 mackey
Premium Member
join:2007-08-20 |
to Grim Reaper
Re: [Upgrades] Fiber being trenched in residential areas?said by Grim Reaper:Sure I'd love fiber but I'm perfectly happy with affordable, fast, and reliable coax which is already here now. It's been reliable, however it's not fast (especially upload) and FTTP is usually half the cost even from big companies such as at&t. Would you rather have 400/20 coax for $100, or 1000/1000 fiber for $80? How about 200/10 coax for $75 or 200/200 FTTP for $45? The fact that a 100% brand new FTTP network can be installed for a lower monthly cost than coax which has been on the poles for 20+ years already tells me that all these coax upgrades are not as cheap as people like to pretend. said by Grim Reaper:Plus if 0.1% of customers need a truck roll and you say they can't handle that, how would they handle replacing EVERY service drop with fiber? Again it's not that FTTP is cheap, it's that these supposedly cheaper incremental coax upgrades really aren't. Do you replace every piece of outside equipment now, again in a few years, again a few years after that, and roll trucks to 50% of your customers, or do you replace it with fiber and send the trucks to everyone once and not have to do it ever again? |
|
| |
They won't deploy it at $80. That is usually 3rd party independents. Your not going to see sub $99 gig from the large cable cos. It would be $149.99 for 1000/1000. Even if they did FTTP they aren't going to drop prices. Charter has never been cost competitive even in areas with At&t fiber or Verizon Fios. |
|
mackey
Premium Member
join:2007-08-20 |
mackey
Premium Member
2021-Feb-21 4:04 pm
said by motorola870:They won't deploy it at $80. That is usually 3rd party independents. Your not going to see sub $99 gig from the large cable cos. It would be $149.99 for 1000/1000. I know coax is ridiculously expensive when compared to FTTP, that was my point. Full cost at&t 1000/1000 is $70 directly from at&t, plus I was adding a bit because I don't remember if the gateway was $5 or $10. Current promotion is $40/month for 1000/1000 for 1 year. Full cost Spectrum coax starts at $75/mo for 200/10 and goes up from there. |
|
 ·Charter
 ·AT&T FTTP
|
to motorola870
said by motorola870:They won't deploy it at $80. That is usually 3rd party independents. Your not going to see sub $99 gig from the large cable cos. It would be $149.99 for 1000/1000. Even if they did FTTP they aren't going to drop prices. Charter has never been cost competitive even in areas with At&t fiber or Verizon Fios. I mean a cable over builder in my area WOW! (Which is in the top 10 cable companies based on size) offers 1000/50 for $64.99 |
|
·Allo
·Charter
Asus RT-AC88
|
to motorola870
said by mackey:It's been reliable, however it's not fast (especially upload) and FTTP is usually half the cost even from big companies such as at&t.
Would you rather have 400/20 coax for $100, or 1000/1000 fiber for $80? How about 200/10 coax for $75 or 200/200 FTTP for $45? The fact that a 100% brand new FTTP network can be installed for a lower monthly cost than coax which has been on the poles for 20+ years already tells me that all these coax upgrades are not as cheap as people like to pretend.
Again it's not that FTTP is cheap, it's that these supposedly cheaper incremental coax upgrades really aren't. Do you replace every piece of outside equipment now, again in a few years, again a few years after that, and roll trucks to 50% of your customers, or do you replace it with fiber and send the trucks to everyone once and not have to do it ever again? You hit the nail on head with all of that, you are correct. I have only kept Charter because of like a lot of Americans the other choice is dsl and that one sucks badly but that is soon changing. I also don't get why people would ever keep cable internet if fiber was available. said by motorola870:They won't deploy it at $80. That is usually 3rd party independents. Your not going to see sub $99 gig from the large cable cos. It would be $149.99 for 1000/1000. Even if they did FTTP they aren't going to drop prices. Charter has never been cost competitive even in areas with At&t fiber or Verizon Fios. That is right as Charter's normal price for 940/35 is like $145. Charter at least in my area offers way better promos in areas with the regional fiber overbuilder called Allo Communications. Allo offers 500/500 for $60 and $89 for Gig although its $10 more per month in Lincoln. While Charter offers promos of 400/20 for $30 a month and $90 for 940/35 in those same areas which will soon include my city. Those promos Charter offer are pretty good but I'm very sick of the poor upload speeds HFC provides so I can't wait to switch away from Charter. |
|
(Software) pfSense
Ubiquiti U6-LR
Ubiquiti UAP-AC-HD
|
said by Radisc359:said by mackey:It's been reliable, however it's not fast (especially upload) and FTTP is usually half the cost even from big companies such as at&t.
Would you rather have 400/20 coax for $100, or 1000/1000 fiber for $80? How about 200/10 coax for $75 or 200/200 FTTP for $45? The fact that a 100% brand new FTTP network can be installed for a lower monthly cost than coax which has been on the poles for 20+ years already tells me that all these coax upgrades are not as cheap as people like to pretend.
Again it's not that FTTP is cheap, it's that these supposedly cheaper incremental coax upgrades really aren't. Do you replace every piece of outside equipment now, again in a few years, again a few years after that, and roll trucks to 50% of your customers, or do you replace it with fiber and send the trucks to everyone once and not have to do it ever again? You hit the nail on head with all of that, you are correct. I have only kept Charter because of like a lot of Americans the other choice is dsl and that one sucks badly but that is soon changing. I also don't get why people would ever keep cable internet if fiber was available. said by motorola870:They won't deploy it at $80. That is usually 3rd party independents. Your not going to see sub $99 gig from the large cable cos. It would be $149.99 for 1000/1000. Even if they did FTTP they aren't going to drop prices. Charter has never been cost competitive even in areas with At&t fiber or Verizon Fios. That is right as Charter's normal price for 940/35 is like $145. Charter at least in my area offers way better promos in areas with the regional fiber overbuilder called Allo Communications. Allo offers 500/500 for $60 and $89 for Gig although its $10 more per month in Lincoln. While Charter offers promos of 400/20 for $30 a month and $90 for 940/35 in those same areas which will soon include my city. Those promos Charter offer are pretty good but I'm very sick of the poor upload speeds HFC provides so I can't wait to switch away from Charter. Same here, Charter is the better option vs. AT&T VDSL which is 50/10 maximum at my address and isn't worth the $55+fees they want for it. If AT&T or Metronet brings fiber to my address, I'm gone. |
|
Alcatel-Lucent G-240G-A
|
to Radisc359
If the telcos and other companies start to actually compete, Spectrum will be forced to do something.
In my neighborhood in the suburbs of Birmingham, AL, I have 3 choices of internet.
1. Spectrum whose prices range from $49.99 for 200/10 to $104.99 for 1000/35 on a promo.
2. AT&T Fiber from $45 for 100/100 to $60 for $1000/1000
3. C Spire Fiber for a flat $80 which gives uncapped 1000/1000.
C Spire is also covering our entire city and 2 other neighboring cities with FTTP.
Spectrum is going to lose a lot of customers if they don’t start becoming competitive..
It’s 2021 and they don’t have a whole home DVR, and are still building HFC in brand new developments which have 2 FTTP options.
What’s the excuse for that except piss poor planning and management? |
|
 Grandave
Premium Member
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY
Ubee EU2551
|
to mackey
said by mackey:said by motorola870:They won't deploy it at $80. That is usually 3rd party independents. Your not going to see sub $99 gig from the large cable cos. It would be $149.99 for 1000/1000. I know coax is ridiculously expensive when compared to FTTP, that was my point. Full cost at&t 1000/1000 is $70 directly from at&t, plus I was adding a bit because I don't remember if the gateway was $5 or $10. Current promotion is $40/month for 1000/1000 for 1 year. Full cost Spectrum coax starts at $75/mo for 200/10 and goes up from there. All of this. He has hit the proverbial nail on the head. Charter has to do 39.99 for 400/20 but what about those 49.99 for ultra fee because we can fee? Or the 199.99 to push a button fee for gigabit? Are these fees dropped or do they tacked on as well. My point all the long is. At some point there's no longer going to be docsis. You're gonna have to migrate to fttp. So start transitioning now since entire city governments are in your hands. Permits and even ROW access all mso's won't be told no. But a ton of Verzion and other telcos had to go through a ton of hoops to get service installed. Plus fighting with landlords and co-op boards, condo associations. To get fios installed here in nyc and new York State. Brownfields, Greenfields, purplefields etc.. Who cares.. If customers start to get educated on why fiber is less expensive to maintain and prices will start to come down. Customers will flick like rabbits to it. But it won't happen because. We still have executives who are from the 80s running boards, being top shareholders. Who don't want to see prices come down. I mean why not charge people a 199.99 or 49.99 fee because we can fee? Why not charge customers a fee for DVR service and a box fee because we can. When customers become more educated on how coax operates and how fiber operates, with costs comparisons. Customers won't stick with coax. Don't under estimate the customer base on education via website tools and reading. Canada can have 85mhz already on the upstream to provide 100mbps on their gigabit connection. Do they say how much that is a month non promo rack rate. Versus a 1000/1000 incumbent or another fiber provider price? Don't leave out that juicy detail. |
|
| Grandave |
to FlatWorld
Hey flatworld. Can I rent a room in your house? I'm retiring soon and I want to have fiber before I pass on to the ground. So I'll rent a room and pay for our fiber connection. Plus I'll bequeath you a fiber connection in my will. So for as long you and family live thete, fiber will always be there!  |
|
| |
to FlatWorld
said by FlatWorld:If the telcos and other companies start to actually compete, Spectrum will be forced to do something.
In my neighborhood in the suburbs of Birmingham, AL, I have 3 choices of internet.
1. Spectrum whose prices range from $49.99 for 200/10 to $104.99 for 1000/35 on a promo.
2. AT&T Fiber from $45 for 100/100 to $60 for $1000/1000
3. C Spire Fiber for a flat $80 which gives uncapped 1000/1000.
C Spire is also covering our entire city and 2 other neighboring cities with FTTP.
Spectrum is going to lose a lot of customers if they don’t start becoming competitive..
It’s 2021 and they don’t have a whole home DVR, and are still building HFC in brand new developments which have 2 FTTP options.
What’s the excuse for that except piss poor planning and management? Yeah, I have to agree... Sorry if you want to milk the hell out of copper at the expense of pleasing shareholders, but GD, how long is it taking you to do all these band splits just to get an upload over 40mbps? How long from right now when you're reading this is it going to take Spectrum to offer 100+mbps upload?... Compare that to "the other guys"... jesus, even T-Mobile 5G home is offering more than that, at half the cost. motorola870 I've read your posts for years, and appreciate all your contributions, but you're losing ground to defend the copper infrastructure. |
|
| |
to Grandave
said by Grandave:said by mackey:said by motorola870:They won't deploy it at $80. That is usually 3rd party independents. Your not going to see sub $99 gig from the large cable cos. It would be $149.99 for 1000/1000. I know coax is ridiculously expensive when compared to FTTP, that was my point. Full cost at&t 1000/1000 is $70 directly from at&t, plus I was adding a bit because I don't remember if the gateway was $5 or $10. Current promotion is $40/month for 1000/1000 for 1 year. Full cost Spectrum coax starts at $75/mo for 200/10 and goes up from there. All of this. He has hit the proverbial nail on the head. Charter has to do 39.99 for 400/20 but what about those 49.99 for ultra fee because we can fee? Or the 199.99 to push a button fee for gigabit? Are these fees dropped or do they tacked on as well. My point all the long is. At some point there's no longer going to be docsis. You're gonna have to migrate to fttp. So start transitioning now since entire city governments are in your hands. Permits and even ROW access all mso's won't be told no. But a ton of Verzion and other telcos had to go through a ton of hoops to get service installed. Plus fighting with landlords and co-op boards, condo associations. To get fios installed here in nyc and new York State. Brownfields, Greenfields, purplefields etc.. Who cares.. If customers start to get educated on why fiber is less expensive to maintain and prices will start to come down. Customers will flick like rabbits to it. But it won't happen because. We still have executives who are from the 80s running boards, being top shareholders. Who don't want to see prices come down. I mean why not charge people a 199.99 or 49.99 fee because we can fee? Why not charge customers a fee for DVR service and a box fee because we can. When customers become more educated on how coax operates and how fiber operates, with costs comparisons. Customers won't stick with coax. Don't under estimate the customer base on education via website tools and reading. Canada can have 85mhz already on the upstream to provide 100mbps on their gigabit connection. Do they say how much that is a month non promo rack rate. Versus a 1000/1000 incumbent or another fiber provider price? Don't leave out that juicy detail. Canada has high prices. The CRTC is just like the FCC. They don't have true competition. Also people need to understand some areas barely turn a profit as it is on HFC. Charter has notoriously cut areas off before in systems that were due for upgrades due to density issues with few customers. They aren't going fiber in brownfields due to cost and they arent' going to prioritize it in underground areas. If anyone sees fiber it is new build. There are rural systems that barely struggle to get 1Gbps over Coax. Thanks to satellite gutting pay tv along with streaming some areas are not that profitable as most think. As recently as 2016 Charter did a full system upgrade with 1GHz electronics and ran an entire new plant in areas using new hardline coax about 30 miles from me. Charter isn't doing FTTH. If they really felt threatened by At&t or other FTTH providers they would have already upgraded. People need to understand this is a hobby site most people don't care to upgrade to 1Gbps. Anyone going to float Charter 20-30 Billion to do a full FTTH upgrade? They would have to take on debt isn't happening. |
|
mackey
Premium Member
join:2007-08-20 |
mackey
Premium Member
2021-Feb-22 5:57 pm
said by motorola870:Anyone going to float Charter 20-30 Billion to do a full FTTH upgrade? Well who's floating them the $100 Billion they're going to need to keep nursing fucking DOCSIS along? DAA N+0 like Comcast's supposedly doing replaces *everything* except a small amount of last-mile coax. All CMTSs, nodes, eqs, hub RF/muxers, etc get completely ripped out and all new nodes and servers put in. And once DOCSIS 4.0 has equipment shipping then all that is going to need to be ripped out and replaced yet again. Even just moving to a mid-split is going to require modifying or replacing every single node, amp, and eq, and will require sending a tech to a significant number of houses to replace drop amps and add filters to cable boxes. DOCSIS is a dead end. A really, really expensive one at that. |
|
| |
said by mackey:DOCSIS is a dead end. A really, really expensive one at that. You keep saying that, but the operators love the idea of FDX, 1.8 and 3.0 GHz, so you have many bad days ahead of you. said by mackey:DAA N+0 like Comcast's supposedly doing replaces *everything* except a small amount of last-mile coax. All CMTSs, nodes, eqs, hub RF/muxers, etc get completely ripped out and all new nodes and servers put in. And once DOCSIS 4.0 has equipment shipping then all that is going to need to be ripped out and replaced yet again. Comcast just needs to swap a module in the node. |
|
|
mackey
Premium Member
join:2007-08-20 |
mackey
Premium Member
2021-Feb-22 6:40 pm
said by Franken:You keep saying that, but the operators love the idea of FDX, 1.8 and 3.0 GHz, so you have many bad days ahead of you. They keep saying that, but they have not purchased any hardware yet. I'll believe it when I see it rolled out on a large scale. And Spectrum has explicitly stated they are not doing FDX. |
|
| |
to Franken
said by Franken:said by mackey:DOCSIS is a dead end. A really, really expensive one at that. You keep saying that, but the operators love the idea of FDX, 1.8 and 3.0 GHz, so you have many bad days ahead of you. said by mackey:DAA N+0 like Comcast's supposedly doing replaces *everything* except a small amount of last-mile coax. All CMTSs, nodes, eqs, hub RF/muxers, etc get completely ripped out and all new nodes and servers put in. And once DOCSIS 4.0 has equipment shipping then all that is going to need to be ripped out and replaced yet again. Comcast just needs to swap a module in the node. Not to mention they are manufacturing gear now to do 1.2GHz without DAA. ARRIS and ATX are making 1.2GHz and 1.8GHz gear that can be retro fitted into existing housings depending on the age of the gear. Even the taps are hot swap ready in some cases. Just like how they were installing 1GHz taps and passives when 750MHz actives were being installed. The operators usually prep for future increases. |
|
| motorola870 |
to mackey
said by mackey:said by Franken:You keep saying that, but the operators love the idea of FDX, 1.8 and 3.0 GHz, so you have many bad days ahead of you. They keep saying that, but they have not purchased any hardware yet. I'll believe it when I see it rolled out on a large scale. And Spectrum has explicitly stated they are not doing FDX. There are already 1.2GHz passives in the wild. I would not be shocked if Charter is also using 1.2GHz amplifiers and nodes in certain systems as well. |
|
| |
to mackey
said by mackey:They keep saying that, but they have not purchased any hardware yet. I'll believe it when I see it rolled out on a large scale. And Spectrum has explicitly stated they are not doing FDX. Do you have insight into what they have bought? Comcast is now upgrading to 1.2 GHz, which is the upper boundary for FDX in 4.0. ATX has 1.8 GHz taps, which can be upgraded to 3 GHz. Other vendors will follow. 1.8 GHz amplifiers will soon be available. Charter is heavly invested in a new standardized node, the GAP node, made for the future HFC/fiber networks. It is not yet available, so it is not being deployed yet. |
|
Grandave
Premium Member
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY Netgear RAX120
Ubee EU2551
|
Grandave
Premium Member
2021-Feb-23 2:29 am
How many years have Comcast stated higher upload was coming? 10 years. It's been a damn decade and operators can't give 100mbps upload. This 3ghz vaporware crap is a pipe dream. Or it's gonna cost 300 bucks a month plus 500 to 1k in setup and because we can fees to get that 3ghz service.
No way in doggie hell are customers getting symmetrical hfc for cheap. It won't happen it's a pipe dream.
By the time 3ghz is supposedly ready to have gone live. 200 billion in r&d could have been put into migration to ftth. But again.. Mso's are run by backwards thinking buffoons who don't know the difference between a rj45 interface and a coax jack. Docsis is a highly expensive medium. The licenses are utterly insanely priced. Not to mention the approved modems, CMTSes, amps etc.. Just to get the very stating docsis approved.
Again fiber is cheaper in all areas of the game. But logic doesn't play here supposedly? |
|
| |
said by Grandave:How many years have Comcast stated higher upload was coming? 10 years. It's been a damn decade and operators can't give 100mbps upload. This 3ghz vaporware crap is a pipe dream. Or it's gonna cost 300 bucks a month plus 500 to 1k in setup and because we can fees to get that 3ghz service.
No way in doggie hell are customers getting symmetrical hfc for cheap. It won't happen it's a pipe dream.
By the time 3ghz is supposedly ready to have gone live. 200 billion in r&d could have been put into migration to ftth. But again.. Mso's are run by backwards thinking buffoons who don't know the difference between a rj45 interface and a coax jack. Docsis is a highly expensive medium. The licenses are utterly insanely priced. Not to mention the approved modems, CMTSes, amps etc.. Just to get the very stating docsis approved.
Again fiber is cheaper in all areas of the game. But logic doesn't play here supposedly? They have had ways to increase the upload for years just had no reason to do it when the competition didn't even offer symmetrical speeds. Charter could do plug and play swap outs on the newer gear in the field for the diplex filter. Some of the 860MHz and 1GHz systems could litterally switch to 5-85MHz from 5-42MHz. They haven't as the technology advanced further and they don't want to do 2 upgrades in less than 5 or so years. Charter is going for the 5-204MHz split to allow for gig uploads. It's not like Charter or TWC hasn't gone out of the way to reclaim spectrum before in existing amplifiers. Analog AGC modules were swapped with QAM AGC carriers to free up 6MHz in certain systems. |
|
Grandave
Premium Member
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY Netgear RAX120
Ubee EU2551
|
Grandave
Premium Member
2021-Feb-23 4:18 am
You keep saying they can or could. But again for over a decade nada. This is a hobby for operators an expensive one. Licenses are way overpriced and the r&d into this is way up there. You like copper great I get it. But on a larger scale this coax has an EOL but hey I'll move into a fiber area first. Before I'll get a symmetrical cable connection. |
|
3 edits |
said by Grandave:You keep saying they can or could. But again for over a decade nada. This is a hobby for operators an expensive one. Licenses are way overpriced and the r&d into this is way up there. You like copper great I get it. But on a larger scale this coax has an EOL but hey I'll move into a fiber area first. Before I'll get a symmetrical cable connection. Coax is not EOL. You do realize they are keeping capital expenses low on purpose? It is a fetish to expect cable operators to go full FTTH. They are not. The reason why we haven't seen a 5-85MHz expansion on a wide scale deployment is because they weren't needing it when they were dealing with DSL. Maybe when people actually go look at the turnover rates in areas with FTTH it isn't as high as most think. Why would they deploy anything higher than 35-50Mbps upstream when they are still seeing net growth on broadband. The actual take up on symmetrical gig is low and it is likely people who work from home or are heavy users that game or stream. Lets not forget they keep refarming capacity. Why do they need 1.2GHz or 3GHz when they can provide current speeds with slight capacity upgrades. Not to mention even FTTH is a shared connection with splits usually being 32 or 64 customers per port. There are no dedicated circuits on residential lines. Charter has already said they can leverage existing capacity by removing SD, going MPEG4 and shifting more channels to SDV. Mediacom is already testing symmetrical gig using a high split 1.2GHz capacity node + 0 setup. I would expect SD only service to be turned off in next couple of years anyways the amount of SD boxes left is dwindling. » www.fiercetelecom.com/te ··· petition |
|
Grandave
Premium Member
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY Netgear RAX120
Ubee EU2551
|
Grandave
Premium Member
2021-Feb-23 6:29 am
You do understand that cable co's have had protections in place for many many decades under there belts right? For stating operators don't have to is funny. They kept hostage customers for decades while telling customers they're fine with there 5/768k connections.
Coax is dead show all the graphs charts you like. Bottom line is this. Once ftth is made available in cable co areas customers flock. The one who stays are only on price
I mean 400/20 is 39.99 in areas with fiber competition. Will be discussing in a few years maybe 5ish how cable will be caught with their pants down yet again.
Btw 10gbps symmetrical will be made available before cable even offers 750mb upload. |
|
·Charter
·AT&T FTTP
|
to motorola870
said by motorola870:Canada has high prices. The CRTC is just like the FCC. They don't have true competition. While Canada does have higher prices than the US on average it really isn't as big of a difference as it seems. once you convert the Canadian dollar to USD their prices are somewhat similar. Telus's symmetrical Gig is $78.54 a month in USD. |
|
| |
Anona992b to Grandave
Anon
2021-Feb-23 4:10 pm
to Grandave
said by Grandave:Btw 10gbps symmetrical will be made available before cable even offers 750mb upload. A lot of people don't need 750 Mbps DOWNLOAD let alone upload. And a lot of areas aren't getting FTTH. Heck at&t is the local telco here and they don't see fit to put FTTH here some new company isn't |
|
|
| |
Anondf654 to mackey
Anon
2021-Feb-23 4:10 pm
to mackey
said by mackey:And Spectrum has explicitly stated they are not doing FDX. To be more accurate, Charter stated that they did not have any current plans for FDX. Which from their perspective made a lot of sense at that time (at least with the earliest varieties of FDX which required N+0, and Charter did not want to even consider N+0 due to costs (amps with echo cancellation came later in the technology evolution)). However, Charter still sees ESD and top-split as giving them most of the bang for a lot less buck. And Rutledge is nothing if not frugal with the companies money (some would use the term cheap rather than frugal, but no matter, the company spends money the way many would with their own money, i.e. not chasing the latest shiny object, but waiting for the next gen to be shipped and after the bumps have been smoothed over). That has been good for the owners of the company, which are for whom he works. |
|
| |
to Anona992b
For those that are interested, Brady, John and Jeff from Cox will talk about the road ahead, on March 19. "The Road To DOCSIS 4.0": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qOUEi5-jRk |
|
mackey
Premium Member
join:2007-08-20 |
to Anondf654
said by Anondf654 :However, Charter still sees ESD and top-split as giving them most of the bang for a lot less buck. And Rutledge is nothing if not frugal with the companies money Which shows just how delusional he is. Forget standards, there aren't even any proposals for top-splits, and the manufacturers would laugh him out of the room if he tried. |
|
| mackey |
to motorola870
Something something Egyptian rivers. You sound just like the people a couple years ago who were going "DSL is not dead! There's no need for FTTP as G.Fast is going to solve everyone's bandwidth problems!" Sure, there's no technical reason they can't upgrade it a bit more, however it's going to be stupid-expensive to do so no matter which direction they go. |
|
| |
to mackey
said by mackey:said by Anondf654 :However, Charter still sees ESD and top-split as giving them most of the bang for a lot less buck. And Rutledge is nothing if not frugal with the companies money Which shows just how delusional he is. Forget standards, there aren't even any proposals for top-splits, and the manufacturers would laugh him out of the room if he tried. You don't know any plans manufacturers have. R&D is already under way. It is clear you are going to argue anything they do is wrong if it has to do with Coax. Just because Charter isn't declassifying their plans does not mean they aren't working on upgrades. The GAP node has likely had delays due to COVID19 but Charter is investing in nodes with modular upgrades that can do various things such as a wifi hotspot, FTTH, etc. I would not be surprised if we see the first round of GAP nodes some time this year. The only technology that was balked at was Comcast's request for FDX nodes and power consumption. |
|
mackey
Premium Member
join:2007-08-20 |
mackey
Premium Member
2021-Feb-23 7:52 pm
said by motorola870:said by mackey:said by Anondf654 :However, Charter still sees ESD and top-split as giving them most of the bang for a lot less buck. And Rutledge is nothing if not frugal with the companies money Which shows just how delusional he is. Forget standards, there aren't even any proposals for top-splits, and the manufacturers would laugh him out of the room if he tried. You don't know any plans manufacturers have. R&D is already under way. It is clear you are going to argue anything they do is wrong if it has to do with Coax. Just because Charter isn't declassifying their plans does not mean they aren't working on upgrades. The GAP node has likely had delays due to COVID19 but Charter is investing in nodes with modular upgrades that can do various things such as a wifi hotspot, FTTH, etc. Please, anyone who is even half following the industry can tell you there are zero plans for a top-split. WiFi is not a top-split and FTTP is also not a top-split so I don't know how those are related to my assertion that no one is looking into making equipment for a top-split. As it is Broadcom nearly walked out on the cable industry over DOCSIS 4.0 even without this top-split nonsense. |
|
·
·
