I just wanted to add a little bit. My edit window was long gone.
I said "with such future 2-way HFC plans in mind, Terayon has been chosen by cable operators already. It
allows them to roll out services sooner, at less expense, while continuing to work in the future with planned
plant upgrades as needed."
I should elaborate...I should have emphasized "as needed" a bit more. It seems that, having a TERN systems up and running means that an MSO can wait. This may be considered a good thing, especially considering that technology is constantly getting both better and cheaper. With existing service in hand, MSO's can stretch out that expensive process of upgrading plant, possibly gladly. With every reason to believe the technology can keep up with future bandwidth advances, if not lead in them, an MSO may feel quite comfortable with TERN, knowing future upgrades can now be done as slowly or as quickly as needed. I'm remembering too, concerning both TERN(or other, in time) CDMA and DOCSIS modem chips, it's going to become very cheap to put whatever mass of compatibilities you want on a little chip- if it isn't already. This would help explain the existence of the positive remarks from Canada's Rodgers Communications, which deployed TERN systems despite already being 85% 2-way HFC compliant.
Dan B |
