Researchers Break Speed, Distance Limitations of Fiber Tuesday Jul 07 2015 08:33 EDT Photonics researchers at the University of California, San Diego have broken through key barriers limiting the speed and distance applications of fiber optic cable. The researchers have developed wideband "frequency combs" used to synchronize the frequency variations of the different streams of optical information. They then successfully deciphered information after it travelled a record-breaking 12,000 kilometers through fiber optic cables with traditional amplifiers and no repeaters. "Today’s fiber optic systems are a little like quicksand," states researcher Nikola Alic. "With quicksand, the more you struggle, the faster you sink. With fiber optics, after a certain point, the more power you add to the signal, the more distortion you get, in effect preventing a longer reach." Alic notes that their new approach removes this current power limit, by proxy extending how far signals can travel along fiber optic cable without need for a repeater. |
 | |
This is progressGetting DSL to a gigabit at 328 feet is useless. We already have cable that can do that.
Unless you can get DSL to work at hundreds of megabits upload and download at miles of currently in place copper just give it up and start running fiber. | |
|  |  n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY |
n2jtx
Member
2015-Jul-7 8:58 am
Re: This is progresssaid by buzz_4_20:Getting DSL to a gigabit at 328 feet is useless. We already have cable that can do that.
Unless you can get DSL to work at hundreds of megabits upload and download at miles of currently in place copper just give it up and start running fiber. Nah. Where they can get away with it, AT&T and Verizon will milk USF funds to keep it alive as-is since there is no real investment and it is free money. Where they can't, they will abandon it and let the customers migrate to cable while trying to upsell them on capped overpriced LTE services. | |
| | | mmay149q
Premium Member
join:2009-03-05
Dallas, TX
kudos:48 |
mmay149q
Premium Member
2015-Jul-7 9:17 am
Re: This is progresssaid by n2jtx:said by buzz_4_20:Getting DSL to a gigabit at 328 feet is useless. We already have cable that can do that.
Unless you can get DSL to work at hundreds of megabits upload and download at miles of currently in place copper just give it up and start running fiber. Nah. Where they can get away with it, AT&T and Verizon will milk USF funds to keep it alive as-is since there is no real investment and it is free money. Where they can't, they will abandon it and let the customers migrate to cable while trying to upsell them on capped overpriced LTE services. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This is pretty accurately what's going to happen, guess I need to start looking for investors, time to start the 1st ISP dedicated to a fiber enriched America... | |
| | | | | |
Odyss
Anon
2015-Jul-7 11:28 am
Re: This is progressI am still at a loss as to why anyone needs gigabit speeds? The highest bandwidth application is Ultra HDTV. Why do I need to watch 100 TVs simultaneously?
The trend is the other way, more people spend more time watching TV on 360p screens that only need 750 kbps. | |
| | | | |  djrobx
Premium Member
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
kudos:4 ·Time Warner Cable
|
djrobx
Premium Member
2015-Jul-7 11:53 am
Re: This is progressI do understand what you're saying. The trend is toward streaming and away from downloading, but...
What 360p screen? SD video looks like crap even on my phone. iPhone 6 is roughly 720p, iPhone 6+ is 1080p.
Have you seen the size of OS patches lately? Even true of gaming consoles, I think I had to wait a whole evening before I could start using my Wii U when I got it.
Also, the overall increase in capacity helps with congestion. The faster these big downloads get off the pipe, the more capacity is freed up for Netflix HD streams. | |
| | | | | mmay149q
Premium Member
join:2009-03-05
Dallas, TX
kudos:48 |
to Odyss
said by Odyss :I am still at a loss as to why anyone needs gigabit speeds? The highest bandwidth application is Ultra HDTV. Why do I need to watch 100 TVs simultaneously?
The trend is the other way, more people spend more time watching TV on 360p screens that only need 750 kbps. What about people that work from home that may constantly be sending or uploading 100MB - 20GB files, like people who work on movies with very little compression, or audio, what if one person wants to download a file, while another wants to view a Netflix HD video? I mean a 100Mbps connection is nice, but that download may chew through the Netflix bw till it's done. What about if you get a new computer and have over 400 Windows updates, some of which can be over 1GB. This is just some of the things that really require 1Gbps, not to mention the future of stuff that will require even more speed, like for instance, backing up your 4TB drive to a cloud account you have, could you imagine backing up 4TB's over a 5Mbps connection? Or even 1TB for that matter? What if you make your money off YouTube and you have to upload videos weekly/daily? Or for that matter any other entertainment site? Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is that as our society becomes more and more connected, in probably 10 + years 1Gbps is going to be considered slow, and laying the infrastructure now and being ready for that, is a lot better that playing catch up only to turn around and have to re-invest for lets say 10Gbps or etc. ALSO if you build it NOW and offer it NOW when it's not really needed guess what? You can collect off it as long as it's viable, so let's say you pay off the network in 5 years, and until 1Gbps is no longer useful you only have maintenance costs, and the costs of doing business (Employee salaries, benefits, etc) but the 1Gbps standard will last you another 15 years, that's 15 years of making some nice profit off your initial investment, and gives you plenty of time to save up for the expansion to 10Gbps or 100Gbps, just saying, with fiber, you could literally have a long term investment plan... Edit: Plus not to mention your time on this planet is short, who has time to sit around and wait for a file to be uploaded or downloaded? Lol | |
| | | | | | | |
Odyss
Anon
2015-Jul-7 3:02 pm
Re: This is progressSorry, I'd call that a strawman argument. My neighbor across the street was a professor in biology and did genome mapping, so he might need that speed, but no one else in the neighborhood did. The people on this site wail and moan about how fiber is slow to deploy and then cannot come up with a strong economic argument for deploying it. They just say we need gigabit, but the vast majority of people do not and will not need it.
The only intelligent reason to deploy fiber is that it reduces your operating costs and you can recoup the investment in about 15 years - not a great incentive, but as long as people ignore the drivers they'll continue to wail and moan about the slow progress. | |
| | | | | | | mmay149q
Premium Member
join:2009-03-05
Dallas, TX
kudos:48 |
mmay149q
Premium Member
2015-Jul-7 4:15 pm
Re: This is progresssaid by Odyss :Sorry, I'd call that a strawman argument. My neighbor across the street was a professor in biology and did genome mapping, so he might need that speed, but no one else in the neighborhood did. Yeah, but how can people know if they need it or not unless it's there? How many people have GREAT innovative ideas, but don't bring them to fruition because the speed resources aren't there and business class gigabit costs about 10 mortgages a month? Personally I agree with an intelligent person buying only what they need, but that's why 25/25 would be your lowest tier for people who aren't creating media and uploading it to YouTube multiple times a month, and 1/1Gbps WOULD be there for people who did, you completely miss the point where this is for CHOICE and the current copper networks just can't provide the upload speed fast enough for some applications... What about the gamers who make their money at home with a stream feed to the video games they are playing and having their face on the webcam while doing it? That takes some serious upload if you want decent quality, what if 1Gbps allowed a lot of YouTube entertainers to host LIVE EVENTS or etc? The other point you're missing? Fiber Optics is the future evolution of the internet, without it, you're essentially saying "The internet is good enough and never needs to improve or innovate" and I'm sorry, but I'm more for the good of mankind than I am the good of lining investors and executives pockets with gold. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Re: This is progresssaid by mmay149q:Yeah, but how can people know if they need it or not unless it's there? Simple: if you do not know if you need it, you don't. If you needed something faster, you will find out very quickly since whatever it is you needed it for will not work as expected. The problem is that only 2-5% of people might make meaningful use of more than 10Mbps worth of upload and the bulk of those who do not need it have no interest in paying any sort of premium to enable that 2-5%, so rushing FTTH provides no net benefits to network operators within the next 15-20 years. Ripping out existing infrastructure to accommodate a tiny fraction of the market does not make much sense, which is why they are not bothering to do so any faster than they have to. | |
| | | | | | | | | ·Time Warner Cable
 ·Vestalink
ARRIS SB6141
(Software) Sophos UTM Home Edition
Sophos AP15
|
Re: This is progressThe problem is that the need is a hole in the bucket catch 22.
Since consumers don't have gigabit speeds, there is no application to exploit it.
The average tech minded individual just sees the ISPs as being cheap and trying to keep getting by with what they have like a broke college student. But we're all well aware that they are from being broke. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Re: This is progressThe simple reality is that if you have to choose between investing a billion dollar in an FTTH overbuild where you already have VDSL2 and cable in one place that yields maybe 50M$/year in new revenues and investing the same billion in wireless or other thing/place that generates 200M$/year in new revenue, you are likely going to prefer the 200M$/year option and not bother with the 50M$/year option until you run out of more profitable investments. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Re: This is progressSo they are waiting till it's too late for US Residents to be up to par with the rest of the world for the sake of delaying the spending of money. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Re: This is progressThey are spending billions annually on infrastructure, just not where and on what you would prefer them to. There is no "delaying spending" here, merely spending money where they can get the most return on investment.
Large companies cannot afford to stop spending since any money they do not spend on operations becomes taxable. This is why most corporations always carry debt even when they have billions in cash and cash equivalents. As long as they carry debt large enough to make surplus income vanish, they can minimize their tax burden. | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | mmay149q
Premium Member
join:2009-03-05
Dallas, TX
kudos:48 |
to InvalidError
said by InvalidError:The simple reality is that if you have to choose between investing a billion dollar in an FTTH overbuild where you already have VDSL2 and cable in one place that yields maybe 50M$/year in new revenues and investing the same billion in wireless or other thing/place that generates 200M$/year in new revenue, you are likely going to prefer the 200M$/year option and not bother with the 50M$/year option until you run out of more profitable investments. I'd do the smart thing and invest in both, and if I didn't want to invest in the FTTH cause it only yields $50M a year, then I'd find a way to offer more services for customers so that turned into $100M + a year instead of just leaving my customers out to dry because I can turn around and rape the hell out of my wireless customers with caps and overages..... | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Re: This is progressYou cannot invest in everything at once due to finite manpower, equipment and time. Proper project management is to select the projects with the best net present/future value and execute them in that order.
If you have a list of 50 projects on the table and FTTH is 40th in projected net value, it will take a while before it makes sense from a project management perspective to sink resources into it. | |
| | | | | | | | | |  alchav
join:2002-05-17
Saint George, UT
kudos:1
|
alchav
Member
2015-Jul-9 1:13 pm
Re: This is progresssaid by InvalidError:You cannot invest in everything at once due to finite manpower, equipment and time. Proper project management is to select the projects with the best net present/future value and execute them in that order.
If you have a list of 50 projects on the table and FTTH is 40th in projected net value, it will take a while before it makes sense from a project management perspective to sink resources into it. You guys could go round and round, but the bottom line is everyone has to make a choice according to their finances and needs. I have a strong background being retired from PacBell, now AT&T, but for me Internet and Structured Wiring has been high on my list when buying a home in a Community. My last two Communities, Palm Desert, CA and ST George, UT have Fiber. When I left Palm Desert the Community was 100% FiOS, and in ST George the Community was innovative in offering Fiber. My point is if you want the best you have to be proactive, and not just sit back and complain. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Re: This is progressYes, if you absolutely must have fiber, your only guaranteed option is to move where it is available.
For the rest of people, FTTH will have to wait until it bubbles up through the stack of other more profitable projects incumbents have in their pipeline.
For now though, FTTH delivers only marginally better revenue, leading Verizon to scrap plans to expand FiOS coverage for the foreseeable future, back out of some franchise agreements and even sell chunks of their FiOS footprint. | |
| | | | | | | | | | alchav
join:2002-05-17
Saint George, UT
kudos:1 ·ooma
|
alchav
Member
2015-Jul-9 7:13 pm
Re: This is progresssaid by InvalidError:Yes, if you absolutely must have fiber, your only guaranteed option is to move where it is available.
For the rest of people, FTTH will have to wait until it bubbles up through the stack of other more profitable projects incumbents have in their pipeline.
For now though, FTTH delivers only marginally better revenue, leading Verizon to scrap plans to expand FiOS coverage for the foreseeable future, back out of some franchise agreements and even sell chunks of their FiOS footprint. When I arrived in the Community in Palm Desert in 2000 all they had was Dial-up, and when I left in 2013 they were 100% FiOS. Like I said, I have a strong Telco background, but if I wasn't proactive that Community might still be in the Dark Ages. I joined a Committee to bring in ISP's and tell us what they had to offer. Within a year we had TWC, and soon after Verizon DSL. The Community grew to around 5000 homes, so Verizon included us in their FiOS deployment in 2005. This Community didn't wait for anything to Bubble Up, they went after and got what they wanted! | |
| | | | | | | | | | mmay149q
Premium Member
join:2009-03-05
Dallas, TX
kudos:48 |
mmay149q
Premium Member
2015-Jul-13 9:31 am
Re: This is progresssaid by alchav:said by InvalidError:Yes, if you absolutely must have fiber, your only guaranteed option is to move where it is available.
For the rest of people, FTTH will have to wait until it bubbles up through the stack of other more profitable projects incumbents have in their pipeline.
For now though, FTTH delivers only marginally better revenue, leading Verizon to scrap plans to expand FiOS coverage for the foreseeable future, back out of some franchise agreements and even sell chunks of their FiOS footprint. When I arrived in the Community in Palm Desert in 2000 all they had was Dial-up, and when I left in 2013 they were 100% FiOS. Like I said, I have a strong Telco background, but if I wasn't proactive that Community might still be in the Dark Ages. I joined a Committee to bring in ISP's and tell us what they had to offer. Within a year we had TWC, and soon after Verizon DSL. The Community grew to around 5000 homes, so Verizon included us in their FiOS deployment in 2005. This Community didn't wait for anything to Bubble Up, they went after and got what they wanted! Exactly, bubbles aren't created by the industries, they're created by the consumer, when are people going to learn that? | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | mmay149q |
to InvalidError
said by InvalidError:You cannot invest in everything at once due to finite manpower, equipment and time. Proper project management is to select the projects with the best net present/future value and execute them in that order.
If you have a list of 50 projects on the table and FTTH is 40th in projected net value, it will take a while before it makes sense from a project management perspective to sink resources into it. Not if you were smart about it and changed your business model over to only being a fiber ISP provider, in addition to that you could work with the media industry to be the 1st cable provider that would offer a truly useful streaming product regardless of what ISP you're using, and regardless of what device you're using. So then technically you could be the 1st cable provider to cover the entire US. Now granted building out your fiber will take time, however having a 2nd income while building out your fiber network would be no problem, and if you did it right you could even offer VoIP the same way, now you have 3 services you offer, 2 of which can be used on any device, and any network. This is why I said above I need investors, this would be my goal, not this crap we have today where it's "Oh well I covered 33% of the city, someone else can cover the rest, oh wait that's right, it's only me and Comcast in town, hahahahahaha poor peons" people want a seamless experience and it's about time someone stepped up to the plate and did that, current technologies suck, it's better to install fiber now so later down the road upgrades are easy and cheap, you could offer a plethora of speeds all just between 100Mbps as the lowest symmetrical to 1000Mbps as the highest symmetrical, hell you could offer 10 plans and just go up by 100Mbps each plan to give people a ton of choices... | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Re: This is progressLarge telecom corporations have more business opportunities than just residential TV and broadband, many of which with much better return on investment than wired residential services. | |
|
| | | | | | | | betam4x
join:2002-10-12
Nashville, TN |
to InvalidError
2-5%? A statistic pulled out of your rear end? Alright, you think that's true? While I could argue that point all you want, I'll simply shut it down. What was the GDP last year? Of those trillions dollars, HOW MANY of the people that contributed to that number would have been able to complete their transactions on 10 mbit uploads and whatever downloads? You think wal-mart runs on steam? I worked for a small business for 4 years prior to moving away, and THEY are paying $1,000/mo for 20 megs up/down (it would have costed us $100,000/mo through our only option)...they were/ARE DYING for more (youtube video uploads, graphics editing, videos, media creation!) but can't afford to pay for more because Centurylink has a stranglehold on the market. If centurylink had competition, 20 megs would be around $20, only 200x it's cost rather than 10,000x it's cost. Rather than criticizing others, how about you sit back, relax, and let the market decide. In most markets you have your choice. Stick with it. If people choose FTTH, you were clearly wrong, but you can stick with cable and/or dsl. Oh that's right, you work for a cableco don't you? Do you think that your animosity towards the future is going to keep you employed in the end? | |
| | | | | | | | | mmay149q
Premium Member
join:2009-03-05
Dallas, TX
kudos:48 |
to InvalidError
said by InvalidError:said by mmay149q:Yeah, but how can people know if they need it or not unless it's there? Simple: if you do not know if you need it, you don't. If you needed something faster, you will find out very quickly since whatever it is you needed it for will not work as expected. The problem is that only 2-5% of people might make meaningful use of more than 10Mbps worth of upload and the bulk of those who do not need it have no interest in paying any sort of premium to enable that 2-5%, so rushing FTTH provides no net benefits to network operators within the next 15-20 years. Ripping out existing infrastructure to accommodate a tiny fraction of the market does not make much sense, which is why they are not bothering to do so any faster than they have to. It's definitely not as simple as "If you don't know if you need it you don't need it" In fact that's probably the dumbest argument I've ever heard Way more than 2 - 5% of people make use of faster speeds than 10Mbps, apparently you don't have a family because Netflix uses 6Mbps per HD stream, and with 2 kids that's 12Mbps, not to mention other things like YouTube, and other streaming services, and I'm pretty sure most dwellings have more than 1 person living in them, so you really have no idea what you're talking about... Or live alone and so you think everyone else should be ok with what you have... It makes total sense if you want to be ahead of the curve instead of behind it, but then again from everything you're saying you're probably getting paid by a mega ISP to play down anything that requires investment... | |
|
| | | | | | | |
to Odyss
Welcome to 2015.
Don't worry, it will not take long before you catch up with technology and realize just how silly you have been. | |
| | | | | | | MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4 |
to Odyss
said by Odyss :Sorry, I'd call that a strawman argument. My neighbor across the street was a professor in biology and did genome mapping, so he might need that speed, but no one else in the neighborhood did. The people on this site wail and moan about how fiber is slow to deploy and then cannot come up with a strong economic argument for deploying it. They just say we need gigabit, but the vast majority of people do not and will not need it. So what happens when you and all you're low-speed using neighbors sell your homes and a slew of professors (or other bandwidth-hungy work-from-home video producers) gentrify and move into the hood? Your world view doesn't apply to them, or millions of others. So, are you still satisfied with 1200 baud dialup, or have you moved on from that yet? | |
|
| | | | alchav
join:2002-05-17
Saint George, UT
kudos:1 ·ooma
|
to Odyss
said by Odyss :I am still at a loss as to why anyone needs gigabit speeds? The highest bandwidth application is Ultra HDTV. Why do I need to watch 100 TVs simultaneously?
The trend is the other way, more people spend more time watching TV on 360p screens that only need 750 kbps. Thinking like you is why Fiber Providers are having a hard time with deployment. Technology moves fast, remember the first PC's people didn't think they would ever need more than 1Mb of RAM and a 20Mb HHD. That changed real fast. GigaBit Providers are popping up all over the place, and people better wake up and take advantage. Streaming Video is only going to get better, and Remote Servers will be the only thing used. A Big Pipe is needed for all this....Fiber! | |
| | | | | | | |
Odyss
Anon
2015-Jul-7 2:53 pm
Re: This is progressSo in other words you cannot think of a reason why someone would need gigabit speeds either. Short of teleportation and holographic TV, what possible applications are in the pipe that need more than 10 Mbps? An intelligent person buys only what they need. | |
| | | | | | | mmay149q
Premium Member
join:2009-03-05
Dallas, TX
kudos:48 |
mmay149q
Premium Member
2015-Jul-7 4:08 pm
Re: This is progressI just answered all that with business related answers, and time is money, if you can't get what I said, and you can't understand why 1Gbps is needed this day in age, then you possibly need to trollolololol down the river to someone else who understands your backwards thinking. | |
| | | | | | | | |
to Odyss
I will give you a reason.
I downloaded 6GB of data last night and didnt want to have to wait the hour and a half I did.
If you don't agree with my reason or think it is a valid reason then GFO as I don't care what you think. | |
| | | | | | | alchav
join:2002-05-17
Saint George, UT
kudos:1 ·ooma
|
to Odyss
said by Odyss :So in other words you cannot think of a reason why someone would need gigabit speeds either. Short of teleportation and holographic TV, what possible applications are in the pipe that need more than 10 Mbps? An intelligent person buys only what they need. Says the Anonymous person, we don't even know where you live, probably where Fiber is a remote possibility. You're right, today most people don't even know about Fiber, they're happy with their 3Mbps DSL if they even have that. I'm talking about tomorrow, when Streaming Ultra HDTV, Uploading, and Downloading Data from Remote Servers will be main stream. Then you and the Average Person will wonder how you got left behind, just like the Verizon customers that never got FiOS......Clueless! | |
|
| | | |  SeleniaGentoo Convert
Premium Member
join:2006-09-22
Fort Smith, AR
kudos:3
|
to Odyss
said by Odyss :I am still at a loss as to why anyone needs gigabit speeds? The highest bandwidth application is Ultra HDTV. Why do I need to watch 100 TVs simultaneously?
The trend is the other way, more people spend more time watching TV on 360p screens that only need 750 kbps. Hello, 90's guy(good times). Welcome to 2015! Since you woke from your coma, most TVs sold are 1080p or even 2160p at the higher end. 2160p lacks mainstream support but 1080p has been supported for years. Heck, my tablet is 2160p. Video is not the only bandwidth intensive app. We have online backups and downloadable games from online stores that exceed 50GB and are only growing. Do note that HD streaming tends to be horribly compressed and we will need more bandwidth to be mainstream for a quality HD experience. This will only be more true when 4K and the brand new 8K become mainstream. Maybe we want to run our own servers. Get a business account that allows it and away you go if the bandwidth is there. I know I like physical control of my own hardware. | |
| | | | | betam4x
join:2002-10-12
Nashville, TN |
to Odyss
Forget your puny 4k, 8K has been standardized and needs something like 48 gb/sec. Compression algorithms will probably help, but it will still take a lot of bandwidth for 8k. End game it isn't about gigabit, it's about fiber (which is cable of speeds beyond a gigabit). Next gen infrastructure in place for next gen media. Nowadays? People work from home. Games are 50-100 gigs, and multiple users tend to use 1 connection. | |
| | | | | Kamus
join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX |
to Odyss
Your lack of imagination is disturbing...
Ask yourself this:
How much bandwidth will we need for the holodeck? (whenever that might happen)
When we get to that point, then we can (maybe) stop worrying about bandwidth.
For now, here's the applications we would need 1 gig for, and a lot more than that in the future:
multiple 4k televisions, eventually multiple 8k televisions (it's going to happen) per household.
and starting in 2016: 360 degree lightfields, Also "videos" for VR that are eventually 16k per eye (that's with out counting the fact that this is 16k per eye for just a 100 degree field of view, actual videos would need to be much, much higher resolution, since they'd need to cover 360 degrees)
Those are just conservative estimates, I can't imagine how much bandwidth we will need to transmit real time depthmaps of the world around us for Augmented reality and virtual reality applications.
1 gig *sounds* like a lot, but you have to realize that it's actually obsolete by now. 1 gig internet connections have been up and running for a few years now, and now we're starting to see 10 gig deployments. (that to be fair, don't even have an interface to connect to because of how much the market has focused on wireless)
I run a VPS that gigabit download speed, and i can tell you that i have no problem downloading at the full 1 gigabit from say, amazon servers.
The internet would be a very different place to navigate and use if it wasn't for the fact that it's designed to run on obsolete connections.
Fiber capacity is still growing exponentially, and quite faster than moore's law is. And as far as i can tell, there doesn't seem to be a wall in sight any time soon.
Now what we need is for these breakthroughs to somehow carry trough to the last mile. | |
|
| | | ·ooma
·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon FiOS
|
to mmay149q
Basically, it's called Google.. but they won't build everywhere. They are now coming to realize there has to be a REMOTE realization of profit in the far off future to build.. that's why they're going after what ATT took for granted. Now they have to build fiber too (without government handouts) or get the hell out of the way and lose dense geographies like Dallas, Raleigh, Atlanta, etc.That Bell South transaction is now coming to bite them in the ass.. and it only took a few hundred million from Google's pockets. | |
| | | | |
•••• | | | | betam4x
join:2002-10-12
Nashville, TN |
to mmay149q
That already happened. The ISPs and users keep telling themselves that Google fiber is a joke and will never expand...then it expands...and again...and again. That doesn't count the countless munies and small independents. 25 years from now you'll be able to get gigabit almost anywhere in the US, and the phone companies will no longer be in business. Only AT&T has actually somewhat woken up with their gigapower service. Will cable still exist? That's a good question, quite a few networks are bypassing the cable companies and taking their content to the end user directly. | |
|
| ·Verizon FiOS
|
to buzz_4_20
This isn't changing the physics of fibre, just adding more signal processing, but for regional deployments where optical budgets can be a problem w/ current tech, this can significantly reduce cost, maint, and deployment time.
As to twisted pair, the funeral is delayed since it's still waiting to be embalmed. It's like adding an engine to a buggy. It can be done, but why... | |
| | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX
kudos:2 |
Re: This is progress...because adding infrastructure of any kind is an expensive task, so if you can avoid doing it you have a temporary cost savings.
Except that avoiding making the changes tends to mean you're now stuck competing against cable's standard tier at best...
It's cool to watch fiber getting even better at what it does. This particular advancement will mainly help with long-haul networks, but if the cost of deploying 100 miles of fiber decreases, it's that much closer to replacing slowish wireless links. And my guess is that amps have an even smaller latency penalty than repeaters do. | |
| | |  itzalex
join:2015-02-14
Osage Beach, MO |
to elefante72
said by elefante72:As to twisted pair, the funeral is delayed since it's still waiting to be embalmed. It's like adding an engine to a buggy. It can be done, but why... To milk that cash-cow until the very last second. | |
|
| |
|
How about .. |
·
·
·
