jc100
join:2002-04-10
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Matt
Re: Daniel Island, SC Fiber To The Home
I've got a question for you. Do you really consider 13 /1.4 as fiber? Also, how is 30/5 fiber? It might be fiber light, but certainly isn't fiber in the real definition. Actual fiber, as looked at via European Standards, is symmetrical or at least evenly scaled. To me, 10mbit or higher constitutes fiber. IE 10mbit bidirectional and higher would fit the mold. Anything less would just be sub par. I would consider 30mbit download and 10 mbit upload to be satisfactory. As I said, 1.25MB/S plus upload is a fair amount to give to users. It allows for ample speeds on sending stuff. In this day and age, digital is the mainstream phrase. If you got a 1GB home movie to share from your dvd camcorder, why should it take hours to send. With a 10mbit upload standard as universal, one could share this 1GB in about 15-20 minutes. At current rates, people are lucky to have 60-100KB/S upload and this same file would take HOURS! |
|
jonnyb
join:2008-03-15
Haverhill, NH | jc i dont have FTTH, i have cable and it is more than enough for me to do what i need to do it is probably enough for most people to do what they need to do. |
|
Matt
Running Free
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
 ·North State Commun..
 ·Corporate Colocation
| reply to jc100
said by jc100  :I've got a question for you. Do you really consider 13 /1.4 as fiber? Also, how is 30/5 fiber? It might be fiber light, but certainly isn't fiber in the real definition. Actual fiber, as looked at via European Standards, is symmetrical or at least evenly scaled. To me, 10mbit or higher constitutes fiber. IE 10mbit bidirectional and higher would fit the mold. Anything less would just be sub par. I would consider 30mbit download and 10 mbit upload to be satisfactory. As I said, 1.25MB/S plus upload is a fair amount to give to users. It allows for ample speeds on sending stuff. In this day and age, digital is the mainstream phrase. If you got a 1GB home movie to share from your dvd camcorder, why should it take hours to send. With a 10mbit upload standard as universal, one could share this 1GB in about 15-20 minutes. At current rates, people are lucky to have 60-100KB/S upload and this same file would take HOURS! I consider it Fiber because the data is delivered to my house via a fiber optic cable, which is then converted to ethernet.
Fiber is not defined by the speed and anyone who defines it that way is being obtuse.
Believe it or not, most of the speed test sites can't max out my connection, down or even UPstream, a small percentage of the time. I have several servers sitting off 100Mbps connections in two different high capacity, high speed data centers, and I've yet to find ANYTHING that can even push more than 70Mbps to me down or accept more than 8Mbps up.
My 1.4Mbps real-world throughput is enough for friends to watch standard def movies from my home network using Orb at 480p quality, my business VoIP connection, and a few computers browsing the web all simultaneously.
While it would be nice to have 10Mbps symmetrical, (I could actually use it for remote admin of my servers) 1.4Mbps works pretty damn well. SO much so that I can't justify the price (double what I currently pay) for the extra 3Mbps up I have available to me. |
|
jonnyb
join:2008-03-15
Haverhill, NH | See i also have fiber but instead of the fiber terminating at my house like it does for you Matte it terminates at the pole so there isnt much difference from FTTH to cable as a lot of people may think. |
|
jc100
join:2002-04-10
·RoadRunner Cable
edit:
April 9th, @11:04AM
| reply to jonnyb
Ok, let's look at this from another perspective. For most, cable is plenty, but as things grow in size, will that be the case. Ten years ago, most people thought dialup was great. Now, cable / dsl is the mainstream. Do you want to remain on the same tier ten years down the road. I understand some people simply web browse and email, nothing else. However, you are missing a large sect of the population, which are teenagers and young adults. These people love to share pictures, webcam one another, make videos, etc of their lives. All of which can be considerable in size. Not to mention, some families love sending grandma and grandpa home movies they captured of the kids. I mean I own a mini dvd camcorder myself and and had to upload a 1GB video for some business I helped someone with. This took a LIFETIME. I think about 6 hours to send. Honestly, while I hardly upload, it would be nice to have the potential for it to go fast. Therefore, I am looking at this from a future innovation ideology versus being stuck where we are at now. |
|
Matt
Running Free
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
·Corporate Colocation
edit:
April 9th, @11:06AM
| reply to jonnyb
said by jonnyb :See i also have fiber but instead of the fiber terminating at my house like it does for you Matte it terminates at the pole so there isnt much difference from FTTH to cable as a lot of people may think. I agree. And in actuality, BPON, GPON and the HFC cable systems have quite a bit in common, as they are shared at a location much closer to the end-user.
Although the BPON/GPON systems have a much higher bandwidth potential and are generally shared among an order of magnitude less users. |
|
jc100
join:2002-04-10
·RoadRunner Cable
edit:
April 9th, @11:12AM
| reply to Matt
That's a flawed assumption. You are talking about the delivery and I'm referring what users actually receive. From your explanation, if a cable company delivered one High Def station, then it should be able to advertise it broadcasts in HD? After all, in theory it does broadcast in it. It has that single station. The same for ISPS. In theory, a lot of data is passed through fiber versus copper. Still, it doesn't give the ISP a right to claim they are offering fiber connectivity since it has little resemblance to ACTUAL fiber. It's merely cable sent to users in another method. It isn't added speeds. As I said on my other reply, this is a digital age and people want to webcam, remote, share home movies, etc etc. We need to keep up with the pace. Ten years ago everyone had dialup. Would you still say that same standard is efficient for today? It's not WHAT can users do but WHEN will they do it type deal. I am sure few people can max out a 100mbit individually (unless you live in a country like Japan, Sweden, etc), but that's an aside issue. The main point here is users want capacity and ISPS are merely trumpeting their own horns by charging more for less. Right now, we're in a downward slide of usage caps, slow speeds, and excuses on why people can't see any highspeed at all. Yet, ISPS will continue to claim they are giving it all with new marketing campaigns. We now offer Fiber, etc etc without really offering anything different than the next guy. |
|
jonnyb
join:2008-03-15
Haverhill, NH
| Let me say this jc i agree with pretty much most of what you said but regardless in a few years mark these words all these companies saying that there service is unlimited will be charging by the byte its a matter of time they do it overseas and they will do it here soon enough and then all the bitching about speed and bandwidth wont be such a big deal especially when you pay for it oh ya and finding a un secure wireless connection good luck everything will be secure. |
|
jc100
join:2002-04-10
·RoadRunner Cable
| Hi Daniel,
Well the charge by byte model is reflective of where you live. Many countries with expansive fiber networks give an all you can eat model. Korea, Japan, Sweden, Italy, Norway, among many others have 10mbit symmetrical fiber and no data caps. However, places like the UK, countries in Africa, Canada, and many other locales have a limited tiered model. The only reason this exists is because these businesses know users tolerate it. I highly doubt it has anything to do with "finances" other than finding more ways to line their pocket. As I have said, profit is good. However, profit needs to be balanced with feasibility. At least in the U.S., companies are highly subsidized to expand. The same thing happens in the first category where these countries have unlimited fiber. Sadly, the companies here squander much of that money or hoard it claiming it's not ample to meet their needs. All of which, we don't hold them accountable for. Yet, the countries above make sure their citizens get wired. Furthermore, that population argument is a load of crap ISPS toss out. Many of our cities are more dense than those that got fiber in Europe. Simply put, the consumer is the one that needs to do the talking. If people continue to pay and tolerate these caps, then surely we will see more. If people go elsewhere, then ISPS are forced to change their business models and be competitive. It's relative. |
|
jonnyb
join:2008-03-15
Haverhill, NH
| i hear ya barken big dog that makes much sense but i dont think there is a prob with my service even if they do cap it i have never met that cap or exceeded the cap and if you are exceeding the cap then maybe the chances are you are up to shaddy business i say maybe now dont get all crazy. "Simply put, the consumer is the one that needs to do the talking. If people continue to pay and tolerate these caps, then surely we will see more. If people go elsewhere..." now all we need to do is apply this thought to the gas companies and we will be all set. |
|
jc100
join:2002-04-10
·RoadRunner Cable
| It goes a long way but the problem is often mobilizing people to get off their butts to do things. There is no big dog about it. It's simple logic. Unfortunately, its talking to the laymen and women and getting them to see the same perspective. As per caps, caps are not the issue. However, caps are just a slippery slope to the eventual bill by the byte model. It's relative. I will say it again. Consumers should get what they pay for. ISPS continued to advertise unlimited until they were sued or forced to stop doing so. Now, they are upset that people got acquainted to their false marketing, and using it for what it's worth. In terms of my usage, I received letters in the past. That's when my ISP tried to claim 5GB was a lot of data in a month. Now, they leave me alone. The point still stands. |
|
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA
| reply to jc100
said by jc100 :Actual fiber, as looked at via European Standards, is symmetrical or at least evenly scaled. To me, 10mbit or higher constitutes fiber. IE 10mbit bidirectional and higher would fit the mold. Anything less would just be sub par. I would consider 30mbit download and 10 mbit upload to be satisfactory. Most of the fiber to the home currently in the U.S. is probably BPON. 20/5 is standard for BPON and yes that is sub par compared to active fiber but compares quite favorably to what is currently available from cable or DSL. |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA
| reply to jc100
I think anything with Fiber that goes to the home is FTTH, even if I'm only buying a 768/128kbps package (such things probably don't even exist, but it's just an exaggeration)... The potential is there for greater speeds, even if the consumer chooses not to utilize it. I have 20/5 Mbps now, but that 20/5 is being provided over a system (GPON) that could just as easily provide 200/50 if Verizon wanted to and I wanted to buy it (I don't, I have no reason to pay more for higher speeds right now- but might later). Now, sure, DOCSIS2 on a HFC network could probably provide that 20/5, but definitely not the 200/50. |
|
digitalfreak
Frodo failed. Bush has the ring
join:2005-12-09
49533
| reply to jonnyb
said by jonnyb :i hear ya barken big dog that makes much sense but i dont think there is a prob with my service even if they do cap it i have never met that cap or exceeded the cap and if you are exceeding the cap then maybe the chances are you are up to shaddy business i say maybe now dont get all crazy. "Simply put, the consumer is the one that needs to do the talking. If people continue to pay and tolerate these caps, then surely we will see more. If people go elsewhere..." now all we need to do is apply this thought to the gas companies and we will be all set. Wow, there's actually punctuation in this one! |
|
jester121
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
 ·ViaTalk
| reply to jc100
I think you're getting excited over nothing. And "fiber" isn't a metric that's subject to interpretation -- it's a medium for moving data -- if there is glass inside and it involves flashes of light, it's fiber. Whether you think it qualifies under a made up "European Specification" doesn't really apply. 
6 hours to send a file is hardly a lifetime. There are those among us who remember 1200 bps modems downloading one floppy disc worth of software from BBSes that took overnight - yet we did it EVERY NIGHT!
Speeds increase as the market will bear, same as computer speeds and storage capacities. Technology will continue to develop at its normal pace. |
|
Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Pittsburgh, PA
| reply to EPS
said by EPS :II have 20/5 Mbps now, but that 20/5 is being provided over a system (GPON) that could just as easily provide 200/50 if Verizon wanted to and I wanted to buy it (I don't, I have no reason to pay more for higher speeds right now- but might later). Now, sure, DOCSIS2 on a HFC network could probably provide that 20/5, but definitely not the 200/50. Actually the GPON could easily provide 80/40, Verizon can provide 200/50 for some but not everyone. Even DOCSIS3 will be hard pressed to provide the 80/40! |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | Well, that's where oversubscription models come in... Verizon has already said they're planning to go down that road as I recall. |
|
jc100
join:2002-04-10 | reply to jester121
I used a 2400 baud external modem on a 386 laptop... really hated it =). Early 90s when my mom had a laptop from work =). Had an atari 800 lol but that didnt have a modem =(. |
|
