From owner-freebsd-hardware Thu Jul 11 11:29:17 1996 Return-Path: owner-hardware Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA24076 for hardware-outgoing; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 11:29:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jparnas.cybercom.net (jparnas.cybercom.net [206.28.135.58]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA24055 for ; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 11:29:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.cybercom.net (localhost.cybercom.net [127.0.0.1]) by jparnas.cybercom.net (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id OAA03235; Thu, 11 Jul 1996 14:28:11 -0400 Message-Id: <199607111828.OAA03235@jparnas.cybercom.net> X-Authentication-Warning: jparnas.cybercom.net: Host localhost.cybercom.net didn't use HELO protocol To: Henry Spencer cc: hardware@freebsd.org, bsdi-users@bsdi.com X-External-Networks: yes Subject: Re: your mail In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 11 Jul 1996 10:15:40 EDT. Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 14:28:09 -0400 From: "Jacob M. Parnas" Sender: owner-hardware@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In message you write: >> >...Note that the splitting is *not*, in general, over the entire >> >metropolitan area -- the cable company can and does subdivide. The folks >> >in the Rogers Toronto-area experiment say that the net effective data rate >> >did vary depending on load, but it was always a lot faster than phone... >> >> I thought that while it was pretty easy to add a new ISDN server, it was >> hard to add a new cable. This would seem to be a problem, especially if >> this was done in bulk... > >They don't have to add new cable, just new boxes at the appropriate point >in the distribution tree. (As I think I already mentioned, the signal >distribution in cable is a tree, not a star, with the last amplifiers at >a fairly local level, out on poles in your neighborhood.) Especially if >everything before the final amplifier uses fiber -- which is, I believe, >the new trend, to the point where existing wiring is being converted at a >brisk pace in many areas -- the wiring is already in place. > >> >> And if you have to move, you may be out of luck. >> >ISDN has the same problem. >> >> I thought ISDN was a bit more common and standardized, but I could be wrong. > >Standardized, yes, but common... well, that varies a whole lot. It's not >something you can count on being able to get, especially at a reasonable >price, not yet. The bottom line for ISDN and cable is similar -- if you >really need it, that constrains where you move -- although the extent of >the problem may differ at the moment. > >> Also, how much are the charges for installation, equipment and any monthly/ >> packet/etc charges? > >This depends very heavily on the cable company, the same way ISDN charges >depend very heavily on the phone company. In Toronto, Rogers is talking >about a flat monthly fee of $30-40 on top of what you pay for your basic >cable service (which they quietly assume you already have!). We'll see. > > Henry Spencer > henry@zoo.toronto.edu Thanks for all the useful information. I wish my cable company would provide the service that some of you are getting. A nearby one does, but that doesn't help. *sigh*. I did think that ISDN was catching on, like touch-tones did, but I'm not sure. Jacob