Robert:
Your presence on this board is welcome. I, for one, value your objective input.
As far as the "superiority" of TERN's solution that you describe, it appears to me that the benefit of the S-CDMA transmission method is the shorter-term cost savings to be realized by cable systems deciding to go with the TERN platform as opposed to the CMTO or any other manufacturer's modem.
If my assumption is correct, then a subscriber whose cable system is lacking in system upgrades would necessarily be required to purchase a TERN modem as opposed to a modem by any other manufacturer. Is this correct? If so, then would this not be inconsistent with the goals of DOCSIS?
Secondly, notwithstanding the upfront cost savings of cable providers opting for TERN system, at some point these reluctant cable providers are going to have to upgrade their systems to accommodate increasing demands of users, & that the benefits of the TERN modem today may be short-lived a few years down the fiber road.
This is not to say that the TERN solution is not necessarily the wrong solution or the best solution, but one that must be weighed by the cable provider in light of its overall plans for future upgrades.
Granted, HSAC & its focus on less-urbanized areas is an excellent customer for the TERN modem. However, I suspect that the initial service delivered to these "remote" customers 1 to 2 years out will soon become less than satisfactory should their demands & expectations increase & the cable plant is incapable of delivering a higher level of service.
The foregoing is obviously an issue for the cable provider & not for TERN. But longer term, the cable providers who defer upgrading their plant today will more likely subject themselves to stiffer competition later on as other forms of broadband access become more available in less-populated areas.
JMO. |
