Cable Industry Exploring Adding Symmetrical Broadband Speeds to Boost Uploads

Phillip Dampier February 29, 2016 Broadband Speed, Competition, Consumer News 1 Comment
The original DOCSIS 3.1 standard offers up to 10/1Gbps speeds. Adding "full duplex" technology could boost that upstream speed as high as 10Gbps.

The original DOCSIS 3.1 standard offers up to 10/1Gbps speeds. Adding “full duplex” technology could boost that upstream speed as high as 10Gbps.

The cable industry is seeking to confront one of the strongest selling points of fiber broadband – identical upload and download speeds – by enhancing the DOCSIS 3.1 standard to support “full duplex” technology.

Since inception, cable broadband has been designed to deliver asymmetrical speeds, with priority given to download speeds. To this day, cable systems typically offer customers only a fraction of those fast download speeds for uploads. Cable broadband engineers originally assumed that since the majority of customer broadband usage would be on the download side, less bandwidth was needed for upstream activity. During the late 1990s, it was not uncommon to receive 6-10Mbps of download speed, while being offered just 384kbps for uploads. Today, 1-5Mbps is more typical for entry-level broadband upload speed, but that may no longer be sufficient.

The ongoing buzz for fiber broadband has called out this speed disparity. Most fiber to the home networks offer identical upload and download speeds, which can be as fast as 1,000Mbps or in some cases even faster. That marketing advantage may be costing some cable companies broadband customers. CableLabs, the engineering association of the cable industry, has been tasked with closing that gap and this week announced symmetrical speeds using the newest DOCSIS 3.1 specification are on the fast track and a release schedule could be announced as early as mid-2016.

Dan Rice, CableLabs’s senior vice president of R&D, told Multichannel News “full duplex” will be an extension of DOCSIS 3.1, not a replacement, which guarantees a faster rollout of the enhancement.

The delivery of symmetrical Internet speeds will likely require some cable operators to make hardware changes to their infrastructure. Key to that may be ridding cable plant of multiple amplifiers and filters installed between the cable company’s nearest fiber node and the customer’s home. As cable operators push more reliable fiber further out into their networks, reducing the amount of coaxial copper cable in use, network advancements become easier and less costly.

Whether cable companies will use the enhanced upstream broadband capacity to match their download speeds or just moderately improve them isn’t known. The completion of the enhanced specification will likely give engineers and accountants at each cable company a better idea of how much upload bang for the buck makes the most sense.

Oregon Lawmakers Write Loophole for Google Fiber That Will Save Comcast Millions Instead

Phillip Dampier February 29, 2016 Comcast/Xfinity, Competition, Consumer News, Google Fiber & Wireless, Public Policy & Gov't Comments Off on Oregon Lawmakers Write Loophole for Google Fiber That Will Save Comcast Millions Instead

bank_error_in_your_favorFrom the Department of Unintended Consequences, Comcast will likely be the biggest benefactor of a new Oregon law intended to attract Google Fiber to Portland.

The Oregon Legislature rewrote the state’s tax laws after learning Google objected to Oregon’s concept of “central assessment,” which calculates local property taxes partly on the value of a company’s brand. The tax policy proved so contentious, Comcast spent years fighting the tax before ultimately losing its appeal before the Oregon Supreme Court in 2014. After two years of lobbying Google to come to Portland, nothing short of a repeal or exemption of this tax policy was likely to get the search engine giant to reconsider.

Comcast officials must not have believed their luck when state lawmakers resolved the tax problem for them, all because of efforts to woo Google back to the state. Legislators proposed a tax exemption for companies that agreed to invest in gigabit speed broadband and deliver it to the majority of the state’s broadband customers. The new law was a clear invitation to Google to begin wiring the state for fiber, but Comcast has crashed the party instead.

Comcast officials argue their own new “Gigabit Pro” service qualifies the cable company for the same tax exemptions Oregon intended Google to receive, despite the fact its 2-gigabit offering costs a fortune and is unlikely to attract more than a fraction of Comcast customers.

gigabit proOregon lawmakers wrote a law seeking to assure equal access by prohibiting companies from targeting only affluent neighborhoods for fiber upgrades, while forgetting to consider the cost of the service itself. Gigabit Pro will never feature prominently in Portland’s challenged neighborhoods at a cost of $4,600 for service during the first year.

Lawmakers now face the wrath of several local tax authorities that report they’ll lose tens of millions in tax revenue if Comcast successfully applies for an exemption. Staff members of the Oregon Public Utility Commission believes Comcast ultimately will qualify for that exemption, even if only a few customers pay Comcast’s asking price for gigabit service.

“If the application is approved, schools, libraries and local governments across the state would receive significantly less revenue,” wrote Mary Beth Henry, director of Portland’s Office of Community Technology, in a letter to state regulators. “This application was not the kind anticipated by the Legislature.”

Portland officials argue Comcast is violating the spirit of the new broadly written law by pricing its fiber service at $300 a month, far out of reach of most households. Google Fiber typically charges $70 for its gigabit service.

Critics of the legislature contend this isn’t the first instance of the Oregon body making a mess of things. In addition to not bothering to define what qualifies as “affordable” Internet, how much companies had to spend to offer it, or how many customers had to actually sign up for the service, language in the original bill accidentally left Google Fiber off the exemption list.

Newest Google Fiber Cities Rely on Pre-Existing Fiber Networks; Is Google Cost-Cutting?

google fiberTwo of Google Fiber’s newest fiber cities will only get the gigabit fiber-to-the-home service because someone else already laid the fiber.

In the last week, residents of San Francisco and Huntsville, Ala. were told they were next in line for Google Fiber service. But instead of proposing to build a citywide fiber network for all residents, Google will rely almost entirely on pre-existing fiber networks they will use to reach customers.

In San Francisco, only an unspecified portion of the metro area will qualify for Google Fiber, namely certain apartments, condos, and subsidized housing units already served by a fiber optic connection. Single family homes and apartments not currently connected to fiber may never qualify for Google’s service.

A Google Fiber executive seemed to signal Google may be taking a harder look at the cost of building fiber service, and future expansion may rely on renting space on someone else’s cable.

“To date, we’ve focused mostly on building fiber-optic networks from scratch,” said Michael Slinger, Google Fiber’s business operations director. “Now, as Google Fiber grows, we’re looking for more ways to serve cities of different shapes and sizes.”

That suddenly makes existing municipal and private dark fiber networks very attractive and in demand. Many municipalities have underused institutional fiber networks that serve anchor institutions, public safety, and government offices. Public access is often limited to non-existent. The prospect of Google paying to use those networks to reach more customers may prove attractive to cash-strapped cities. Private fiber overbuilders and those with excess capacity may also find a new revenue stream renting space to the search engine giant. In Huntsville, Google will have non-exclusive access to the city’s publicly owned fiber network. Any competitor could technically offer their services over the same network.

Competitors and analysts seemed ready to dismiss Google’s latest expansion announcements. Diffusion Group analyst Joel Espelien told the San Jose Mercury News Google Fiber’s plans to wire affordable housing in San Francisco was nothing more than “pure PR.” He’s unimpressed with Google Fiber generally, dismissing it as “Costco Internet,” delivering bulk sized connections at prices most consumers are unaccustomed to paying for Internet access.

“It’s both cheap and it isn’t cheap,” Espelien said. “It kind of depends on your point of view.”

Google’s reasons to offer service to only a few locations in San Francisco are clearly pegged to the costs of wiring the entire city.

“We considered a number of factors, including the city’s rolling hills, miles of coastline, and historic neighborhoods,” Google said in a blog post. All of those features that tourists love to see are also expensive because of costly engineering efforts to hide the cables from view to stay within zoning regulations.

Sanders, Warren Raise Doubts About Charter-Time Warner Cable-Bright House Merger

Sens. Sanders and Warren

Sens. Sanders and Warren

Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Bernie Sanders (Ind.-Vt.) has expressed serious doubts about the claimed consumer benefits of a multi-billion dollar cable company merger between Charter Communications, Time Warner Cable, and Bright House Networks.

In a joint letter with Sens. Al Franken (D-Minn.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Sanders told FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and Attorney General Loretta Lynch the deal would create a “nationwide broadband duopoly, with New Charter and Comcast largely in control of the essential wires that connect most Americans to how we commonly communicate and conduct commerce in the 21st century.”

The senators explained that “broadband service is not a luxury; it is an economic and social necessity for consumers and businesses.”

The five Democrats believe the merger could have negative effects on consumer choice, competition, and innovation in broadband and online video. With Comcast and New Charter controlling at least two-thirds of the high-speed broadband lines in the country, Sanders and his colleagues are concerned this will allow Comcast and New Charter to raise rates while reducing broadband innovation, allowing the United States to fall even further behind other industrialized nations with superior broadband.

The senators asked the Department of Justice and the FCC to carefully evaluate how the proposed deal could impact the marketplace.

“New Charter must not only prove that this deal would not harm consumers, but they must also demonstrate that it would actually benefit them and promote the public interest,” the senators argued.

This week, New Jersey regulators approved the merger transaction in that state, leaving California as the last major challenge for Charter executives. Federal regulators are not expected to rule on the deal until the spring or summer.

Unlimitedville: Affordable Unlimited Wireless Broadband Service via Sprint

unlimitedvilleFinding affordable wireless Internet access that isn’t speed throttled or usage capped is becoming rare, but Stop the Cap! has been exploring a provider that offers both.

Unlimitedville is the latest authorized reseller of Sprint that has managed to get permission to market an unlimited LTE 4G wireless data plan that comes without speed throttles. The service is priced at $42.99 a month (not including certain minor fees and surcharges) and includes a 30-day free trial to test the service. A $50 setup fee includes a mobile hotspot device (typically a Netgear Zing or Pocket Wifi) that is yours to keep once you commit to the required 2-year contract (after the free trial).

Customers we have communicated with give the service a universal thumbs-up for not limiting or throttling usage. Customers in suburban and semi-rural areas near highways and interstates report the best speeds from relatively uncongested Sprint cell towers. Those in very rural areas may have a lot of trouble finding Sprint service available, so potential customers should review Sprint’s coverage map carefully for data service coverage before considering Unlimitedville.

There are some peculiarities about doing business with this reseller, however.

First, Unlimitedville acts as a front line sales agent, but accounts are apparently provisioned by an another company named Impact Wireless, a “master agent” for Sprint. After service is established, all future communications, support and billing take place directly with Sprint.

sprint zingGetting service established is the first minor hurdle. Because the contract plan is intended for business use, customers will need to list a company name on the enrollment form. It is acceptable to consider yourself a consultant or use your current profession if you intend to use the service at anytime/for any reason for work or while travelling for work. No formal business registration is required. Some customers sign up using their last name, as in “Smith Consulting.” You do have to give them your Social Security number or business Taxpayer ID Number to run the usual required credit check. Most applicants are easily approved within 72 hours and Sprint will then call to help arrange for service. If you are not approved, you can agree to pay an upfront deposit and after 12 on-time monthly payments, the deposit will be returned to your account.

Second, some customers have recently reported they’ve been surprised to discover their account activation came with membership in a free loyalty program for a certain home improvement retail chain. With the recent demise of Karma’s Neverstop plan, disconnecting customers are banging at the doors of Unlimitedville to get in. Evidently this overflow is also affecting Impact Wireless, which evidently has some limitations on how many new customers it can enroll itself over a certain period of time. As a result, they may be looking for other entry points available to them to get customers activated as quickly as possible. Customers should be ready to be flexible. Getting unlimited wireless data from anyone these days increasingly requires creativity.

As Unlimitedville gains more visibility, there are also questions about how long it will last given carriers’ dislike of resellers that attract a lot of heavy users. The service has been around at least as long as Karma and is still welcoming new clients, so it is hard to say. It will probably last longer if customers respect the wireless network that powers it was not built to sustain customers running up a terabyte of usage a month. Being a responsible user of a limited resource is likely to help keep these kinds of unlimited services viable, an important consideration for customers who do not have the luxury of going to another provider if Unlimitedville folds.

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

Your Account:

Stop the Cap!