x
<<   <   Page 3 / 5   >   >>
fiber_r_us 12/5/2012 | 4:11:44 PM
re: Components Companies Face a Chilly Winter Actually, the paper illustrated the extra cost was in the civils of laying more fibre. The equipment cost was not significantly different.

The report was an independent report - not a BT report.
geekay 12/5/2012 | 4:11:43 PM
re: Components Companies Face a Chilly Winter As someone rightly said "Economists (read analysts) make astrology look more respectable"
bollocks187 12/5/2012 | 4:11:41 PM
re: Components Companies Face a Chilly Winter Look I would certainly like to get involved in that debate.
- GPON is closed and costs a huge amount to upgrade
- Active is open and costs little to upgrade.
- PON has less fiber at the CO than Active because it is concentrating/aggregating traffic.
- Price/performance Active is the winner.




paolo.franzoi 12/5/2012 | 4:11:41 PM
re: Components Companies Face a Chilly Winter
As I have already stated, there have been RFPs won with GPON ONTs - indoor, 1 Ethernet Port at a price of $70. Those ONTs have 10/100/1000 drop side ports. This is very similar to the price of equivalent pure Ethernet units.

Most of the quotes you get from Active Ethernet folks are on that order of product. Not an outdoor ONT with battery backup and an RF overlay. Those prices are significantly different, but we need to compare similar home units.

You may be sick of the truth, but the truth is the truth.

seven
cw.774 12/5/2012 | 4:11:41 PM
re: Components Companies Face a Chilly Winter I sure do get tired of Seven's 'expensive laser' mantra. I hope you consider that a 1310FP upstream is used for a BX10 link that are all over rfq's I've seen. You can't do that with GPON; where you need 1310DFB 99.9% of the time (100% for all formal rfq's I've worked on really). So depending on mix of reaches, and considering ODN splitting wears, it could be an even wash.
paolo.franzoi 12/5/2012 | 4:11:41 PM
re: Components Companies Face a Chilly Winter
Again, you are missing the point at the CO. In Active, you need 1 laser per customer. In passive, you need 1/32 customers. You end up with a lower cost, lower power, and higher density CO end. For this you give up the ability to simply unbundle end users (i.e. you can hand UNE-L type interfaces to "CLECs").

As for upgrades, there are many limits on both technologies when one wants to take a home above 100Mb/s. From upgrades of the network equipment (which both technologies have available today) to the much bigger issue of GigE ports on home routers at a low cost.

seven
paolo.franzoi 12/5/2012 | 4:11:40 PM
re: Components Companies Face a Chilly Winter As I pointed out, Tellabs is profitable. You are asking is Alcatel profitable and then saying that they are not because of other business units. Huawei and ZTE (both in the GPON business) are also both profitable. Thats 3. Want to try again.

As for GPON optical drops, EPON biplexers (which basically are very similar to GPON biplexers) go for under $20. SFPs are already commodities. Again, you don't just change an SFP. You change out the entire home electronics. With GPON you change - 0. It already comes with 10/100/1000 interfaces. So, try again.

Verizon OLTs deploy with 600 subs on a shelf, GPON over 1000. That is because they get 32 per port. Outside the US that goes to 64 and yes those are deployed topologies.

I am waiting for bandwidth declarations where you can drop in 10x bandwidth on the Ethernet switch without changing the CO electronics.

As for length of runs, ONTs can be 20Km distant from each other on a PON segment with a max PON distance of 60Km.

I am not arguing that point to point is horrible. I just note that every carrier in the world - not municipality - seems to be choosing a network with this topology - Vz, NTT, FT, Telefonica, various Chinese Carriers, EVERY cable company, on and on. There must be something there that you are not considering. Every one of these chooses to go the other way. Ever think they might have actually studied this?

seven
bollocks187 12/5/2012 | 4:11:40 PM
re: Components Companies Face a Chilly Winter 7

Your dreaming about a carrier grade "1 Ethernet GPON unit for $70. How much is the vendor making. I'll tell you -$70.

Alcatel was pushing a $300 ONT to Verizon at a loss of $75 - that is why they are trying to get out if they can. AFC/Tellabs fell into the same stupid trap chasing Verizon. Motorola is the next fool in line - lol

The Verizon technical team is stupid when it comes to actually writing specs on what they want for sub $300. They spend too much time in the standards trying to dicate what they want and taking over 10-15 years to deploy anything (FSAN for example).

7 I have repeatedly asked you to name ANY GPON vendor that is profitable selling GPON to the RBOCs/PTT - you avoid this becuase I Know that you know there is no one - lol. Your just not man enough to admit it !

So stop trying to push a GPON agenda when the business economics are so wrong. It is like a politician saying the war is a good thing or the stimulus package is going to create jobs - lol

Fact not Fiction

Fact not Fiction
bollocks187 12/5/2012 | 4:11:40 PM
re: Components Companies Face a Chilly Winter 7 "bombastic" as usual.

I understand your point but it does not cost in or play to the elvel you are proposing.

UPGRADE: Lets look at the pt-pt ONT - you can get GiGE/100Mbps ONT on the market that can be upgraded to GIG to the home with a simple SFP change - GPON no chance ever of doing that you have to replace the complete system ONT+OLT.

Mixing different reaches on fiber runs is easily done with pt-pt - GPON no chance.

Cost of SFP optics has reduced significantly and will contiue to do so - in part due to the Enterpise use of GiGE/100Mbps optics. GPON optics will not decline and therefore they will cross.

Also GPON OLT with 64 users ha ha don;t make me laugh try 16.
fiber_r_us 12/5/2012 | 4:11:39 PM
re: Components Companies Face a Chilly Winter Actually, Tellabs PON unit is not profitable and they are trying to get out of it.
<<   <   Page 3 / 5   >   >>
HOME
Sign In
SEARCH
CLOSE
MORE
CLOSE