<I don't think 'gross' is an exagerration>
Relative to the regular hyperbole on THIS thread (though I never intended my statement as hyperbole, but was relying on my memory of industry advertised figures) IMO, the statement was far from "grossly negligent". It turns out many do get upwards of 5Mbps, with 3 being the most common minimum during peak usage. Anyway, let's consider your other points.
<the provider you mention may be making an exagerration of their own>
Certainly is possible, as with any company's sales hyperbole. What percentage of the population will get 6-8Mbps with ADSL?
<my point is that any capacity figure for a cable modem is meaningless
unless and until it is coupled with the maximum number of users allowed that capacity at one time. To say that a 3Mbps rate is 'almost always' available or that 1.5 is guaranteed can only be evaluated if one knows the assumptions upon which it is based.>
Well, the number of users/node alone, would not tell you what your bandwidth would be. Unless everyone was using a constant bandwidth intensive (say 3-5Mbps) application at the same time, you would still get reasonable bandwidth even with more users. And how many consumer-oriented bandwidth intensive applications are there? (Few, if any, at this point).
But here are some numbers from COX:
The average number of users per node (connected to an OC-3 - providing 155Mbps) currently is around 70, with the most being around 300. The coax linkage to the curb allows up to 10 Mbps per user.
95+% of all current users get *at least* 3Mbps, with an unspecified percentage of those users getting from 4-10Mbps. At any time, less than 5% of users get less than 3Mbps, and this is considered to be the result of an addressable connection problem. For anyone getting less than 3Mbps on a consistent basis (days at a time), there is a presumed problem somewhere in the line and a tech is sent out sometime between the same day and 3-4 days to analyze/correct.
If the cause is an overload of subscribers (where many people would be getting less than 3 Mbps - COX claims this hasn't happened yet), COX is setup to split 1/2 the users to another node, effectively doubling bandwidth to that node's users.
Further clarifications:
Correction from previous report (incorrect info from colleague), there IS an installation charge of $99, and then the cost of a 3Com ethernet card (with lifetime guarantee) of $50. The modem rental is $15/month, and is *included* in the charge of $45/month (if you already get cable TV at $20/month), or $55/month if not. You can buy a Motorola Cybersurfer modem for around $350-$400 currently, paying off the rental fee in a little over 2 years.
<We differ in the reason for that competitive factor. I believe it's a
question of speed to market and market share, not capacity.>
I don't think it's capacity either. This was my point that most people wouldn't see a difference between a local loop rate of 1Mbps and 8Mbps due to *backbone* bottleneck. I think this constraint will be here for years, and is part of the reason people won't pay up for high bandwidth and that telcos won't seriously deploy for several years.
To the extent that folks WANT Mbps rates, I think cable will win out over ADSL (where available) on *price*.
<If telcos allow their institutional inertia to keep them from deploying ADSL until guaranteed profits are available, then they are dead in the water>
It appears much cheaper to offer cable modems, as the cable companies don't have the maintenance intensive CO problems of heat, power, space, surge protection (yet, but keep an eye on TIII), crosstalk, line coils, bridge taps and aging copper lines.
In general, there is no bandwidth killer app to drive higher priced (>$50/month) services, so even if telcos deploy, how many will buy at these prices and higher?
Most of the folks who are on the internet really aren't interested in downloading big files. This is why the average number of cable modem users per node is only about 25% of target area (at arguably compelling prices of $25/month more than a standard 56K ISP connection), and why you likely WILL get 3+Mbps. And this is likely why many of the cable cos without current 2way capability do not intend to upgrade their equipment at this time.
As has been voiced many times here and in news reports, bandwidth is great, but it seems there is currently nothing to drive the economies of scale needed for profitable widespread ADSL deployment.
Steve |
