Page 1 / 2   >   >>
MrFinance 5/19/2016 | 6:16:07 PM
Re: Time to market and playing catchup I see what you mean on video.... Maybe... increasingly Netflix etc let set my own stream quality products preference and if my broadband supports it I'll go high end even if I'm not holding my phone at a 50inch equivalent distance.. Maybe that's just me though. Regarding on-live, I'd see their failure as more business model than anything else. They should have sold to Microsoft early on, and anyway the game streaming business model was crappy when so few consumers had broadband speeds well in excess of 20-30mb/s to support it. I don't think that will hold true by 2025 and it may be a far superior option for Sony to kill the physical console generations off at the ps4k and release PlayStation 5 in the cloud and get the immediate audience of 95% of the ps4 / ps4k owners who will have adequate bandwidth by then. Anyhow I think we are of the same mind that massive speed increases to GB and certainly beyond will not be economic for consumers to pay for, let alone need. Thanks for the interesting thoughts.
brooks7 5/19/2016 | 10:36:09 AM
Re: Time to market and playing catchup Except that GPON doesn't have a need for DBA downstream as each customer can consume all the bandwidth needed as there are no timeslots.  So, it does provide exactly comparable functionality.

As to whether symmetric is super important....maybe.  The ability for a home to upload videos (and remember we are talking about home users without any business applications) is interesting but nobody is going to be able to charge for it and I am confused on how the marketing for that wil go...."Hey upload your sex tape to Youtube at 10x the speed!"

I see g.fast as a nice little niche product that will go into a smaller market than VDSL2 which in itself was a nice tiny niche.  There are so many places where the technology doesn't really work economically due to housing density.  What do you do in rural where it will be 1 home passed per dslam?  It seems to be a good technology for apartments with a dslam per floor, but in standard density housing it is not clear that this is a good fit.


spawnbsd 5/19/2016 | 6:33:56 AM
Re: Time to market and playing catchup @brooks7

DBA on GPON has nothing to do with DBA on G.fast, the name is a poor choice which is why many G.fast vendors refer to it as DTA now. DBA on GPON allows for dynamic allocation of timeslots in the upstream direction (only) for each subscriber on the PON, based on actual subscriber traffic. DBA/DTA on G.fast allows for dynamic allocaton of timeslots in the upstream AND downstream direction based on actual subscriber traffic; unlike the fixed upstream/downstream allocation in VDSL2 due to FDD usage.

Independent DBA/DTA for coax use cases, allows the upstream and downstream timeslot allocation to change uniquely for each subscriber line. Collective DBA/DTA for twisted pair vectored use cases, allows the upstream and downstream timeslot allocation to change dynamically for all subscriber lines; at the same time (this is required, otherwise we get killed by NEXT). Obviously independent DBA would be preferred, but collective DBA would still give 'burstable' symmetric capabilities, especially on lower density DPU's where it's statistically improbable two subscribers would be uploading and downloading at the same time (and exhausting all timeslots allocated).

DBA/DTA on G.fast is important as it gives burstable symmetric capabilities on copper, something the cable co's with D3.1 will not able to respond to. Yes full duplex is coming to cable, but despite CableLabs thinking it's a small change and will be possible soon, it requires significant chipset redesigns and cable plant changes. By the time CableLabs has full duplex on D3.1, we'll have 3rd or 4th gen G.fast chipsets, which will also support full duplex on twisted pair.
brooks7 5/18/2016 | 1:13:51 PM
Re: Time to market and playing catchup

"After five years of uninterrupted service, the OnLive Game Service comes to an end."


Streaming video services have not worked.  There are lots of reasons for that which has to do with the business models in the gaming community.  And the technology that I have mentioned has been around since Ultima Online and Everquest and is used today in Call of Duty, Counterstrike and World of Warcrat.  

No...video on a 50 inch monitor takes more bandwidth than on a 10 inch monitor for the same quality from the viewers perspective  As devices become more personal and shared devices decline, I think we will see a slow capping of entertainment content bandwdith.  Note, we are still talking about something 10 years from now and can be handled by today's technology as deployed today in the fiber and coax realm.  GPON = 32 customers per 2.5Gb/s.

I am not saying that bandwidth usage won't continue to grow, but there is this limit of cost per home and bandwidth per home in the access plant.  The plant is a 1 to 1 relationship in expenditure.  So, how much are service providers willing to pay if they can't charge any more money for these exploding bandwidths.  Right now a GPON ONT is about $100.  That is the scale we are talking about for Gigabit deployments.  Let's figure out when a 10Gb/s ONT can be about $100 and when end devices in the home will have 10GbE ports on them.


MrFinance 5/18/2016 | 12:16:45 PM
Re: Time to market and playing catchup Not quite...I'm referring to cloud game streaming (on-live, Sony Gaikai), which unless vr takes off will scale to much better visuals/price than console/pc gaming provided broadband can take c. 30mb/s at 4k equivalent (the compression is not quite as efficient as video as it needs to be done in real time for acceptable latency for screen based gaming - not possible currently to do compression at acceptable latency for vr based gaming). Not sure I follow your point on personal - do you mean smartphone and tablets tend to be lower resolution than TVs? If so, then maybe, depends a bit if flexible screens get perfected in which case most devices will be 4k by 2025
brooks7 5/18/2016 | 9:19:45 AM
Re: Time to market and playing catchup  

The mistake you have in your math is that gaming is more like 56K.  The tech for online gaming is still based on that which was used in dial-up.

And as screens get more personal the bandwidth needs go down.


MrFinance 5/17/2016 | 5:43:59 PM
Re: Time to market and playing catchup I take your point in the short term (actually it's the same point i was making - speeds today are mainly marketing not use driven). That said, i think that 100mb/s is a realistic future sustained usage for a few hours peak if not 24/7. 2025's peak hour 5 person western house= 3-5x 4k security camera and/or userbroadcasting upstreams = 60mb/s + 3x (5users household,, 2 of which sharing a screen) 4k content downstream (gaming or video) = 45mb, + a few random background software downloads from laptops/phones/smartcars/ smarthealth/ smart whatever for another 10-20mb (as mostly it will be set to download outside peak). You can maybe bump that up a bit if you are a big believer in VR, in which case double the download streams to 8k equivalent content and eliminate the screen sharing = 150mb/s download and c 2-250mb/s total. Cut that a bit if you think h265 compressors will get better or recognise that vr is so proprietary still that we'll likely end up using something better than h265. Whatever you believe, for sure it's not a GB/s sustained. The only thing that could really need fibre rather than copper is uncompressed VR cloud gaming where the streams need to be 6-10gb uncompressed to hit the latency needs. Personal view though is that (even setting aside the fibre physical capex cost), the chances router/switch/optics costs for cloud vr gaming scale down faster than graphics card costs to generate the gaming locally is pretty much zilch. Hence I'm not a big fiber believer. At least in europe, copper can carry the sustained usage and you can hybridize the home gateway with mobile to cover off the marketing claim need vs cable and fibre. I'm not a us expert, but even with your worse copper topology and smaller mobile spectrum allocations, would worry fibre business cases will struggle.
brooks7 5/17/2016 | 5:09:10 PM
Re: Time to market and playing catchup Not 100Mb/s per customer.

100Mb/s per customer constant usage.  Meaning that the 100Mb/s is always on.  Today that is less than 1Mb/s on average.  Think about consuming 1M Megabytes of information each and every day. Not 1 Megabyte, 1,000,000 Megabytes.  That is about 100Mb/s of constant traffic.  Call it 3000 hours of HD video downloaded each day.



MrFinance 5/17/2016 | 5:00:52 PM
Re: Time to market and playing catchup I hear you, telco is an odd mix between a tech and a capital asset business... My counter would be you can depreciate your old assets on lower price tiers and you should be building that price decline and user canibilisation into your initial return on capital assumptions lest someone (cable, fibre over builders or 5G startups) spots the invitation to eat your lunch. Of course lots of telco is not fully competitive and continues to earn returns well in excess of wacc, so I'm not arguing that you do get the behaviour you suggest and that it's appropriate behaviour from the point of view of the investors if not the customers or government. PS they'd better upgrade from 100mb to GB fibre if they want to beat d3.1 offers. I'm fully with you that it's largely pointless from consumer use case for the foreseeable future, but 1gb is such a pretty little marketing term no, and maybe I've got the math wrong but strikes me the upgrade costs are a lot less than the marketing hit.
brooks7 5/17/2016 | 4:32:00 PM
Re: Time to market and playing catchup The challenge with all the upgrades is the depreciation cycle.  Telecom used to be a very predictable market with upgrades.  When products were fully depreciated, they were replaced.  Now technology moves faster than finance.  So, people have spent lots of money to recapture their existing customers.  That is a terrible way to run a capital asset business.  The question is to skip right from copper to fiber and there has really only been 1 generation of that.  In residential, I would not expect a new generation of deployment until we get to GPON being congested or an average bandwidth per home of about about 100Mb/s continuous usage (call that 10 HDTV streams for each home 24/7/365).


Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Sign In