Tuesday, July 8, 2008

July 8, 2008

Thought I'd share this tidbit with everyone. After over a year it looks like we'll be getting FTTH but of course no install date. That's because it 'may' be Utopia or Qwest installing it.

That's right. I'm not fooling. I received an email plus had a couple of conversations with a couple of buds who mentioned Qwest is serious about bringing FTTH in Salt Lake Valley. Would be nice to see what their roll out plan is. Here is a tidbit from one of the letters I received from them

Fiber to the home is available in some areas of Utah. We have no target or completion date to provide for you at this time, but Qwest is actively upgrading this option. The best advisement is that you re-check with us in the upcoming weeks and months for information regarding the progression of this area of development.



They are talking about 20 Megs up / down which would be perfect for us. We're thinking about moving our business to the web at some point. I have written the code we'll need but it's beta so far.

So Concast - 0 Consumers - 1

How's that for the ending of a story...

Here's an article about the rollout.

I'll post a few more things in the future. Sites I frequent which may be of interest. Also we're thinking of transcribing some of this to youtube. I've had people say they were too lazy (their words) to read about the story however would be interested in a vid or two explaining what happened.

So perhaps we'll roll something like that out. We'll see :D


BTW, it's nice being with an ISP (xmission.com) that has a clue how technology works vs a provider who tries to dazzel people with technical nonsense

To make its case, the group attempts to dispel the "technical-sounding nonsense" put forth by Comcast and its allies. If you've been following this debate at all, you already have a good sense of what Comcast's position is: upgrades are too expensive, BitTorrent traffic would instantly consume any upgraded bandwidth, and the only way to properly manage traffic is to discriminate against specific protocols.


Eve the White House is confused on what is a good broadband policy

Crawford added that what America needs is "access to a general communication structure that is open with universal access," a notion characterized by Russell as a "tragic mistake" and invoked an image of a single, regulated monopoly.


Here's an interesting article on the problem of bandwidth

No, p2p is no longer the single biggest traffic whore, responsible for only 20 percent of total traffic. It's streaming video, like YouTube and Hulu, which is now 50 percent of total traffic. During peak congestion—the times when Comcast will slow you down for hitting the pipe too hard—70 percent of it is http.

Which explains Comcast's flip on network management and why it's a total smokescreen. P2P is no longer the number one leech on networks, it's streaming video across regular old http. So they don't need to throttle p2p exclusively anymore—they need to slow the whole pipe down, hence the new "protocol agnostic" scheme.



Another good article about Broadband

Despite the repeated claims of the current administration that our "broadband policy" is working, the US actually has no broadband policy and no aggressive and inspiring goals (think "moon shot"). The EDUCAUSE model suggests investing $100 billion (a third comes from the feds, a third from the states, and a third from companies) to roll out fiber to every home in the country. Whether the particular proposal has merit or not, it at least has the great virtue of being an ambitious policy that recognizes the broad economic and social benefits from fast broadband.

Here's hoping that the next president, whoever he (or, possibly, she) is, gives us something more effective—and inspiring—than this. It's telling that the current administration's official page on the President's tech policy hasn't had a new speech or press release added since... 2004.


And finally, a thought validated about Concast speeds. What you really are paying for.

Reader Peter is one such atypical customer. He wants to cooperate with Comcast, but he can't get a straight answer as to how much downloading he's allowed to do. He can't even get an estimate. Since he pays for the highest tier of access from Comcast, he figures that he should be able to download more than a "typical" user. Not true, says the Comcast "Abuse" department. Since his internet is "faster" he's simply paying more for the ability to reach the bandwidth limit sooner.


Wonderful.

Thank God FTTH is coming. That would quickly impact that lousy company in my area.

9 comments:

jon said...

I am pretty sure Qwests FTTH is really FTTN (fiber to the node). Hence the 20Mbps speeds. They also will not be letting you choose your ISP anymore.

I have also heard that if your neighbors get it. You may not be able to stay with your 3rd party ISP with your older DSL because of interference problems. The fix is for you to upgrade too. So I guess that would cut out cheap DSL too if your neighbor gets the $99 package.

don said...

Qwest is not planning on putting in FTTH. They are doing FTTN and using the FTTx buzzwords to drum up publicity. This is the same technology Comcast implemented around 2000; a fiber backbone. AT&T is doing the same thing in other parts of the country. The only real FTTH (aside from small private developments) are UTOPIA and iProvo.

I have some contacts with the company who is doing the QWEST work and it is very small in scale now.

I wouldn't bother checking back in a few weeks or months if i valued my time.

u235sentinel said...

don said...

Qwest is not planning on putting in FTTH. They are doing FTTN and using the FTTx buzzwords to drum up publicity. This is the same technology Comcast implemented around 2000; a fiber backbone. AT&T is doing the same thing in other parts of the country. The only real FTTH (aside from small private developments) are UTOPIA and iProvo.

I have some contacts with the company who is doing the QWEST work and it is very small in scale now.

I wouldn't bother checking back in a few weeks or months if i valued my time.


I would be very interested in your references as everything I've heard till now had clearly stated FTTH. I've been told it's VERY new.

I'm aware of Utopia and iProvo. Unfortunately I don't live in Provo and our City Council (and especially the Mayor) have been heavily against Utopia in West Jordan Utah. It should be pretty easy for Qwest to come on in and roll it out since nobody else is doing it thus far.

Checking back was easy to do. I simply added my name to their email list. Problem with that is I tend to learn things before it's official ;-)

Kinda like when Qwest DSL was coming to my city. I had heard about it several weeks after Concast terminated our service and months before it was officially announced.

I have that habit ;-)

Anyway, please post your reference about Qwest fiber. I'm interested in learning which is it.

thanks

u235sentinel said...

jon said...

I am pretty sure Qwests FTTH is really FTTN (fiber to the node). Hence the 20Mbps speeds. They also will not be letting you choose your ISP anymore.

I have also heard that if your neighbors get it. You may not be able to stay with your 3rd party ISP with your older DSL because of interference problems. The fix is for you to upgrade too. So I guess that would cut out cheap DSL too if your neighbor gets the $99 package.


You're the second in the last day to say that. I very much would like to learn more about this if available. The article said fiber to the home so I'm guessing that's probably accurate as I've heard rumblings of this happening in Salt Lake Valley since last Christmas.

I don't have any details beyond that. I'm hoping it would be like the DSL infrastructure where you can connect with a DSL provider (like Xmission). But I've left Xmission before when Concast came to town. It was an upgrade from my ISDN lines at the time.

The only thing that would prevent me from selecting Qwest FTTH would be if they didn't support Linux. My firewall is running Ubuntu and most of my computers have been converted over from Windows as well. Any Windows apps / games I need run just fine under WINE or Cedga (for my CSS and TF2 needs).

Other than that, I'm game. I'd be willing to pay the $99 price as well. After all, I paid a lot more for ISDN and this would be a bargin :-)

Jesse Harris said...

Qwest simply can't do FTTH because it doesn't have the money. Verizon has been cross-subsidizing from its wireless division and large commercial base to build FIOS. AT&T is doing the same thing with U-Verse. And Qwest? They just switched their wireless partner from Sprint to Verizon (and rumor has it they're eying another switch to AT&T), there's no plans to offer video to maximize the investment in faster speeds, uploads are still a paltry 896Kbps. Qwest simply can't compete; they need to either die or get bought out by someone who can afford to build the infrastructure.

Greg said...

Good news -

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080711/internet_regulation.html?.v=5

don said...

My original info came from reading news on www.FiberToTheWhatever.com/news.php

I just did a google search for 'qwest fttn utah' and found this link.

http://searchtelecom.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid103_gci1311197,00.html

u235sentinel said...

Jesse Harris said...

Qwest simply can't do FTTH because it doesn't have the money. Verizon has been cross-subsidizing from its wireless division and large commercial base to build FIOS. AT&T is doing the same thing with U-Verse. And Qwest? They just switched their wireless partner from Sprint to Verizon (and rumor has it they're eying another switch to AT&T), there's no plans to offer video to maximize the investment in faster speeds, uploads are still a paltry 896Kbps. Qwest simply can't compete; they need to either die or get bought out by someone who can afford to build the infrastructure.


I wonder what the telcos have done with the billions they reaped from NII. Since 1994 they have received tax money which was supposed to go into building that infrastructure. Fiber to the home was to be a reality by 2006 I believe. Now it's just another tax we pay for .....????

I'm surprised Qwest is advertising FTTH and running FTTN instead. Even the article said FTTN. Heck, the email's I received also said FTTH!

I'll follow up with Qwest about this. If it's to the node then they should advertise it as such.

Thanks all for the heads up.

don said...

Yeah, i think some of these companies are too liberal with their false acronyms. AT&T is doing the same out here in IL. They are running FTTN (a pile of crap if you ask me) but since they are putting fiber drops in new neighborhoods, they can throw around the FTTH buzzword and sound revolutionary when all they are doing is what Comcast did 10 years ago.