Wednesday Evening Links
|
 | | PSTN Just now finding out U-Verse uses Copper? Seriously? Are people really that stupid? And blaming At&t for deceiving people? | |
|  | openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Re: PSTN The author seems kind of like a sensationalist moron. Based on his "article", I'd suggest that Mr. Kushnick is lucky his firm actually pays him a salary. If by chance he is truly just now learning that AT&T's U-Verse is provided by twisted pair for the last mile, he probably shouldn't be an analyst or director of anything.said by The Huffington Post :Bruce Kushnick has been a telecom analyst for 29 years, and is currently the chairman of Teletruth, an independent customer advocacy group focusing on broadband and telecom issues, as well as executive director of New Networks Institute, a market research firm. | |
| | | | | Re: PSTN said by openbox9:The author seems kind of like a sensationalist moron. Based on his "article", I'd suggest that Mr. Kushnick is lucky his firm actually pays him a salary. If by chance he is truly just now learning that AT&T's U-Verse is provided by twisted pair for the last mile, he probably shouldn't be an analyst or director of anything.
That isn't the worst of it. What he's doing is conflating "PSTN" with "outside plant." PSTN (Public Switched Telephone Network) and "outside plant" are two entirely separate things. You can deliver IP connectivity over copper pairs (as we know) and you can deliver PSTN services over... well, over just about anything short of string.
Jim | |
| | | | | | Re: PSTN It amazes me you didn't read the story properly... AT&T is asking the FCC to shut down the PSTN (i.e.; stop providing services over the wires) -- which they claim is different than their broadband networks -- when in fact it's the exact same wires.
And in every link I provide, AT&T claims U-verse is a fiber optic technology -- not copper-based, and AT&T failed to mention this material fact that is is copper in any state or federal proceeding.
Yet the state actually changed the laws believing AT&T's hype, and it appears the FCC is going to do the same thing.
Moreover, if you actually read the article you would see that there is another more appropriate term the PSNIT, Public Switch ed Network Infrastructure and Technology which includes all wires, network switches, etc. And it includes all technologies including the 'non-switched services, such as data services.
The reason this is important is because AT&T is using the 'closing down the PSTN' to essentially erase basic obligations like making sure customers can get service.
Moreover, in every AT&T and Verizon state the companies made commitments to replace the 'old copper wiring' with fiber -- and so where's you questions about why they failed to upgrade the networks with fiber?
And as I've been talking about this since U-Verse was announced in 2004... And i even wrote a book about this failure to upgrade their states with fiber.
Maybe before you spout off you should actually read the articles and the other work we've been doing for 2 decades - as we've been filing about the failure to upgrade their states since 1992.
What he's doing is conflating "PSTN" with "outside plant."PSTN (Public Switched Telephone Network) and "outside plant" are two entirely separate things.
You have no idea what you're talking about. The PSTN was the generic term for all wires, network switches since the 1990's --
This is from the New Jersey law, which is still in effect. -- where the company got billions over the last 2 decades to transform the PSTN networks --
"D. NJ BELL'S PLAN FOR AN ALTERNATIVE FORM OF REGULATION MAY 21, 1992 --- NJ Bell's plan declares that its approval by the Board would provide the foundation for NJ Bell's acceleration of an information age network in Now Jersey and referred to by NJ Bell as ‘Opportunity New Jersey’. Opportunity New Jersey would accelerate the deployment of key network technologies to make available advanced intelligent network, narrowband digital, wideband digital, and broadband digital service capabilities in the public switched network, and thereby accelerate the transformation of NJ Bell's public switched network, which today transports voiceband services (voice, facsimile and low speed data), to a public switched network, which transports video and high speed data services in addition to voiceband services."
This was fiber to the home -- so I guess the PSTN was not simply the central offices.
And I see you live in Michigan... An AT&T state... Formerly Michigan bell, the Ameritech, then SBC and now AT&T-Michigan -- did you know they charged you thousands of dollars for fiber -- but hey, you knew that right? | |
|
 skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2
 ·Cox HSI
 ·Clear Wireless
| Outlaw DSL and watch the US average go sky high I don't know about Korea but in Japan, FTTH in a lot of areas it is getting pretty pricy and deployment has slowed to a crawl. I was looking at NTT East and prices for 100Mb best effort service was close to $80 with a $300 install fee and hefty cell phone like $400 ETF.
Some deals for Asahi as the content provider had the install fee down to about $50 on a special. It's still a good price compared to the US but far from the dirt dirt dirt dirt dirt cheap prices we normally see quoted in news items. NTT East and West late last year dropped prices by a bundle because so many younger customers are dumping FTTH for LTE. My friends said that after the price cuts they're back down to about $55 including the typical $12 Internet fee (physical connection and Internet content are priced separately) but many are still dumping it for tethering off LTE. Softbank, DoCoMo and KDDI all offer up to 75Mb/25Mb LTE. | |
| |  tobyTroy Mcclure
join:2001-11-13
Seattle, WA | Re: Outlaw DSL and watch the US average go sky high $80 per month, I wish my 3 Mbps was that cheap, and was actually 3 Mbps (CenturyUnlink) | |
| | | | Many areas where DSL would get dumped won't get FTTH or FTTN either. They be forced to get LTE. Now Verizon has fixed LTE called HomeFusion. Promises 12 Mbps download 5 Mbps upload which is better than DSL but it's $60 for a mere 10 GB per month and $10 per GB afterwards. Or you can get 20 GB for $90 or 30 GB for $120. So $120 for 30 GB? That's joke. Who can afford that? And you still only get 30 GB. Cable's 250 GB-300 GB caps for $50-$80 a month seem like a bargin compared to fixed LTE. I'd take at&t 6 Mbps DSL and its 150 GB cap for $43 over LTE anyday. | |
| | | skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·Clear Wireless
| Re: Outlaw DSL and watch the US average go sky high It was a joke. But seriously I can't think of too many circumstances where someone is close enough to a CO or RT but can't get cable HSI. My business is in this situation because our local business park was built before CATV was deployed there in the early 1980's and video wasn't something biz was interested in but residential? Even with DSL, I'm 19.2K 24AWG copper feet from the CO so while I have it as a backup to WiMax, 3.5dB margins means 384-512kbps service on a good day (while I get 10-12Mb from my unlimited use fixed WiMax). I would think that most DSL subs are in a market where they can get cable HSI but perhaps choose DSL because it is frequently cheaper. | |
|
| |
|
|
