Hi Alex, I failed to mention in my previous post that AT&T is also waiting for the IPTV software fixes from MSFT and others, IN ADDITION to its copper handicap at the present time.
No argument w.r.t.: "The jury is still *way* out what is the right way. ADSL2 is enough capacity to give you video." But so can ADSL operating at 6 or 8 Mbps give your video. ADSL2/ADSL2plus will double the downstream rate, and if the carrier elects to use pair bonding (the use of two pairs instead of one), speeds upwards of 25 Mbps or greater in the downstream can be achieved. However, the problem today, as opposed to the video dialtone days of the nineties, is that the telcos now must be able to support not only a single NTSC (standard) tv set, but a combination of up to three different, concurrent TV viewings in a household in addition to supporting VoIP (how many phones?) and high speed Internet access (by how many concurrent users?), not to mention Junior and his friends engaging in online gaming. That is, if they wish to remain competitive with the Cable Operators, who've been doing this now for quite some time. ADSL2, under optimal conditions (meaning, the residence is spaced at a very short distances from the field node) can deliver as advertized, assuming the software is in place and the user isn't demanding very high Internet access speed. If the total speed is 12 Mbps, say, which is the high end of ADSL2, and three TV sets are sopping up 9, then there is only 3 left for HSI, VoIP and whatever else goes on in a home (gaming, hosting, p2p, etc.). Throw in a single (or two) concurrent HDTV session(s), which is not far-fetched anymore, and all bets are off for most other discretionary uses. But longer loop lengths are still problematic. This is why the telco operators in some foreign countries are now promoting single session TV viewing capabilities over their native copper ADSL services, and making no bones about it. When ADSL speeds are low enough in those locales, it becomes a matter of either TV or Internet access (plus phone service, too, if they're using a splitter arrangement), but not both. The challenges facing the RBOCs won't be as severe as all that. But challenges they'll continue to be, at least for a while longer. It remains to be seen what AT&T is going to do for the majority of its users who reside outside optimal distances, other than to put them on longer waiting lists than they initially anticipated, or building field nodes (meaning a lot more of them) closer to homes at the extra expense. --- As for Verizon going bankrupt, that's another discussion, possibly another several discussions, entirely. If the consumer wireline side ever did become distressed due to the misadventures of FiOS, then you might see something occurring similar to what BT has done, shedding some of its outside plant to competitors or independent operators, or re-opening the unbundled loop area, or the government might even intervene with something that is creative and transformative, for a change. Like, supporting the creation of neutral a Loop Co framework in partnership with municipalities. Or, the company might simply pull back and cease its capital projects for a while. Who knows. One thing I don't think you'll see is the cash-cow wireless side of the business bailing out the wireline side. The company wouldn't be stupid enough, by the time things got that bad, to throw good money after bad, because doing so would sink both ships. Frank -- NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/ Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/ Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/
