Scrapps, you are absolutely right insofar as G.lite would be a tremendous improvement for me too. I'll take it and say "Thank you".
I was very glad when I got my new pentium processor too, even happier when I got my G3, but clearly the world does not stop spinning. ADSL/DMT was capable of 8 Mbits downstream. It has been degraded by G.lite in the name of RBOCs not having to send out trucks and to allow for rapid deployment. Well rapid deployment is finally happening by not because of G.lite, and full rate DSL can be done without truck rollouts. I want my 8 Mbits. Video on demand clearly makes use of the bandwidth, and SUNW's SunRay wants 100 Mbits for optimization so I can already see limitations.
As for cost, from the same article:
Todd Andreni, ADSL marketing manager for Texas Instruments, nonetheless said he sees evidence that full-rate ADSL, not G.Lite, will be the winner for consumer access. TI is supplying DSL silicon for both the central office and the consumer connection. It is focusing on client-side silicon that offers full-rate capabilities, while allowing service providers to retain the ability to scale back the data rate to 1.5 Mbits/s.
"All of the service providers we have talked to are moving toward splitterless full-rate and not G.Lite," Andreni said, adding that Texas Instruments itself "is agnostic on the issue."
There is little cost difference between G.Lite and full-rate silicon, Andreni noted, and for service providers, a single standard may be preferable; it's "much easier to monitor, because they can serve every market" with the same infrastructure. ...>>
So why should I be glad that G.lite leads and an inferior technology becomes dominate? If the answer is so that those who have invested in G.lite can make money while a superior and equally deployable technology is suppressed, that's not my perspective. I've already made good money with AWRE and perhaps they need a new business model.
I want AMATI,
Michael |
