Lowly DSL Poised For Gigabit Speed Boost

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
It looks like there is hope for all you guys stuck on DSL after all. The bad part is that you'll most likely be waiting until 2016.

That's all changing. At the Broadband World Forum in Amsterdam this week, several companies are announcing and demonstrating products that bring DSL -- or digital subscriber line -- into a future with a speed of 1 gigabit per second. That's about 1,000 times the data-transfer speed the technology offered when it arrived in the late 1990s.
Click to expand...
 
Great news for everyone who lives 10 feet away from their service provider.
 
Fiber to the Premises, then vDSL (this G.Fast) to the customer. They've been doing it for years for apartment complexes and row home communities. How is this news?
 
If it forces AT&T to stop lying to their customers about DSL availability, I'm all for the competition.
 
Jorona said:
Fiber to the Premises, then vDSL (this G.Fast) to the customer. They've been doing it for years for apartment complexes and row home communities. How is this news?
Click to expand...

VDSL hasn't been able to reach 1Gbps yet. G.Fast will fix that.

But yes the basic idea has been around for awhile. They are just getting faster speeds from it.
 
So now all we need is someone to run Fiber 99% of the way to my house first... then I can get great DSL.
 
sure 2016 when its 'available' - to small select areas. how long until nearly everyone can get it? rather not speculate.
 
Catalan said:
Great news for everyone who lives 10 feet away from their service provider.
Click to expand...

you're off by about 800ft and yet the point is still incredibly spot on accurate.

without fiber loops this is useless. who here really sees telcos dropping the required fiber in areas they are actively trying to unload POTS services to make this work?
 
Not news. The percentage of customers who are less than 1,000 feet from the DSLAM is less than 1% (At least for the company I work for), and of those customers, only 21% are currently running at higher than 10mbs (on connections that support VDSL). Now, I don't have any way to pull data of customers who requested speeds higher than 10mbs and ~weren't~ on VDSL capable cards, but just looking at those numbers, I doubt G.Fast will be implemented anytime soon.
 
And by 2016 Cox will have supposedly fully deployed gigabit cable to my city. Meanwhile nowadays you can't get more the 40Mbps from DSL vs. Cox where it peaks at 150Mbps.
 
harbingerofdoom said:
without fiber loops this is useless. who here really sees telcos dropping the required fiber in areas they are actively trying to unload POTS services to make this work?
Click to expand...

I do. The cost of keeping those ancient switches online has risen exponentially in recent years. The sheer downsize in a equipment means they could close entire buildings to make up the cost. This replacement is already underway in most large Telco's.
 
plupien79 said:
So now all we need is someone to run Fiber 99% of the way to my house first... then I can get great DSL.
Click to expand...
Uh, AT&T refuses to offer us 6mbit DSL because they already offer 768kbit UVerse. It's the fastest "fiber" the company can manage in my area.
 
harbingerofdoom said:
. who here really sees telcos dropping the required fiber in areas they are actively trying to unload POTS services to make this work?
Click to expand...
Yeah the city here dropped fiber a decade ago, somewhere close to 140 miles of it or so... unfortunately it's dark and they still are dragging their feet letting companies light it up. :|
 
Hell, lets wire up Morse code lines while we are at it guys. DSL needs to die, the technology that underlies the system is a POS. When I first got DSL way back in the day the tech had a light install day so we tested it out at 10 feet from the terminal post, it was getting about 90% of the advertised speed. We tested it after install in my house and it was getting about 40% of the advertised speed. The difference in distance was about 100 feet.
 
That_Sound_Guy said:
I do. The cost of keeping those ancient switches online has risen exponentially in recent years. The sheer downsize in a equipment means they could close entire buildings to make up the cost. This replacement is already underway in most large Telco's.
Click to expand...

The network backbones have nothing to do with this. Sure they are raping our wallets to run massive fiber trunks between their network hubs in order to downsize their equipment. But once that is done the could give zero fucks about bringing faster speeds to their customers.
 
m heisty said:
Hell, lets wire up Morse code lines while we are at it guys. DSL needs to die, the technology that underlies the system is a POS. When I first got DSL way back in the day the tech had a light install day so we tested it out at 10 feet from the terminal post, it was getting about 90% of the advertised speed. We tested it after install in my house and it was getting about 40% of the advertised speed. The difference in distance was about 100 feet.
Click to expand...

While I generally despise DSL, I can say that if you were getting that much drop off over that short of a distance, there was something seriously wrong with the drop or the end equipment. DSL sucks at distance yes, but it doesn't suck that much.

That all said, I would rather see DSL just go away and everything go fiber and be done with it. I hate keeping up with DSL's 5000 flavors and the minor annoying differences for minor performance improvements that are still all shit compared to fiber.
 
I'm on Verizon dsl, and while I'm lucky enough to be close enough to get a 16/1 package, the last few months have been terrible. Something broke at the local office and I had no connectivity, it took a long time and a bunch of useles steps to figure out that I had to set the router back to PPPoE instead of RFC 1483. I haven't used PPPoE in a really long time, haven't had to put my username/password into a router since then. So if they aren't willing to even maintain the status quo and would rather DEGRADE service quality and uptime (every night from about 10pm-3am my pings are terrible and I get disconnects), there is about a 0% chance this will be invested in. the telcos want to just drop dsl altogether and use LTE, it's the future! Even though it's so over saturated that today it took me TEN MINUTES to send a 3mb photo to my friend on Verizon LTE. That's pretty much 56k. Can you tell I'm really upset with my Verizon Services? :mad:
 
"Stuck on DSL" makes me grit my teeth, Steve. Some of us would love to be "stuck on DSL".

Then again, I'd bet there are a lot of people with gigabit who would love to be "stuck having morning coffee on their dock" like I am. 1.5Mbps of loons, coyotes, and fishing for dinner any damned time I want.
 
Makaveli@BETA said:
Cable FTW!
Click to expand...
An oxymoron if I ever heard one.

If we all pitch in some money, maybe we can help AT&T or another common carrier to buy Comcast. Until then, Comcast's business models as a cable TV provider (restricted channel access, forced commercials etc) are and only can be diametrically opposed to the best interests of the internet, including the concept of net neutrality. They've already started their race to the bottomless bottom, with their ridiculous "fast lane" proposals. I've lost track of the number of times they've been caught disregarding and/or lying about violation of established internet standards, in fact a recent story on this site had them rewriting email headers without permission from the senders. Simply outrageous shit.
 
I sat in on a webinar for G.Fast from one of the big hardware providers a month or so ago. They're saying they think this is basically for MDUs (aka, apartments) and European cities where repaving (especially cobblestones) after plowing fiber to each location would cost a fortune. The idea is to pull fiber to a handhole near the subscriber and run just a few people off the DSLAM. They quoted the UK as an example, and said they would need to install 1 million G.Fast DSLAMs to service the country. Which brings about a whole host of other things (how to manage that many units, how to power them, how to manage having the subscribers power them, etc..)
 
dr/owned said:
And by 2016 Cox will have supposedly fully deployed gigabit cable to my city. Meanwhile nowadays you can't get more the 40Mbps from DSL vs. Cox where it peaks at 150Mbps.
Click to expand...

You are one the lucky few, Most area's like where i live its 100mbit cable (has no cap) vs 6mbit DSL (has a cap). Some areas its up to 24mbit DSL but still capped.

As few people said few select area's. Yea most likely only few area's will get it and majority of area's won't see it til 2020 or so.
 
They're doing 1000mbit at about 800 feet. Maybe that can do 50mbit-500mbit at 1500-2000 feet?

I'd gladly change from my shitty 15mbps WISP connection! Here's to hoping! (and comcast, F U pal for treating me like shit because I'm 100 feet too far from the nearest node to hook up.)
 
I'm still on DSL waiting for bell fibe to be installed in my neighbourhood. I was looking at the price recently and I did see a fibre to home option .... Of course it was the most expensive like 80/month.
 
Can't say I feel like I'm struggling with my lowly 17Mbps connection. Working fine for me currently. I can upgrade to FTTC to get 75Mbps but don't feel the need right now.

Maybe it's cos I still remember the joy of 2400baud.
 
DogChainX said:
They're doing 1000mbit at about 800 feet. Maybe that can do 50mbit-500mbit at 1500-2000 feet?

I'd gladly change from my shitty 15mbps WISP connection! Here's to hoping! (and comcast, F U pal for treating me like shit because I'm 100 feet too far from the nearest node to hook up.)
Click to expand...

Actually it's around 328 feet. And that was with shielded cable, which most homes probably aren't equipped with. In real life, it will probably mean at or slightly better than current cable speeds for most people, depending on their line quality.
 
Ryokurin said:
Actually it's around 328 feet. And that was with shielded cable, which most homes probably aren't equipped with. In real life, it will probably mean at or slightly better than current cable speeds for most people, depending on their line quality.
Click to expand...

Shhhhh.....I've been on a crappy WISP 15mbps connection. You're drowning my happy ignorance. :cool:
 
Bell Labs has already announced its successor to G.fast, XG-FAST which can reach 10 Gbs over copper lines.
 
BladeVenom said:
Bell Labs has already announced its successor to G.fast, XG-FAST which can reach 10 Gbs over copper lines.
Click to expand...

I've announced super duper fast internet. It's so fast that I can't think of any way to describe it. How does it work you ask? Magic.
 
We have UVerse, but only use it for TV since the internet caps out at a pathetic 24Mbps. It has been stuck there for a while now, becoming less and less relevant in terms of internet as Comcast continually boosts it's speeds in our area. Obviously 24Mbps isn't going to cut it anymore considering Comcast is working toward Gigabit speeds themselves via DOCSIS 3.0/3.1.

I'm also wondering what the typical DSL monthly download limit will be at those speeds :rolleyes:
 
Well, in my area it was 60MBit Cable vs 1Mbps DSL. A no brainer.

They upped to 10Mbps DSL and I bite. No data caps is fucking awesome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top