 Simba7I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT | Duh.. They're expecting an unshielded copper pair to handle modern bandwidth demands?
It's rather obvious on why it can't handle squat. |
|
Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| " They're expecting an unshielded copper pair to handle modern bandwidth demands?"
The copper pair will only be unshielded in most cases the length of the drop from the terminal to house. Cable is shielded, or at least it always was during my almost 30 years with SWB/SBC/AT&T. |
|
Simba7I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT | said by Austinloop:The copper pair will only be unshielded in most cases the length of the drop from the terminal to house. Cable is shielded, or at least it always was during my almost 30 years with SWB/SBC/AT&T. The problem is, most areas are still using the decades-old lines without hope of updating them or even checking on them for damage or signs of old age.
Most copper pairs are not certified for anything else besides voice, and even that is iffy.
--
Bresnan 30M/5M | CenturyLink 5M/896K
MyWS[PnmIIX3@3.2G,8G RAM,500G+1.5T+2T HDDs,Win7]
WifeWS[A64@2G,2G RAM,120G HDD,Win7]
Router[2xP3@1G,2G RAM,18G HDD,Allied Telesyn AT2560FX,2xDigital DE504,Sun X1034A,2xSun X4444A,SMC 8432BTA,Gentoo] |
|
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| That wasn't what you said in your original statement. How would you suggest checking for damage on buried cables? Dig them up every how many years?
For example, the cable that serves my house was placed pre 1979 and has no problems. I get a full 25 meg profile on U-Verse. |
|
 tschmidtPremium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:8
 ·G4 Communications
·Fairpoint Commun..
 ·Hollis Hosting
| reply to Simba7
said by Simba7: Most copper pairs are not certified for anything else besides voice. That is true but DSL is designed to work over copper. The larger issue is distance. If the circuit is short DSL works just fine.
The problem is to compete with Cable circuit needs to be shorter then 10,000 feet which requires investment in expensive remote terminals.
/tom |
|
| Lets correct your statement a little.
To compete with Cable, DSL needs lines to be shorter than 1000ft. |
|
 NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to Simba7
Here. Have some squat:
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9 Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| reply to Simba7
said by Simba7:The problem is, most areas are still using the decades-old lines without hope of updating them or even checking on them for damage or signs of old age.
Most copper pairs are not certified for anything else besides voice, and even that is iffy.
Probably true for Qwest/CenturyLink. But I see a lot of new, aerial copper in SBC/AT&T areas I travel through.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
Simba7I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT | reply to NormanS
Nice upload you have there. |
|
NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9 | reply to Skippy25
Let's split the difference. I am doing just fine on 3,300; let's call it 3,500 feet max.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
|
|
| reply to Skippy25
You are wrong. With pair bonding, DSL can provide speeds of over 10 mbps or more at 10,000 feet. |
|
tschmidtPremium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:8 Reviews:
·G4 Communications
·Fairpoint Commun..
·Hollis Hosting
| reply to Skippy25
said by Skippy25:To compete with Cable, DSL needs lines to be shorter than 1000ft.
Well I guess that all depends on your definition of "compete."
VDSL2 can deliver 15Mbp/s rates out to 3kft and 8 to about 7kft.
But you are correct Cable is able to deliver significant speed over the coaxial portion of the network between the node and customer.
Another important consideration is how well the ISP has provisioned their internal network and peering. Fast first-mile access is wasted if they are unable to move the data within their network and get it to the Internet.
/tom |
|
NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9 | reply to Simba7
If I thought I really needed it, I'd get tech support to put me on Annex M; trade off some download for more upload.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
AZinOH
join:2007-04-25
Swanton, OH Reviews:
·Windstream
| reply to Simba7
My 12MB DSL serves my need & I will keep it until it does not:
 |
|
| reply to tschmidt
VDSL2 can do better than that. 50mbps at 3300ft without bonding. 100mbps can be achieved if within 1600ft, still without bonding. Finland has several providers offering 100mbps on VDSL2. |
|
Simba7I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT | said by silbaco:VDSL2 can do better than that. 50mbps at 3300ft without bonding. 100mbps can be achieved if within 1600ft, still without bonding. Finland has several providers offering 100mbps on VDSL2. Too bad we won't have that for quite awhile. Not to mention, ADSL is still widely used throughout this country. |
|
NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9 Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by Simba7:Too bad we won't have that for quite awhile. Not to mention, ADSL is still widely used throughout this country.
AT&T is actually retiring ADSL equipment in their 22 states as they move users to "IPDSLAM"; which is either ADSL2+, or VDSL, depending on the location.
MT is CenturyLink, yes?
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
 nunyaWho is John Galt?Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-23
O Fallon, MO
kudos:8
 ·Charter
·surpasshosting
 ·voip.ms
| reply to AZinOH
My results above (I have the U/L throttled for VoIP) show why DSL (and U-Verse) is destined to fail. DSL is embarrassing.
The best thing DSL has going for it is a captive audience. That's not saying much for the product.
While the cable companies were developing DOCSIS, the ILECs and RBOCs were all up in arms about getting "long distance" (remember long distance?).
That's why the cable companies are eating the telco's lunch when it comes to broadband.
The only RBOC who did it right was Verizon (Fios). But, Fios has such a limited footprint, it will not be the company's saving grace.
U-Verse, I'm sad to say, was a 1/2 assed hack. AT&T insisted on using the existing OSP, hoping technology would come along to rejuvenate it. Well, it did - but it was too expensive to deploy. And now they are a day late and a dollar short. When I see the speeds people are still putting up with from DSL, it's laughable compared to cable.
It's pretty obvious what the telcos's long term plans are:
1) Get released from "carrier of last resort" (get out of the POTS business).
2) Stop investing in outside plant.
3) Where customers have no choice, milk them to the end.
4) Focus only on wireless. Wireless is the telco's cash cow.
--
If someone refers to herself / himself as a "guru", they probably aren't. |
|
NormanSPremium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:9 Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
| said by nunya:When I see the speeds people are still putting up with from DSL, it's laughable compared to cable.
When I see the bill for such amazing speeds, I gag. Comcast, the local MSO, wants not just my firstborn son, but my left nut as well, for that kind of speed. But they admittedly do have a crumb to toss my way: Xfinity Economy. DSL speed for DSL price.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
|
Simba7I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT | reply to NormanS
said by NormanS:MT is CenturyLink, yes? Unfortunately, yes. I doubt CL will ever upgrade this state to anything besides ADSL. Heck, Optimum is kicking the crap out of them at the moment (30x5 vs 5x896k). They don't seem to care. |
|
