MVL - HDSL update:
Looking at the details, though interesting, this product is really not in HDSL's league.
paradyne.com
The following critical comments were offered by an engineer in the field:
-------------
No relation to HDSL-2.
If you read the descriptions on the Paradyne page, you will find that
the 768 kbps bandwidth is the total bandwidth, which must be split
between the two directions. As a result, 4 pair would be needed for a
DS-1 connection. If you have multiple modems, then they share the
total bandwidth as well. Since they claim that this is not like a
packet network ("no collisions") in the paradyne web page, I must
assume that sharing of the total bandwidth is on an assignment basis,
which means that you don't get the nice statistical multiplexing
capabilities of a packet network.
This is is just another, low-performance (relative to HDSL), proprietary transmission scheme. The density, power, and cost points announced are all futures. (they talk about 2000 lines / 7 foot bay with power savings from DSP sharing, but the Paradyne web page says that's the capability in the future. The density in 90 days is 4 ports/card, no DSP sharing, 1.5W port, and only 576 ports/ 7 foot bay) It's also interesting that they had a "static" board (no live demo) at their booth at COMNET.
The home lan feature is interesting, but gimmicky. For $70 I can buy
a hub, 2 nic cards, software, and cabling for a 10 base T network at
Fry's. Most people I know with multiple computers have an ethernet.
Why would I go for a sub megabit home network which lowers bandwidth out to the internet when for a small price more I can statistically mux the whole bandwidth and have a simple, industry-standard ethernet at home, and all the functionality that goes with it?
------------
[The argument FOR is MVL STILL gives multiple home/office computers higher bandwidth - relative to analog - even during simultaneous sessions, as well as file/printer sharing w/o ethernet cards. This WILL be a selling point to some, as far as I can see]
Steve |
