Posted by
Hemos
on from the cool-new-approach dept.
dlkf writes "CNNreports that Hartwell, Georgia is the test site for a new technology developed at the Georgia Tech Research Institute used to transmit TV signals over the phone line. With the addition of a set top box, users get 60 channels along with their DSL and phone line."
Yeah, it's been around for 2-3 years, actually!
by
xtal
·
· Score: 5
Disclaimer: I work for iMagicTV, and we've been developing this stuff for some time, and have a bunch of major customers. If you're interested in how this stuff works, not just from the customer perspective but the backend stuff that the telco is running too.
This is nothing new, and has been available in middle-of-nowhere Atlantic Canada for some time, but since we're not part of the USA (yet), it must not count.
It WOULD be a feat if they got 60 channels simultaneously multicast over DSL, but that's just not possible. They have a bunch of seperate streams that you can tune into.
This is just great. Now with the snip of your wires at the demarc, you will now:
1. won't have internet access
2. won't have telephone access
3. won't be able to watch tv.
Might as well just go outside at that point.
My (former) telco is doing this.
by
TheTomcat
·
· Score: 4
My (former) telephone company was doing this before I left the province (last October).
It doesn't translate directly to the standard coax that we're used to coming out of our walls, but a special connection that plugs into a 'tuner' box, and 'tunes' one channel at a time, much the same way small-dish sattelite 'tuners' work.
Anyone I've asked has said that it hasn't hurt ADSL performance (same network as the VibeTV stuff) too much.
NBTel's supposed to be worldclass in telecommunications (or something). After all, one of my hometown's main industries is hosting callcenters. That's right. You call AOL customer service, you get Moncton(Riverview), NB, Canada. Same with Equifax.
Oops, drifting offtopic. Anyway, my point was that this is being done, and it's similar quality to small-dish sattelite TV (Bell Expressview, or Starchoice in Canada).
Before the cable company in NB got bought by Shaw/Rogers, they were talking about providing telephone service. Stange how things get twisted around.
I've really had a very good experience with AT&T Cable internet. The price is reasonable, the speed is quite fast (I downloaded some disk images last month at over 200KB/s, note: KB not Kb) they were quite prompt about getting the installation done. If I remember correctly, I called in on a Thursday and they came the following Wednesday, and it was a holiday weekend. Two working days later is a very good turn around time. Since getting service in July I've only had one network outage that I've noticed, and it lasted less than 2 hours. The only thing that I can complain about is that their mail and news servers are kind of slow and go down sometimes. I'd recommend not using the e-mail address you get from them for anything other than billing information. _____________
-- I don't want free as in beer. I just want free beer.
Re:Movin' on up to a monopoly?
by
dbarclay10
·
· Score: 5
I live in Canada, and I'll adress a few of your points from a Canadian perspective:
1) Very few people trust their local telco. I certainly don't trust them even with DSL, let alone with cable access.
I trust my local telephone company. In my life, I've never been without telephone service. I'm serious. There was a tornado nearby once, and the power(and cable access) was out for nearly a day - but we still had our phones.
I've witnessed dozens of cable outages. While generally short(usually around an hour), a few have lasted upwards of a day or two.
2) When was the last time a cable system in a big city (where the rollout would probably start, as it usually does) was economically viable with only 60 channels?
In most parts of Canada, you need to pay an extra 10-15 dollars(Canadian) to get 60 channels. Regular service has about 30-40. I think the most you can actually get(no matter how much money you have), short of getting a satellite dish, is about 75 or a hundred.
3) Think about the cable signal over copper lines. If you're in an area with fibre optics, great. But if not, your cable reception could be evil.
I'll agree that I think this is a backwards step. We should be moving away from old telephone lines to something approaching TV cable, or ideally, fibre. However, most of my region(I live in a town of 10,000 people) have fibre optics. In fact, I have fibre going right up to across the street(where there's a big telephone company box of some sort). Mind you, my impression is that Canada(and especially Ontario) is rather well-connected.
4) 95% (at least) of all municipalities that have cable available for residents have a long term contract in place. To switch to a telco for this would require some nifty sidestepping of issues.
I don't know anyone who has a long-term cable contract. It's always monthly.
5) Imagine cable support through your telco.
I was recently chatting with someone about this:) They were from Texas, I think, and had problems because of the local telephone company monopoly. They moved to an area with more competition, and things got better.
Well, I've got news:) Up until about five years ago, there was only ONE telephone carrier available in my area. And they were just fine:) No serious problems, technicians always made it out when they said they would(although, sometimes[if it wasn't a serious problem], you'd have to wait a few days). Perfectly well-behaved.
The point? Don't bash the technology because the people who are initially using it arn't the nicest people in the world. If this makes it into my city before cable broadband access does, I'll sign up for it.
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
--
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Movin' on up to a monopoly?
by
Zaphod+B
·
· Score: 4
Well, surprise, surprise. After the cable companies found out that they could carry Net access over their lines, I'm not surprised at this retaliation. But let's look at it:
1) Very few people trust their local telco. I certainly don't trust them even with DSL, let alone with cable access.
2) When was the last time a cable system in a big city (where the rollout would probably start, as it usually does) was economically viable with only 60 channels?
3) Think about the cable signal over copper lines. If you're in an area with fibre optics, great. But if not, your cable reception could be evil.
4) 95% (at least) of all municipalities that have cable available for residents have a long term contract in place. To switch to a telco for this would require some nifty sidestepping of issues.
5) Imagine cable support through your telco. Not to pick on my unnamed local telco which starts with V and ends in N and has a giant gaping intelligence gap between, but they can't even support DSL, and they're just barely able to offer what might be considered reasonable service for their phone lines.
I don't see a great amount of competition for $CABLE_PROVIDER in the near future.
-- Zaphod B
When duplication is outlawed, only outlaws will have/bin/cp
"Georgia is the test site for a new technology developed at the Georgia Tech Research Institute... "
I laughed when I read this little piece of "breaking news"... This kinda technology has been in use for over a year in Moncton, New Brunswick CANADA... yeah that's right... Canada...
I lived there while they were rolling it out last year, never got to test it myself since it wasnt available on my street, but I hear it was comparable with cable. Check it out if you want http://www.nbtel.nb.ca , click on Vibevision for more info.
"With the addition of a set top box, users get 60 channels along with their DSL and phone line."
While it is ALWAYS nice to have alternative ways of getting subscriber based TV (read: Cable), this really doesn't impress me as a comsumer. In my area, we have digital cable. I have 180 channels including 10 HBO channels and 10 Showtime channels. Also, built right into the cable box is a cable modem. Granted DSL has guarantted speed while cable is shared speed, it's as fast (if not faster)as normal home DSL connections most of the time.
What I want to know is what compression they are using? To sqeeze 60 channels into a DSL line is quite a feat (since you can STILL use DSL at the same time), but feasible (you should watch Quicktime streams on a 100BaseT connection sitting on Internet2, which lets you cheat your way through parts of the internet).
--
Burn Hollywood Burn
Re:Information Age Barriers
by
Auckerman
·
· Score: 4
"I suppose what I want to know is: Why weren't these barriers knocked down before?"
Where there is already a govt sanctioned monolopy that offeres a comparable service that is proven to work and is affordable, why would any competitor come to YOUR town and set up shop. No guaranteed customers. Which is probabally why it's first appearing in a "small town" where in the article it mentions that the cable company wouldn't hookup a line to his business for just one subscriber....
It'll always cut out at the important bits of the story!
Why not upgrade to our plus service - we'll automatically download programme schedules for you, to make sure the VerizonBox(TM) always cuts out at the right moment!
Sorry. Sarcasm overload here. Although quite how far into the realms of fantasy I am I'm not sure...
Slashdot Mirror
Disclaimer: I work for iMagicTV, and we've been developing this stuff for some time, and have a bunch of major customers. If you're interested in how this stuff works, not just from the customer perspective but the backend stuff that the telco is running too.
This is nothing new, and has been available in middle-of-nowhere Atlantic Canada for some time, but since we're not part of the USA (yet), it must not count.
It WOULD be a feat if they got 60 channels simultaneously multicast over DSL, but that's just not possible. They have a bunch of seperate streams that you can tune into.
..don't panic
This is just great. Now with the snip of your wires at the demarc, you will now:
1. won't have internet access
2. won't have telephone access
3. won't be able to watch tv.
Might as well just go outside at that point.
My (former) telephone company was doing this before I left the province (last October).
It doesn't translate directly to the standard coax that we're used to coming out of our walls, but a special connection that plugs into a 'tuner' box, and 'tunes' one channel at a time, much the same way small-dish sattelite 'tuners' work.
Anyone I've asked has said that it hasn't hurt ADSL performance (same network as the VibeTV stuff) too much.
NBTel's supposed to be worldclass in telecommunications (or something). After all, one of my hometown's main industries is hosting callcenters. That's right. You call AOL customer service, you get Moncton(Riverview), NB, Canada. Same with Equifax.
Oops, drifting offtopic. Anyway, my point was that this is being done, and it's similar quality to small-dish sattelite TV (Bell Expressview, or Starchoice in Canada).
Before the cable company in NB got bought by Shaw/Rogers, they were talking about providing telephone service. Stange how things get twisted around.
I've really had a very good experience with AT&T Cable internet. The price is reasonable, the speed is quite fast (I downloaded some disk images last month at over 200KB/s, note: KB not Kb) they were quite prompt about getting the installation done. If I remember correctly, I called in on a Thursday and they came the following Wednesday, and it was a holiday weekend. Two working days later is a very good turn around time. Since getting service in July I've only had one network outage that I've noticed, and it lasted less than 2 hours. The only thing that I can complain about is that their mail and news servers are kind of slow and go down sometimes. I'd recommend not using the e-mail address you get from them for anything other than billing information.
_____________
I don't want free as in beer. I just want free beer.
I live in Canada, and I'll adress a few of your points from a Canadian perspective:
:) They were from Texas, I think, and had problems because of the local telephone company monopoly. They moved to an area with more competition, and things got better.
:) Up until about five years ago, there was only ONE telephone carrier available in my area. And they were just fine :) No serious problems, technicians always made it out when they said they would(although, sometimes[if it wasn't a serious problem], you'd have to wait a few days). Perfectly well-behaved.
1) Very few people trust their local telco. I certainly don't trust them even with DSL, let alone with cable access.
I trust my local telephone company. In my life, I've never been without telephone service. I'm serious. There was a tornado nearby once, and the power(and cable access) was out for nearly a day - but we still had our phones.
I've witnessed dozens of cable outages. While generally short(usually around an hour), a few have lasted upwards of a day or two.
2) When was the last time a cable system in a big city (where the rollout would probably start, as it usually does) was economically viable with only 60 channels?
In most parts of Canada, you need to pay an extra 10-15 dollars(Canadian) to get 60 channels. Regular service has about 30-40. I think the most you can actually get(no matter how much money you have), short of getting a satellite dish, is about 75 or a hundred.
3) Think about the cable signal over copper lines. If you're in an area with fibre optics, great. But if not, your cable reception could be evil.
I'll agree that I think this is a backwards step. We should be moving away from old telephone lines to something approaching TV cable, or ideally, fibre. However, most of my region(I live in a town of 10,000 people) have fibre optics. In fact, I have fibre going right up to across the street(where there's a big telephone company box of some sort). Mind you, my impression is that Canada(and especially Ontario) is rather well-connected.
4) 95% (at least) of all municipalities that have cable available for residents have a long term contract in place. To switch to a telco for this would require some nifty sidestepping of issues.
I don't know anyone who has a long-term cable contract. It's always monthly.
5) Imagine cable support through your telco.
I was recently chatting with someone about this
Well, I've got news
The point? Don't bash the technology because the people who are initially using it arn't the nicest people in the world. If this makes it into my city before cable broadband access does, I'll sign up for it.
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Well, surprise, surprise. After the cable companies found out that they could carry Net access over their lines, I'm not surprised at this retaliation. But let's look at it: 1) Very few people trust their local telco. I certainly don't trust them even with DSL, let alone with cable access. 2) When was the last time a cable system in a big city (where the rollout would probably start, as it usually does) was economically viable with only 60 channels? 3) Think about the cable signal over copper lines. If you're in an area with fibre optics, great. But if not, your cable reception could be evil. 4) 95% (at least) of all municipalities that have cable available for residents have a long term contract in place. To switch to a telco for this would require some nifty sidestepping of issues. 5) Imagine cable support through your telco. Not to pick on my unnamed local telco which starts with V and ends in N and has a giant gaping intelligence gap between, but they can't even support DSL, and they're just barely able to offer what might be considered reasonable service for their phone lines. I don't see a great amount of competition for $CABLE_PROVIDER in the near future.
Zaphod B
When duplication is outlawed, only outlaws will have
I laughed when I read this little piece of "breaking news"... This kinda technology has been in use for over a year in Moncton, New Brunswick CANADA... yeah that's right... Canada...
I lived there while they were rolling it out last year, never got to test it myself since it wasnt available on my street, but I hear it was comparable with cable. Check it out if you want http://www.nbtel.nb.ca , click on Vibevision for more info.
While it is ALWAYS nice to have alternative ways of getting subscriber based TV (read: Cable), this really doesn't impress me as a comsumer. In my area, we have digital cable. I have 180 channels including 10 HBO channels and 10 Showtime channels. Also, built right into the cable box is a cable modem. Granted DSL has guarantted speed while cable is shared speed, it's as fast (if not faster)as normal home DSL connections most of the time.
What I want to know is what compression they are using? To sqeeze 60 channels into a DSL line is quite a feat (since you can STILL use DSL at the same time), but feasible (you should watch Quicktime streams on a 100BaseT connection sitting on Internet2, which lets you cheat your way through parts of the internet).
Burn Hollywood Burn
Where there is already a govt sanctioned monolopy that offeres a comparable service that is proven to work and is affordable, why would any competitor come to YOUR town and set up shop. No guaranteed customers. Which is probabally why it's first appearing in a "small town" where in the article it mentions that the cable company wouldn't hookup a line to his business for just one subscriber....
Burn Hollywood Burn
Introducing...
The Verizon TV Service!
Sorry. Sarcasm overload here. Although quite how far into the realms of fantasy I am I'm not sure...
If it takes 3 months to install like my DSL did, I don't want it.