From: nilknocgeo@earthlink.net   
      
   "Robert Heller"  wrote in message   
   news:q5Sdnf6ZRZONpynOnZ2dnUVZ_uydnZ2d@giganews.com...   
   > At Wed, 2 Jul 2014 15:37:58 +0000 (UTC) "Adam H. Kerman"    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >>   
   >> conklin  wrote:   
   >> >"Stephen Sprunk"  wrote:   
   >> >>On 01-Jul-14 16:03, conklin wrote:   
   >> >>>"Adam H. Kerman"  wrote:   
   >>   
   >> >>>>Do you really believe there's a business case for building a fiber   
   >> >>>>plant in a rural area?   
   >>   
   >> >>>As the copper wire is abandoned everywhere, ...   
   >>   
   >> >>Copper isn't being "abandoned" anywhere; it is quite valuable.   
   >>   
   >> >Its use for telephone service is being abandoned everywhere.   
   >>   
   >> Oh, for heaven's sake, George: There are selected places in which Baby   
   >> Bells and ex-GTE (which absolutely DOES NOT apply to rural telephone   
   >> coops nor exchanges that never were Bell nor GTE) are trying to get out   
   >> of providing a traditional telephone switch in a central office serving   
   >> copper loops to subscriber premisis. This is for regulatory reasons as   
   >> they are required to provide wholesale rates to competitors who access   
   >> the historic telephone plant. There are a handful of instances in which   
   >> state public utility commissions have gone along with this, and FCC is   
   >> always threatening to eliminate federal mandates.   
   >>   
   >> It's going to be a very long time before it happens in a majority   
   >> of Baby Bell exchanges.   
   >>   
   >> Non-Bell exchanges are regulated differently and, with some exceptions   
   >> (like former GTE exchanges), are not subject to wholesale rates and   
   >> competition. They have no regulatory incentive to abandon copper.   
   >>   
   >> If the copper pair is in good condition, it's still useful for data and   
   >> voice needs. Cable distributors providing broadband manage to do it   
   >> on coax, which is ancient wiring technology too.   
   >   
   > Actually, by *world* standards, what the USA Cable distributors (eg   
   > Comcast   
   > and Time Warner) provide is sub-standard. DSL technology is EOL (End of   
   > Life)   
   > -- the equipment is no longer being made or supported. Copper *IS*   
   > becoming a   
   > "dead" telecom technology and is pretty much dead in most of the   
   > *developed*   
   > world and is dieing in the developing world. It seems to be 'hanging on'   
   > in   
   > the USA, however.   
   >   
   >>   
      
   So when rural areas need to fix their copper, they also turn to fiber.   
   Verizon got rid of Durham, NC, formerly GTE.  Frontier took over, and offers   
   only slow DSL, about half of what they advertise.  I'd like to see it go   
   away.  The only Verizon bill I get is for cell phone for my wife, and that   
   is only because they offer rural service AT&T does not.  AT&T gave me a   
   "free": femtocell for the house because they don't even try to cover the   
   rural area I was speaking of.   
      
      
   >> btw, there are two different fiber models. I dunno why you were saying   
   >> you   
   >> have "FiOS" (the i is lower case), which is Verizon's marketing term.   
   >> We all know that Verizon was rolling out FiOS slowly and pretty much   
   >> stopped at some point, due to its incredible expense. Your notion that   
   >> fiber is cost effective to install is goofy.   
   >   
   > It is no more expensive than stringing copper on the utility poles.   
   > Actually   
   > *fiber* cables are getting to be cheaper than copper -- copper is slowly   
   > becoming a 'precious' metal -- people are doing things like stealing   
   > copper   
   > pipes from old buildings to sell for scrap.   
   >   
   > Yes, Verizon has pretty much stopped rolling out FiOS. Mostly due to poor   
   > ROI   
   > in *rural areas* and little point in *urban* areas (some of this is   
   > collusion   
   > with Comcast and Time Warner and some is that Verizon is concentrating on   
   > wireless). Note the poor ROI in rural areas relates to things like loan   
   > payoff   
   > times and population density. Right now, Verizon has sold off almost all   
   > of   
   > their copper telephone infrastructure -- only in Mass. does Verizon have   
   > any   
   > copper telephone infrastructure, and they can't sell it off to Frontier   
   > (or   
   > one of the smaller players), because they can't sell *just* the copper --   
   > they   
   > don't want to sell the FiOS installed in the 'wealthy' Boston suburbs --   
   > the   
   > FiOS is very profitable and copper loses money. Verizon does as little as   
   > they   
   > can get away with maintaining the copper. I doubt much of the copper   
   > telephone   
   > infrastructure in Western Mass meets anything like minimum operating   
   > standards   
   > -- if you can get a dialtone most of the time, that is good enough. People   
   > frequently lose phone service when it rains ([rain] water gets into the   
   > cables). Modems don't work at higher speeds. Lines with static. Verizon   
   > *has*   
   > been 'called on the carpet' about these issues, but I Verizon would rather   
   > pay   
   > fines than actually fix things. The fines are probably cheaper than the   
   > cost   
   > of fixing the phone lines -- in some cases the cables need to be completly   
   > replaced, which Verizon is not going to do.   
   >   
      
       I have had experience with statellite Internet, which is quite slow.  I   
   think from what you are saying that all you have left is the satellite   
   option.  I have left my satellite dish up even though I should take it down   
   and crush it.   
      
      
      
   >>   
   >> FiOS is "fiber to the premisis"; they have fiber on the pole line and   
   >> then install a fiber drop to the building and have some sort of terminal   
   >> on the outside of the building with battery that lasts for a brief   
   >> period but not the eight to twenty-four hours that battery would have   
   >> lasted at the central office.   
   >>   
   >> AT&T's Uverse is "fiber to the node", in which AT&T builds nodes to   
   >> serve a couple dozen to a hundred buildings but continues to use a   
   >> portion of the copper loop between the node and the pole line, then   
   >> the original drop between the pole line and the premisis.   
   >>   
   >> In a city or suburban area, the drop may be 20 to 40 feet from the pole   
   >> line, but in a rural area, you're talking about a significant distance,   
   >> and I have no idea why any rural co-op, no matter how much subsidy it   
   >> received, would replace anybody's drop with fiber. So between not being   
   >> in a Verizon area and being in a rural area, I have no idea why you would   
   >> state that you have FiOS, although maybe Verizon is providing some   
   >> support   
   >> to rural co-ops. In a rural area, a fiber drop installation would cost   
   >> more than several years of gross revenue they'd receive from the   
   >> subscriber,   
   >> so that's just not going to happen unless the subscriber has a need for   
   >> it and pays up front. I don't really understand how maintaining copper   
   >> drops are affordable in rural areas.   
   >   
   > George probably does not have "FiOS". He has FTTH (Fiber To The Home),   
   > provided by a local municipal telecom coop. FTTH has the 'look and feel'   
   > of   
   > FiOS and George might be *understandably* confused about the terminology.   
   > I   
   > think George is using the term "FiOS" in a generic sense (eg like the term   
   > "IBM PC" to refer to any desktop computer with an Intel x86 processor that   
   > can   
   > run MS-Windows) -- FiOS is Verizon's *brand name* for their FTTH service   
   > offering. *Verizon* has been actively working to *prevent* the very   
   > existence of local municipal telecom coops, by getting laws banning them   
   > passed in several state legislatures. There is no way that *Verizon* is   
   > helping these local municipal telecom coops -- Verizon is openly hostile   
   > to   
   > these efforts.   
   >   
      
       I was using FiOS as a genertic term, like Frigidaire in place of "ice   
   box" or "combination freezer ice chest," and so forth.  I notice that   
   skybest calls it "fiber optic."   
      
      
      
   >>   
   >> Given that rural telephone and electric co-ops receive monies for phone   
   >> and data from the Universal Service Fund and grant monies for electric   
   >> from   
   >> the farm bill (which pay for maintenance and installation of the physical   
   >> plant with respect to the pole line, which also benefits telephone), your   
   >> idea that rural telephone co-ops don't receive massive subsidy is absurd.   
   >   
   > Verizon has also received money from the Universal Service Fund (not that   
   > they   
   > really need it). Note: the FCC *has not* be using the Universal Service   
   > Fund   
   > to fund local municipal telecom coops that are building (and have built)   
   > FTTH   
   > (Fiber To The Home) systems. The Universal Service Fund has only be used   
   > for   
   > *rural telephone* companies (including the likes a Verizon), mostly   
   > *copper*   
   > based systems (basic POTS). The FCC has used some of the Universal Service   
   > Fund to fund cell providers in recent years and is only *now* beginning to   
   > look at renaming the Universal Service Fund to the Connect America Fund   
   > and   
   > looking at funding broadband Internet in rural America.   
   >   
    POTS is going to fade away because of the old equipment needed to keep it   
   going.   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)