Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > Networking

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals
· Free Stuff
· Contests and Sweepstakes
· Black Friday 2013
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-16-2013, 10:33 AM   #1
jae
Senior Member
 
jae's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago Heights
Posts: 943
Default Verizon Fiber to Homes: What happened?

I remember hearing about super high speed fiber lines coming into residential areas back in like 2005 (i think). Super Fast Data, Voice, and Cable over fiber-optic. I thought it was gonna take over.. So what happened?
__________________
Lenovo Thinkpad Edge 14 | AMD Turion II @ 2.3GHz | 4GB Ram | 320GB HDD | LINUX [DEAD]
eMachine | AMD Athlon II @ 2.8GHz | 2GB Ram | 500GB HDD | Win7
AMD Athlon64 @ 1.8GHz |Gigabyte GA-K8NF9 Ultra | 1GB Ram | 750GB HDD | FreeNAS [STILL KICKING!!!]
jae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 12:23 PM   #2
JackMDS
Super Moderator
Elite Member
 
JackMDS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 26,052
Default

While the following has nothing to do with Verizon Fiber per-se it depicts the process.

As an example you might read or heard in the last few years stories about Cisco's plans for the few years.

It does not matter what we think/hope/wish.

This is the era of Greed and Marketing over technology.


See here - http://www.cnbc.com/id/100457747

So forget about the past "stories" from Cisco, Verizon, or any one else.



__________________
Jack
Microsoft, MVP - Networking.

Last edited by JackMDS; 02-16-2013 at 12:25 PM.
JackMDS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 01:01 PM   #3
VirtualLarry
Lifer
 
VirtualLarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 24,451
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jae View Post
I remember hearing about super high speed fiber lines coming into residential areas back in like 2005 (i think). Super Fast Data, Voice, and Cable over fiber-optic. I thought it was gonna take over.. So what happened?
Yes? It's called Verizon FIOS, and now with the higher speed tiers, it's called "FIOS Quantum".

I have 75/35 Internet service and TV, for ~$127/mo after taxes and fees.

Don't ask me why they've mostly stopped expanding, though. Apparently the customer attach rate in deployed areas was/is still too low. Verizon got too greedy, they want big huge quick short-term profits. So they're getting rid of their DSL subscribers, not expanding FIOS (too costly), and instead, is trying to push everyone to cellular wireless broadband (LTE). One reason for that is cost of deployment to end-users is low (just put up a few towers here and there), and they get to charge $$$ for data plans and especially monthly overages.

So far, FIOS has remained without any sort of data caps, although there were a few reports of throttling of heavy users, but nothing really confirmed.
__________________
Rig(s) not listed, because I change computers, like some people change their socks.
ATX is for poor people. And 'gamers.' - phucheneh
haswell is bulldozer... - aigomorla
"DON'T BUY INTEL, they will send secret signals down the internet, which
will considerably slow down your computer". - SOFTengCOMPelec

Last edited by VirtualLarry; 02-16-2013 at 01:03 PM.
VirtualLarry is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-16-2013, 02:43 PM   #4
cmetz
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,288
Default

Wall Street happened.

How DARE Verizon spend a lot of capital to build a better future? That puts a drag on profits NOW, and we can't have that, can we?

Pretty much drove the CEO out over this. New CEO got the message loud and clear, VZ has announced that they're not expanding FIOS to new markets. But don't worry - they will be happy to offer you home high speed Internet service over their egregiously overpriced 4G network!
cmetz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 06:03 AM   #5
lamedude
Senior Member
 
lamedude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mercedes-Benz Silverdome
Posts: 732
Angry

Verizon still owes me 45Mbps.
lamedude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 07:24 AM   #6
rsutoratosu
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,080
Default

Im lucky to get fios 4-5 years ago and after doing research, its pretty much confirmed that expansion is stopped.. its very sad, one of my other friends can't get it.. blows
rsutoratosu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 11:41 AM   #7
Engineer
Elite Member
 
Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 35,605
Default

Maybe cable and Docsis 3.1 (up to 10Gbps down/2Gbps up on copper) will bring some gigabit joy to the masses in the near future, especially considering that cable operators are starting to roll out up to 300Mbps on Docsis 3.0 (Comcast IIRC).

Also, IIRC, there seems to be work on putting TV on TCP/IP, therefore eliminating the dual, separate bandwidth requirements for internet and TV. There was talk that this would vastly improve speeds on copper and would be cheaper for the ISP's/TV operators to deploy and maintain vs what they are using now. Time will tell I suppose.

Also makes me wonder how far "Google Fiber" will go now, especially with the government (FCC) pushing gigabit internet to all the states as quickly as possible (I'm assuming government subsidized networking, etc.)
__________________
University of Kentucky Wildcats!

Go Big Blue...Go Big Blue...Go Big Blue!!!

"Opportunities look a lot like work" - Ashton Kutcher
Engineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 12:09 PM   #8
jpiniero
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmetz View Post
How DARE Verizon spend a lot of capital to build a better future? That puts a drag on profits NOW, and we can't have that, can we?
FiOS was always about Cable TV, not Internet. If they had known that cord cutting was going to progress this quickly, they would have killed the project before it started.
jpiniero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 12:14 PM   #9
cmetz
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,288
Default

jpiniero,

>FiOS was always about Cable TV, not Internet. If they had known that cord cutting was going to progress this quickly, they would have killed the project before it started.

[Citation Needed]
cmetz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 12:28 PM   #10
cmetz
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,288
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Engineer View Post
Maybe cable and Docsis 3.1 (up to 10Gbps down/2Gbps up on copper) will bring some gigabit joy to the masses in the near future, especially considering that cable operators are starting to roll out up to 300Mbps on Docsis 3.0 (Comcast IIRC).

Also, IIRC, there seems to be work on putting TV on TCP/IP, therefore eliminating the dual, separate bandwidth requirements for internet and TV. There was talk that this would vastly improve speeds on copper and would be cheaper for the ISP's/TV operators to deploy and maintain vs what they are using now. Time will tell I suppose.

Also makes me wonder how far "Google Fiber" will go now, especially with the government (FCC) pushing gigabit internet to all the states as quickly as possible (I'm assuming government subsidized networking, etc.)
At the end of the day, DOCSIS is a hack, just like DSL. It happens to scale a lot better for two reasons: coax cable has more bandwidth, and the cable guys built out (had to) fiber-to-the-node, so for a long while now it's actually worked more like the AT&T U-Verse implementation of DSL than the more traditional home-run (to the CO or to a big RT) implementation of DSL. But you're still trying to shoehorn data service into a cable technology - and often, a cable plant - that wasn't built for it, and you hit physical limits and run into voodoo reliability problems and it's a big headache.

At some point, the cable guys are going to have to face the music and go FTTH too.

Google Fiber is very interesting to me for a few reasons.

Historically, post-Telecom Act, there were some overbuilders - RCN comes to mind - and they did okay, for a while, but at the end of the day the economics of being an overbuilder are pretty brutal. It's really unclear to me how GF can overcome the history here.

The telcos and cable companies - they play to win (win being their win, not necessarily public good). They put up shill "public interest" groups who loudly proclaim that more choices and competition is clearly bad for you, they make a lot of political "contributions", they know the politicians and the regulators well and have an army of lobbyists who can help them see things their way, etc. They've been doing this for a LONG time, and if they weren't good at it they'd have been toast a long time ago. And then, when that doesn't work, well... you know... accidents happen. Oops... did we do that? Google is likely to find that they just aren't able to be evil enough to play in this particular sector of the economy.

Finally, Google, as many large tech companies do, is going to find themselves becoming a competitor in one area to their critical business partners in another. What happens when Verizon or AT&T really decide that Google is a problem? All the Android phones can disappear from their wireless stores overnight... they can push out firmware updates that might have a bug or two... they can cause traffic to and from Google's critical web properties like the search engine and Youtube to get routed through a really unfortunate set of overloaded circuits. This might just be war, and Google might just find that they don't really have the stomach for it. Remember what happened when Google decided they were going to take on eBay? That lasted publicly for what... days?

I hope GF is for real and not purely a PR exercise, and I hope they're going in with the best of intentions. I know they put together a team of people who are entirely capable of doing excellent things, and they have the capital to do it. But this is going to be a really, REALLY tough expansion for Google to make.
cmetz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 12:35 PM   #11
Engineer
Elite Member
 
Engineer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 35,605
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmetz View Post
At the end of the day, DOCSIS is a hack, just like DSL. It happens to scale a lot better for two reasons: coax cable has more bandwidth, and the cable guys built out (had to) fiber-to-the-node, so for a long while now it's actually worked more like the AT&T U-Verse implementation of DSL than the more traditional home-run (to the CO or to a big RT) implementation of DSL. But you're still trying to shoehorn data service into a cable technology - and often, a cable plant - that wasn't built for it, and you hit physical limits and run into voodoo reliability problems and it's a big headache.

At some point, the cable guys are going to have to face the music and go FTTH too.
I can agree with you that at some point, FTTH is going to have to happen. But at this point, to get 30 to 100 times the current bandwidth (or more) without laying all new lines is nothing to sneeze at.
__________________
University of Kentucky Wildcats!

Go Big Blue...Go Big Blue...Go Big Blue!!!

"Opportunities look a lot like work" - Ashton Kutcher
Engineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 01:36 PM   #12
jpiniero
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmetz View Post
[Citation Needed]
From following FiOS from the beginning, it was rather obvious. Even though Verizon had the ability to do so without local support, they very rarely built out in a town unless they got or thought they could get the local cable franchise rights. They touted this 100 year plan which blew up on them because the prospects of cable tv's future moved so quickly.

Quote:
I can agree with you that at some point, FTTH is going to have to happen.
FTTH is dead because it costs too much.
jpiniero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 01:40 PM   #13
cmetz
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,288
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Engineer View Post
I can agree with you that at some point, FTTH is going to have to happen. But at this point, to get 30 to 100 times the current bandwidth (or more) without laying all new lines is nothing to sneeze at.
The future improvement claims being made by the cable guys are marketing numbers. I believe that freeing up channels can get more capacity, but I'm extremely skeptical about two orders of magnitude. Not all RF channels are created equal, especially for upstream use. Cable systems are usually way too oversubscribed in the upstream and they need to put a lot of the extra system capacity into being able to handle that better, rather than offer increasingly high theoretical per-sub max rates. Also, freeing up channels is extremely, and I mean *extremely* painful for the MSOs to do - they've been talking about it for years, DOCSIS 3 makes it a lot more worth doing, but still the MSOs are channel locked.

The big reason why FTTH is the way out for the cable MSOs is that it's a clean(er) slate for them. It's entirely possible to get an order of magnitude out of the cable system - it's just a whole lot harder when you have to do that as a transition and not break all your existing subs and services.
cmetz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2013, 11:02 PM   #14
lamedude
Senior Member
 
lamedude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mercedes-Benz Silverdome
Posts: 732
Default

Comcast has already ditched analog. It looks like they already have 8 channel downstream (channel IDs are 3-7 in the modem page) and 3 channel upstream (2 64QAM, 1 16) here. If you're close to the node Comcast offers FTTH.
lamedude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2013, 01:00 AM   #15
jpiniero
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lamedude View Post
If you're close to the node Comcast offers FTTH.
That and a whole lot of other restrictions, which lowers the potential customers down to very little; if the $300/month doesn't scare them off.
jpiniero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 10:43 AM   #16
Cabletek
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 171
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jae View Post
I remember hearing about super high speed fiber lines coming into residential areas back in like 2005 (i think). Super Fast Data, Voice, and Cable over fiber-optic. I thought it was gonna take over.. So what happened?
Recovering the cost of deployment through cost of services turns out to take longer than estimated with users only ordering internet, and streaming through services like Netflix or stealing it through things like torrent downloads, instead of paying the fat, overpriced, triple play service to Verizon.

That coupled with the recession lead Verizon to put the brakes on for deployment of its FIOS Plant and services. They even sold some of it off with old copper line service in the west to Frontier communications, [after it finished cheery picking the big cities with lots of potential customers in the smaller acreage, but higher per capita areas {like NY city for example}] to get out of supporting the less profitable areas. I suspect frontier will file bankruptcy in a few years and it is in reality just way for Verizon to get out of supporting the more rural areas it build FIOS into, but that gets into politics and no one wants to hear about that.

So basically until the recovery where people start paying too much for services to them, like they do with say TWC, Cox, or Comcast again, Verizon has plant build on HOLD, or until someone legally challenges them and forces to keep with their word any way. truth be told I think the cable co's were right when they said Fiber costs too much to build to the home to deploy the same services coax is already built there for. Especially when the DOCSIS 3 channel bonding came out and worked. However, in the future the bandwidth will eventually likley exceed the ability of 1Ghz copper coax, and fiber will finally be the medium of choice. Unless wireless gets a lot better.

http://stopthecap.com/2012/09/25/ver...lls-investors/

Last edited by Cabletek; 02-19-2013 at 11:02 AM.
Cabletek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2013, 02:51 PM   #17
Eug
Lifer
 
Eug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 16,561
Default

What about new developments and subdivisions? Dunno about the US, but in Canada, a lot of new residential developments are getting FTTH.

The problem though is even if you get FTTH and fast speeds, usage caps are quite low. It doesn't really help that much to have 100+ download speeds if your usage cap is still 75 GB. However, the caps are starting to get bigger now too, for everyone.

Everyone is dragging their feet bringing FTTH for existing neighbourhoods though. For older neighbourhoods, the best they are getting is FTTN (which is what I have). I'm not complaining though, since FTTN gets me 25+ Mbps speeds from third party ISPs on VDSL2. (I'm not on cable because congestion is terrible in my area on cable.)

But yeah, in Canada FTTH and FTTN is all about TV. It seems the big reason Bell (the telephone company) has been heavily introducing FTTN to existing neighbourhoods is because they're pushing their version of cable TV. The faster internet is just a bonus for consumers.
__________________

OS X & iOS: 27" iMac Core i7 870 | 13" MacBook Pro C2D 2.26 P8400 + SSD | 13" MacBook C2D 2.4 T8300 + SSD | iPad 2
Windows: X3400 Athlon II X3 435 | 11.6" 1810TZ Pentium SU4100 + SSD | Revo R3610 Atom 330 + SSD
Android: RAZR HD | Nexus 7
Eug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2013, 04:54 AM   #18
lamedude
Senior Member
 
lamedude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mercedes-Benz Silverdome
Posts: 732
Default

AFAIK greenfield deployments are FTTH but to provide a uniform experience (I think that's the excuse) they're capped at the same speed as their DSL tiers.
lamedude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 01:01 PM   #19
T_Manero
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2
Default

I just joined . . . . doesn't video streaming take up most of internet traffic. Then on cable/satellite . . . 200 channels and nothing to watch except Law & Order and NCIS ?
Shouldn't the country get more sleep to stay awake during the day, go outside & fix the house and work on landscaping, interact with their children instead of households watching TV in separate rooms, etc.
Or just watch old shows instead of the new blood & gore & reality crap.
So why fund a copper/fibre highway towards cultural mediocrocrity, obesity and oversized media content profits.

Last edited by T_Manero; 02-27-2013 at 01:44 PM.
T_Manero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 01:09 PM   #20
Leymenaide
Senior Member
 
Leymenaide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Eastern, PA
Posts: 306
Default

From what I heard Verizon is for sale. They will sell it and the new owner’s will collude with Comcast and rates will go up another 30-40% while they reduce service.
Leymenaide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 01:29 PM   #21
Mushkins
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 960
Default

What happened was they took our money for it, then the politicians put it in their pockets.

Then they took our money for it again, and put it in their pockets.

Still no techs out there laying fiber that we paid for twice.
Mushkins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 04:15 PM   #22
ScottMac
Moderator
Networking
Elite member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 5,471
Default

Gaining the municipal permits is an ugly pain in the butt, and can get expensive with the bonds required.

Trenching fiber (or direct boring) is also extremely expensive for the distance covered in most municipalities.

By the time they (would have gotten) get the fiber network built out the way they originally described, LTE wireless will be well on its way for much less investment and much quicker return on investment with waaaaaaaaay less legal and political hassles.
__________________
Eschew Obfuscation! Espouse Elucidation!

Optimists are never pleasantly surprised.

Nov 4th, 2008: History is made: - Richie Daley becomes the first Mayor in history with his own pet President.
ScottMac is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.