David,
You wrote -
<<Don't believe what you have heard about availability and problems with ADSL. It is out there. I've seen it, I know people that have it at their houses and businesses, via GTE where I live, and where trials have been going on for a year. We would all have it today if wasn't for the PUC's regulations. Without sounding elitist, the problem is that the poor neighborhoods where there are relatively few PCs and the rich suburbs all have to be pre-wired before ANYBODY can get the service.>>
The cheif hype regarding xDSL technology was that it would allow for major bandwidth increases on POTS copper lines. Signal attenuation is and will be a hurdle for xDSL before it is widespread. If you have to rewire the local phone loops to overcome attenuation problems, the value of this technology diminishes greatly and there is no shorterm bandwith increase on POTS. Widespread use of this will not happen in 2 years, it will not happen in 5 years. Cable modems would have a better chance of succeeding in residential areas.
<<Caller ID? That's been around since the 70's. It took that long to figure out how much to charge for it, and get past legal issues with privacy vs security.>>
I assume you are equating "Caller ID" to my reference to ISDN, they are NOT the same thing, not even close. I was referencing ISDN as a possible alternative "high bandwidth copper solution", but with shortcomings. Those being expense (unless you live close to the central office) and difficulty in configuration. An ISDN BRI consists of 2 64k bearer channels (for voice or data) and one D channel (for signaling and/or X.25 packet networking). ANI (automatic number identification, "Caller ID") is a feature of Signaling System 7, and you DON'T need ISDN to get ANI (it can arrive on a dedicated single line, digital or analog, before the first ring). If you did any serious work for the telcos, you should know the difference between the two.
<<As for the technology that allows the same phone number to work for internet, voice, fax, etc..., that is why the telcos are buying RS/6000s like crazy. It takes a lot of iron for the switches to accomplish that. You can't roll this technology out until you have built the infrastructure.>>
Here when you say "the same phone number to work for internet, voice, fax" I assume you meant to say the technology can run these applications on the same POTS LINE simultaneously. I am aware of only one product being produced and sold now that attempts to mux POTS lines between a user and central site (without rewiring the local loop), and it is all software, patented. Any telcos that are buying "a lot of iron" for POTS multiplexing are crazy. The players are working on multiplexing their fiber backbones now (and are doing it via companies like Ciena) and as this technology takes hold, the switch, router, and repeater as we know them become less important.
What does become important is a common directory service standard that is robust and scalable, because the network is not going to be a WAN, but a really BIG ASS WAN. xDSL or not.
jww |
