Slashdot Mirror
Broadband-over-Powerline Experiences?
tarp asks: "I'm moving to the City of Manassas, Virginia, where ZPlug offers BPL (Broadband over Power Lines). The city was the first in the nation to offer BPL as an alternative to DSL or Cable. They claim a 300 to 500 kilobit per second connection speed, and rock-solid performance since the only downtime would be when the power grid goes down. BPL is also rolling out in other locations, despite campaigns by amateur radio enthusiasts to stop it due to interference. Anyway, have any of you used BPL, and is it something I should try rather than getting a DSL or Cable connection?"
It's not only when the power lines go down..but when their servers fail. They lull you into a sense of security because you think "oh it should never go down because my power never goes down"
Plus it's relatively new technology. I bet there will be horrible times if you ever need to call tech support.
If it is causing so much interferance I would hope that it would be easy to stop or moderate.
How strong is the interferance?
How far from the power lines does it extend? (Of course power lines are everywhere, so even a 10 meter wide stretch of interferance would be significant.)
Stop the world; I need to get off.
holy crap, that's not a typo. They're really calling this broadband?
Is 500k really that fast nowadays? I don't know about your city specifically, but Cox seems to cover most of the state for cable (i'm from Norfolk myself) and they recently upgraded their regular service to 4mbps down, 512kbps up... I think we're paying $40 a month for that, $50 if you don't subscribe to cable. So unless ZPlug is really freakin' cheap, i'd say you're getting ripped off.
"If you're not on the edge you're taking up too much space!"
That might be applicable for surfing, but anyone who has is a chronic early-adopter has been burned by New-Amazing-Technology(tm) time and time again (My father is one of these, he's purchased betamax machines, laserdisc players, Newtons, eBooks, etc.).
Unless there is a truly compelling reason to go with the new, different technology (i.e. it's either this or 56k, or its marginally cheaper), stick with what works.
I would write more, but my Commodore-64 is acting up.
"They claim a 300 to 500 kilobit per second"
How can that compare to the 2-6Mbit of DSL or the ~3Mbit of Cable?
Plus it makes the radio enthusiasts pretty pissed off.
I'd stick with what's been tested. For now, at least.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
I spoke with one of the more technically versed sales reps for the roll-out here in eastern PA, and they assured me it was secure because they "only allow certain mac addresses to connect". No WPA, not even WEP. All in all, fairly disappointing. I'll have to get -much- more sick of my one-way cable modem to consider switching.
--
I would be very cautious about being an early adopter of this unproven technology. The equipment is first gen, the service techs are green and the speed doesn't sound very impressive. If that's all that's available, then I'd make sure I didn't get locked into a contract if I were you.
I went to DSL Reports and they don't even list it as a category yet, FYI.
I should also note that while the power grid is still pretty sturdy, this speaks nothing of equipment failures, and it would seem that power goes out more often than land-line phone service or cable from what I've seen. Of course, I'm basing this on Las Vegas where most of the lines are below-ground, so your results may vary.
It all boils down to this: are you willing to accept the headaches of this new technology, and is the price/performance compelling enough to warrant that risk? Of course, I think this applies to all new technology. *has flashbacks of the "bad old days" of cable modems*
There is a difference between "insightful" and "inciteful" other than spelling.
Unless you have UPS, a generator or are using a notebook, that shouldn't be a problem as your desktop PC wouldn't be working either ;-)
for $15 per month, it's a bargain.
-THE BIG BUT-
What are they charging in actuality? THAT is the question.
(I can get DSL faster than that your BoP for $27/mo here, and right now I'm sitting in a bar with free wireless and $2 Guinness. Bargain hunt, fella.)
The latest Slashdot meme.
... for the record, those of us flying Remote Controlled aircraft are gravely concerned about the potential impact (no puns intended). We use 72Mhz Transmitters, and the harmonics and other stuff I don't understand are apparently causing significant control issues with our aircraft.
gus
.. if only.
http://www.gobpl.com/ - This site makes it sound like there is not much future in BPL.
r e/ - FEMA, which has a lot more influence that the ARRL, is siding againt BPL.
http://vhfgroup.rochesterny.org/downloads/ - A couple of MP3's of the interference.
http://iwce-mrt.com/ar/radio_bpl_deployments_fi
Any wire can act as antenna. Power lines by themselves give off a signal. But because power lines are not perfect antennas, efforts to limit any interference caused by BPL will not be 100% effective. What will kill BPL is if it's starts interfering with emergancy services (FEMA) or consumer products.
Personally, I'd be more concerned about the privacy issues. Any data on the power lines is essentially being transmitted to anyone with a radio who happens to be able to pick up the signal. Spread spectrum technology would help with privacy concerns.
This sounds like a fun project, sniffing traffic from power lines....
Go not unto/. for advice, for you will be told both yea and nay (but have nothing to do with the question)
unless, BoP systems can obliterate cable or DSL in price-to-performance, why even do it? sure it's a proof of concept and that the technology works, but is it worth it?
from what i have read, BoP adds a fair amount of 'white noise' that causes ham radioers and 802.11x users a bit of trouble. These users must boost their signal to compensate and that lowers speed or quality of signal or completely destroys it if the signal were fairly weak in the first place.
I can see how the system would be usefull for those outside cable and DSL grids like rural areas of the US's northwest(montana, wyoming, dakotas) where the distance is too great for the current standards BUT does BoP extend into these areas?
BPL test areas are starting to get shut down left and right as interference complaints and excesive radiated power measurements start rolling in. Don't say f-you to your cable company yet.
-73, de n1ywb
www.n1ywb.com
you think that's bad? i go to uw-oshkosh and was checking out dsl providers around the area:
http://www.ntd.net/rdsl.htm
fucking $550 in lame "setup fees" and $40 a month for _384kbps_! i'd like to see the dumbasses that are signed up for that when cable is available at 1.5-3Mbps for the same price or just a bit more (and none of that setup fee shit). jesus.
before you rip open the "yeah but does anybody actually live in wisconsin" jokes - yes, cable is available almost everywhere i've been.
As I see it, BPL (or BoP if you prefer) in its current incarnation is not a valid alternative to cable or DSL if those are available in your area. Where BPL will shine is in rural areas where cable and DSL don't reach; in these locales the BPL can take advantage of the already existing infrastructure. To install cable or DSL in these areas would require enormous expense; the cost-per-customer (that is, the cost to implement per customer served, not the cost the customer ultimately pays) is too prohibitive to warrant installation.
Even so, I see wireless IP as an up-and-coming alternative to BPL that promises greater bandwidth at lower cost. Such as what these guys are doing.
Give me my freedom, and I'll take care of my own security, thank you.
The FCC can rearrange the spectrum to make way to BPL if it wants to. Don't forget that is the purpose of the FCC to regulate communications.
I would not be surprised if they moved all the complainers on to the old TV spectrum and made way for a BPL spectrum.
Wah, wah, I can't do my remote control air plane. Response: Get a different frequency transmitter, the FCC doesn't give a fuck.