does my country needs fiber optics?

[EvilNeo]

in my country fiber optics aren't installed vastly so almost every normal house in the whole country runs with cooper wires for telephone and internet
the main ISP in the country is starting to advertise fiber-to-the-home options for users at a high cost ofc
but the internet speeds itself in the country suck as well as the allowed data usage
so do we really need fiber optics to enhance the speeds?
i'm talking about at best 8 mega bits per second with data usage of 5 giagbytes at cost of 75 L.E a month that's for an average joe

of course 5 gigs a month is crap for anyone

so let's say that an average guy who just graduated from college and work somewhere, most people start earning about 1500 L.E a month, might get that 8 mb/s with 100GB data usage per month should be enough that's if he alone uses it
so that 8mb/s with 100GB data usage comes at 250 L.E a month, for someone who starts to build his life that's alot
i highly doubt that fiber optics would help improve the internet in the country as it all looks like a bunch of wallet sucking ISP plans

i just want a networking expert insight on this,how do you think the country would improve the internet service from it's current shitty state
and when should people start ditching cooper wires because they want higher internet speeds??

[thekeemo]

Never go with tal2a get the "new price plan"

[Mug]

3 minutes ago, EvilNeo said:

ber optics aren't installed vastly so almost every normal house in the whole country runs with cooper wires for telephone and internet

It's almost as if this isn't the case for most countries

[EvilNeo]

Just now, thekeemo said:

Never go with tal2a get the unlimited

O_O i thought i'm the only Egyptian here 
i 'm not talking for myself
i'm just wondering about the current state of the internet on the country

[vanished]

By the sounds of it yes your country could use some infrastructure upgrades, but then again, so could almost every country on Earth

 

I think everyone has the right to uncapped 100 mbit down for $40/month or better, but there are strikingly few places where that's a thing

[thekeemo]

1 minute ago, EvilNeo said:

O_O i thought i'm the only Egyptian here 
i 'm not talking for myself
i'm just wondering about the current state of the internet on the country

We are many..

Adding fiber makes infrastructure for cheaper high speed internet in the future

[EvilNeo]

Just now, Mug said:

It's almost as if this isn't the case for most countries

ya but most countries have better infrastructure that would probably support upgrading and maintenance 

[thekeemo]

1 minute ago, EvilNeo said:

ya but most countries have better infrastructure that would probably support upgrading and maintenance 

Placing fiber MAKES infrastructure

[Joegeddon]

The way it works in the UK is that companies are installing fiber optics in the standard infrastructure but then the cabinet to house cable is still a copper cable.

[Mug]

1 minute ago, EvilNeo said:

ya but most countries have better infrastructure that would probably support upgrading and maintenance 

Well, by the looks of it, the infrastructure in your country is being upgraded, it's just that you're going to have to pay ofr it directly. Shame.

[EvilNeo]

1 minute ago, thekeemo said:

We are many..

Adding fiber makes infrastructure for cheaper high speed internet in the future

unless people don't know that it should be cheaper with fiber then the ISP strikes again

[Jack Longman]

6 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

By the sounds of it yes your country could use some infrastructure upgrades, but then again, so could almost every country on Earth

 

I think everyone has the right to uncapped 100 mbit down for $40/month or better, but there are strikingly few places where that's a thing

In the UK, where I am atleast we have uncapped usage at this speed for about £40 a month which is around 75 Canadian Dollars per Month

[thekeemo]

1 minute ago, EvilNeo said:

unless people don't know that it should be cheaper with fiber then the ISP strikes again

Better than nothing

[vanished]

1 minute ago, Jack Longman said:

In the UK, where I am atleast we have uncapped usage at this speed for about £40 a month which is around 75 Canadian Dollars per Month

I guess I should count myself lucky because despite all the complaints I could make about our ISP, they don't actually enforce their data caps so I've never really had to worry about that.

[EvilNeo]

3 minutes ago, Mug said:

Well, by the looks of it, the infrastructure in your country is being upgraded, it's just that you're going to have to pay for it directly. Shame.

what i was thinking about is that maybe there would be better ways to improve the internet than going fiber all over
better servers perhaps? to support higher amounts of data per user

what i always wonder about is how fast can internet run into a cooper wire? and when exactly do users require fiber just for extra speeds
btw i always wondered would a user have better internet speed if the fiber runs ONLY to the cabinet  and the rest is just cooper?
or would he get degraded speeds once it runs into cooper again?

[Jack Longman]

4 minutes ago, EvilNeo said:

what i was thinking about is that maybe there would be better ways to improve the internet than going fiber all over
better servers perhaps? to support higher amounts of data per user

what i always wonder about is how fast can internet run into a cooper wire? and when exactly do users require fiber just for extra speeds
btw i always wondered would a user have better internet speed if the fiber runs ONLY to the cabinet  and the rest is just cooper?
or would he get degraded speeds once it runs into cooper again?

Here where I am the fiber line goes to a cabinet and it is all copper from there, i live around a 1/2 mile from the nearest cabinet and get 40 down 9 up. Fiber dedicated lines will be faster and part copper runs will be slower. The only time you will require a dedicated fibre line is if you are a business with multiple internet clients or heavily rely on having fast internet. Other things can improve your personal speed though such as a better router/modem and using gigabit ethernet cables rather than wireless if possible

[.:MARK:.]

Issue here is that everyone needs fibre, but if you think you don't need it because it's expensive, then you'll never get it and the infrastructure of your country will not progress.

Fibre WILL improve the internet of your country, it just wont be cheap at first... Nothing is.

Also if your ISPs want to be wallet sucking they will do what most others do, they will milk the current old infrastructure for all the money they can and present no alternative. Fibre may be expensive, but at least it's available.

[leadeater]

Also remember fibre itself is not expensive, the cost of the cabling and networking equipment only makes up around 20% to 30% of the cost of installation. The majority of the cost is in the consent process and local regulations, trenching and laying ducting, and finally wages. This cost would apply to any technology upgrade that required that type of work, whether it is fibre, new copper or something not yet invented.

 

One of the core mistakes almost everyone did many years ago was to use direct buried copper cables, if ducting was used then this could be reused significantly lowering the cost of future upgrades.

 

I would say for any country that is significantly behind in network technology and infrastructure, has mostly direct buried copper the best solution is not FTTH, FTTB or Fibre to the Curb (FTTC but also used for another). I would see using FTTN or Fibre to the Cabinet (FTTC) as the lowest cost solution with the quickest benefit to the majority, VDSL2 would be used from the cabinet/node to the home which actually gives very good speeds. Where distance would be an issue deploy a new cabinet. I've seen VDSL2 connections hitting near 70Mbps, the majority hover around 30Mbps and when significantly far from the cabinet 3-9Mbps.

 

Another cost factor most people are not aware of is the up stream cost to a higher tier provider for international network traffic which is charged at data rate, so more homes with faster internet is actually a higher direct cost.

 

Edit: FTTH would still be on the road map of course and any new subdivision should deploy it, but FTTH is a little pointless if upstream networking can't handle the load.

[.:MARK:.]

6 hours ago, leadeater said:

Also remember fibre itself is not expensive, the cost of the cabling and networking equipment only makes up around 20% to 30% of the cost of installation. The majority of the cost is in the consent process and local regulations, trenching and laying ducting, and finally wages. This cost would apply to any technology upgrade that required that type of work, whether it is fibre, new copper or something not yet invented.

 

One of the core mistakes almost everyone did many years ago was to use direct buried copper cables, if ducting was used then this could be reused significantly lowering the cost of future upgrades.

 

I would say for any country that is significantly behind in network technology and infrastructure, has mostly direct buried copper the best solution is not FTTH, FTTB or Fibre to the Curb (FTTC but also used for another). I would see using FTTN or Fibre to the Cabinet (FTTC) as the lowest cost solution with the quickest benefit to the majority, VDSL2 would be used from the cabinet/node to the home which actually gives very good speeds. Where distance would be an issue deploy a new cabinet. I've seen VDSL2 connections hitting near 70Mbps, the majority hover around 30Mbps and when significantly far from the cabinet 3-9Mbps.

 

Another cost factor most people are not aware of is the up stream cost to a higher tier provider for international network traffic which is charged at data rate, so more homes with faster internet is actually a higher direct cost.

 

Edit: FTTH would still be on the road map of course and any new subdivision should deploy it, but FTTH is a little pointless if upstream networking can't handle the load.

Technologies such as G.INP and G.Fast greatly improve the performance of FTTC over short distances, giving more time to plan infrastructure upgrades to fibre.

[leadeater]

44 minutes ago, .:MARK:. said:

Technologies such as G.INP and G.Fast greatly improve the performance of FTTC over short distances, giving more time to plan infrastructure upgrades to fibre.

That's rather nice, didn't know those improvements existed. Looks like G.INP is mostly an improvement to VDSL2? And G.Fast is a complete new standard?

 

I can imagine though if these even have a slightly decent uptake there will be tons of VDSL2 equipment on the market for places that need that extra cost saving.

 

Always find it amusing that we hear so many people saying copper is dead yet there is a ton of industry researching still going on to improve it. Cheaper to make existing copper faster than to lay something new, can only work for so long though.

 

Just glad here in NZ we deploy FTTH to everywhere except the smallest towns/rural where they get VDSL2.

[.:MARK:.]

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

That's rather nice, didn't know those improvements existed. Looks like G.INP is mostly an improvement to VDSL2? And G.Fast is a complete new standard?

 

I can imagine though if these even have a slightly decent uptake there will be tons of VDSL2 equipment on the market for places that need that extra cost saving.

 

Always find it amusing that we hear so many people saying copper is dead yet there is a ton of industry researching still going on to improve it. Cheaper to make existing copper faster than to lay something new, can only work for so long though.

 

Just glad here in NZ we deploy FTTH to everywhere except the smallest towns/rural where they get VDSL2.

Yeah, G.INP improves the reliability of VDSL2 and G.Fast I believe is just a higher frequency using a similar system to VDSL2.

Problem here is that Openreach (people who own the infrastructure in the UK) consider themselves and this country the "digital leader" when it comes to broadband. And they do anything to avoid rolling out FTTP.

To show their lackadaisical approach to speeds here, there was a EU broadband meeting a few months ago, and the countries revealed the goals for coverage and speeds stating things like "100Mbit/s to 95% by 2017". But the good old UK just says "Superfast by 2020" Like anyone knows or cares what Superfast means...

To sum it up, we wont have over 10% FTTP by 2030 here.

[DXMember]

unlimited for 10€/mo

[EvilNeo]

10 hours ago, leadeater said:

 

I would say for any country that is significantly behind in network technology and infrastructure, has mostly direct buried

copper the best solution is not FTTH, FTTB or Fibre to the Curb (FTTC but also used for another). I would see using FTTN or Fibre to the Cabinet (FTTC) as the lowest cost solution with the quickest benefit to the majority, VDSL2 would be used from the cabinet/node to the home which actually gives very good speeds. Where distance would be an issue deploy a new cabinet. I've seen VDSL2 connections hitting near 70Mbps, the majority hover around 30Mbps and when significantly far from the cabinet 3-9Mbps.

 

 

just to be clear about some points:
the VDSL2 can be deployed without the use of fiber optics but if it gets deployed with ,say FTTC, that would make an even more improvement?

and how could i know whether i'm on VDSL or VDSL2 or even ADSL, without asking the ISP?

can a certain DSL version be deployed on a certain district and not the other?

 

and what's the diffrerence between FTTB,FTTC,FTTN
I've looked over wikipedia and understood that FTTB is a fiber connection from the central office to an electricity box in a single building
so is the FTTC a fiber connection between the central office and a big-ish electricity box placed on the street to cover multiple buildings at once?
does that mean that the FTTN is somekind of an even bigger box that receives fiber connection from the central and split it among a larger area of buildings? 
so all that mean that they are (relatively) sorted by internet quality per home as this: FTTH>FTTB>FTTC>FTTN ?

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, EvilNeo said:

just to be clear about some points:
the VDSL2 can be deployed without the use of fiber optics but if it gets deployed with ,say FTTC, that would make an even more improvement?

and how could i know whether i'm on VDSL or VDSL2 or even ADSL, without asking the ISP?

can a certain DSL version be deployed on a certain district and not the other?

 

and what's the diffrerence between FTTB,FTTC,FTTN
I've looked over wikipedia and understood that FTTB is a fiber connection from the central office to an electricity box in a single building
so is the FTTC a fiber connection between the central office and a big-ish electricity box placed on the street to cover multiple buildings at once?
does that mean that the FTTN is somekind of an even bigger box that receives fiber connection from the central and split it among a larger area of buildings? 
so all that mean that they are (relatively) sorted by internet quality per home as this: FTTH>FTTB>FTTC>FTTN ?

It is best to use the term Fibre to the Premises (FTTP) as it encompasses both FTTH and FTTB. The only time where FTTB would differ is for a multi story apartment complex, but unless this applies to you best to ignore that for now, too many different ways that is dealt with.

 

Fibre will always be in the mix somewhere, it is the only thing capable of long distance high speed connections. Even before the big fibre deployment initiatives became a public topic of discussion fibre has always been used from the road side cabinet back to a larger distribution point, referred to now as Fibre to the Cabinet (FTTC) or Fibre to the Node (FTTN).

 

FTTN and FTTC usually mean the same thing. Even when there is an intermediary node between a larger distribution and the road side cabinet it would be fibre between those, would be rare to have copper between the node and cabinet. Basically it is safe to ignore everything but the link between your house and the cabinet, everything after that will be fibre.

 

Where the problem actually comes in is that the majority of road side cabinets were originally put in many years ago, even before dailup, so the distance/placement for high speed internet over copper phone lines wasn't a consideration. To compound this problem the copper cables were directly buried rather than put through ducting so many houses are too far away or too many houses connect to a single cabinet and there is no solution to this problem other than costly trenching and laying new cables/cabinets which is why this has basically never happened. The only reason it is happening now is the demand is significantly high enough, and I mean public demand (outrage) not network utilization demand as that was hit long long long ago.

 

Now that internet providers have been forced to actually start laying new cables/cabinets to existing premises it makes sense to use fibre, the need for this to be done has existed even before fibre was cheap enough to deploy. Since the main cost is in the ground works not the type of cable it is logical deploy fibre all the way to the premises. At lot of cabinets are also fibre only, when you sign up to fibre here most of the time the copper line is disconnected and removed, the copper and fibre can come from different cabinets.

 

I have been rather critical of ISPs and existing issues but a lot of them are not their fault. The original copper cables were directly buried as at the time modern plastics for ducting wasn't available, costed too much or didn't make sense to do so at the time. The original scope was to provide telephone connections and that was all. What I can blame ISPs for is the utter lack of doing anything until legislation's were made to force them and public money invested. When you pay for a service you expect that some of that cost inbuilt in to the fee is for future development and service improvement.

 

As for you questions about VDSL:

• As above, fibre will be in the mix somewhere. Most important factor is between your house and the cabinet, distance.
• Ideally when you sign up for a internet plan it will say exactly what it is, it is specified here but that may not be the case in every country.  You can tell by the modem/router that is required for the connection, also the connection details when you login to the modem will say what the connection type is.
• Yes different places can have different DSL types, even from the same ISP. Usually only happens during upgrades for places not yet done, there are places here still on ADSL2+ but if you walk 200m down the road those houses can have both VDSL2 or fibre.