Who Wins: Fios or DOCSIS 3.0? - Studies, studies, and then more studies...
Links: home · search · speed test · login · more ·
Who Wins: Fios or DOCSIS 3.0?
Studies, studies, and then more studies...
(old news - 12:35PM Tuesday Nov 21 2006)
tags: Fiber · competition · business · bandwidth · cable · telco · networking
Tipped by china crisis
During the past decade, North American cable providers have spent more than $100 billion upgrading their networks. The past year has seen endless debate over whether these networks have the capacity to effectively compete with telco fiber to the home deployments.

In August, a Cablelabs report suggested another round of multi-billion dollar upgrades might be in order and that MSOs might be better off just running fiber to the home. Then another report insisted that the cable industry had plenty of capacity to compete effectively. Now, a new analyst report says that even with DOCSIS 3.0 upgrades, cable providers will have a hard time competing with Verizon Fios.

DOCSIS 3.0 will offer downstream data rates of 160 Mbps or higher and upstream data rates of 120 Mbps or higher (per channel). It will also incorporate Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) and offer a plethora of other performance and functionality upgrades. For reference, DOCSIS 2.0, currently in use, delivers up to 40 Mbps down/30 Mbps up per channel.

But the capacity provided by DOCSIS 3.0 isn't going to get it done, insists the Light Reading report.

"By most accounts, FiOS wins the bandwidth battle against Docsis 3.0 hands down, a point that even the most partisan cable engineers and strategists usually concede," the report says. "Using its existing BPON architecture, Verizon is able to offer shared bandwidth of 622 Mbit/s downstream and 155 Mbit/s upstream, divided among no more than 32 homes."

And that's before Verizon upgrades to GPON (Gigabit Passive Optical Network) technology. With GPON technology, which has been more popular in Asia, Verizon can offer 2.4Gbps shared downstream and increase its potential for HD program delivery via Fios.

The report claims that not only will Verizon be able to continually offer faster speeds than cable, but the PON driven network will cost less to maintain than the traditional hybrid fiber-coax (HFC) plant. It does note that cable upgrade deployment should cost less.

Among the flurry of predictions, it's important to remember that there's only half a million Fios subscribers in the United States. Many rural communities and second and third-tier cities won't be seeing either Fios or DOCSIS 3.0 anytime soon. It's also important to note that Verizon is the only major telco seriously pursuing the FTTH architecture. AT&T's planned FTTC/VDSL2 architecture will not match the capacity of DOCSIS 3.0.

On the cable front, many of our users, particularly those in less competitive markets, are still plugging along on DOCSIS 1.0 networks and won't be seeing DOCSIS 2.0, much less 3.0, anytime soon. Another study (tired of studies yet?) suggests DOCSIS 3.0 will reach 60% penetration by 2010.

Since many of you are going to be involved in these deployments, we'll ask in our latest poll which you prefer: FTTH or DOCSIS 3.0 (Coax/fiber)? What are the inherent benefits of each? Will the differences be noticeable to the average consumer?

Related:
  1. Thursday Morning Links
  2. Thursday Evening Links
  3. Wednesday Evening Links
  4. Friday Evening Links
  5. Verizon Laughs Off DOCSIS 3.0
  6. Tuesday Evening Links
  7. Wednesday Evening Links
  8. What Network Neutrality Is REALLY About
Links: New Topic
Forums »

tmangani @ 21st Nov 11:46AM:
Fios vs. DOCSIS

The Concorde was the fastest passenger aircraft, but they could not make it work on a mass scale. A Mac was more powerful than a PC but could not get more than 10% market share.

History has always shown that it's not always the best, fastest or newest technology that wins. The market will always decide.
reply
N3OGH @ 21st Nov 11:46AM:
You can't beat light..

Speed.

Sure, Docsis 3.0 will offer a great deal of bandwidth, but at present time nothing can beat the capacity of fiber optics.

In the long run, a FTTH is cheaper to maintain, and cheaper to upgrade.

In the long run fiber wins, every time....
--
Never ask what sort of a computer a guy drives. If he's a Mac user, he'll tell you. If not, why embarrass him? -Tom Clancy
reply
gatorkram @ 21st Nov 11:59AM:
per channel.

I think the thing people miss when they read about docsis 3.0, is the speeds are per 6mhz channel. Nothing is stopping them from offering the service over more channels.

Sure, I'd rather have a fiber connection right into the backbone, and not even need an ISP that wants to filter everything, but we have to take what is offered.
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
reply
hayabusa3303 @ 21st Nov 12:10PM:
Re: per channel.

Then before you know it they come out with a docsis 4.0.
Then all the cable companies sit and wait again for 2 or three more years before looking into it. :hmm:
reply
Matt @ 21st Nov 12:14PM:
Re: per channel.

said by gatorkram :

I think the thing people miss when they read about docsis 3.0, is the speeds are per 6mhz channel. Nothing is stopping them from offering the service over more channels.

Sure, I'd rather have a fiber connection right into the backbone, and not even need an ISP that wants to filter everything, but we have to take what is offered.
Exactly. Those are per 6Mhz channel and a single coax cable is capable of 1Ghz of bandwidth or more.

GPON I believe is also per "channel", but they use wavelengths of light, so they face a similar limitation, albeit a much higher one.

Bottom line is both technologies are viable for the foreseeable future and I'd happily accept either over my pokey 8Mbps/512Kbps DOCSIS 1.1 connection.
--
Use the OS tool for the job - loser fanboy.
reply
MadMANN @ 21st Nov 12:23PM:
Service is all that matters

For techies, maybe a fiber line to your house is mouth watering. But for the regular Joe, it's not going to matter HOW it's delivered, as long as what is delivered is what customers want/need and is within budget.
reply
Ignite @ 21st Nov 12:33PM:
Re: per channel.

said by gatorkram :

I think the thing people miss when they read about docsis 3.0, is the speeds are per 6mhz channel.
No I think they get the point that the whole point of DOCSIS 3 is that it offers bonding of the 6MHz channels and that's where the additional bandwidth comes from.

160/120 assumes 4 x 6MHz 256QAM downstreams and 4x6.4MHz 128QAM S-CDMA upstreams bonded together. On the upstream side that's very optimistic for a lot of operators to think that they'll be able to find 25.6MHz of free spectrum on a single node that's clean enough.

You completely missed the point when you read, or as is pretty obviously the case didn't read the DOCSIS 3 info.

GPON delivers that bandwidth, 2.4Gbit/s, to at most 32 homes, and reducing the contention is a case of moving some customer facing fibres to a different splitter.

Show me production cable nodes with 32 homes passed.
reply
cbrain @ 21st Nov 12:38PM:
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS

I already have fiber. Why are you bothering me with this dribble? ;)
reply
bmn @ 21st Nov 12:39PM:
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS

said by tmangani :

The Concorde was the fastest passenger aircraft, but they could not make it work on a mass scale. A Mac was more powerful than a PC but could not get more than 10% market share.

History has always shown that it's not always the best, fastest or newest technology that wins. The market will always decide.
Definitely a drawback to a market driven economy... People buy cheap crap, not quality.
--
Prove it...
reply
Rick @ 21st Nov 12:44PM:
I know who WON'T win

AT&T and their Uverse service.

I mean,while people argue as to whether fios and docsis 3.0, both with massive potential will be a little down the road, there is still poor old AT&T way back at the end of the pack.

Don't forget, this is the company that promised 15 to 20 markets by years end. With just a little over a month to go and counting, it's still just one apparently.

Does their service even really WORK?

Has this whole thing been some kind of a scam vapor launch on their part?

Apparently, some people in San Antonio do have it, but what has AT&T done to get it to them?
Spent so much money cleaning up copper lines and placing equipment just to try to claim it is a viable product?

And, if so, is that a viable strategy for a wide scale rollout across their whole area? I sure don't think so.

I'm still TRYING to reserve judgement on this but it's certainly getting hard to do.
15 to 20 markets that is still now one..with just over a month to go, makes it appear that there are some real problems going on in Ma Bells labs.

And, forgive me for being a skeptic, but i've never really believed that those copper lines that couldn't get me over 40k out of my 56k modem will suddenly be able to deliver me hdtv..hsi and voice.

It just hasn't rang true to me.

I think that AT&T now..right now..has to abandon this and go with Fiber to the home.

We, the customers in their service areas..deserve that and the competition it can offer the cable co's.
--
The life you help save just might be your own Team Discovery
reply
Matt @ 21st Nov 01:07PM:
Re: per channel.

said by Ignite :

You completely missed the point when you read, or as is pretty obviously the case didn't read the DOCSIS 3 info.
Thanks for the correction. Sorry for not having the time to read a 160 page PDF full of engineering graphs along with cryptic electrical engineering terms and symbols: »www.cablemodem.com/downloads/spe···0804.pdf

The fact of the matter is, it's still a simple matter of allocating an additional channel to split a node and the MSO can effectively double the available bandwidth.
--
Use the OS tool for the job - loser fanboy.
reply
UncleDirtNap @ 21st Nov 01:15PM:
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS

Problem here, from a current FIOS and former Cable customer, the fiber is costing less, a lot, and the service blows away the cable option.

With several times the bandwidth of cable, especially on the upstream, and TV about to be offered at a fraction of what Comcrap was charging - the cheap stuff is the superior tech and the crap is costing more.

With TV, Internet and phone costing about 65% of Comcast's next closest offering which fails to make the performance grade, cable has zero chance of ever getting me back as a customer.
reply
swhx7 @ 21st Nov 01:29PM:
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS

said by bmn :

Definitely a drawback to a market driven economy... People buy cheap crap, not quality.

That's just a way of saying you have a different idea of what value for the dollar is.

The Mac with equivalent hardware was "more powerful" according to its fans - but that was based on testing with things it was good at, like Photoshop. On other tasks the PC made better scores. But the masses didn't decide based on these considerations alone - other factors have been more important, such as generic vs. proprietary hardware, software compatibility, GUI familiarity and style, and network effects.

The Concorde if I'm not mistaken had its use restrained by factors other than "quality" - such as imposing special requirements on airports, and sonic boom issues. Likewise Beta tapes were better in the narrow dimension of picture quality, but consumers also looked at cassette size, recording time, price, and other factors.

In the case of cable vs. fiber, bandwidth is what consumers look at and it is also where fiber beats cable. Because the virtues of the product coincide with consumer preferences in this case, it has a good chance of succeeding.

Providers could still shoot themselves in the foot with bad decisions. For example, the policy of ripping out the copper may alienate some potential customers.
reply
swhx7 @ 21st Nov 01:35PM:
Re: Service is all that matters

You're right, this is going to be driven by content. Providers won't succeed with the relatively few techies running p2p and servers. They need to add something like PPV over IP and it will be in big demand.
reply
Ignite @ 21st Nov 01:36PM:
Re: per channel.

said by Matt :

The fact of the matter is, it's still a simple matter of allocating an additional channel to split a node and the MSO can effectively double the available bandwidth.
It's a 'simple' case of doing that now as well. That's not a DOCSIS 3 thing at all, multiple downstreams to a single node/SCG has been available for a while.
reply
Matt @ 21st Nov 01:38PM:
Re: per channel.

said by Ignite :

said by Matt :

The fact of the matter is, it's still a simple matter of allocating an additional channel to split a node and the MSO can effectively double the available bandwidth.
It's a 'simple' case of doing that now as well. That's not a DOCSIS 3 thing at all, multiple downstreams to a single node/SCG has been available for a while.
Which was the OP's point.

Round and round we go ... :D
--
Use the OS tool for the job - loser fanboy.
reply
jsouth @ 21st Nov 01:56PM:
Reading the title

If it is a competition between FIOS or DOCSIS 3.0 I would say the winner is us. More competition the better.
--
Bush bashing is old. How about more solutions instead?
reply
richardpor @ 21st Nov 01:59PM:
It All Moot

As long as FIOS is only available to Single occupancy homes in Verizon service areas this debate is moot.

I would say cable wins every time on the basis of numbers. I can be sure if I move to a new apartment or condo complex I will have cable. Fios can not guarantee service.
reply
HyPeRbAnD @ 21st Nov 02:06PM:
My opinion

It's going to take Verizon 10+ years to get the coverage that cable has. As Verizon builds their network cable will do it on a as needed basis. Cable is in good shape as far as fiber, they are very deep with it and generally have spares at the nodes. So cable will be able to extend existing fiber closer to the homes. Verizon doing FTTP is the way to go, but cable can do fiber to feeder(coax) with no actives after it. At that point they can go in the 2-3 GHZ range and have plenty of bandwidth.

DOCSIS 3.0 is great, but that isn't the real bandwidth hog. Its VOD that is the driving force for node split, cable modems just benefit from that as they get recombined with less homes per node on it.

In the end I think it going to be like Ford vs Chevy. Customer service will be the deciding factor.
reply
rradina @ 21st Nov 02:18PM:
Re: per channel.

said by Matt :

Exactly. Those are per 6Mhz channel and a single coax cable is capable of 1Ghz of bandwidth or more....
I think that depends on amplifiers, splitters and the length of the coax run. Satellite signal splitters are rated beyond 2Ghz so there must be at least 2Ghz of bandwidth in coax.

In my opinion, ATT is trying to build in baby steps. The fortunate advantage of cable operators is that they can also take baby steps. They can gradually move fiber closer to homes and keep milking more bandwidth out of that last mile, half mile or 1000 foot coax run. Unless maintenance of the hybrid really drains revenue, it seems cable still has home field advantage.
reply
Matt @ 21st Nov 02:21PM:
Re: per channel.

said by rradina :

said by Matt :

Exactly. Those are per 6Mhz channel and a single coax cable is capable of 1Ghz of bandwidth or more....
I think that depends on amplifiers, splitters and the length of the coax run. Satellite signal splitters are rated beyond 2Ghz so there must be at least 2Ghz of bandwidth in coax.

In my opinion, ATT is trying to build in baby steps. The fortunate advantage of cable operators is that they can also take baby steps. They can gradually move fiber closer to homes and keep milking more bandwidth out of that last mile, half mile or 1000 foot coax run. Unless maintenance of the hybrid really drains revenue, it seems cable still has home field advantage.
The DOCSIS 3 spec states the theoretical limit from the CMTS to the modem is 100 miles, but 15 miles is the practical limit.
--
Use the OS tool for the job - loser fanboy.
reply
rhuckabe @ 21st Nov 02:28PM:
bandwidth observation

I realize that bandwidth is critical in terms of providing HDTV, internet video, and gaming. But as far as web browsing, I just don't see where extreme bandwidth is necessary. It has been my experience that my PC can process internet data only so fast, and that web content does not load noticably faster past a certain point, say 6 Mbaud. If you are downloading large files, then yes it could make a difference, but for the "average user"...no. Are these valid assumptions?
reply
HyPeRbAnD @ 21st Nov 02:35PM:
Re: bandwidth observation

said by rhuckabe :

Are these valid assumptions?
I would say yes, because I have many friends and family that have no clue what speed they have. All they know is they can go online, surf the web and IM people. Most people are not like BB Report users that want the fastest internet connection available for free.

In some cases people don't even know you can get phone from cable co's and cable from the phone co's. Say that fast 3 times.
reply
LeftOfSanity @ 21st Nov 02:37PM:
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS

said by UncleDirtNap :

Problem here, from a current FIOS and former Cable customer, the fiber is costing less, a lot, and the service blows away the cable option.

With several times the bandwidth of cable, especially on the upstream, and TV about to be offered at a fraction of what Comcrap was charging - the cheap stuff is the superior tech and the crap is costing more.

With TV, Internet and phone costing about 65% of Comcast's next closest offering which fails to make the performance grade, cable has zero chance of ever getting me back as a customer.

65%? got a link? Is that for Promo vs Promo, or normal price vs. normal price?
Do you really think Verizon will be your saviour for long? They are already increasing prices. Read the first page.
--
Fighting on the Internet is like winning the Special Olympics. Win or lose, your still Retarted!
reply
PolarBear @ 21st Nov 02:50PM:
Re: It All Moot

That is a very good point, richard.

Most (almost all) apartment complexes are pre-wired for cable in at least one, if not more rooms. Simply plug in your cable modem to the jack of your choice, and you are ready to go.

What about FiOS? Are they going to string fiber to a high rise apartment? If so, could you imagine the installation cost?
--
"I invented it, Bill made it famous." --David Bradley, the inventor of Ctrl+Alt+Del.
reply
quetwo @ 21st Nov 03:07PM:
Re: per channel.

said by Matt :

said by gatorkram :
Bottom line is both technologies are viable for the foreseeable future and I'd happily accept either over my pokey 8Mbps/512Kbps DOCSIS 1.1 connection.
Pokey 8Mbps? Some of us are still stuck at sub-1Mbps.... Lots of us....
reply
Matt @ 21st Nov 03:15PM:
Re: It All Moot

said by PolarBear :

That is a very good point, richard.

Most (almost all) apartment complexes are pre-wired for cable in at least one, if not more rooms. Simply plug in your cable modem to the jack of your choice, and you are ready to go.

What about FiOS? Are they going to string fiber to a high rise apartment? If so, could you imagine the installation cost?
Verizon is going to use a Fiber/Ethernet transceiver and use the existing coax wiring.

There was a couple of news posts here on it, but I can not find them atm.
--
Use the OS tool for the job - loser fanboy.
reply
BosstonesOwn @ 21st Nov 03:23PM:
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS

said by LeftOfSanity :

said by UncleDirtNap :

Problem here, from a current FIOS and former Cable customer, the fiber is costing less, a lot, and the service blows away the cable option.

With several times the bandwidth of cable, especially on the upstream, and TV about to be offered at a fraction of what Comcrap was charging - the cheap stuff is the superior tech and the crap is costing more.

With TV, Internet and phone costing about 65% of Comcast's next closest offering which fails to make the performance grade, cable has zero chance of ever getting me back as a customer.

65%? got a link? Is that for Promo vs Promo, or normal price vs. normal price?
Do you really think Verizon will be your saviour for long? They are already increasing prices. Read the first page.
Yeah and we all no cable doesn't ever jack rates. Even if verizon saves me $5 a month I will gladly swap.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!"
reply
Shamayim @ 21st Nov 03:24PM:
"Better" is not the issue

Who can deploy to the most customers at a profit is what counts. So far cable wins hands down. FIOS is expensive to deploy and still can't/won't wire apartment buildings; cable is already there, expanding and improving.

Project this forward and I'd bet cable wins, while the stockholders of Verizon start demanding the company begin showing profit on expensive FTTH real soon (won't happen) or throw in the towel on further deployment.
--
"tick...tick...tick..." »www.jtf.org/
reply
PolarBear @ 21st Nov 03:36PM:
Re: It All Moot

said by Matt :

...use the existing coax wiring.
In my city, all apartment cable wiring is terminated in a locked steel box somewhere on the building. Verizon has no way of accessing it, physically or legally.
--
"I invented it, Bill made it famous." --David Bradley, the inventor of Ctrl+Alt+Del.
reply
dvd536 @ 21st Nov 03:38PM:
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS

said by bmn :

said by tmangani :

The Concorde was the fastest passenger aircraft, but they could not make it work on a mass scale. A Mac was more powerful than a PC but could not get more than 10% market share.

History has always shown that it's not always the best, fastest or newest technology that wins. The market will always decide.
Definitely a drawback to a market driven economy... People buy cheap crap, not quality.
Quality has to be OFFERED before it can be bought.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth
reply
anon @ 21st Nov 04:15PM:
Re: bandwidth observation

True, until grandma needs the 16GB copy of of juniors first steps in HD etc. I think as the bandwidth comes available the sites will grow to consume it through thick media.
reply
majortom1029 @ 21st Nov 03:50PM:
what happens when you add in narads tech and other companies

Why do they only compare docsis 3

what about technologies like narad wich cablevision is testing now?
reply
Matt @ 21st Nov 04:43PM:
Re: It All Moot

said by PolarBear :

said by Matt :

...use the existing coax wiring.
In my city, all apartment cable wiring is terminated in a locked steel box somewhere on the building. Verizon has no way of accessing it, physically or legally.
The cable company doesn't own the wiring inside the building, so anyone can attach to that side of the cable in the box. All they need is the permission of the owner.
--
Use the OS tool for the job - loser fanboy.
reply
PolarBear @ 21st Nov 04:50PM:
Re: It All Moot

I agree with you, Matt, but I don't think Comcast does. As far as they are concerned, they own the entire building simply because it has "their" wiring inside of it.
--
"I invented it, Bill made it famous." --David Bradley, the inventor of Ctrl+Alt+Del.
reply
floydb_1982 @ 21st Nov 04:54PM:
I'm guessing DOCSIS 3.0 have the edge

Cable is more widly avalibale than optic fios is. So if you think about it more people can get cable than optic fiber
reply
JamesPC @ 21st Nov 05:09PM:
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS

Very good point..."good form"
reply
wcweaver @ 21st Nov 05:34PM:
DOCSIS Anything

Some of us still live where DOCSIS anything is better than what the local Telco (Embarq) is offering. My area only get 512K from Embarq. Therefore, Comcast has no reason to upgrade as they have no COMPETITION from Embarq.
reply
jms27 @ 21st Nov 07:15PM:
We Americans dont have time for this mess, we work, eat...

I'll tell you who wins this battle, right now cable, why because people are too busy in most of the country, they pick based on availability, then price, then quality. We are what we eat, fast and cheap!! Unless verizon exposes FIOS to the masses, which will force people to compare service realize FIOS is the winner. If bill gates told me to come with him when he quit Harvard to fight and beat IBM, I would've said no, same thing with FIOS, the vision, hardware and persistent must come together to win this battle, otherwise we are looking at just another example of Apple back in the day. May be Fios will turn out to be like apple now, it'll take time to see the fruit of the labor!!
reply
burger2000 @ 21st Nov 08:08PM:
Re: It All Moot

Not always. If the cable company paid for and pulled the coax themselves they own it. Also sometimes property owners will sign exclusive agreements with one provider and in return will receive additional services like reduced rate on a bulk account or free installation of (or replacement of aging) coax.

So there are many cases where in fact the cable company DOES own the inside wiring.
reply
Nerdtalker @ 21st Nov 08:41PM:
Re: You can't beat light..

I agree, it's pointless to try and overcome the physical limitations of coax itself. Ditch the HFC network, and run fiber to the home, heck, the fiber is already laying around the neighborhood. More specs and modulation schemes aren't going to overcome the laws of physics, fiber will always be a faster medium just because of its nature.

We need something revolutionary to really put Cable ISP broadband at parity/on a competitive stance with FIOS. And that simply is essentially becoming FIOS. Funny, that's a "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" type of methodology.
--
"Some people never see the light till it shines thru bullet holes." -Bruce Cockburn

I'm testing Gmail's spam filters: Broadbandreports1@gmail.com
Spam: 12900+ messages currently using 406 MB.
reply
Endgame @ 21st Nov 09:18PM:
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS

said by bmn :

said by tmangani :

The Concorde was the fastest passenger aircraft, but they could not make it work on a mass scale. A Mac was more powerful than a PC but could not get more than 10% market share.

History has always shown that it's not always the best, fastest or newest technology that wins. The market will always decide.
Definitely a drawback to a market driven economy... People buy cheap crap, not quality.
That is because it is very hard to make a lot of money in this unfair and overpopulated world!
--
Give me a 100% uncapped, unblocked, unthrottled, and stable 100/100 meg symmetrical interweb connection with really low pings to my apartment for cheap and I'll go away! :)
reply
EnasYorl @ 21st Nov 11:25PM:
Re: per channel.

said by Matt :

said by gatorkram :

I think the thing people miss when they read about docsis 3.0, is the speeds are per 6mhz channel. Nothing is stopping them from offering the service over more channels.

Sure, I'd rather have a fiber connection right into the backbone, and not even need an ISP that wants to filter everything, but we have to take what is offered.
Exactly. Those are per 6Mhz channel and a single coax cable is capable of 1Ghz of bandwidth or more.
GPON I believe is also per "channel", but they use wavelengths of light, so they face a similar limitation, albeit a much higher one.

Bottom line is both technologies are viable for the foreseeable future and I'd happily accept either over my pokey 8Mbps/512Kbps DOCSIS 1.1 connection.

Fiber wavelengths can now run at OC-768 (40Gbps)

Mainstream links are now OC-48(2.5Gbps) or OC-192 (10Gbps)

And today it's not uncommon to have 40 to 80 wavelengths on a single fiber.

Cable plant is typically 50 to 850Mhz So 800/6Mhz per QAM. Would give you 5333 Mbps of downstram on DOCSIS 3.0 but Zero bandwidth for TV channels.

I think we know what is the best solution for the next 50 years.
reply
EnasYorl @ 21st Nov 11:28PM:
Re: per channel.

said by Matt :

said by Ignite :

You completely missed the point when you read, or as is pretty obviously the case didn't read the DOCSIS 3 info.
Thanks for the correction. Sorry for not having the time to read a 160 page PDF full of engineering graphs along with cryptic electrical engineering terms and symbols: »www.cablemodem.com/downloads/spe···0804.pdf

The fact of the matter is, it's still a simple matter of allocating an additional channel to split a node and the MSO can effectively double the available bandwidth.
Simple, but still costly. You have to have the new fibers in place, new equipment for inside and outside plant, new CMTS ports, etc.
reply
Ignite @ 22nd Nov 02:28AM:
Basic Digital Encoding...

gatorkram has actually pm'd me to tell me I'm wrong and DOCSIS 3 manages to get 160Mbit into a single 6MHz channel.

I have tried to explain basic RF to the guy, that DOCSIS 3 is all about channel bonding and the only way to get more than 38Mbit down a 6MHz channel is to use a denser constellation than 256QAM but I'm apparently wrong.

Thought I'd put this here anyway incase anyone else wanted to tell him he was wrong as well - he may believe someone else.

gatorkram, as you won't believe me hopefully Cablelabs will convince you..

»www.cablemodem.com/downloads/spe···0804.pdf

Page 135 onwards describes the physical downstream interface, including bonding of 256QAM downstream channels.
reply
Ignite @ 22nd Nov 04:21AM:
Re: per channel.

said by Matt :

said by Ignite :

said by Matt :

The fact of the matter is, it's still a simple matter of allocating an additional channel to split a node and the MSO can effectively double the available bandwidth.
It's a 'simple' case of doing that now as well. That's not a DOCSIS 3 thing at all, multiple downstreams to a single node/SCG has been available for a while.
Which was the OP's point.

Round and round we go ... :D
The OP's point was based on nonsense. If it's so easy to do these upgrades why aren't they being done now?

Probably due to outdated networks and the requirement to send a load of channel munching analogue down the pipes.

If you had a look at your local cableco's frequency plan you'd probably be quite surprised at how little space there is in there.

TV makes money, HSI doesn't make as much money so there's no incentive there to dump an analogue channel, spend the required cash to install additional CMTS cards and do the required wiring.
reply
Ignite @ 22nd Nov 04:23AM:
Re: per channel.

said by EnasYorl :

Simple, but still costly. You have to have the new fibers in place, new equipment for inside and outside plant, new CMTS ports, etc.
A second downstream requires no new fibre or equipment in outside plant, it's just another QAM channel.

It does require additional CMTS ports and wiring between them and forward path matrix, it also requires there to be 6MHz of space on the downstream path which isn't a trivial matter in a lot of cases.
reply
patcat88 @ 22nd Nov 08:47AM:
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS

said by bmn :

said by tmangani :

The Concorde was the fastest passenger aircraft, but they could not make it work on a mass scale. A Mac was more powerful than a PC but could not get more than 10% market share.

History has always shown that it's not always the best, fastest or newest technology that wins. The market will always decide.
Definitely a drawback to a market driven economy... People buy cheap crap, not quality.
Agreed, look at walmart and 99 cent stores.
reply
EnasYorl @ 22nd Nov 10:24AM:
Re: per channel.

said by Ignite :

said by EnasYorl :

Simple, but still costly. You have to have the new fibers in place, new equipment for inside and outside plant, new CMTS ports, etc.
A second downstream requires no new fibre or equipment in outside plant, it's just another QAM channel.

It does require additional CMTS ports and wiring between them and forward path matrix, it also requires there to be 6MHz of space on the downstream path which isn't a trivial matter in a lot of cases.
I was focusing on the statement about splitting a node. And yes there is little open spectrum until Analog channels are pulled. And that is very costly expense to give every house hold two to three set top boxes.
reply
dagg @ 22nd Nov 10:37AM:
its odd

i never thought I would wish that i lived in a VZ area, but its clear to me now, that is the only way I will ever see anything faster than 3 down 768 up.

cable in my area has moved to docsis2, but the whole damn network in my neighborhood is so unstable, i might as well be on dialup...

ATT is in no hurry to upgrade any of the infrastructure out here, the first fiber carrier that started to run lines to my area went broke and sold to surewest who immediately pulled the plug on that idea and now wont even admit that there is a buch of dark fiber that was laid out here....

i think maybe its time that i just got some investment capital and put my own fiber loop in place.
reply
Ignite @ 22nd Nov 11:07AM:
Re: per channel.

said by EnasYorl :

I was focusing on the statement about splitting a node. And yes there is little open spectrum until Analog channels are pulled. And that is very costly expense to give every house hold two to three set top boxes.
For sure.

Even in EuroDOCSIS land the pre-DOCSIS 3 stuff is only trialled in an area where there's no more analogue. A struggle to get any additional QAMs for use for broadband internet, let alone the additional 3 that the DOCSIS 3 equipment requires.
reply
SSidlov @ 22nd Nov 08:18PM:
If you can't get it, it doesn't matter what the tech is.....

while FIOS may be better Tech, it frankly doesn't matter if they won't deploy it your neighborhood. I live surrounded by FIOS listed or soon-to-be-activated communities by Verizon. My town with it's lower income levels, is not scheduled until sometime in 2009, according to some linesmen I've spoken with, even though the fiber cables for OTHER towns is already running through it. If you can't get it, it frankly doesn't matter. I'll suffer with my 15/2mb from CV for $45. For $9/mo more I can get 30/2 host my own mail and website.
reply
platinumsun @ 25th Nov 05:04PM:
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS

One day I'll be in the same boat, but in ATT country I have to wait it out
reply
Timmn @ 26th Nov 12:47PM:
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS

I don't remember the exact figures, but a ticket to France on a Concorde was like three times the ticket price on a regular commercial aircraft.

If you look at the price differential between a Mac and a PC, Macs have always been more expensive, the only thing that held back Apple from gaining market share was price.

People don't always buy "cheap crap", most of them will buy a good quality product at a low price.
reply
bmn @ 27th Nov 11:11AM:
Re: Fios vs. DOCSIS

said by Timmn :

If you look at the price differential between a Mac and a PC, Macs have always been more expensive, the only thing that held back Apple from gaining market share was price.
That's been tossed around so many times without any evidence to back it up its ridiculous. The difference in architecture, the proprietary (closed-source) OS, etc. were greater factors in keeping them from gaining market share. With the switch to Intel and OS X, an open source OS, their market share has risen while still costing more than the average PC.
--
Prove it...
reply
thender2 @ 28th Nov 04:53PM:
Re: "Better" is not the issue

FIOS can wire apartments just fine.. I got mine, and I didn't even have to fool them into thinking I lived in a really large house. :)
reply
HyPeRbAnD @ 5th Jul 05:46AM:
at the end of the day

At the end of the day the cable product will look the same as the telco product. You pick up your phone and both will have dial tone, TV will look the same and internet will be comparable.

The big factor will be customer service, reliability and who can get the products out the fastest. Right now cable has the advantage on getting it out the quickest since most of them already have HFC networks and DOCSIS 3.0 is very easy to add. It will take telco's 10 to 20 yrs to rebuild their networks so they can match cables footprint.

Both telco and cable have poor customer service. If cable can improve on that they will be the winners. So right now I think cable could be the winners..
reply
dgspeed @ 13th Sep 04:44PM:
At the end of the Decade

I agree that cable/telco will in the future offer similar services with similar customer service issues, but technology will cause major separation in the future.

FIOS will be much cheaper to maintain once the build costs are absorbed, and it will eventually beat everyone on price and performance. Cost per mile maintenance for FIOS is a fraction of that for cable, and that includes premise and CO equipment.

FIOS is fiber to the premise, meaning that there are no issues with neighbors hogging bandwidth. Cable companies already fire abusive customers, probably downloading and uploading video, and with more video and movie services available on the Internet, it will only get worse.

Then there is the issue of high demand for more HD channels, preventing cable from giving up too many 6Mhz channels. An HD channel uses the bandwidth of 10 standard digital channels. FIOS will win in the long run, but cable wins where FIOS won't be deployed.

Don't even get me started on wireless. Everyone in the future will probably watch TV and use the Internet from Iphone-like devices, and couldn't care less about resolution. The kids of today are the consumers of tomorrow.
reply

Thank you for using lo-fi dslreports.com - report bugs
© 99-2009 silver matrix LLC