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: Bernard Levy who wrote (3748)	5/17/1999 1:38:00 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 12823

Thanks, Bernard. Whose devices are the BRCM chips being used in? I never fully got that straight. Also, I'm glad to see that you are up on the finer details of the engineering tasks that the ILECs will face, as you are on wireless techs. This matter often tends to get trivialized for DSL, save, perhaps for WTC's accounts of the subject. I'm guilty of it too often. And it's no wonder. Many of the implementations of DSL we're seeing currently are of the 'net genre, which is to say that they resemble the try it and see if it works, and if it doesn't work fix it type. Having said that, we probably wouldn't be chatting here this evening on this board, if the 'net had been conceived and brought forward in any other way. It's proved to be a game of tradeoffs which favors ultimate gain. But don't tell that to the ILECs. [smile] Regards, Frank

To: Bernard Levy who wrote (3748)	5/17/1999 8:09:00 AM
From: Hiram Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

Bernard, do you know of anyone using 256 QAM modulation downstream? I have seen 128 QAM being used,but not 256 QAM. The trade offs between QAM and QPSK on the upstream are well documented,does TERN using QPSK lose a significant portion of potential of upstream throughput using QPSK? Is that where they are getting a significant portion of their upstream robustness from QPSK? Hiram

To: Bernard Levy who wrote (3748)	5/17/1999 1:51:00 PM
From: MikeM54321	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

Re: ILEC's DSL Upgrade Requirements "Some providers may be offering DSL service right now without having upgraded their COs and local loop accordingly, but when the ILECs start rolling out DSL service systematically, this is one thing they will handle carefully." Bernard, Frank, or Thread, Could you fill us in on the generalities of what the ILECs would be facing if there was full deployment of DSL services. I think I have a general idea of what they have to do inside the CO, but on the other side, I'm not real certain? By "other side," of the CO, I mean the side AWAY from the home and offices. IMHO, inside the CO is very complex because of all the flavors and lack of standards DSL has. Between the CO and the home, I constantly read where the twisted copper pair has to be, "groomed." At the premises, again it's to complicated to figure out what will happen. But the "other side," holds a great deal interest to me. I think it may be a fairly standard procedure to blast bandwidth down to the CO. So that is that part I'm very curious about. If I'm not mistaken there are some 33,000 COs around the country and I'm currently under the assumption getting them fed, with the necessary bandwidth, is a big proposition. Thanks, MikeM(From Florida) PS Just for my reference, here is where I recently brought it up: Message 9195275