AT&T possibly/probably going FTTH on rumors???

[redgtxdi]

 

[ElFenix]

it's not like the cable guys don't have problems uncorking all their bandwidth, either. those analog channels suck up a lot of room on that pipe.

 

[James Bond]

YES!

 

[spidey07]

It's just a different design (and what drives design? Profit and money out)

Coax has TONS of bandwidth. If ATT really want's to compete with cable then they have to go FTTH.

I've said it many times before...the next 3-5 years are going to be awesome for the customer. All thanks to competition. Cable already has the cabling to support next generation services....will they spend the capital is the only question. Telco is playing catch up.

 

[redgtxdi]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
it's not like the cable guys don't have problems uncorking all their bandwidth, either. those analog channels suck up a lot of room on that pipe.

Though, at least they have options.

#1.) They can use analog channels to compete w/ FTTH TV. (So far VZ FIOS doesn't offer a similar analog package & thus inferior)

#2.) If FTTH TV implements similar analog TV, cable doesn't have far to go to go 100% fiber. Most cable systems are mostly fiber these days anyway.

Cable's mostly ahead in the $$$ game w/ VZ sinking tons of dough into fiber. Cable could do the same & ultimately balance the scales completely.

???

 

[RapidSnail]

Unfortunately, the FTTH initiative seems to be for new developments only.

 

[redgtxdi]

What I don't understand is why somebody (like AT&T) doesn't create a co-op that joins a few (or several) companies together. Let them all foot the expense of installing fiber and only dig up everybody's streets ONE TIME.

Instead......we're gonna have streets torn up like a half-dozen times over the next decade while everybody installs their OWN fiber and then we won't have grass for front lawns anymore as there won't be any ROOM for grass anymore 'cuz it'll all be a bunch of drop boxes for all the different FTTH co's...........LOL!!!!!!

:laugh:

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: redgtxdi

Originally posted by: ElFenix
it's not like the cable guys don't have problems uncorking all their bandwidth, either. those analog channels suck up a lot of room on that pipe.

Though, at least they have options.

#1.) They can use analog channels to compete w/ FTTH TV. (So far VZ FIOS doesn't offer a similar analog package & thus inferior)

#2.) If FTTH TV implements similar analog TV, cable doesn't have far to go to go 100% fiber. Most cable systems are mostly fiber these days anyway.

Cable's mostly ahead in the $$$ game w/ VZ sinking tons of dough into fiber. Cable could do the same & ultimately balance the scales completely.

???

i don't think the analog channels really compete with fiber. the analog channels are only there because they can offer a low cost package and because some people don't want a cable box (why the fsck doesn't every tv have a cablecard already?!?). the analog channels are burden because the 60 or so channels require more than half (i think it was 2/3?) of the bandwidth available in the coax. so, until they get rid of the analog channels (either by making everyone get a box or by making them digital to the home and putting a dac on the home), that's a barrier to uncorking the pipe.

 

[uhohs]

hurry up. we need to catch up to other countries.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: uhohs
hurry up. we need to catch up to other countries.

Good grief, not another one of you misinformed asshats.

In communications distance = money. OK? Repeat....distance = money.

OVER?

 

[FoBoT]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: uhohs
hurry up. we need to catch up to other countries.

Good grief, not another one of you misinformed asshats.

In communications distance = money. OK? Repeat....distance = money.

OVER?

so i guess the US being so large impacts stuff like this

 

[iversonyin]

Any links to the rumor?? This could be huge for its stock.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: FoBoT
so i guess the US being so large impacts stuff like this

That's one BIG factor. It's more customers per area and the capital outlay to service these areas. So the expanse of the US plays a big role. If everybody lived within a few hundred miles I could build you a network for cheap.

It's still a "last mile" problem. As the inventor of communications the US is struggling with dated cabling. It's all about the physical layer. Fiber to the Home is the way to go, but can one justify the cost? It's a gamble. I gamble on FTTH vs. Cable (HFC).

 

[kranky]

FTTH means no competition. Copper is regulated and the telcos must allow competitors access (for a fee, of course). Those regulations do not apply to coax or fiber. Once the copper is gone, and fiber is in, who can compete? What other companies are large enough to bankroll a giant fiber rollout?

My feeling is the early adopters will pay a premium. When Verizon and AT&T get enough fiber customers, there will be a point when it will be cheaper for them to switch all the remaining customers over to fiber and walk away from the copper. Then they get their monopoly back. All the competitors combined couldn't keep it running.

And if that "Net neutrality" thing doesn't get established, then the Verizons and AT&Ts can "manage" net traffic with their huge share of the internet backbone coupled with the FTTH. Are you an AT&T customer, with AT&T VOIP? Your packets get priority. Switch to Vonage? Oops, your packets don't get processed quite as fast.

 

[uhohs]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: uhohs
hurry up. we need to catch up to other countries.

Good grief, not another one of you misinformed asshats.

In communications distance = money. OK? Repeat....distance = money.

OVER?

asshat ur face.
how is my comment misinformed? yes, there are many reasons like you stated why our connections are slower. i'm not talking about the reasons. i'm just saying OUR CONNECTIONS ARE SLOWER.

 

[Jawo]

Working in wired telecom, its interesting to see people's opinions. Yes, companies can and most likely will exert their influence over their customers (lobyists rule america). Only eight tier 1 internet companies support(control) the internet; AT&T, Global Crossing, Level 3, Verizon Business (formerly UUNET), NTT Communications, Qwest, SAVVIS, Sprint Nextel Corporation. Most tier one companies do not directly sell to homes, only commercial interests. They usually work together to get things done. If companies decide to work by themselves no one could really get anywhere online, past their ISP.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: uhohs
asshat ur face.
how is my comment misinformed? yes, there are many reasons like you stated why our connections are slower. i'm not talking about the reasons. i'm just saying OUR CONNECTIONS ARE SLOWER.

OUR CONNECTIONS ARE SLOWER BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE US AND DISTANCE OF THE US.

Confirm, over?

 

[xSauronx]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: uhohs
asshat ur face.
how is my comment misinformed? yes, there are many reasons like you stated why our connections are slower. i'm not talking about the reasons. i'm just saying OUR CONNECTIONS ARE SLOWER.

OUR CONNECTIONS ARE SLOWER BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE US AND DISTANCE OF THE US.

Confirm, over?

you two having fun yet?

 

[redgtxdi]

Let's just jump-start to the Matrix & get it all over with.


That's where we're all headed anyway.........right??

:laugh:

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: xSauronx

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: uhohs
asshat ur face.
how is my comment misinformed? yes, there are many reasons like you stated why our connections are slower. i'm not talking about the reasons. i'm just saying OUR CONNECTIONS ARE SLOWER.

OUR CONNECTIONS ARE SLOWER BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE US AND DISTANCE OF THE US.

Confirm, over?

you two having fun yet?

Not really. Step into networking.

ROGER.

 

[uhohs]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: uhohs
asshat ur face.
how is my comment misinformed? yes, there are many reasons like you stated why our connections are slower. i'm not talking about the reasons. i'm just saying OUR CONNECTIONS ARE SLOWER.

OUR CONNECTIONS ARE SLOWER BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE US AND DISTANCE OF THE US.

Confirm, over?

YES CONFIRM. I'M JUST SAYING THEY ARE SLOWER. KTHX.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: uhohs
YES CONFIRM. I'M JUST SAYING THEY ARE SLOWER. KTHX.

Roger. Check the county code for the US.

Over.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: kranky
FTTH means no competition. Copper is regulated and the telcos must allow competitors access (for a fee, of course). Those regulations do not apply to coax or fiber. Once the copper is gone, and fiber is in, who can compete? What other companies are large enough to bankroll a giant fiber rollout?

My feeling is the early adopters will pay a premium. When Verizon and AT&T get enough fiber customers, there will be a point when it will be cheaper for them to switch all the remaining customers over to fiber and walk away from the copper. Then they get their monopoly back. All the competitors combined couldn't keep it running.

And if that "Net neutrality" thing doesn't get established, then the Verizons and AT&Ts can "manage" net traffic with their huge share of the internet backbone coupled with the FTTH. Are you an AT&T customer, with AT&T VOIP? Your packets get priority. Switch to Vonage? Oops, your packets don't get processed quite as fast.

wow, what a bunch of FUD

 

[kranky]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: kranky
FTTH means no competition. Copper is regulated and the telcos must allow competitors access (for a fee, of course). Those regulations do not apply to coax or fiber. Once the copper is gone, and fiber is in, who can compete? What other companies are large enough to bankroll a giant fiber rollout?

My feeling is the early adopters will pay a premium. When Verizon and AT&T get enough fiber customers, there will be a point when it will be cheaper for them to switch all the remaining customers over to fiber and walk away from the copper. Then they get their monopoly back. All the competitors combined couldn't keep it running.

And if that "Net neutrality" thing doesn't get established, then the Verizons and AT&Ts can "manage" net traffic with their huge share of the internet backbone coupled with the FTTH. Are you an AT&T customer, with AT&T VOIP? Your packets get priority. Switch to Vonage? Oops, your packets don't get processed quite as fast.

wow, what a bunch of FUD

What's your take on the situation?

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: kranky
FTTH means no competition. Copper is regulated and the telcos must allow competitors access (for a fee, of course). Those regulations do not apply to coax or fiber. Once the copper is gone, and fiber is in, who can compete? What other companies are large enough to bankroll a giant fiber rollout?

My feeling is the early adopters will pay a premium. When Verizon and AT&T get enough fiber customers, there will be a point when it will be cheaper for them to switch all the remaining customers over to fiber and walk away from the copper. Then they get their monopoly back. All the competitors combined couldn't keep it running.

And if that "Net neutrality" thing doesn't get established, then the Verizons and AT&Ts can "manage" net traffic with their huge share of the internet backbone coupled with the FTTH. Are you an AT&T customer, with AT&T VOIP? Your packets get priority. Switch to Vonage? Oops, your packets don't get processed quite as fast.

wow, what a bunch of FUD

Roger. I don't think Ive seen a more misinformed post on ATOT ever.

Just when you think of a more dumb reply, this one takes the cake.

OVER?