« Haydon Leaving Nortel | Main | What Us, Worry? »
Is Optical Back?
By Mark Evans | August 22, 2007
WOW!’s decision to purchase optical equipment from Nortel isn’t huge news given WOW! is a small cable/phone/high-speed Internet service provider in Denver but it is another sign that the optical market is coming back to life after some terrible days after the telecom boom ended.
For all the fiber installed during the dot-com boom and the suggestions much of it is still unlit, there is little doubt demand from optical equipment is coming back as consumers demand bigger pipes to send and receive data-hungry services such as video and IP-TV.
As Tom Buttermore, general manager, cable solutions with Nortel, said in the press release: “The consumer appetite for real-time services has never been higher, placing a heavy toll on networks that deliver everything from voice and data to video-on-demand”.
Topics: Contract Wins |
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:14 am
Optics is dead never to return like the bubble days. I suspect optical backbone implementations are Nortel’s most growing and profitable area but this is peanuts relative to their overall business losing money for a decade.
As for IP-TV, Cisco spent billions acquiring already profitable Scientific Atlanta as Nortel pulls another inspiration like PEC, Neptune, Putian, or even to sell Microsoft server software boasting its IP-TV inspirations and increased demand for bandwidth where each of is will have a requirement for 10 devices in so few years like anyone we’ll spend 10 times more for IP or something. It’s nonsense.
I have’nt heard much about IP-TV yet and they aready have TV cards that work on PCs and don’t use IP. Also look at video cam demand and prices that does use IP to transmit and receive audio visuals, so I don’t know what all the hype is about.
IP-TV like 4G is hype, a buzzword, where’s the money?
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/gear/2005-08-16-iptv-sbc_x.htm
SUMMARY: MATH.& HISTORY
Based on history, Teletruth believes SBC is misleading the public by making claims it knows can’t be true. They claim 18 million homes in 3 years will be rewired at a cost of $4 billion for “IPTV†— video services using the IP networks.
— That comes to.$222 a household for deployment of a fiber optic based new service.It is pure fantasy. And the equipment doesn’t even work today.
—History points to SBC simply making stuff up to change laws in their favor.
The title of this USA Today article is correct, — $4 billion is not much money and SBC can not be trusted to either spend the money or deploy the technology.
USA Today: “The carrier plans to spend $4 billion by 2007 to wire 18 million homes for the cutting-edge technology.â€
Do the math — It’s simply ridiculous!
It comes out to 6 million homes a year — at a cost of —– $222.22 per household…. Please stop laughing.
Anyone acquainted with this business knows that it cost more than $222 per household to rewire, much less supply the technology needed for IPTV — which is new and has been deployed sporadically in other countries.
USA Today writes: “Indeed, nobody knows how IPTV will behave once it is “scaled,†or rolled out, to millions of paying customers. One of the largest IPTV installations in the world is in China, and that one has only about 500,000 customers.â€
And the real kicker — The stuff doesn’t work today, but they can make statements to show how SBC is delivering on broadband.
USA Today: “The wildcard is Microsoft. The tech giant is developing the operating system that will form the heart of SBC’s IPTV service - and it isn’t close to done. ….There’s also the question of whether the half-dozen or so vendors
supporting the project can get their hardware and software to mesh properly.
Getting it perfect right out of the box is critical.â€
August 22nd, 2007 at 3:57 pm
jamezzz- you actually spent 15 minutes writing this garbage?
August 23rd, 2007 at 12:53 am
This is NOT garbage, Observer has it right. Back in ‘94 when ADSL was the “next big thing” (and I was there, right in the midst of it) the same mantra was being regurgitated by the then-seven Baby Bells. Each one had the very same unrealistic numbers in terms of cost, homes passed, speed and functionality. It took another 4-5 years to get it right by which time the Cablecos had already developed an insurmountable lead. Worthy of note is that deploying phy-layer network (i.e.: ADSL, Fiber), which the Telcos know how to do is a lot easier when compared to adding a whole new set of high-QoS services, as in IPTV. The latter is NOT a part of Telcos’ core competencies. This stuff doesn’t even work in the labs (and I have also been there as well). Lastly, making a $4B bet is easy when it is someone else’s money.
On a different note, the bigger question is why even mention a no-name like WOW! Where are the real optical customers?
August 24th, 2007 at 7:21 pm
Optical may be back but again Nortel is not winning its fair share of the growth because of investment discontinuities between 2001 and 2005. Alcatel and Cisco have emerged as the leaders along with Ciena, Tellabs then finally Nortel. This is another relatively weak part of Nortel’s portfolio compared to competitors.