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 : COM21 (CMTO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mark Laubach who wrote (2159)	6/4/2000 1:49:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 2347

Thanks, Mark. I appreciate your getting back to me. It seems a wee bit extravagant to use 64k on the upstream path, fwiw, but if this is early pilot then it really doesn't matter. I'm also curious to know what CMTO is doing in preparations, if anything, for FTTH. While some of the earlier inhibitors to adopting this model have been cost of materials and labor, those are coming down to some degree now with commoditization, better technology, and newer splicing techniques and snap connectorization. But an architectural void exists, IMO. In other words, a "universally accepted" reference model for an "all digital" baseband system using fiber, end to end [meaning program feed, right through the head end to the end user, without ever converting to analog rf carrier, but instead 1's and 0s all the way], does not exist yet. Not unless one is willing to accept the FSAN PON-RM, i.e., the ITU/Bellcore Full Service Area Network Consortium - Passive Optical Network-Reference Model. A problem that I am seeing some some PON adaptations is that they continue to support many of the analog characteristics of the end to end video signal. In fact, a to d conversion for non-digital (lower spectrum channels) takes place out in the boon docks -where they do get converted at all, prior to hitting the residence (Next Level vdsl, for example)- as opposed to doing MPEG conversion directly in the h-e. Of course, Next Level's model would work with head end digital encoding, too.. but the h-e market is pretty much sewn up by cmts's which speak analog/RF. Don't you agree? Or.. not? Any thoughts that you could share with us would be highly appreciated, whether they be in line with CMTO's approach or your own ideas. TIA. FAC