Agreed, Patrick. As a business only provider many of our customers that bring in a 10-50-100Mbps or higher microwave connection in from us are doing so to complement their existing fiber connection(s).
As time progresses some of those customers end up favoring our microwave connection over their fiber connection. Sometimes it's because we're better peered and have fewer "hops" or lower latency other times it's simply because we have fewer points of failure and therefore our availability is higher. It all comes back to those three ever important sticking points: Location - Location - Location Best, Brad -----Original Message----- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Patrick Shoemaker Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 8:46 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Why the telco's will never be true competitors to us Exactly. The terms "wireless" and "fiber" are too broad to make any valid reliability comparison without more specifics. Comparing a licensed point to point microwave system with redundant paths, spatial diversity, standby power, and a tower structure rated to 150 MPH to an aerial fiber strand running through the woods in northeast ice storm territory would lead one to believe that wireless is the more reliable technology. Comparing a 2.4 GHz 802.11 link with grid antennas shooting some trees in icy territory to a SONET ring connecting two metro area datacenters would lead one to believe that fiber is the more reliable technology. Unfortunately, this distinction is not made by the general public, and it makes the sales process for business grade fixed wireless services more difficult. Patrick Shoemaker Vector Data Systems LLC shoemak...@vectordatasystems.com office: (301) 358-1690 x36 http://www.vectordatasystems.com Bret Clark wrote: > Brian Webster wrote: >> Fiber deployments have been commonplace between >> telephone switches for years now and I have never heard about reliability >> issues and/or downtime problems with the fiber. Not that they don't happen >> but when you average their uptime to their outages, I would think they have >> some of the better reliability figures over any technology. >> > > Sure, because they are running a SONET network and fiber breaks are > rather common, but when you have a secondary path then you don't hear > about it. Build a wireless infrastructure the same way with redundancy > and you'll have the same uptime. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
