Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Fibre (AFCI) ** IPO -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E_K_S who wrote (3006)	5/22/2000 10:23:00 PM
From: MikeM54321	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3299

"My feelings are incumbents and CLECs are too concerned with it[VDSL]." Eric- Whoops. Typo. I meant to say, "are NOT too concerned..." Sorry about that. Funny in lml's first paragraph reply to you, I believe he slipped in the same way. Hmmm..something Freudian going on in the wishful thinking department? Back to your last posting. I'm afraid I don't know who GVN is so can offer no comments. Apparently they may be a AFC competitor with their IAD product. But I did find your ATM comments interesting. As you may know, ATM is the telco solution to quality of service(QoS) issue required to do toll quality voice and broadcast quality video. So that is why it's important to work this into their UMC box. Also, it's a sneaky little detail that plays into SBC's plans to do a run around the line sharing problem. SBC doesn't want to do line sharing as somewhat mandated by the Telecom Act. But there is a provision in the act, specifically rule 99-238, that says if they do....well my memory is failing me now. Full details are on the Last Mile thread starting at: Message 13206520 ...you'll see why it's important for the UMC to handle ATM if your read through the posts. I'm going to do a refresher myself. IMO, ATM is going to be a rising star contrary to what a lot of Netheads think (I'm referring to the Nethead vs. the Bellhead standards battle). -MikeM(From Florida)

To: E_K_S who wrote (3006)	5/23/2000 6:39:00 AM
From: lml	Respond to of 3299

Good work, EKS. Your efforts are appreciated at this twisted pairs' end. I believe AFC is on the right track with this modular approach to providing xDSL compatibility. Yes, this is AFCI's approach, & a key to their cont'd success. As previously stated, most large carriers do not wished to be locked into a proprietary system of network components. They prefer the modular approach, and hence, IMHO, AFCI's strategy is more appealing than ALA's approach, which is typical of a French company. ALA is an excellent telecommunications community with excellent products & customer service. But from a carrier's POV, they love the ability to pick & chose their components, which IMHO, protects them against unforeseen as well as foreseeable problems in product delivery requirements, both quantity & timeliness.