In the not from todays gyration dept. a few thoughts on xdsl/cable modem world
> Thank you, Sandy, for your timely answer. But, I just start to learn something
> in ADSL and I don't quite get some of your answers.
>
> 1)
> >Sometimes I think it is pointless to debate the merits of the competing
> >technologies, because I think what really counts is - how is the technology
> >being used? When you try to answer this question, you leave the technical
> >arena and venture into the business and marketing arena.
>
> Sometimes I think whether a technology has a bright future does not depend
> on the technology itself, instead, it depends on what the customers need
> and if the technology fits the market. From my beginner's understanding,
> both ADSL and cable modems are trying to provide all the services, including
> internet service, television service, video conference service, and so on.
With regard to DSL participation in the various services you mentioned:
Internet service - yes.
Television service - no. Only full-rate DSL (8 Mbps) and VDSL (9-45 Mbps) can
provide adequate bandwidth for delivering 'cable TV.' Not very many providers are
offering full-rate DSL, and those who do are pricing it very high. Video on
demand is another subject and we could spend hours discussing the details of both,
so I'll leave it at that for the time being ;).
Video conferencing - only for business. Telecommuters are being oversubscribed
too heavily to allow video conferencing at-home, and many of them have too small
bandwidth for video conference anyway (you need at least 512 kbps symmetric for
really good quality video conference).
>
> It seems to me that whoever wins the technology will win the market. Put it
> in another way, whoever loses the market will die out. For example, if ADSL
> can finally beat cable modem, why would the customers waste their money in
> getting the cable modem since ADSL can provide all the services cable modem
> can provide?
Right now, it can't. Also, DSL has many deployment issues - low loop
qualification, slow rollout, higher price than cable. It is not an issue of who
will win the market - the market is big enough for competing technologies to
thrive. It is seldom 'apples to apples' when comparing DSL and cable, because 1)
it is very rare that both are in the same area for comparison and 2) so many
different cable and DSL providers are deploying different service options. Can
256 kbps US West DSL compete with 2 Mbps @home cable? Both are doing OK. Also,
consider that both cable and DSL will be challenged by various broadband wireless
services.
> As long as the price is concerned, I think if the technology
> is attractive enough, many people will start to work on it and will speed up
> the development of the technology and as a result, will cut the price.
People don't care about technology - they care if they can get it, if it is good,
and if they can afford it. Right now, cable is winning that battle.
> 2)
> >The cable modem network architecture is very similar to ethernet. So, if you
> >and a neighbor are all downstream of the same headend, your neighbor may have
> >access to your computer, if you have allowed any shared resources.
>
> Thank you for your answer. I don't know the detailed technology in cable
> modem, but I guess it's kind of broadcasting the information? If cable
> modem is providing internet service and many people are doing on-line
> shopping and on-line investing right now, how can people use cable modem
> without worrying about credit card or other personal information being
> stolen? Why are there so many people using cable modems if it is insecure?
No, it is similar to an ethernet LAN, not broadcasting. I suggest you research
the network architecture and technology of cable modems so you can compare the two
better. With regard to security, it is only an issue if you let it be - in other
words, if you designate any of your computer resources as 'shared', others will
have access. If you don't, they won't. |
