Slashdot Mirror


NTT, Japan's Largest Fixed Telecom Provider, Begins Phasing Out ADSL

AmiMoJo writes: Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation (NTT), the third largest telecoms provider in the world, is beginning to phase out ADSL for broadband internet access (Google Translate helps). NTT is no longer accepting new registrations, and no longer manufacturing the equipment required. Instead they recommend users opt for their FLET'S HIKARI fibre optic service. Their "Giga Mansion Smart Type" services offers 1Gb/sec for around $40/month.

70 of 135 comments (clear)

  1. 1Gb/sec for around $40/month. by invictusvoyd · · Score: 2

    Is there a data cap ?

    1. Re:1Gb/sec for around $40/month. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No. All tentacle and schoolgirl porn you can eat.

    2. Re:1Gb/sec for around $40/month. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No data cap, but if I'm reading this correctly, there are other conditions.
      - a 2 year contract with early termination fee.
      - the $41/month includes a minimum $4/mo (500JPY) ISP charge. The ISP is charged separately from NTT, which only provides the pipe. I suspect the low-priced ISP service might include a data cap, or be limited to less than 1Gb/S during most of the day.
      - An installation fee of 18000 JPY (just 145 US) paid over 2.5 years
      - Cable modem rental charge, though I presume you can bring your own.

      All in all, it seems very reasonable, but note that the strong dollar makes a difference: This package would be $50 at last August's exchange rates.

    3. Re: 1Gb/sec for around $40/month. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      for the non business plans there is a cap of 25GB upload per day, which if you exceed regularly they will send you a nasty letter. there is no download cap. mansion type means you share a single 1Gb connection with the neighbors in your apartment. For your own dedicated line, it is around $60. You can pick another isp though if you want a cheaper plan.

    4. Re:1Gb/sec for around $40/month. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I couldn't see a cap mentioned anywhere. Most Japanese ISPs don't bother with caps. NTT tried one about a decade ago when it was 100/100Mb service, IIRC 300GB/day. Didn't go over well, soon abandoned.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:1Gb/sec for around $40/month. by Chikungunya · · Score: 1

      Its exactly like this with some extra options when making the contracts in special sales (I got a second hand Washing machine).
      They do require you to install some useless things in your computer to use the service but at least has been problem free the whole time I have been using it.

    6. Re:1Gb/sec for around $40/month. by Pikoro · · Score: 1

      No. It's 1Gb up / 1Gb down (best effort). No data caps. It's left up to the ISP. NTT provides the pipe, then you have your choice of ISPs who compete on price. The fiber line runs around $40/mo and then you tack your ISP fees onto that but changing ISPs is as simple as updating the username/password in the modem. FLETS is an awesome system and I really wish they would do something like that in the USA. Let the government own the pipe and pay for it with taxes. Then let anyone start up their own ISP.

      --
      "Freedom in the USA is not the ability to do what you want. It is the ability to stop others from doing what THEY want"
    7. Re:1Gb/sec for around $40/month. by Zanadou · · Score: 1

      Goddamn it, I pay 50$ per month for a shitty 12 Mbit ADSL connection. No data caps though.
      I hate living in a first world country that for all intents and purposes is actually a third world one.

      Australian Detected_

  2. America's not so behind after all! by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 4, Funny

    And they say America is falling behind when it comes to internet access. But Verizon is also phasing out DSL; getting a new DSL subscription these days is virtually impossible (speaking from experience, even if you just cancelled a month ago and want to resubscribe, suddenly it is "not available in your area"). In fact, Verizon is probably /ahead/ of the curve since they seem to be doing the same with FIOS. Oddly, they seem to be pushing Verizon wireless as the alternative instead of gigabit speeds but that's probably only because I haven't looked hard enough on their website, right?

    1. Re:America's not so behind after all! by Zocalo · · Score: 1
      Depending on which state you are in there might be a reason for that, and it's nothing to do with being on the cutting edge of broadband delivery; Verizon is apparently selling their landline business to Frontier Communications in 14 states. From the linked article:

      The deal includes Verizon's wireline assets in Arizona, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin as well as some assets in California.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    2. Re:America's not so behind after all! by ashshy · · Score: 1

      That was in 2009. More recently, Frontier also bought Verizon's landline operations in Texas, Florida, and the rest of California. That deal is still pending. http://www.fool.com/investing/...

      --
      #o#
      O Moo.
    3. Re: America's not so behind after all! by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 1

      I assure you, AT&T is right behind them. They did a trial run up in the SNET region maybe a year or so ago to determine the process and identify problem areas.

    4. Re: America's not so behind after all! by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 1

      I don't think 'Murica was the target for the DirecTV acquisition. Included, yes, but not sure about the primary target.

      We have that neighboring country to the South you see. . . . .

    5. Re:America's not so behind after all! by Zocalo · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the clarification - I'm actually in Europe, but read something about it on a mailing list and seeing OP mention Verizon jogged my memory. Makes sense if OP is in one of the areas impacted by the pending deal that they'd be trying to upsell their wireless biz and downplay their hopefully soon to be unloaded fixed line assets though. No point signing up new customers only to hand them off to Frontier if you can convince them that they'd be better off with the wireless service and hopefully keep them around to be milked

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    6. Re:America's not so behind after all! by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "Thanks for the clarification - I'm actually in Europe, but read something about it on a mailing list ..."

      A mailing list? How old are you, gramps?

    7. Re:America's not so behind after all! by Binestar · · Score: 1

      A mailing list? How old are you, gramps?

      Judging by his Slashdot User Number, about 3 times older than you.

      --
      Do you Gentoo!?
  3. BT is doing the opposite of this in the UK by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 4, Informative

    As of a couple of months ago at least, BT will refuse to sell you fibre to the premises if you have access to ADSL.

    My flat is literally 40 feet away from a fibre and even Ethernet enabled street box, and I can't get fibre.

    --

    -WolfWithoutAClause

    "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    1. Re:BT is doing the opposite of this in the UK by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      He said they would refuse him fiber to the premisis not fiber to the cabinet.

      BT won't sell you FTTPoD (fiber to the premisis on demand) if you live in a flat. Probablly because of the internal wiring complications you mention.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    2. Re:BT is doing the opposite of this in the UK by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      The only time (other than due to capacity issues) BT will insist on ADSL over fibre is when there isn't an up to date survey for your property - such as in the case of a brand new building.

      I had to place an order for a phone line and ADSL with my ISP and wait for it to be activated before the survey (done during the process) was updated on the Open Reach database and fibre suddenly became available. My ISP was fine about upgrading my internet from ADSL to fibre just a week into my 12 month ADSL contract with no charges.

      ADSL is always offered because its pretty much ubiquitous these days - you have to be fairly way out in the sticks for it not to apply, so if you are in a postcode region which offers ADSL then ISPs can offer it without an up to date survey. Fibre however requires an up to date survey - insist your ISP request one to be done if you think you should have access to fibre.

    3. Re:BT is doing the opposite of this in the UK by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      BT's goal is to milk their existing copper network as much as possible before being forced to upgrade it by the government. There is very little competition, and in many areas none at all. Zero incentive to upgrade the network if they can force you to simply pay the same amount for a shitty copper line and ADSL.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:BT is doing the opposite of this in the UK by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 1

      Really? As in real fibre, not BTInfinity, which is still just ADSL over the significantly shorter distance to the cabinet in the road???

      I mean, sure they'll upgrade you to ADSL to the cabinet, no problem, which they call 'fibre', but it's really still ADSL going into your property as opposed to fibre where they actually have a real fibre entering your property.

      Real fibre is several hundred megabits or more, whereas BTInfinity caps out at ~75 Mbps, more normally you'll actually get ~55 Mbps.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    5. Re:BT is doing the opposite of this in the UK by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and you can't get it to a block of flats why exactly????

      One word: monopoly.

      Don't forget blocks of flats can actually use fibre; they can connect the flats with Ethernet quite easily; because the flats are close together, and they can reduce the infrastructure costs when doing that.

      Otherwise you have lots of ADSL's with boxes, each individually powered, at each end of each wire, wasting energy, with BT charging a standing charge on each one, and the line is going at 1/10 the speed.

      Anyway, there's was a 'stop sell' even on non blocks of flats at least until July, I haven't checked in the last few weeks, they may well have renewed it.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
  4. $40/mo is pretty nice by The-Ixian · · Score: 2

    I am paying CenturyLink $150/mo for synchronous 1Gbps (non-bundled) and I thought that was a pretty good deal.

    I know that DSL gets a bad rap but I was using 60Mbps VDSL before I switched to the 1Gbps service which, I believe, uses G.fast DSL to get from the demark to my apt... so take that cable!

    --
    My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    1. Re:$40/mo is pretty nice by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I am paying CenturyLink $150/mo for synchronous 1Gbps (non-bundled) and I thought that was a pretty good deal.

      As well as being more than 3x as expensive, it's not called "Giga Mansion Smart Type". Japanese products have the best names.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:$40/mo is pretty nice by nanoflower · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I wouldn't complain about 70Mbps if that came without a monthly bandwidth cap. I'm paying $145 (with all taxes and fees included) for the voice/TV/Internet triple play and get about 90Mb/s up and 12Mb/s down but I'm limited to 300GB/month unless I want to pay that $10/50GB overage charge. The extra speed doesn't do much good if you can't use it because you hit the 300GB limit before the month was over.

  5. What Aussies would give for 1Gbps!!! by BringMyShuttle · · Score: 2

    Sad how Japan's yesterday is Australia's future:

    Right now Australia's Internet is pathetically slow by first world standards - though competitive by third world standards.... YAY! Internet speeds: Australia ranks 44th, study cites direction of NBN as part of problem http://www.abc.net.au/news/201...

    The Liberals are promising the NBN will deliver at least 25Mbps to most household... YAWN! The Coalition’s rebooted NBN plan proposes to use a mix of technologies, including Telstra’s copper network and cable networks, to deliver minimum broadband download speeds of 25Mbps to 90 per cent of households and businesses by 2020. http://www.businessspectator.c...

    And the best you can get if you pay through the nose is 100Mbps? WHAT A JOKE! http://www.whistleout.com.au/B...
    http://www.crikey.com.au/2014/...

  6. Meanwhile in Germany, by jaklode · · Score: 1

    we are still waiting for VDSL to roll out more.

  7. Re:AT&T.... by Osgeld · · Score: 3, Insightful

    and considering its not an option for 80% of the country they are glad to sign you up for 3mbs service for only 57.99 + taxes and fees making it damn near 100 bucks a month

    fuck the ISPs in the USA they all SUCK

  8. Probably not bad by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

    Honestly Japan being much more condensed it probably makes sense. In the US we're too spread out to abandon certain technologies yet. My parents still have (3Mbps) DLS as their only option. I have a brother who doesn't even have that. He uses he cell phone for all his internet browsing occasionally tethering it to a desktop.

    I live in a town - a small town (population ~8,000), but still a town, and we have good cable modem speeds but only the newest neighborhoods have fiber available (the local telecom company has installed it in new developments since 2010 or so, but hasn't retrofitted any older subdivisions).

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    1. Re:Probably not bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Honestly Japan being much more condensed it probably makes sense. In the US we're too spread out to abandon certain technologies yet.

      I see this argument a lot. If it were true then those technologies would be available in the parts of the US that are densely populated.
      No, the big problem is oligopolies and the corrupt politicians that gives them a subsidized and protected market instead of splitting them up to promote competition.

    2. Re:Probably not bad by StayFrosty · · Score: 1

      I don't buy the population density argument if you are in a town or city of any size. I live in a city with a population of 100,000, but the best I can get is 60mbps down and a paltry 5mbps up. All the neighboring communities (1000-6000 people) have ftth from various local providers offering up to gigabit speeds who, for unknown reasons, can't seem to ever get fiber run here.

      If you aren't living in a town or city, hopefully ADSL is available but don't hold your breath.

      --
      "Frequently wrong, never in doubt."
    3. Re:Probably not bad by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's a load of crap. Some of the poorest served areas in the country are major metropolitan areas, including the major cities in the Northeast corridor.

      Internet access speed in the U.S. does not correspond with population density, at all. It matters entirely whether you're in one of the few lucky areas that has Google or other fiber access. In fact, if you happen to live in a small town that put in municipal fiber, you likely have far better internet access than the big city an hour down the road.

    4. Re:Probably not bad by known_coward_69 · · Score: 1

      when did japan start to get internet back in the 90's? US was first with consumer internet and that means we will be last with better tech because the carriers have to depreciate all the equipment they originally bought. just like other countries were the first with texting and 3G data, the US was first with a mass LTE deployment

    5. Re:Probably not bad by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Anything from the 90's has already been replaced or has long been fully depreciated. The simple fact is the telephone operators resisted at first and then largely failed to be competitive in the consumer access space.

      This allowed the content guys "cable" to get in they game. They got everything to the "good enough" stage for major market segments, choked out the competitive offerings (the telcos and mom and pop ISPs) and have stagnated ever since. Mainly because they needed time to get their IP-VOD offerings up to industry par so they can protect their content distribution middle man revenue bonanza before allowing "cord-cutting" to be totally viable for most. Now that digital cable offers most of the on demand flexibility and DVR functions people seem to want they can lever their existing content agreements to ensure that stays the best deal. They don't have to worry about NFLX eating their lunch.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    6. Re:Probably not bad by chilenexus · · Score: 1

      DSL has a range limit of about 12,500 feet from the central office, or from the vault location they run fiber to from the CO, and a preference to be under 10,000 feet. Considering the large price for the equipment to support it from the telco side, they're not going to put that equipment in if there's only 4-6 customers within range and it'll take 20+ years at that rate to pay off that equipment. At best they'll get that equipment as a hand-me-down when it's been ripped out of someplace else that has been upgraded 2-3 steps higher if the telco is feeling generous, and if the more expensive equipment isn't cheaper to maintain. Population density does matter, in that the company doesn't want to lay out the cash to serve areas that will take a long time to pay them back their investment - unless there's good publicity for them rolled in with it, too.

    7. Re:Probably not bad by babybird · · Score: 1

      This is very true. I used to live in a small western city (OK, like 80,000 population) in Colorado where the only broadband options for residential consumers were CenturyLink and Comcast. Comcast said they couldn't offer gigabit internet to the city because it wasn't feasible. So the citizens put up a ballot initiative to install municipal fiber with gigabit speeds for something like $50 or $80/mo., and when the ballot initiative passed, low and behold it didn't take but 2 months for Comcast to change its tune and say they'd be offering 2.4Gb service for about $10/mo. more than their current maximum 105Mb service, but only within the city and only in areas where the new municipal fiber was going to be available. To everyone else, either the former maximum or no service at all.

      In fact where I was living, my neighbor directly connecting to the back side of my lot could get that 105Mb service from Comcast, but I, on the other side of the property line could get nothing at all. Had I not decided to move to Arizona around that time, I'd have made a deal with my backyard neighbor to pay for internet service for him if he'd allow me to string a CAT5 cable out his back door to my back door.

      For comparison purposes, the only broadband available at my house was through CenturyLink, and with no Comcast competing with them, the most I could get from them was 1.5Mbit/892Kbit, while my backyard neighbor could get 100Mb from CenturyLink and connected to the same demark because we were in the same neighborhood and the next nearest dmark was 2 miles away (our neighborhood was in the middle of the country, just outside the city).

      The collusion, corruption, and extortion rampant throughout ISPs in the U.S. is way beyond the pale. There is zero excuse for any of it. Gotta love unbridled crapitalism I guess!

      --
      Keith D.
    8. Re:Probably not bad by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 1

      Lucky you. I live in a city that, with the entire metro counted, is over a million people. Yet my apartment building has 30+ year old wiring, and AT&T long ago cemented their illegal exclusivity contract by physically going into each cable box and destroying all the cable inside of them. Now the management refuses to pay for anyone to re-wire it all, so we're stuck with ADSL. I've seen a max of 26 down and 180K up. When I work from home, and need to do a voip conference call, we can either have some torrents going OR be streaming a single Netflix; anything more and the voip starts to cut out. Even more frustrating is that just across the street is real fiber...60-100 down and 40+ up. But it's technically in another city...and the "old boy" politics in Tulsa will keep it that way for all eternity.

  9. First World Internet by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Must be nice to live in a country with first-world internet service. There is absolutely no core reason, other than sheer monopolistic greed, for why we can't have internet of this quality in major US metropolitan areas.

    1. Re:First World Internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      hey, in this country we do things by capitalism.

      the market selects the best, most efficient solution, every time.

      and since by definition, the best solution is what the market selects, we
      are perfect. absolutely perfect.

      so stop second guessing the market and take your socialist whining
      somewhere else

    2. Re:First World Internet by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      hey, in this country we do things by capitalism.

      the market selects the best, most efficient solution, every time.

      and since by definition, the best solution is what the market selects, we
      are perfect. absolutely perfect.

      so stop second guessing the market and take your socialist whining
      somewhere else

      I couldn't have said it better.

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    3. Re:First World Internet by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      corporate fascism isn't capitalism

  10. In France by dujardin · · Score: 2

    Orange is providing 500/250 but is progressively upgrading to 1 gig download, for €46/month. Coverage is not 100%, only 4M of a total of 34M in the country. Other operators give 1 gig (Iliad, Bouygues) but they cover far less places. NC/SFR is also offering 800 Mbit download on mixed fiber/cable (Docsis), again only on a few territories. Orange is actually encouraging switching to Fiber, pictures of telecom hubs show how much less real estate it takes compared to copper. A current experiment runs in Palaiseau to fully dismise the copper network.

  11. ADSL is for apps by tepples · · Score: 2

    For a lot of the world population, ADSL is the last mile through which apps on tablets connect to the Internet. It might be slower than fiber, but it's still a lot faster than cellular. If you try to sustain a download through an entire cap period, cellular is on average not much faster than 14.4 dial-up.*

    * 5 GB/mo = 40000000 kbit/mo * 1 mo/30 days * 1 day/86400 s = about 15 kbps

    1. Re:ADSL is for apps by tepples · · Score: 1

      Volume over time is a measure of speed. 5 GB/mo is a speed.

    2. Re: ADSL is for apps by tepples · · Score: 1

      The latency to return an entire file is roughly the latency to return the first byte plus the length of the file divided by throughput. Therefore, throughput contributes to the latency measurement.

    3. Re:ADSL is for apps by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

      GPON gear is cheaper than G.max. Fibre is cheaper than copper to lay.

      The difference is that western telcos can pretty much charge the entire cost of equipment to go on the end of existing copper up front, whilst laying fibre needs to be amortised over a 20 year period. Because they're focussed on the next 3 months, this screws up any long-term planning objectives traditional telcos may have had.

  12. Frontier FiOS by tepples · · Score: 1

    Here in Indiana, Frontier continues to offer FiOS service under license from Verizon.

  13. Giga Mansion Smart Type by Quirkz · · Score: 2

    Giga Mansion Smart Type - I swear, Japan has the best names for everything. It's always a little stiff, comes off as just made up enough that maybe it's a joke, and maybe it was composed by a robot, but then you can't stop saying it to yourself over and over as if there's a code to be cracked there, where if you can just get it, it'll actually make sense.

    1. Re:Giga Mansion Smart Type by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 2

      The trouble is mostly in the translation. Japanese doesn't easily match up 1-for-1 with western languages when you're focused on the words. I'm not sure what the state of concept based translation software is but translation web services use the former.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    2. Re:Giga Mansion Smart Type by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Actually you're proving my point. "Manshon" to "mansion" is not a proper translation of the concept. The western world's notion of "mansion" is not a large apartment house but an over-sized, typically opulent single family dwelling. The same is true for those odd "decorator" words that are commonly attached in Japanese (mostly marketing material). The Japanese usage is meant to emphasis that it is the appropriate choice for an apartment house (manshon) as opposed to a family dwelling (famiri).

      Accordingly a concept translation might be something like: "Hikari Next Generation Giga for apartment houses" and "Hikari Next Generation Giga for homes."

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    3. Re:Giga Mansion Smart Type by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 1

      To make it utter perfection the name should be "Giga Kitten Mansion Smart Robot Type"

    4. Re:Giga Mansion Smart Type by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 1

      Loan words often change in meaning from what the word in the original language meant. Attend, in english, means "to be present at" or "deal with". In French, it's a form of the verb for "to wait" (the French use the verb "assister" for the english meaning of attend). Another fun one is "Arbeit", which in German is the word for work, but in Japanese and Korean, it specifically means "part time job".

  14. Re:AT&T.... by seven+of+five · · Score: 1

    Amen to that brother.... 6Mbps here for $40 a month AT&T... in the hardscrabble backwater called Chicago, I can't get FIOS, can't get the good U-verse... 4G, AT&T and Comcast is it :(

  15. Re:Why? by jones_supa · · Score: 1

    Ask those guys who buy 32GB RAM for a gaming or video editing machine... if some people have extra money, they will buy the bigger numbers.

  16. Re:Why? by The-Ixian · · Score: 2

    what does your average person need with that kind of connection?

    For streaming HD content.

    I get it that network border peering agreements have a lot to do with things, but it seems as though even with a 50+Mbps Internet connection, I was still encountering reduced performance at times.

    Since going to Gigabit, I have not had any issues at all.

    I don't utilize most of the bandwidth personally, but I do carve out a DMZ for public WIFI access that my neighbors can use (I live in an apartment building).

    --
    My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
  17. Re:AT&T.... by Cimexus · · Score: 1

    Ah, but Uverse *IS* DSL - ADSL2+ or VDSL to be precise. In any other country it would be advertised as such, but US telcos seem to love to sell services with weird names in order to obfuscate what technology is actually being used to deliver them...

  18. I moved and had to switch to Cox Cable Modem by frog_strat · · Score: 1

    I was on ATT DSL. Cox makes DSL look heavenly. Cox works ok for a while but periodically just stops for about a minute. Now my wife understands my efforts to try to avoid cable modem. They gave everyone a supposed bump up from 5mb to 15. I say keep the 10mb and just give me a DSL level reliable connection.

  19. in the UK it would be fibre by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

    In the UK openreach VDSL is called "fibre". Here it is called "superfast fibre". As if "up to" 80mbit DSL is superfast.

    http://www.superfast-openreach...

    And it's common to do this in some other places in Europe.

    It makes AT&T's fibs about their service look like small potatoes.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:in the UK it would be fibre by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      In the UK openreach VDSL is called "fibre". Here it is called "superfast fibre".

      To be fair, it sounds as if they are running more fibre, just not necessarily all the way to your home.

    2. Re:in the UK it would be fibre by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

      "To be fair, it sounds as if they are running more fibre"

      They've been running fibre in distribution for decades. This is fibre to the street cabinets.

      Unfortunately the circuit is a bastard hybrid of fibre to a street DSLAM coupled with a voice pair back to the central office. There's no good reason why DSLAM/concentrators couldn't have been used, making the entire copper loop the distance of the cabnet to the customer premises.

      As it is, copper loop problems between the cabinet and the central office can seriously screw up VDSL delivery and debugging them takes _months_ (personal experience with a wet trunk run back to the CO)

  20. Re:Why? by chilenexus · · Score: 1

    You're going to find this hard to believe, but there are residences who have more than one person using the internet at a time. If you've got 2 roommates, will your 3Mbps connection be any good if someone else is using Netflix, Hulu, or YouTube (lol - fairly demanding?) at the same time?

    Sure, your download only took 20 minutes - but that's 20 minutes that you can't be doing much of anything else over the internet. Is that download actively holding your attention? Or perhaps it's time to pick up a book while your connection is tied up.

    Another point being that people don't want to have to "make do" with a connection they are paying more for than most of the rest of the world, and getting at best half of the speed.

  21. Re:AT&T.... by Osgeld · · Score: 1

    I have crapcast its 69.99 a month. add in taxes and fees and its 96 a month bull

  22. We found the CenturyLink fanboi! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And, he has mod points.

    Internet access in Seattle sucks, and attacking its victims shows just how bad it is. I f***ing hate my dial-up. I had faster access in Alabama seventeen years ago than I now have in Seattle. Plus, I'm paying $3,200 per month for a two bedroom place with no AC that is falling apart. There's a reason so many young developers move to Seattle then quit their jobs so quickly and flee.

    1. Re:We found the CenturyLink fanboi! by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      OK, where is the fanboy in question? All I saw in the post to which you're responding is damnation with faint praise ("is still working on phasing in ADSL", "They've almost got service to my entire block", It only took them fifteen years since they started", etc.).

  23. Re:10/10 Mbit/sec - 16 EUR by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

    So, from the "EUR", we can identify "here", for both of those posts, as "some Eurozone country".

    Could somebody be so kind as to indicate which particular Eurozone country/countries are being referred to here?

  24. Re:Why? by dujardin · · Score: 1

    I agree that 1 Gbps is probably overkill. In fact, I'm myself only on a 200Mbit contract (at 41€/month) and I'm happy though I just use 100Mb/s of it, even with five users and we're quite heavy on downloads. The thing is that the choice is between a slow ADSL (2 Mb/s due to technology limits), and super-fast fiber. I think that current usages require around 10-20 Mb/s for a nice experience, and that it would probably make more sense as a collectivity to upgrade networks by bringing the fiber closer to the homes, but still using the copper termination for the last 10 to 1000 meters (think FFTC/FTTB/whatever). Commercial interplays and regulations result in what we see now, competing companies focusing all on the same high-density areas which enjoy several very-high speed deployments, very progressive FTTH deployment because it takes half a day for two men to connect a house with the FTTH relay down the street (think there remain around 30M houses), and lots of people still hanging behind more than 4km of wire. It semt to me that the UK had chosen the progressive path, providing fast VDSL to nearly the whole country in just a few years. If it's not working well there either, it's quite sad.

  25. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  26. Re:ADSL is for cows. by sims+2 · · Score: 1

    Yes adsl is for cows http://www.flexit.co.uk/case_s... Maybe someday fiber will be for humans.

    --
    Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
  27. Re:Why? by sims+2 · · Score: 1

    On a single verizon lte connection ive run 2 netflix streams and youtube without issue it often runs in the 20mbps range yet it has trouble smoothly streaming a single twitch stream.

    --
    Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
  28. Re:Why? by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

    Don't get me wrong, like anyone I'd love a fiber connection for $50 a month but what does your average person need with that kind of connection?

    Yesterday my son fired up the PS4 to play some silly game or other and the damn thing needed an update -- 5Gbytes!

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video