companies start to use it, the prices will come down off the supplies they buy since more people are wanting it. Not to mention more research will be done. | |
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | unless someone can make a business case... There's not going to be a BIG push for FTTH.
- Docsis 3 can be deployed w/o much upgrade on infrastructure
- switched digital can be implemented to save bandwidth
I do see FTTH... but not in the NEAR future for TWC.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
|
|  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: unless someone can make a business case... said by en102:There's not going to be a BIG push for FTTH. - Docsis 3 can be deployed w/o much upgrade on infrastructure - switched digital can be implemented to save bandwidth I do see FTTH... but not in the NEAR future for TWC. Yes Comcast has Docsis 3.0 with 35% coverage and still has a cap. yeah same thing a FiOS.  | |
|
| | | | Re: unless someone can make a business case... Sadly, most users don't care about caps. | |
|
| | |  RallyBah HumbugPremium
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY | Re: unless someone can make a business case... They don't care about caps, is because they don't know what the hell it is. When they get a bill that's double what they're use to paying, because they decided to watch movies/tv online.. then they'll start caring. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: unless someone can make a business case... said by Rally:They don't care about caps, is because they don't know what the hell it is. When they get a bill that's double what they're use to paying, because they decided to watch movies/tv online.. then they'll start caring. My upstairs neighbor downloads so much crap and visits MySpace, Youtube, Hulu, etc, it's not even funny. Most people don't know or care to know what a megabyte is. They'll definitely learn when they see that increase in their bill. | |
|
| | | |
1 edit | said by Rally:They don't care about caps, is because they don't know what the hell it is. When they get a bill that's double what they're use to paying, because they decided to watch movies/tv online.. then they'll start caring. And they will certainly start worring about it when they get the bill that brings back memories of being overcharged like extra $200 for a few text messages from wireless companies years ago (P.S. SMS is still WAY overpriced). That extra $1/gb will really add up, hinder Internet innovation, and if it isn't updated quickly to keep up with the times it will surely anger many.
--
- "Techie" Jim | |
|
| | | CorydonCultivant son jardinPremium
join:2008-02-18
Denver, CO | said by fifty nine:Sadly, most users don't care about caps. They will start to care about caps once they are affected by caps. Under the Comcast model (250 GB/month), that won't be for a while for the vast majority of people.
--
"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings." | |
|
| | | | | | Re: unless someone can make a business case... Let them watch to many videos on YouTube and we'll see what happens. | |
|
| | | | | CorydonCultivant son jardinPremium
join:2008-02-18
Denver, CO | Re: unless someone can make a business case... said by PapaMidnight:Let them watch to many videos on YouTube and we'll see what happens. I did a little searching and found that an hour's worth of watching is about 200 MB. In other words, you could watch videos nonstop 24 hours a day for 31 days and still only use about 150 GB, or 60% of your cap.
--
"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings." | |
|
| | | | | | | | Re: unless someone can make a business case... said by Corydon:said by PapaMidnight:Let them watch to many videos on YouTube and we'll see what happens. I did a little searching and found that an hour's worth of watching is about 200 MB. In other words, you could watch videos nonstop 24 hours a day for 31 days and still only use about 150 GB, or 60% of your cap. Out of curiousity, Corydon, were you watching the low bitrate versions of Youtube's content, or were you watching the HQ MP4 or HD versions of that same content? If you were watching the high quality versions of the videos, you would be hitting at least 1-2 GB in an hour on average. That is if you're a heavy Youtube user, but still that could be different if people are just watching the lowest quality that Youtube offers. | |
|
| | | | said by BF69:Yes Comcast has Docsis 3.0 with 35% coverage and still has a cap. yeah same thing a FiOS. The caps might because on the 65% of the nodes that are still Docsis 1.1, they are seeing congestion issues.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" | |
|
| | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: unless someone can make a business case... said by NetAdmin1:said by BF69:Yes Comcast has Docsis 3.0 with 35% coverage and still has a cap. yeah same thing a FiOS. The caps might because on the 65% of the nodes that are still Docsis 1.1, they are seeing congestion issues. they COULD potentially have issues. I seriously doubt they do. besides any proof that once Docsis 3.0 is 100% they'll stop with the caps? Nope. | |
|
| | | | | | Re: unless someone can make a business case... said by BF69:any proof that once Docsis 3.0 is 100% they'll stop with the caps? Nope. Let's not get the cart in front of the horse. As long as they have to deal with 1.1 in the network, the case for having cross the board caps is strong.
Do you have any proof that caps won't increase with once 3.0 is fully deployed? Nope.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" | |
|
| | | | | Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | Re: unless someone can make a business case... While it would only apply to Charter, look at it. It is migrating to D3 and yet is applying caps. I would take that as a strong indicator that moving systems to D3 is not going to remove the caps. If they wanted the could say any one on any tier can be cap free, as long as they use a D3 modem. This would balance out any congestion issues generated by the D1 and D2 modems. | |
|
| | | | | | | | Re: unless someone can make a business case... said by Lazlow:While it would only apply to Charter, look at it. It is migrating to D3 and yet is applying caps. You can't generalize to the rest of the industry from Charter's actions. Charters position is unique. Their financial status is good enough reason for them to institute caps. If they limit usage with caps, they can limit their CAPEX to deal with congestion.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" | |
|
| | | |
| | | | |
| | | | said by BF69:said by en102:There's not going to be a BIG push for FTTH. - Docsis 3 can be deployed w/o much upgrade on infrastructure - switched digital can be implemented to save bandwidth I do see FTTH... but not in the NEAR future for TWC. Yes Comcast has Docsis 3.0 with 35% coverage and still has a cap. yeah same thing a FiOS. Comcast has a cap not because of bandwidth problems, but because of greed.
Their network has more than enough capacity to handle subscribers on "unlimited" plans. | |
|
| | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: unless someone can make a business case... said by 45612019:said by BF69:said by en102:There's not going to be a BIG push for FTTH. - Docsis 3 can be deployed w/o much upgrade on infrastructure - switched digital can be implemented to save bandwidth I do see FTTH... but not in the NEAR future for TWC. Yes Comcast has Docsis 3.0 with 35% coverage and still has a cap. yeah same thing a FiOS. Comcast has a cap not because of bandwidth problems, but because of greed. Their network has more than enough capacity to handle subscribers on "unlimited" plans. Because you say so.. now, how about some viable evidence.. I don't care if its true or not, so long as you sit here, on a public forum/bbs like this, you're spewing nothing but conspiracy.. | |
|
| | | | | said by 45612019:Comcast has a cap not because of bandwidth problems, but because of greed. And you know this how? Do know what the average homes passed per node number is for them? Do you know the number of nodes per downstream and upstream port? Do you know if they are 750, 870 or 1Ghz and where?
Their network has more than enough capacity to handle subscribers on "unlimited" plans. The backbone probably has enough capacity for unlimited usage. The problem isn't the backbone, it is a the last mile network. 1.1, which is what they probably have deployed most widely, only supports a total of ~38Mbps per channel. That isn't enough bandwidth for everyone to use their connection in an "unlimited", full bore, 24/7 fashion.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" | |
|
| |  tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | i would say that most users don't come close to hitting their caps.
i listen to pandora 95% of the time i'm home, watch streaming video...i telecommute and transfer large iso files back and forth between my office. my wife hits the myspace, facebook, as well as edits her personal website for her dogs (she's a breeder).
i have prtg running via snmp on my cisco 2811, and a *heavy* month for us is ~150 - 170 gig. normally we're in the ~60 gig range.
granted its just the two of us (well, my 18 month old can't stream video by himself, but he does enjoy playhouse disney online), but i can't see that this will go up by too much, even if we add a voip line.
while i do find an objection to comcast's caps in the first place, as i feel that they are a crucial first step in a company that hasn't always been a bastion of net neutrality, i do find them reasonable if a cap needs to be implemented.
that being said, d3 may alleviate some of the worries and the caps may go up. additionally, just because my pipe is faster, doesn't mean that i'm going to be wasting more of my time streaming videos. that is a true logical fallacy. i would just enjoy the speed and have my pages load faster.
q. | |
|
maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1 Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·DIRECTV
| "Explores" "Explores" means nothing more then "We're testing it in a lab somewhere to see if it works", and it won't guarantee that your neighborhood is getting an upgrade any time soon.
As a matter of fact, where the telco wires are just for you alone from the closest DSLAM, and replacing it with fiber for you alone while your neighbor stays on dialup with his copper line, is possible and easy.
Cable runs like a "ring" around say 50 houses or something like that, so they would have to upgrade everyone to fiber. I don't believe a "per house" install like FIOS would be possible. And that means getting fiber to your home from TWC is very, very far away.
DOCSIS 3.0 seems to be the cheaper way to go for now.
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" | |
|
| | What will the cap be? 250gb on a 10 / 10 link?
500gb on a 100 / 100 link?
unlimited for in Hawaii traffic only 100 - 200gb over sea cap?
They should use the room for more HD over faster speed what is the over sea link speed? | |
|
 heat84Bit Torrent Apologist
join:2004-03-11
Fort Lauderdale, FL | AT&T is being left in the dust OK, so is AT&T gonna wake up before everyone else leaves them behind? If U-Verse isn't FTTH when the restart deployment in a year, they might as well file for bankruptcy (or as for a bailout LOL). | |
|
|
See 16 replies to this post |
|
| |  Meanwhile...
 deploying Tuning Adapters enabling Tivo HD users to tune and record switched digital video (SDV) programming. | |
|
| fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: Meanwhile... ... 1) how does this affect you today in NC? and 2) Why should TWC be the ones to retrofit someone else's technology?
Your post implies that you agree that anytime TWC makes a chance that they should burden the cost of enabling legacy devices?
For the record, the only thing TWC was "popped" for was not notifying the Hawaiian franchise authority that they were cutting over to SDV.. not that they didn't give out adapters.
It should be up to the Tivo end user to update/upgrade their own devices... after all, that's part of a benefit of renting a converter from the provider instead of buying.. your box doesn't get outdated WHEN, not if, they update technology.
Technology has changed over the years and has done so fairly easily.. and with out much notice to the consumer. HOWEVER, notice how fast people notice when it's their own equipment?
.. think about it. | |
|
| maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1 Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·DIRECTV
| said by keith721:TWC still can't stop dragging their backsides deploying Tuning Adapters enabling Tivo HD users to tune and record switched digital video (SDV) programming. One could also argue that TiVo is not designing their boxes to be adaptable to new technologies which could be fixed with a new software update.
Time Warner can update all of their boxes remotely without having to do a mass-replacement, why can't TiVo create a box that can be made SDV compatible with a software upgrade?
This also has nothing to do with whether you get fiber to your home. Just like the ethernet cable coming out of your FIOS box is still copper, so will the TV cables at home, so you can still hook any TV to it. | |
|
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS
| ultra nodes epon (10+gbit)fttn is the way to go when trying to deliver individual customer access of 100+ megabits, because the old style aggregate of a 32 customers is obsolete. at peak load will be up well above 3gbits per node and you'll want breathing room or the ability to have higher node aggregate ratios and more cost effective upgrade paths. cable will have to come kicking and screaming into the realization that caps won't stand and customers will eventaully end up replacing cable-tv with internet video. the best thing they can do is be nice to those cablemodem customers of the 1990s and upgrade the network to keep them loyal, otherwise.. telco will be happy to have them back. let the bandwidth wars now commence. | |
|
| | FTTH I just moved my company out of my office and in to my home. I was about to dump my TW Cable internet for Fios when I recieved a call from a TW rep stating they will run Fiber to my house to keep my business and provide me with the speeds I need. They are getting back to me in a couple of days with final pricing.
With everything being the way it is, a lot of small business is moving in to the home and it seems the TW business dept (at least here in So. Cal.) is focusing on them. | |
|
|
|
