|
Is Verizon too cheap or is fiber too expensive?
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 18 June, 2008
Verizon's FiOS has been marketed largely on the premise that running fiber to each building is the best way to build a network for the long term. Since the company is apparently preparing to boost the top download speed for many of their subscribers it seems somewhat odd that they're also talking about going backwards and using old fashioned copper for some new customers after 2010.
Both ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
fgamer
Suspended permanently
|
18. June 2008 @ 02:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well we need more ISP's to thwart off the cable providers that monopolize the industry. Hopefully they bring it to Wisconsin.
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
Senior Member
2 product reviews
|
18. June 2008 @ 02:40 |
Link to this message
|
|
Unfortunately my city said "No" to fiber when they were in the planning stages a few years ago so I can't get it (yet). Hopefully this will change in the future.
As regards to the "They may use copper" comment, if rural areas run off copper (i.e. DSL) wiring I am sure they won't freak out too badly as they have very limited options as it is, I would think some of them can't even get high speed at all.
While I wonder why they don't bump the speed of the 15Mbps to 25Mbps instead of 20, I also am curious to see if they will increase the upload speed.
2Mbps is nice, which is what the current subscribers get unless they upgrade to "Faster Plus", the 2nd highest tier, but I bet a decent amount of their customers would love to see a 5Mbps upload for the low end and possibly 25-30Mbps on the high end if the 50Mbps download comes to light.
|
Member
|
18. June 2008 @ 04:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
More than likely what they are planning on doing is running fiber to a point then using copper for the rest of the run to a customer. Copper is capable of running up to 25-30Mbps for short distances. Fiber is rather expensive to run as one machine to splice it runs about 60K not to mention the dollar figure on the training for said technician to run this machine. With that said more companies here in the US need to upgrade their infrastructure as internet download speeds severally lag behind other industrialized countries.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 18. June 2008 @ 04:07
|
AfterDawn Addict
3 product reviews
|
18. June 2008 @ 08:18 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
While it would be nice to see Verizon stick with fiber for every customer without exception, if they can deliver something faster, cheaper, and more reliable in areas where choices are limited right now it still has to be an improvement
Exactly.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
18. June 2008 @ 12:21 |
Link to this message
|
|
the problem is they do not have the infrastructure to keep doing things like they did they need to cute back on speeds and adjust plan rates make the slow speeds under 300KBPS 10-15$ and double it as you move up in plans
KBPS
600= 30$
1200= 60$
2200= 100$
it sounds bad but tis the only choice land based operations have to go by until they bring the infrastructure up to date or wireless takes over.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
18. June 2008 @ 13:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
The Type SCSC 48 strand optic trunk cable that we use cost @ $11.00 per foot. Each splice box cost around $1,200.00 . Of course each house, block, road, etc does not need 48 strands. The cost of outfitting one small town is crazy. Some one has to pay for this. As ZippyDSM stated, a wireless future may be the way to go.
|
Newbie
|
18. June 2008 @ 13:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
As Zippy and glassd have stated it isnt economically viable at present for an company to run fiber anywhere other than in urban areas unless the people in rural areas want to pay a small fortune for internet!
Here in the UK there has been a massive debate on how the country is going to keep up with the rest of europe and the world, most of the UK's internet is on aging copper wire and no one wants to pay to install fiber.
So again we could all be waiting for them to sort out wireless frequencies etc.
|
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
18. June 2008 @ 13:47 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Pop_Smith:
As regards to the "They may use copper" comment, if rural areas run off copper (i.e. DSL) wiring I am sure they won't freak out too badly as they have very limited options as it is, I would think some of them can't even get high speed at all.
I live out in the sticks and I'd love to have regular high speed, I have to get it over 800mhz long distance wireless now and its a pain in the ass to get going properly.
Its suppose to be able to go through the tree line but that was a load and a half. At least I get a good work out from cutting down the tree tops in the way.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 18. June 2008 @ 13:50
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
18. June 2008 @ 13:52 |
Link to this message
|
|
What is the distance range of your wireless network. Just wondering, as there is talk of installing a tower about 5 miles from my house.
|
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
18. June 2008 @ 14:03 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by glassd:
What is the distance range of your wireless network. Just wondering, as there is talk of installing a tower about 5 miles from my house.
Mine is at least 10kms away (about 7 miles) its on the top of a small mountain though. I'm suppose to be getting 1 meg up and 1 meg down but there is a small army of trees blocking it right now which I'm in the process of "trimming". The wireless system I'm on is called the Motorola canopy.
Here is a coverage map,
http://tncwireless.ca/coverageareas/default.asp
I'm in Scotsburn and the tower I'm on is called Fitzpatrick mountain, the word is a little blurry but its down and to the left of Scotsburn. I'm at about a third of its range capacity so I imagine it reaches out about 23 miles or so. But it is line of sight much like a satellite dish no matter what crap they feed you.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 18. June 2008 @ 14:12
|
Member
|
19. June 2008 @ 10:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
"We don't have this, we don't have that."
Whine.
BUILD MORE INFRASTRUCTURE, you cheap, greedy, sorry excuses for business drones.
If you don't, someone with a pair will, and your little monopolies will be left in the dust.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
19. June 2008 @ 11:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
I live in a town with @ 220 homes. If everyone in my town decided that they wanted a fiber optic connection and a service provider decided to lay fiber optic cable and equipment in our town; for material alone just to get to each property, it would cost $387,000. That would have a ROI of over 7 years. You figure in the Lease of land lines, labor, equipment for burial, connection to your house, modems etc... The Return On Investment would be 20+ years. Banks are looking for a RIO of 3 to 5 years. What kind of monthly bill would you be willing to pay to make this feasible?
|
|
emugamer
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
19. June 2008 @ 12:10 |
Link to this message
|
|
Makes sense. FIOS stops in Northen Westchester, and I live just north, where the homes are 3 to 5 times further apart from each other. I would take the copper if it would increase my current DSL speed. My poor parents have cable internet and are only offered high speed DL and dial up UL.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. June 2008 @ 12:32 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by glassd:
I live in a town with @ 220 homes. If everyone in my town decided that they wanted a fiber optic connection and a service provider decided to lay fiber optic cable and equipment in our town; for material alone just to get to each property, it would cost $387,000. That would have a ROI of over 7 years. You figure in the Lease of land lines, labor, equipment for burial, connection to your house, modems etc... The Return On Investment would be 20+ years. Banks are looking for a RIO of 3 to 5 years. What kind of monthly bill would you be willing to pay to make this feasible?
please post in these, IQ is droping like flies LOL
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/14533.cfm
http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2/673785#4107679
Infrastructure is a huge problem, they need to try and off set costs alil so they can upgrade it IMO, by charging more for super high speed (anything above 1000-2000KBPS) and charging less for slow connections (20 or less for under 300KBPS) you can start moving the low end away from dailup and dailup users wont be quick to change and frankly if you limit can cap thos services alil its still goign to be better than dailup, for normal unlimited connections 30-40 for 400-9000KBPS is not bad and balances things out some after all tis goign to take 10+ years ad billions of dallors to get the US up to date.
yes they screwed up yes they are greedy but currently building and upgrading infrastructure could bankrupt some leaving the more greedy and maladjusted hiking rates as they please.
|
Member
|
20. June 2008 @ 00:07 |
Link to this message
|
Yeah, you know what? Forget what I said.
All of you weeping for Comcast and the rest, and their burden - let's just forget it. Take it away from them.
Why not? We did it with the Rural Electrification Project, the TVA and the phone lines. Let's just mandate and nationalize.
Make everybody pay for it, whether they use it or not, and force the companies out of business. Then it won't be too hard for them to do the business they're supposedly in. That's what'll happen eventually, anyway and frankly if they can't hack it, if they've got to come up with excuses as to why they won't use the connectivity that's already available, they deserve to be dead.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
20. June 2008 @ 00:16 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by mspurloc:
Yeah, you know what? Forget what I said.
All of you weeping for Comcast and the rest, and their burden - let's just forget it. Take it away from them.
Why not? We did it with the Rural Electrification Project, the TVA and the phone lines. Let's just mandate and nationalize.
Make everybody pay for it, whether they use it or not, and force the companies out of business. Then it won't be too hard for them to do the business they're supposedly in. That's what'll happen eventually, anyway and frankly if they can't hack it, if they've got to come up with excuses as to why they won't use the connectivity that's already available, they deserve to be dead.
Not quite 80% of what you say is right however when it comes to avabile bandwidth (for new and old) and money for infrastructure things get fcked up quickly, in order for them to build new and faster theres going to have to be a change in how ISPs manage bandwidth with that said anything that overly restricts people is bad.
Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.
|
|
LastOmen
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
20. June 2008 @ 12:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
Thank goodness they are just starting to put FiOS in my neighborhood. They've been talking it for a year now. The conductors have already been laid down, now the lines are being put in this month. I see the trucks and I CHEESE every time.
=D
Can't wait to say "Bye Bye" to Comcast for good!
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Member
|
17. July 2008 @ 18:04 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by LastOmen:
Thank goodness they are just starting to put FiOS in my neighborhood. They've been talking it for a year now. The conductors have already been laid down, now the lines are being put in this month. I see the trucks and I CHEESE every time.
=D
Can't wait to say "Bye Bye" to Comcast for good!
Pardon my French, but you're a lucky SOB. :-)
Although I guess that means you live in a city, so it evens out. I've lived in a city and frankly, I'd give up a lot not to have to do it again. EVER.
|
