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 : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ftth who wrote (3585)	5/7/1999 12:24:00 AM
From: JGoren	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

OT: Slight Tech question. The phone company (didn't see actually who installed these wires) seems to be bringing in new wires into my complex. They are covered in black rubber and seem to be about 1-1/2 inches in diameter, about twice the diameter of the current lines. There is a whole new set of the wires on the electric poles behind the units with black, oval transformer or booster looking things--usually about a two feet before each pole and after, including one on the line after the pole leading into the building. They are looped at the poles and the building, and the loop seems to be the end of the "wire", so it has to be fed into the building. The loop is located where the current phone wires enters the brick and goes down inside the wall to the phone box which is attached to the building on the outside wall. I am aware that Southwestern Bell recently laid fiber on the other side of the expressway, about a block away. Anyone have any ideas what is being installed? BTW, it's not coming in where the TCI cable wire and junction box are. Maybe my phone service and line is being upgraded so a 56K modem will actually work or maybe ADSL (?) or one of the other acronyms that will provide me with faster access to the net. Thanks in advance. --Refugee from the Qualcomm thread

To: ftth who wrote (3585)	5/7/1999 7:26:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

Dave, thanks for that excellent historic perspective of some of the issues that were relevant at the time. I didn't want to get that granular with my initial response to the poster, but since you've brought it up I'd like to add a few observations and offer some clarifications at the same time. While VoD over twisted pair delivery schemes was something that the open video system (OVS) guys were pushing from a progaming perspective back then, the actual technology that DSLs were forced to utilize was actually considered switched digital video, or SDV. VoD, on the other hand, could utilize SDV, but VoD was only one of a number of layered or tiered side offerings which portended a kind of hierarchical storage and retrieval architecture, behind the scenes. It was SDV, however, that constituted the residence-to-headend (or central office, in this case) schema. The reasons for SDV were obvious. A limited capacity twisted pair line, at best, could only deliver one full motion program grade service from the head end at any one time. This required a means for users to change their channel selection by sending commands all the way to the head end, and redirecting a different channel downstream every time they wanted to change a channel. Traditional cable TV, in contrast, with its hundreds of MegaHertz delivery scheme could actually deliver the entire spectrum at once, and the selection process took place right at the set top box, without the need for upstream involvement. Just a couple of clarifiers, which I hope you don't mind, to an otherwise excellent tutorial reply. Regards, Frank Coluccio ps - re: "To my knowledge, no such system has been implemented- " Siemens Nixdorff implemented what they called FreeBee TV in some skyscraper multidwellings, about two years ago in NY City. It used SDV to deliver free TV to tenants, and it was paid for by advertising dollars. Not sure if it's still up and kicking, in the presence of RCNC and TWX pressures, but that is one early implementation that I was aware of at the time. I think I posted the details upstream somewhere in this thread at the time.

To: ftth who wrote (3585)	5/7/1999 12:24:00 PM
From: QKSAND	Respond to of 12823

Yours and Frank Coluccio's posting helped a great deal for my understanding - upstream vs at-the-set. I really appreciate you gentlemen taking the time in helping out. Reading some other postings, it appears that cable modem has the potential congestion problem when too many residences using the access at the same time. Whereas, ADSL, being dedicated line for each residence, would not have this problem. Is this approximately correct ? It seems that RBOC's can be a real competition to AT&T's cable, if they will just get off their butts and make alliances with ISP's like AOL did with SBC. This would be a real benefit to consumers at large and the e-commerce would boom at accelerated rate. qksand