1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Possible cable broadband bandwidth issue?

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by MizzouTiger, Oct 18, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MizzouTiger

    MizzouTiger Icon

    620
    1
    Jan 9, 2007
    This may be a stupid question, but just started thinking about it. As cable companies start adding HD channels to try to compete with D*, they are going to need more bandwidth to do so, right? So, for those of us with cable high speed internet (I have Charter), will the addition of HD channels by cable companies effect our internet connection speeds?:confused:
     
  2. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    They all work at different frequencies, so "no" as they don't share.
     
  3. Ken S

    Ken S RIP

    6,201
    0
    Feb 12, 2007
    It could, but more likely they will go to a "switched" sort of situation where you'll only be receiving a few "channels" at any given time ...when you change the channel on the remote...they'll just pump different programming down the pipe and eliminate what you're not watching.
     
  4. MizzouTiger

    MizzouTiger Icon

    620
    1
    Jan 9, 2007
    Thanks for the quick replies, guys! And thanks for the information.:)
     
  5. jpl

    jpl Hall Of Fame

    2,776
    6
    Jul 9, 2006
    I think you're going to see a staged approach for cable companies:

    1) Eliminate analogs. This will most likely be the first step. It's the first step that Verizon is taking with fios, which also currently runs QAM. It's the easiest and cheapest correction, with the least disruption. And doing so frees up a lot of space. I posted this in another thread, but I think it bears repeating. For QAM, each QAM channel will carry either:

    1 analog channel
    9 - 10 digital SD channels
    2 HD channels

    Take an average cable outfit - say Comcast. Around here they have about 70 analog channels. By moving those channels to the digital tier, they free up 62 QAMs (free up 70, by getting rid of the channels, but add 8 to take on the digital vs. of those channels). That's enough room to carry 124 HD channels, uncompressed.


    2) MPEG4. These systems are going to take a page out of DirecTV's book. The next gen of STBs developed are going to be mpeg4 enabled. Again, Verizon is definitely going this route too. This frees up more space.


    3) Switched video/IPTV. This is definitely more long term. Traditional cable will go switched video. Fiber will go IP - Verizon has already stated their plan to go full IP (they run some stuff via IP today) in 3 years.

    Either way, as veryoldschool said, the internet portion runs on a different part of the frequency spectrum than the TV service does. In fact, Comcast is working on a super-high-speed internet connection by banding together frequencies. I think they use 6 MHz today for internet connectivity. But they're hitting a speed crunch too. They really can't increase the speed linearly - at least not easily. So their approach is to widen the spectrum, by banding together 4 QAMs (24 MHz) for internet connectivity alone.
     
  6. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    We posted at the same time so....
    The return path is below where cables sends video & the download half is in the FM band.
    As cable needs more bandwidth, they will be above 108 MHz.
     
  7. Ken S

    Ken S RIP

    6,201
    0
    Feb 12, 2007
    VoS,

    I completely agree on the frequencies...I just figured some of them might begin playing with IPTV type of stuff.

    There will be a cable bandwidth issue if DirecTV's DoD and Echostar's new VoD service become widely used...but that's another story.
     
  8. Doug Brott

    Doug Brott Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    28,939
    72
    Jul 12, 2006
    Los Angeles
    Would this have the affect of making channel changes take longer?
     
  9. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    You mean like the issues I'm having? :lol:
    The weak part of cable broadband is from the user to the node. This is shared bandwidth. Once it's in fiber [node to head end] there isn't a problem if the backbone has a large enough "pipe".
    DSL doesn't share bandwidth but it's weakness is the distance to the digital switch.
    Each has its plus and minus.
     
  10. Doug Brott

    Doug Brott Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    28,939
    72
    Jul 12, 2006
    Los Angeles
    True, but that's only in the macro sense .. In my micro-world DSL works great :).
     
  11. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    I'm seven miles from the Telco office and NO DSL for me [or competition for my cable broadband that's twenty miles away]. :mad:
     
  12. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    How long would it take to ping the node? 10 milliseconds? Add a few more for the switching time.
     
  13. Ken S

    Ken S RIP

    6,201
    0
    Feb 12, 2007
    VOS,

    It's all shared...just depends on where the sharing happens. Cable is shared at the "neighborhood" level and DSL is shared at the CO..even FIOS is shared.

    Although it's obviously less expensive for the ISP to make the pipe bigger at the CO level than the neighborhood.
     
  14. veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    :D the whole net is shared. :D
    It's just the sooner your get to fiber the more bandwidth there is.
    DSL has a dedicated line to it and cable doesn't.
     
  15. NYSmoker

    NYSmoker Icon

    657
    0
    Aug 19, 2006
    Guess I am lucky I have FTTH.


    Yes I am bragging. :)
     
  16. Sixto

    Sixto Well-Known Member

    12,224
    94
    Nov 18, 2005
  17. jpl

    jpl Hall Of Fame

    2,776
    6
    Jul 9, 2006
    Well, they are... and they aren't. Here's the deal... For TV, fios runs QAM, just like the standard cable companies do. The fiber gets fed to your home into an optical network terminal, which breaks up the light into it's composite pieces (phone, internet, tv) and feeds out the signals into the copper in your house.

    Because of that, the TV portion is still limited to the spectrum that traditional cable is - for the most part. The main exception is that things like guide data and VOD come in via the IP portion of the spectrum, so the TV portion is fully for TV programming.

    Where things get tight for fios is the fact that Verizon doesn't (and won't) compress their channels. They've committed themselves to that fact. That's what gives it that outstanding PQ. The HD is on par with my HD DVD player, e.g. Also, for some stupid reason Verizon got into the game of offering channels in analog. It's just their locals, and local access channels - channels 1 - 49 are fed in both digital and analog. Their longer term plans are to move fully to IP, which they've stated they're planning to do in 3 years. I think what put them in a bit of a crunch is DirecTV's move. I really don't think their network guys expected there to be this many HD channels at this point in time. I believe they figured that their network would be more than adequate to get them to IP.

    Where they have an advantage with IP is the fact that they bring the broadband with them, and you have the fiber going straight to the home. As an aside, the comment that the fiber is shared is, again, true, and not true. Yeah, the trunc line comes in, and feeds up to 32 houses. But the frequency range of the light is such that you really have your own dedicated part of the trunc line. As a result you don't step on your neighbors when you're doing any kind of heavy web surfing. So, yeah, you do share, but unlike traditional cable, you really don't vie for the same part of the trunc line... As a result we have no slow-downs during peak periods... unlike traditional cable.

    Anyway - back to TV. Because of the HD craze going on right now, it's true that Verizon is at a bit of a crunch. To get around it, though, they're getting rid of all their analogs. They've already started that process, and will probably wrap up by mid 2008 (hopefully sooner - they keep saying springtime, which means summertime to me). As an aside, they've committed to the FCC to fully get rid of their analogs by feb 2009. This was part of a deal that they struck to get an exemption from a policy change that went into effect on july 1st. The FCC is essentially requiring cable companies to decouple their security from their STBs. Meaning that you should be able to go buy an STB off the shelf, get a cable card from the cable company, and be good to go. Smaller cable outfits (and Verizon falls into that category) were given an exemption. But in exchange they agreed to do away with all analogs by feb 2009.

    When they do that, they'll have enough room to add close to 100 HD channels. As it is, they do still have some room to add some channels. They gave us Fox Business Network (although only in SD for the time being) and A&E HD. They're also supposed to give us the Discovery suite of HD channels in the next week or two. Beyond that, it's true that they won't be adding any channels until probably mid 2008. Personally, I'm ok with that. The PQ, along with their commitment to not compress anything, makes it worth it to me. Most of the HD I watch is for my locals, and ESPN, so I'm ok with waiting for a bit... some others (per a fios forum I peruse) aren't as patient :)
     
  18. Stuart Sweet

    Stuart Sweet The Shadow Knows!

    37,060
    287
    Jun 18, 2006
    VOS is right, a lot of cable providers are moving to switched digital video to deal with channel overload. It has the capability of causing a lot of problems, like slow channel changes for example. It's also likely to require a new cable box for each subscriber, so the big question is, can they roll it out fast enough to avoid bandwidth problems?
     
  19. Sixto

    Sixto Well-Known Member

    12,224
    94
    Nov 18, 2005
    jpl, thanks for the details.

    I was surprised. Most people had referred to FiOS TV bandwidth as "unlimited" for now, so I mostly believed it. Didn't much make a difference to me because I'm totally committed to D* but FiOS has knocked on the door a few times. I just always thought D* was the clear leader, FiOS would be a close second, and Cablevision a very distant 3rd.

    Now it looks like D* is the clear leader by a big margin over both cable and FiOS for possibly quite some time.

    Did seem weird that FiOS was adding HD so slowly, one channel or two at a time, now the reason is known.

    Very interesting analysis.
     
  20. Ken S

    Ken S RIP

    6,201
    0
    Feb 12, 2007
    If they want to it's probably a faster roll-out than what DirecTV is attempting to do meaning:
    1. Launching new satellites
    2. Upgrading customer dishes
    3. Upgrading customer equipment

    As for slow channel changes...that appears to be the case with DirecTV as well...just for different reasons.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page