While the big carriers continue to scale back fiber deployment,  the smaller independent telcos are pushing speeds higher over new fiber networks. How can this be done without the massive economies of  scale? It’s never been cheaper, and costs continue to decline. Consider the case of a rural telco with 9000 subscribers delivering 60/30 MBPS connections. That’s something we can only dream about here in AT&T’s Dallas-Fort Worth DSL ghetto.

At the end of 2009, Canby had brought Fiber to the Home-based services to about 1,000 homes-a major milestone given the fact that the ILEC has only 11, 000 access lines and 9,000 customers.

Since it pulled out its higher speed fiber products out of National Exchange Carrier Association (NECA) it has been able to offer a number of speed tiers under its Fiber Optic Zone (FOZ) brand, including on the high end a 60/30 Mbps service in addition to a 40/20 Mbps and 20/10 Mbps service tier. Alternatively, other telephone cooperatives are restricted to offering 3-5 Mbps broadband services.  Keith Galitz, Canby Telcom’s President, said that as it rolls out its GPON-based fiber network, its biggest challenge is keeping apace of bandwidth demand. “It was only a year and a half ago that we introduced 10 Mbps on our fiber network,” Galitz explained. “That’s how fast this thing is moving where the demand is there.” (Fierce Telecom)

I believe the small telco is the model for a better broadband future. With large protected territories, and laws written to squash competition, the large telcos and cable operators have no incentive to offer more bandwidth at a fair price. It’s not from lack of capital. It’s how the capital is used. The smaller independents tend to stay focused on their home markets instead of investing in acquisitions, wireless and pay TV.  They also tend to employ locals and are more responsive to local market needs. I’m not suggesting that we divide cities into a patchwork of small monopolies, but rather open the infrastructure to allow for small providers to enter urban markets as competitors.

Verizon has quietly scaled back its aggressive fiber deployment in favor of DSL over tired old twisty pair. The take rate for the company’s premium priced FiOS service has slowed. While I have not been able to find a break down by service, I’m certain the slowest products are pay TV and voice.

We have been repeatedly told that bigger pipes and direct fiber connections are impossible in America because of far flung population. Never mind the fact that the cost if installing a fiber or twisted pair loop to a residence are nearly identical. John Timmer of ARS Technica provides a current update contrasting fiber service in Hong Kong vs New York City. Both are extremely dense population centers. Both are outrageously expensive. Both have archaic laws regulating new construction and public utilities with plenty of red tape to slow the process.  I’ll even bet the New York city fathers will insist that Hong Kong’s infrastructure is more primitive and its government more corrupt. So why is it that the average Hong Kong resident has a 100MBPS direct fiber connection available at a price lower than Verizon’s cheapest DSL offering? And how can it be that a great many New Yorkers can’t even get FiOS at any price?

Hong Kong Broadband Network announced the initial results of its “Awesome Speed. For Everyone.” sales, which offer a symmetric 100Mbps fiber connection for the hefty price of US$13 a month. In the two months it has been offering it, customer growth has tripled compared to the earlier months of 2009. Clearly, the company has found it relatively easy to roll out or purchase fiber in Hong Kong’s dense urban environment, and is attempting to recoup its investment in infrastructure by attracting lots of people to its service using low prices.

To get half that download speed (and one-fifth the upload) with Verizon costs $140 a month, assuming you bundle it with local phone service. It also requires a one-year commitment, and Verizon has recently raised the early termination fees so that anyone quitting ahead of that year will now owe the company $360. These would suggest that the company plans on recouping its costs through fewer customers that pay far more. (ARS Technica)

My belief is that the Verizon suits do not see access as a serious business. The entire FiOS business model is based on selling subscribers a “triple play”. More consumers want access without overpriced VoIP service and pay TV. If you only want access, Verizon’s suits think DSL is all you deserve.  If we had real competition over the last mile (equal access to the copper infrastructure), Verizon would have to deploy fiber to have a shot at continuing to charge a premium price.

Here’s another lab measurement that will probably make it to the real world, but it does give us some idea of what is possible if the marketplace were competitive enough to motivate providers to offer more.

Verizon yesterday said it tested a fiber technology in its labs and a customer home that delivered 10 Gbps downstream over its FiOS network and 2.4 Gbps in upload speeds. The technology, called XG-PON, delivers insanely fast speeds and is part of Verizon’s efforts to make its $23 billion investment in fiber grow with the demand for better broadband.

If you read our blog in mid-November, you already knew about this, but we didn’t have details on the standard Verizon was using. The XG-PON standard won’t actually become official until mid-2010. The current Verizon technology is GPON which delivers 2.5 Gbps downstream and 1.2 Gbps upstream. Currently Verizon splits those speeds among about 30 homes. Brian Whitton, executive director of access technologies at Verizon, who originally told us about these tests, explained what people might do with such blazing web connections, which mostly involves better video technologies.

My guess is that we will be seeing Gigabit connections showing up in consumers homes at reasonable prices in the next couple of years. That will be terrific for those living in Japan, Korea, and some European countries.  As for the US, don;t look for much to change as long as our regulators belong to the duopoly.

No one is really sure what the limits of fiber optic capacity are.   One thing is certain: With a little investment there’s no scarcity of available bandwidth on existing infrastructure.

Alcatel-Lucent today said that scientists at Bell Labs have set an optical transmission record that could deliver data about 10 times faster than current undersea cables,  resulting in speeds of more than 100 Petabits per second.kilometer.  A petawhat? This translates to the equivalent of about 100 million Gigabits per second.kilometer or sending about 400 DVDs per second over 7,000 kilometers, roughly the distance between Paris and Chicago. (Gigaom)

One of the big costs in fiber deployment the need for a signal boost every 15 -19 miles. Researchers in Australia have just doubled that distance using new laser technology. This extended reach will benefit but urban and rural broadband customers by extending the reach in rural areas and reducing the number of CO’s needed in urban areas. Don’t care if you get a fiber connection? Fiber is still the most efficient and reliable back haul technology. Doubling it’s unsimplified distance may challenge microwave in cost with far greater reliability.

The researchers have developed a method to boost the distance that gigabit passive optical networks (GPON), like those used by Verizon’s FiOS network, to provide high bit rates over long distances. Lee says that the roughly 19 miles that GPON networks are capable of reaching now would still leave many rural locations in Victoria without coverage. He and his team have conducted experiments using a device called a Raman amplifier to send signals over 37 miles.

The amplifier is a powerful laser that is installed in the central office of a network provider and feeds the optical signal that carries information with energy as it heads out over fiber optic cables. The laser is able to increase the reach of the broadband signal by a factor of close to ten times.

In experiments, the team of researchers was able to build a mock system with a signal transmitter, simulated splitter, and a receiver at the other end. The experimental setup was able to transmit error free data at a speed of 2.5Gb/s over single mode fiber 37 miles long. (Daily Tech)

Incumbent carriers rejoice! That very same fiber you buried decades ago is a getting ready to handle the burden of your next expansion. If anyone wants to lay a new pipe to an under served area, fewer strands will get the job done. While the main cost of new fiber is the process on implementing it, this gain in raw pipe size for a single strand is a potential game changer for many carrier business models.

Researchers from Australia, Denmark, and China have combined efforts to show the feasibility of terabit-per-second Ethernet over fiber-optic cables. The solution involves a photonic chip that uses laser light for switching signals, and a form of the exotic material type, chalcogenide.

The groups’ combined efforts are documented in a paper in the February 16, 2009, issue of Optics Express, which details a demonstration of 640 Gbps networking and the extension of the same approach to terabit-per-second speeds. (See “Breakthrough switching speed with an all-optical chalcogenide glass chip: 640 Gbit/s Demultiplexing,” Leif Oxenløwe et al, Optics Express, Vol. 17, Issue 4.) (Ars Technica)

It’s likely the glass strand will continue to be the transmission medium of choice as its limits continue to blow by any competing technology. It’s time to get out the shovels and start digging!

While the big purveyors of connectivity continue to do the foot dragging tango instead of upgrading, more UK communities are home brewing their own broadband.  If you read Third Pipe often, it will be no new revelation that fiber is cheaper to install than any other public utility connection, and on par with twisted pair or coax.

A report on the state of broadband in the UK by the Communications Consumer Panel managed to map over 40 local broadband projects, many out in the sticks in rural areas where the likes of Virgin and BT are but legend and myth.

The projects run the gamut from schemes laying down fibre for just 30 homes, to more ambitious, elaborate community efforts planning to connect 550,000 homes.

The report’s author, Roger Darlington, noted he was surprised at the sheer number of do-it-yourself broadband projects, but noted the phenomenon “reflects a certain amount of frustration that people are not seeing super-fast broadband rolled out as fast as they would like”. In other words, people want super fast broadband… super fast. (The Inquirer)

Instead of marching on Washington with picks and shovels, perhaps we should all stay home and spend the money on networks we own and control, using the picks and shovels to build them. The only thing worse than surrendering control of our connectivity to a duopoly is surrendering it to beltway bureaucrats.

First let me state, I had not thought of this idea but it at first blush has merit. That is you the homeowner own your last mile to the internet. It has the interesting aside of possibly kick starting a real broadband expansion in this country. It is a fact that there is considerable capital available in small bundles to make this happen. –

In a forthcoming New America Foundation working paper, authors Tim Wu and Derek Slater propose an innovative way to drive broadband deployment: a model that encourages consumers to purchase and own the “last-mile” connection that runs into their home. By purchasing their own fiber optic connections, consumers would be able to connect to a variety of service providers. This model holds the potential for higher broadband speeds, greater competition, and lower Internet service prices.

The idea of customer-owned fiber may seem odd at first, but buying items like personal computers, answering machines or even telephones was also unheard of only a few decades ago. Home fiber could someday become a must-have technology.

A great idea? Well I would go for it if I could. But there are quite a few hurdles to consider:

• Right of Way. In any Outside Plant expansion, access is the big issue. It has to be negotiated and in many cases paid for. Now no single homeowner will tackle that the costs would be too high. So a consortium of homeowners with a third party COE outfit that does this would have to be arranged. Which kind of gets us back to a Telco like business model.
• Title. If you pay for it then you have a property right but in what form? The easiest is if your existing property belongs to a homeowners assoc then the HOA could hold title and your interest is represented in the HOA. But what about individuals? Tenants in common is most likely but there is the issue of several but separate liability. Don’t know many who would willing take on the liability for all as their own. A stock holding company might be another approach. How that is managed would have to be developed.
• Upgrades. Just like a HOA, a provision would have to be provided for special assessments if upgrades were required. If some turkey runs his backhoe thru your fiber you want that repaired and work the legal suits later.
• Liability. Not once it is in the ground and installed but during construction. The homeowners participation in the install would generally incur liability unless the contractor is carrying the proper insurance.

The details are what make this a tricky proposition. The multiplicity of events that have to occur to complete such projects is one reason ThirdPipe has generally advocated a municipal approach to such efforts. A political subdivision has the requisite resources, in house right of way specialists and staff to make these efforts possible. If you want to get fancy a municipal development corporation could be instituted to handle all the details in concert with the local political subdivisions. That corporation could then either through access fees, special assessments or a millage garner the funds necessary for the build out. Your title is acquired by your property holdings in the political subdivision.

The funny thing is do we care? At the rate things are going wireless will make much of this political and legal gerrymandering obsolete. The homeowner puts up an external antenna and subscribes to a service.That’s it. All said, all done.

Linky

If you’re planning to buy a home now may be a good time as the market may be at its bottom. Before you sign a contract, consider this: The broadband in your new neighborhood will be just as important as good schools, shopping and other amenities. My advice is shop where there is fiber to the home if at all possible. Next best bet is in a municipality planning fiber to home. Forget promises for the duopoly about future availability. The Telcos and the cable guys promised we’d all have fiber in place eight years ago.  Fiber will maximize the value of the home in the future.

In less than a decade, broadband has gone from a luxury to a must for many people, and for some of them, it’s started to influence their real-estate decisions. Homes that have broadband are winning out over more remote ones that don’t. Areas with better and faster broadband are becoming more desirable than ones with slower access.

Edward Redpath, a real estate broker in Hanover, N.H., said he has seen deals fall through once the buyer realizes a home doesn’t get broadband. Across the Connecticut River in Norwich, Vt., only the center of the village has cable.

“We have a lot of people that don’t go into the rural neighborhoods or consider the rural neighborhoods because they need the broadband,” Redpath said. “Our lifestyle demands speed.” (StarTribune.com)

Computerwold has a very intriguing article. The jest of it is businesses are encourging ‘casual telecommuting’ in an effort to support a reduction in commuting and drive down fuel prices. It is in companies interests to do so as they too consume fuel. –

A Reuters report today highlights organizations that are cutting back the number of days employees are required to physically show up at work because of soaring gas prices. Even employees who are required to be on-site in order to work, such as janitors, are being cut down to four-day workweeks to save gas. White collar workers, of course, are being allowed, encouraged or forced to stay home once a week or more often and telecommute.

One thing leads to another. High gas prices prompt employers (including the federal government) to allow employees to work from home once a week. Once that’s accepted culturally, an elephant appears in the boardroom: If it’s OK once a week, why isn’t it OK five times a week? (This is what happened with “casual Friday” — its once-a-week acceptance lead to the current trend of casual wear every day.) Once telecommuting is accepted, “extreme telecommuting” — working from the Bahamas or Paris or an internet-connected shack on the Australian Outback — becomes acceptable, too. After all, once you’re out of the office and connecting to the company over the Internet, it doesn’t really matter where you are, does it?

“… it doesn’t really matter where you are, does it?”, well yes it does unfortunately. That is if you are going to telecommute then you need a broadband connection on a fairly regular basis. Which is the rub. Say my company said I only had to show up for a video conference once a week the rest done via telecommute. To pull that off I have to be located in cities providing the service. For example here is a map of FIOS deployment.. Were I to want to be in Denver I would be out of luck.

The point? If We the American People want to put a stake thru the hearts of the middle east then we need to complete a transcontinental broadband system. We did it with the railroads in the 1800’s, the phone system in the 1900’s. It is time to do the same in the 2100’s. Till we have the top 500 metro markets covered in broadband and wireless access nearly everywhere we will not achieve the dream of ‘extreme telecommuting’ and deliver a death blow to both high gas prices and middle east geopolitics.

The article does have a kernel of opportunity though. The gas situation may just be the point at which corporations do finally figure out that management by proximity is not the most efficient method of management. If that occurs there will be an explosion in cottage industry employment. With location decoupled from employment results becomes more important than schmoozing as companies will have to develop result oriented metric management styles. We can only hope.

Drive bits not cars.

Compterworld article.