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 : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: fred g who wrote (11764)	10/15/2005 7:44:29 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

We're both getting off the main point that sparked this discussion, again. And that was, the inconsistency between choosing an optimal direction for a solution (in this case it is optical in the ideal sense, where GG has always been aligned in principle) and the vendor pick (which, for some reason in the cabletv last mile case, was coax triage specialist TERN, which is not optical). But both, again, happen to be only innocent bystanders in this give and take that we're having here ;) In any event, the positive attributes you've assigned to coax are indeed true when they are applied to block counts with a minimum number of (or only one) amplifier coming off a fiber node that is part of a HFC system. I'm afraid those attributes _do _not apply as readily, however, where Terayon saw its sweet spot. And that was on the extant single- and dual- black coax systems that sometimes had a string of thirty or more analog amplifiers in a chain going back to the head end. And, like I stipulated earlier, those attributes don't apply (or usually don't, but could on low block count, low amp count) when the coax is not part of a HFC system. Those older, pre-HFC systems were where Terayon was able to allow some operators whose systems met the profile to effectively save money, by allowing them to defer indefinitely the burdens of capex for upgrading to HFC. And where that worked out okay as a bandaid fix, I say all well and good, especially for the financially distressed operator. But does this fit the profile for what is known in Gilder's Telecosm as an ascendant technology? Well, given that I don't make those calls, perhaps it does. re: FiOS's inferior service to that of copper, would you elaborate on that? I'm not following you on this one.