Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Verizon To Pump $18B Into FiOS 215

Posted by kdawson
from the and-where's-my-rocket-car? dept.
larytet writes, "LightReading reports that Verizon will invest $18B into FTTH. The company says its fiber-based service will become profitable after four years, and expects by then to have 7 million customers using FiOS for Internet access." For perspective, have a look at Bruce Kushnick's book $200 Billion Broadband Scandal. His site has a page detailing phone company promises of fiber since 1993. We have been paying for these undelivered promises for years. By now we should have 86 million homes wired with FTTH at 100 Mbits/sec.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Verizon To Pump $18B Into FiOS

Comments Filter:
  • by tdemark (512406)
    We have been paying for these undelivered promises for years. By now we should have 86 million homes wired with FTTH at 100 Mbits/sec.

    This goes so against my usual feelings on how big companies treat the general populace, but...

    With all the companies that make huge promises but never actually delivering, I willing to let it slide when a company delivers something pretty close to the original promise, even if it is just a little late.

    - Tony
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by plague3106 (71849)
      Well, I'm in the 'who cares' boat. My city is rolling FTTH RIGHT NOW. I'll be hooked up by next year, at the latest.
      • My county has been rolling out FTTH for what seems like a year or so now. But, lately, it seems to have stalled. Maybe they're currently installing it in places I don't normally travel. But one thing is for sure: my neighborhood is really low on the list to get it :(
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        That's not the point. The point is that at my house (or my parents' house, since I'm at college), we have dial-up, because there's no other option. It's not even 56k broadband, the max speed is 36.6k, and then there's all of AOL's overhead. Everyone should have broadband by now, even if it's only 256k
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by plague3106 (71849)
          Well, I don't consider 256k broadband by any stretch.

          I do think broadband should be available everywhere as well. I guess my point was that we should have never waited for the telcos to do this; we should have gotten municipalities to do it for us a while ago.
        • by Ironsides (739422)
          Everyone should have broadband by now, even if it's only 256k

          I'm curious as to how groups of houses that are 100 miles from nowhere that share a party line, are supposed to have broadband. Then you have the places that still don't have any phone service at all. And I am talking about the US here.
          • I'm curious as to how groups of houses that are 100 miles from nowhere that share a party line, are supposed to have broadband. Then you have the places that still don't have any phone service at all. And I am talking about the US here.

            That's the crux of the whole "broadband scandal". All the regulatory favors and tax breaks that the guy says total $200 Billion were to subsidize less profitable areas. It's profitable to have broadband in towns or cities, but when it's 20-30 families in a 5-square mile a
        • by gkhan1 (886823)
          Schadenfreude: noun, feeling you get on /. when you're on a 100 mbit connection and see some guy complaing about his 36.6 kbit speed.
      • by kevinl (38843) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @10:01AM (#16228551) Homepage
        You're fortunate that you don't live in a rural area where Verizon is busy trying to sell off their landlines. From today's New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/28/technology/28ver mont.html [nytimes.com]
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by kabocox (199019)
        Well, I'm in the 'who cares' boat. My city is rolling FTTH RIGHT NOW. I'll be hooked up by next year, at the latest.

        Grrr you are what's wrong. You are in the who cares boat because your city is getting fiber now? You should be in the I'm bloody pissed that its taken more than a decade for them to rollout fiber to my city! At this rate, it'll take 2-3 decades for most of the nation to be wired up to slow speed fiber. You are most likely going to get alot slower than 100 Mbits/sec up and down and will be thri
      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        I'm holding off for FOE(Fiber Over Ethernet)
      • Verizon has rolled out FTTH in my neighborhood. Because I'm a cheapskate, the main benefit for me is increased bandwidth and lower price on cable (2.5/5 Mbits/s).
    • by Secrity (742221) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @09:58AM (#16228487)
      The difference is that most of the companies that make huge undelivered promises are not regulated monopolies. When supposedly regulated telephone companies makes huge promises, ratepayers and taxpayers start giving concesssions and possibly paying for portions of those promises at the time that the promise is made.
      • by jZnat (793348) *
        Exactly! This is why countries like Japan, Korea, et al. get their Gigabit connections for $20/month, and we get asynchronous crap for triple that.
        • by Firehed (942385)
          I could deal with asyncronous if it's still limited by the speed of my hard drive... the crap we have now barely saturates the bandwidth of a freakin' floppy. Luckily you can get a 1GB flash drive for about the same price as a ten-pack of floppies, and then you're back to being connection-limited again.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by saleenS281 (859657)
      ... verizon isn't delivering ANYTHING close to their original promise. Uncapped, unadulterated 100mbit service is nothing like the port blocked, don't upload too much in a month POS they're currently providing. Sure, it's leaps and bounds above DSL... but that should not get them off the hook.
      • by Smidge204 (605297)
        Not that I outright reject your accusations, but other than blocking ports 80 and 25 do you have any reference for your claims? At all? I'm genuinely curious about Verizon's capping policy with their FiOS service, but I've read probably over a hundred reviews from customers and nobody has said anything about it.

        =Smidge=
        • by dogbowl (75870)
          Verizon blocks port 80?

          and to think I was getting excited here.....
          • by Smidge204 (605297)
            Inbound port 80 is blocked, yes. I have yet to see a domestic ISP service that doesn't do that. If you want to run a public web server, either use a different port or buy their business class service.

            =Smidge=
        • by Dun Malg (230075)
          Not that I outright reject your accusations, but other than blocking ports 80 and 25 do you have any reference for your claims?
          That's not enough? That right there is an indication that FiOS is just another asynchronous, open wide and swallow, "customers==consumers", "we talk- you listen" broadband offering.
          • That's not enough?
            No, it's not enough. Here in the real world, some of us make decisions based on the actual benefits and drawbacks of a service, rather than just assuming that everything is terrible because they do one thing that somebody doesn't like.
  • by EVil Lawyer (947367) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @09:37AM (#16228149)
    For perspective, have a look at Bruce Kushnick's book $200 Billion Broadband Scandal. His site has a page detailing phone company promises of fiber since 1993. We have been paying for these undelivered promises for years. By now we should have 86 million homes wired with FTTH at 100 Mbits/sec.

    Fine, there have been plenty of broken promises from phone companies (and, I believe, cable providers, satellite providers, and others) over the years. 7 million homes also might be a little optimistic. But FiOS is really, exists in plenty of homes already, and is much more real than many of those other technologies were at the times the promises were made.

    I'm in New York and have FiOS. It's a very nice service. Happily, in New York, the slowest speed tier is 10 down / 2 up, and it's quite affordable compared to cable modem service. I'm looking forward to the FiOS TV service, and the day I'll be completely rid of Time Warner (not that Verizon itself is such a wonderful company).

    • Fine, there have been plenty of broken promises from phone companies (and, I believe, cable providers, satellite providers, and others) over the years. 7 million homes also might be a little optimistic.

      Broken promises are one thing. Broken promises that you have been paying for are quite another. The phone companies have had extra charges tacked on to your phone bill for years to pay for the development of FTTH.

      In legal circles, I believe that they call this 'fraud'.

    • Blocked Ports, and that little move where they pull out your copper connection to the street ( so that you're NEVER going to get DSL again... ) remind us that VZ is still as evil as they ever were.

      • by Thaelon (250687)
        Verizon is one of the most evil companies in existance. I wouldn't get FIOS from them if it were free. They'll never, ever get more of my money voluntarily.

        Did you know they're the same company that disables bluetooth file transfers to cell phones so that you have to pay their exhorberant prices to get files on your phone?

        Not to mention they rebrand the OSes of all their phones with the most hideously ugly verizon theme you can imagine. And I don't mean just a little label here and there. The whole fuck
    • I'm in New York and have FiOS. It's a very nice service. Happily, in New York, the slowest speed tier is 10 Mbits/sec down / 2 Mbits/sec up, and it's quite affordable compared to cable modem service. I'm looking forward to the FiOS TV service, and the day I'll be completely rid of Time Warner (not that Verizon itself is such a wonderful company).

      Um, you are happy with 2 up when you should have 100 Mbits/sec up and and 10 Mbits/sec down when you should have 100 Mbits/sec down. I'll give my local the benefit
    • by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @10:46AM (#16229411)

      Fine, there have been plenty of broken promises from phone companies (and, I believe, cable providers, satellite providers, and others) over the years. 7 million homes also might be a little optimistic. But FiOS is really, exists in plenty of homes already, and is much more real than many of those other technologies were at the times the promises were made.

      Maybe you should read the above book. The number of homes with decent high speed internet in the US is pathetic. Compare, for example, the internet service in Sweden. It is faster, more reliable, lower cost, and each citizen paid much less than each American citizen has in government subsidies. They also have about the same population density. Sorry, but the US is falling behind the world, except in a small number of very urban locations. I'm happy you have good service, but don't mistake the situation in new York for most of the US. I've lived in three of the ten largest cities in the US and in each place I had a choice of a crappy cable service bundled with Cable TV I don't want or an incredibly expensive DSL line bundled with a phone service I don't want.

    • But FiOS is really, exists in plenty of homes already, and is much more real than many of those other technologies were at the times the promises were made.

      I'm in New York and have FiOS. It's a very nice service. Happily, in New York, the slowest speed tier is 10 down / 2 up, and it's quite affordable compared to cable modem service.


      Did you have cable modem service when it first started to roll out? 10/10 and it was cheap (~$30/mo). Once they have added subscribers and oversold their bandwidth the speeds
    • Where do you live in New York???

      I live in NYC and no FiOS for me!
    • Recently moved from Queens to LI, and switched from Time Warner everything to Verizon everything.

      I like the Verizon stuff for the most part, but the remote with for the TV box pisses me off. Time Warner has them beat hands down in that category, but that about it. The TV and Broadband are above all else consistent in terms of quality. That was probably my biggest peeve about Time Warner.
  • Of course! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by laughingcoyote (762272) <barghesthowl@@@excite...com> on Thursday September 28, 2006 @09:38AM (#16228159) Journal

    Well is this unexpected? They were begging for money and consideration at the time, but they were also lobbying. In effect, they say "Oh it'll be fine, you'll see, watch what we'll give you!" Of course, since the promises weren't written into the law as a mandate, with real consequences if they went unfulfilled, what they gave us, predictably, was as little as they could get away with for as much as they could charge.

    Now, in addition to tax revenue and right-of-ways, they want us to give up net neutrality. "Oh, but look what we'll give you!" I imagine they'll do just as well as last time.

    • It's noticeably better than their DSL but if they need to dismantle core Net principles like network neutrality in order to "incentivize" FiOS then they can bite my bum.
    • by TubeSteak (669689)
      Of course, since the promises weren't written into the law as a mandate, with real consequences if they went unfulfilled,
      I'm a big believer in putting everything that needs to be said into the text of a law.

      So why did they wait so long? Profitable in 4 years, but they waited 13.

      Maybe thats how long it took their old equipment to depreciate. (ya know, write the costs off for tax purposes)
  • between home and work- both with comcast pro connections
    pings are pretty sweet,

    18ms for the same roads that take me 20 miles to drive.

    it's still not enough bandwidth for me to access my files live, I use synchronization software to keep my
    'active' documents in place at both ends.. if I could have that increase in speed and keep my ping times, I'd likely loose the synchronizer and work off all my files from my home setup..

    The problem then is, I don't have my 'other location' backup when I pull a boner...
  • by MikeRT (947531) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @09:39AM (#16228181) Homepage
    Subsidies are frequently abused and allocated for all of the wrong reasons. They skew the market, create a new base of lobbyists and generally increase the scope of government intrusion. We wouldn't have people like Ted Stevens be the norm in Congress if the American people could bring themselves to follow what's in the Constitution, and subsidizing business isn't one of the enumerated powers of Congress. If it were a dry, boring job that made them more like "law book janitors" than power brokers, most problems would go away within an election cycle.

    But no, we just need to change where and how the government gives away money, not whether or not the government should be involved at all.
    • Every now and then I come across a posting on Slashdot that makes me want to stand up and salute. So many here just want everything given to them NOW and they think a government agency is the best bet. It's refreshing to see someone stand up for what this country used to be about.

      The Grant County Public Utility District (GCPUD) - a public municipality under Washington State law - decided to do FTTH in 1999 but had secret contracts subsidizing certain favored service providers (they are prohibited from deali
  • by cdrudge (68377) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @09:40AM (#16228201) Homepage
    According to this article [fortwayne.com] in my local paper, Verizon is planning on spending nearly $23b on FiOS and that's for about 1/2 their network. The $18b figure mentioned in the summary comes from discounting the $5b in projected savings from not having to maintain the aging copper physical plant. The linked to article sort of mentions this, but it's not real clear.
  • by qwertphobia (825473) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @09:41AM (#16228243)
    I'll believe it when I see it. I have Verizon phone service, and I live in a well-populated area, but I cannot get DSL yet. It turns out that some of my local loop is running over copper, and the rest is running over fiber. I cannot get DSL because of the fiber but I also cannot get FIOS because of the copper. So I''ve been waiting, but I might just have to bite the bullet and get Comcast...
    • by ivan256 (17499)
      I could not get Verizon DSL in my town, but it was the first in my area to get FiOS. I now have 30Mbit down and 2Mbit up with 5 static IPs. It's also infinitely more stable than my Comcast was.

      Don't give up hope.
  • Well, it looks like at least one of the telcos is making an attempt to deliver on their promise (albeit a little late). When/if a formal investigation is launched into the whole "fiber to the home" scandal, Verizon will have something to hold up in their defense.
  • I'll take two. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by oc255 (218044) <milkfilk&yahoo,com> on Thursday September 28, 2006 @09:43AM (#16228271) Homepage
    I've been hitting the submit button on the "Can I get FiOS?" site in Northern Virginia since I heard about it in 2004. So far, all I've gotten is a web redirect to their DSL offerings.

    Speaking of DSL, I talked to Speakeasy (my dsl provider) and asked them if they'd ever be able to offer their open hosting policies over FiOS. Speakeasy said no because FiOS is regulated differently than your POTS lines. So this really put a damper on things because I won't get port 80 etc over blazing optics. Unless they strike a deal (unlikely?) or an act of congress happens (lobbying?). I'd love to know exactly why fiber is treated differently.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by curlynoodle (1004465)
      FiOS is an "Information Service", where as POTS is still a "Telecommunication Service". I think this is the distinction.
    • I love speakeasy, I wish they made sense for me financially but they just don't. As far as your problem with port 80, maybe you know this maybe you don't:

      Open up an account with dyndns (it's very inexpensive for a year and well worth it)
      From dyndns, set up your domain to point to port 90. Like set up a mask for www.domain.com to www.domain.com:90
      Then from your home router, set up port 90 to point to port 80 on the computer you wish to host.

      You can use this trick to host different subdomains on different c
    • Fiber To The Home You Don't Live In.

      I've given up asking the webpage if I can get FiOS. I live less than a mile from a Central Orifice in suburban MD. I used to work in the telecom industry before the bubble forced me to find new employment. A discussion with a fiber deployment tech indicated that Verizon was deploying FiOS into high-density-zoned areas only. Apparently some MBA did overly simplistic math and decided the best deployment locations were places filled with townhomes and apartments. Sing
  • What exactly does one do with a 100 Mbps FTTH connection other than downloading a 700 MB DivX movie in 1 sec @ 12500 MB/sec ? p.s :Did I get the no's right?
    • little b is bits, big B is bytes - the bigger one is the bigger unit (100Mbps is about 12MB/s). To get your 700MB file, you'll be pulling down 5600 bits plus overhead, and it'll take a little over 1 minute on a fully saturated link. Real world, you'll be waiting a little longer.
  • by chaffed (672859) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @09:51AM (#16228369) Homepage
    I'm surprised by Verizon because you don't need a Verizon PC to use FIOS. Imagine that! Those clever engineers figured out a way to make a service profitable without proprietary lock in. Gee they are great!

    Okay I do have a chip on my shoulder when it comes to Verizon.

    Now imagine if Verizon FIOS was operated like Verizon Wireless.

    You would be required to sign a 2 year contract and pay $1000 for a PC that can barely take advantage of the basic features of the service. If you wanted something that could give you the full experience that would be a 2 year contract plus $2000 for equipment.

    All the while the PC they sold you would be locked to FIOS and have many features disabled. Some features I can imagine being disabled would be File Transfers via FTP or any standard protocol. You would be required to use their application at a fee for every transfer.

    You would be locked out of using other media services like Apple, Yahoo or audiable.

    Your information services would be limited to their partners, probably fox news...

    Finally they would happily hand over your personal information to those willing to pay or a government with no probable cause or a warrant.

    This all sounds very familiar now that I write this all... Net Neutrality anyone? or a lack there of...
    • To be fair, the FiOS terms of service not only forbid you from running a web server on your machine (they even block port 80), but and "server-type application" (whether it uses the Internet connection or not). That would include remote desktop, X11, P2P software, game servers (no Unreal Tournament with your friends), SlingBox, et cetera.

      Sure, they probably are pretty lax on enforcing it, but the typical use for 3/4 of their customers will include at least one "server" application of some sort in the home,
    • by grotgrot (451123)
      You do know that they rip out your existing copper wiring before they will install the fiber? That is one way that they do screw you.
  • by rlp (11898) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @09:51AM (#16228375)
    Congress is actively dealing with this right now! You won't get fiber to your house, but you will get a larger series of tubes. And your representative will mail you your very own Internet.
    • My Representative would make you tube illegal;)

      oh, wait, I live in DC and therefore am not enough of a citizen to have voting representatives. Never mine we have more people than Rhode Island, or Montana.
  • by KalElOfJorEl (998741) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @09:52AM (#16228377)
    That book about the scandal sheds a lot of light of just how screwed over customers have been the past decade+. If anything Verizon has a moral obligation to start something like this from the fact that their customers have been paying extra for it for years and the fact that America is getting its ass kicked in regards to infrastructure compared to some countries in Europe and Japan. China is also planning on sinking billions into its infrastructure as well, so it's about time one of these money whoring telecoms stop the douchebaggery and start fucking doing something instead of syphoning capital out of its customers for service in which the cost doesn't justify the performance. Maybe this will trigger Comcast, ATT, Qwest and others to stop their stupid fucking complacency and start doing something to improve this companies infrastructure instead of holding their monopolies and using the legal system to force out municipally owned service [windley.com].

    Then again, I've never associated telecoms with ever doing anything moral, intelligent or in the best interest of the consumer.
  • Am I the only one that's wondering if this much bandwidth for the average home user is a good idea? Perhaps it's time to tie things like egress filters and packet shapers to the new bandwidth to prevent threats from spreading that much faster?
    • Not so much malware, as the spam that is a side-effect of malware. With 100Mb/s of upstream bandwidth a few zombies could easily overwhelm a lot of individual and small-business mail servers. They could also be used for very effective DDoS attacks.
  • Yes, lots of other phone companies have made promises about bringing FTTH utopia, however the difference is that Verizon is already doing it. They've been rolling it out in several places around the northeast for a while now.

    Here's a blog with lots of details on how the installation is done: http://www.bricklin.com/fiosinstall.htm [bricklin.com].
  • Finally... (Score:2, Funny)

    by pablo_max (626328)
    It's about time! Now I have a reason to buy Intel's 80 core CPU!
  • by strredwolf (532) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @10:05AM (#16228623) Homepage Journal
    Yep, they're slowly rolling it out, replacing the old copper cable. Plus, they're offering such a sweet deal with Internet and TV over the fiber: $35 for 5mbit up/2mbit down (I sometimes hit 6mbit down, strangely enough). $52 for basic 180 channel digital TV (only 18 channels analog, so you need a set top box or DVR), a STB in one room, a two-tuner DVR in another.
  • Currently, Verizon is required by law to allow other ISPs to provide service over thier DSL lines. I'm currently paying slightly more for a third party to provide better "service" as in static IP and easy to reach tech support. With fiber, my only choice is Verizon. If I want a static IP, I need to pay the Business DSL priceses.

    Yeah, profit in four years should be easy for them.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Here in France most of broadband is DSL oriented. For 29.99 you get on a DSL : 25Mb/s, digital TV (more than 100 chans), unlimited call to european land line (and most majour countries), on-demand video, PVR-like features, ... nothing surprising anymore.

    But since year 2000, some small ISP have lanched FTTH in Paris 15th district (Citéfibre http://www.citefibre.com/ [citefibre.com] 59/month for 30Mb/s symetrical, unlimited call to any france landline , digital TV) or other cities (like Pau see http://eco.agglo-pau.fr/I [agglo-pau.fr]
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by birder (61402)
      You can thank competition for this. Something that isn't availble in most US areas.
  • Public privatization (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Rinisari (521266) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @10:12AM (#16228757) Homepage Journal
    Dear lazyweb,

    What say you to publically owned, but privately serviced network infrastructure? For example, a city, town, or borough pays to have its own network system (cable, dsl, ftth, whatever) installed, and then has an outside company (Adelphia, Comcast, Verizon, etc.) provide the bandwidth and support. The city retains control of the lines, so in the event the denizens of the city are unhappy with the provider company, they could vote to terminate (or simply not renew) the contract with the company and seek other bids for service.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by QuantumRiff (120817)
      This has been done in a small town about an hour from me, I think in 1999: Ashland Fiber Network [ashlandfiber.net] The city got tired of being on the end of Qwest's lists for improvement, cause its small, spread out , and mountainous, and they did it themselves. Strung fiber all over town, you purchase your connection to the internet (and get to choose witch small town ISP to use for your email, support, and outgoing internet, etc) and choose who you want to get your TV from , and even which channels!

      Very cheap, and blazin
  • by bodrell (665409) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @10:13AM (#16228767) Journal
    Come on! Define FTTH before you use it twice in a writeup. It's bad enough trying to decipher ridiculous acronyms in the comments, but in the stories themselves? Bah.

    Although I may have been successful in my deciphering, I believe FTTH is not a common acronym that most people (even on /.) have heard about. And no, I shouldn't have to chase a wikipedia link to figure it out. At least the submitter didn't use the much worse acronym FTTP, fiber to the premises (which I would have thought a misspelling of FTP).

  • by Aqualung812 (959532) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @10:40AM (#16229305)
    With everyone putting in 100MB connections, now would be a great time to have FAIR access to the Internet. Here are a few ideas:

    1. Give me TRUE, dedicated bandwidth at a low level. I'm talking like 768k down, 384k up that is MINE. It can't be squashed, and I don't get nasty letters for using 768k down 24/7/365. You really are not giving everyone 30mb down / 8 mb up, at least not all the time. Own up to it and let us know what is allowed JUST FOR US.

    2. Show me my burst level. I might have 768k that is MINE, but I might be able to get 30MB down when everyone else isn't as busy.

    3. Offer unlimited access within the switch (neighborhood). If I have a 100MB pipe to my house, and my next door neighboor is on FTTP, then allow me to talk at 100MB. I understand lowering it once you hit a trunked connection, but allowing full speed COSTS THE ISP NOTHING, and has a HUGE gain. My buddy might have 30MB from Comcast, but if I tell him that if he switches to ISP A he we can talk at 100MB, I'm sure he would switch.

    • by Shotgun (30919)
      Offer unlimited access within the switch (neighborhood).

      Can't, or at least WON'T, be done.
      The box on the side of your house dumps your ethernet into an ATM VC. That's carried to a box on the corner that consolidates all the VCs into a woefully undersized VP that gets dumped into a router at the central office. Basically, your box has no connection to the other boxes around it. The NT in the box on the corner that does all the consolidation doesn't have a router, it would be to expensive to add one, and
  • Get that shit out there. I'd drop Comcrap in a heartbeat if there was the FIOS alternative.
  • Is it thanks to the rising price of copper that the US will finally get FTTH?
    Will Verizon rip out any easy-removed copper wires and sell it to make $.

    Or is it because you can run more spying equipment via FTTH? ;)
  • I just looked at Verizons page and found that they charge you $180 for 15Mb!

    With a pricing like that, they can stuff FiOS where the the bad smell comes from!
    • You do realize thats for a commercial connection? Compare that to a T1, $500 a month for a measly 1.5mb. $230 a month gets you 2mb up, 30mb down. I'll take that any day over a T1
  • Verizon is paying $9650 per install [dslreports.com] on its FiOS rollout. If that keeps up, $18B pays for 1.9M customers. To reach 7M customers, they'd have to spend 2571 each, which is about 1/4. Since most of the cost is pulling fiber to homes, labor intensive, followed by operations staff, again featuring high labor costs, I don't believe Verizon will drop costs by 25% every year for 4 years.

    Of course, "I don't believe Verizon" is a default policy unopposed by any evidence to the contrary. Many of the 7M they're claiming
  • I currently work for a rurual telephone co-op [paulbunyan.net]. Previously we ran an N3 Motorola network that uses fiber to each neighborhood node and copper to the home. We are able to provide 5 mbps up and downstream(VDSL) in ADDITION to a 30mpbs stream for 3 televisions. However, the limitation is that we can only push video 1 mile, and DSL 2 miles from each node. This being a VERY rural area, this leaves about 10% of our customer without TV from us.

    Currently we are wiring a completely new network in a neighbori
  • by Zaatxe (939368) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @11:57AM (#16230763)
    "...and expects by then to have 7 million customers using FiOS for Internet access."

    "Fios" is portuguese for "wires"... That name wouldn't inspire many people here in Brazil!
  • by BubbaFett (47115)
    I'm getting it next Wednesday!
  • Buyer beware that Verizon encourages customers who get FiOS to get their voice via fiber as well. Many people don't even know that keeping voice over copper is an option. The problem is that Verizon doesn't have to allow access to third-party phone service (like Cavalier, etc) over FiOS (by law) as they do over copper.
  • By the time it gets to the most of us not on the coasts and not in immediate Verizon service, FTT* be just as screwy as cable and just as far behind in speed as cable is today in non-Verizon flyover country.
  • I lived with my parents while I went to school last semester and we had FIOS. The speeds ranged from 1.5 to 2.5 megs per second and the sytem still uses dsl for uploading data. Slashdot loaded a little quicker than regular DSl but most sites still only transfer data around 75-180k a second with no noticable difference. Bittorrent was still slow. I read last month that most ISP's mod down bittorrent and other p2p technology so I wonder if this was the case?

    If you plan to use torrents avoid FIOS as its modded
    • by jCaT (1320)
      You need to be a bit clearer with your units. You say that you get "2 megs per second" on your dsl, but do you mean two megaBITS or two megaBYTES? I've had FIOS for a little over a year, and I can say it definitely delivers. I have the 15 megabit / 2 megabit connection, and it's a lot faster than any DSL i've ever had. Your 768k DSL is thirty times slower than that to put things in perspective.

      As for torrents- it works great. I have a linux box running the commandline torrent client, and I can routinel
  • FTTH will probobly suck (and probobly already sucks for those who have it) for one reason.
    ISPs will place restrictions on what you can do with it. (like block running web servers)

    Thankfully, there are pretty much no insane, stupid or draconian restrictions on my DSL account here in australia. For example, they dont block ports or restrict any protocols like BitTorret or VoIP. But at the same time, I have a 20GB per month limit, if I exceed that, I get shaped to 64k for the rest of the month.
  • by Nonillion (266505) on Thursday September 28, 2006 @01:21PM (#16232463)
    By the time Verizon gets FTTH to my rural home I'll either be too old to care or dead. It's been what, more than six (6) years now; what happened to the $200 billion? Out in my area there is NO xDSL, NO Cable Internet, NO Clearwire only dial up and over priced satellite Internet service. The only way I'm connecting now is with my Verizon wireless account, a whopping 16k/bit sync.

    Since my move, I haven't had any broadband service for over two (2) years. I've more or less lost all interest in computers, my Sun boxes sit idle with no Internet connection. All the time I have been mucking around with Linux have been confined to my IBM A31p laptop, and what ever connection I can get at Starbucks, work or open access point.
  • Those who are bit curious. You can find photos of a Fios installation on Flickr [flickr.com] Also, They are upgrading select areas in my city to Verizon Fios. Mostly the newer neighborhoods that are on the beach.
  • In May of 2005 we saw them laying the cables. I kept checking the website and calling on occasion to find out when I could get it. (BTW, the website is updated much less frequently than Verizon's actual service.) Finally in December 2005 we got the 15Mb down/2Mb up service and kicked the Comcast cable modem to the curb. Faster, cheaper and a dedicated line. How can you beat it?

    Downloading, surfing and playing online games has been a dream. We typically run two computers playing WoW, and I may be surfing o

"More software projects have gone awry for lack of calendar time than for all other causes combined." -- Fred Brooks, Jr., _The Mythical Man Month_

Working...