DirecTV loses 1.2 million customers

I’m dumping DTV soon, I rarely watch cable tv anymore.

it will save me a pretty penny.
Nowadays I stick to Netflix and Amazon Video, soon I will be adding Disney Plus which will include ESPN.
So yeah, I think I’m good.
Disney+ will include ESPN?
 
When Google first started installing fiber in Austin they were using the traditional method of digging a trench and laying the fiber. Lots of complaints about torn up yards and sidewalks. They then switched to micro trenching, lot less problems and it went much quicker.


Sent from my iPad using the SatelliteGuys app!

Google, AT&T, Frontier, and Ting continue to deploy a lot of buried fiber using a variety of methods, including microtrenching, in my area.
 
They used micro trenching in Louisville and the problems they had forced them to abandon the city altogether, so it obviously doesn't work well everywhere. Going only two inches underground is ridiculous, you could accidentally cut your fiber digging up a weed, let alone digging for a new tree or fencepost.
 
They used micro trenching in Louisville and the problems they had forced them to abandon the city altogether, so it obviously doesn't work well everywhere. Going only two inches underground is ridiculous, you could accidentally cut your fiber digging up a weed, let alone digging for a new tree or fencepost.
Not to mention the road damage it caused. But fixed wireless has it's problems too. Sure, it's cheaper for these companies to rollout, but the technology still isn't quite ready yet. Verizon's fixed 5G broadband isn't doing so well due to weak and spotty signal. Verizon says they can reach 1,000 feet away with their cells, but it's been reported that it's more around 500. Installing small cells may be less of a hazard than the extensive amount of digging fiber requires, but then there's other issues like getting permission to mount these small cells in the first place, and a extensive amount of fees to cover when installing a new small cell every one thousand feet. The cost of building a second network with a insane amount of cells is still high, it could match the cost of fiber pulls. What makes you think AT&T could do different? Overbuilds have never worked out without large amounts of money lost, and has even resulted in bankruptcy for smaller companies. The only market I can see 5G eliminating wire-line is in rural areas. This technology still isn't ready yet...
 
That's fine in neighborhoods that have aerial lines, its not so easy where utilities are buried. Running fiber that last 50-100 feet to the house means digging up the yard, dealing with other utilities to have their locations marked (and they aren't always right so they risk piercing a gas, electric or water line when they trench) potentially dealing with tree roots, and so forth. Easier to use fixed wireless for the "last mile" (i.e. last few hundred feet) in such places.
Thats no different than any other utility burying lines in yards ... happens all the time.
 
As they should ...
They already own the pole and the right away that its in.
They did that in my city also.
Had a disaster declaration and a tax holiday for business investment for 1 Year.

It was like the California fire crews . Contractors showed up everywhere and 300,000 people ended up having overhead fiber available direct to their houses , all in less than a year. They are slowly going back and ripping out the dead copper lines.

The Congress should just suck it up like they did in the REA days and fiber the nation in 4 years.

Sent from S10 Plus
using the SatelliteGuys app!
 
Not to mention the road damage it caused. But fixed wireless has it's problems too. Sure, it's cheaper for these companies to rollout, but the technology still isn't quite ready yet. Verizon's fixed 5G broadband isn't doing so well due to weak and spotty signal. Verizon says they can reach 1,000 feet away with their cells, but it's been reported that it's more around 500. Installing small cells may be less of a hazard than the extensive amount of digging fiber requires, but then there's other issues like getting permission to mount these small cells in the first place, and a extensive amount of fees to cover when installing a new small cell every one thousand feet. The cost of building a second network with a insane amount of cells is still high, it could match the cost of fiber pulls. What makes you think AT&T could do different? Overbuilds have never worked out without large amounts of money lost, and has even resulted in bankruptcy for smaller companies. The only market I can see 5G eliminating wire-line is in rural areas. This technology still isn't ready yet...


Oh yeah totally agree that fixed wireless 5G is still in the early stages. But there is plenty of incentive for companies to work out the issues and wait for it to be ready, than to do any big fiber rollouts. That's why Verizon halted their fiber buildouts a few years ago, and while AT&T is still doing a few here and there they are really only doing it because of commitments they've had to the FCC/FTC in the past for acquisitions etc. Centurylink gave up building new fiber years ago, Google Fiber is mostly at a standstill. The only companies building out new fiber are small local/regional players, especially those that are co-op type places like rural electric or rural telephone cooperatives where the customers are also the owners. They are able to take a longer term view, leverage other utility work to reduce investment, and make people commit to multi-year contracts to guarantee a payback.

It will take 2-3 years before it really picks up the pace, but we aren't going to see a lot of fiber to to the home coming from the telcos in the meantime. They are willing to wait for the cheaper/better option to become ready. It is sort of like where DSL was in the late 90s, where they need the equipment to come up in quality and down in price, and to get more "lessons learned" from trial deployments to figure out a way around them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CycloneSat
Isn't there already some complaining that 5G mm wave is injurious to health?

I suspect 5G mm wave is not going to be as wonderful as promised. And certainly of little use for cell phones. Dish may bet on it, but that's for IOT.


Sent from my iPad3 using the SatelliteGuys app! Only because can't get Tapatalk to work on such an old device. I'll shift to Chrome on this, too, eventually.
 
Sure there is complaining about 5G being unhealthy, and many people are buying it since they can't think for themselves. Just another conspiracy theory.
 
Verizon never really halted their fiber buildouts.. they just slowed down on new markets...the areas that are currently fios areas are being completly cut over to fiber. ..that includes dsl and isdn customers...and all pots lines...meanwhile verizon business has a huge new businss fiber network in Seattle and other cities
Oh yeah totally agree that fixed wireless 5G is still in the early stages. But there is plenty of incentive for companies to work out the issues and wait for it to be ready, than to do any big fiber rollouts. That's why Verizon halted their fiber buildouts a few years ago, and while AT&T is still doing a few here and there they are really only doing it because of commitments they've had to the FCC/FTC in the past for acquisitions etc. Centurylink gave up building new fiber years ago, Google Fiber is mostly at a standstill. The only companies building out new fiber are small local/regional players, especially those that are co-op type places like rural electric or rural telephone cooperatives where the customers are also the owners. They are able to take a longer term view, leverage other utility work to reduce investment, and make people commit to multi-year contracts to guarantee a payback.

It will take 2-3 years before it really picks up the pace, but we aren't going to see a lot of fiber to to the home coming from the telcos in the meantime. They are willing to wait for the cheaper/better option to become ready. It is sort of like where DSL was in the late 90s, where they need the equipment to come up in quality and down in price, and to get more "lessons learned" from trial deployments to figure out a way around them.

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!
 
Isn't there already some complaining that 5G mm wave is injurious to health?

I suspect 5G mm wave is not going to be as wonderful as promised. And certainly of little use for cell phones. Dish may bet on it, but that's for IOT.


Sent from my iPad3 using the SatelliteGuys app! Only because can't get Tapatalk to work on such an old device. I'll shift to Chrome on this, too, eventually.
Pretty sure that's just a myth.
 
No, not at all. MM waves are simply microwave frequencies above 30GHz and the allowable public RF exposure levels are much higher than for lower frequencies like 100MHz. At MM wave frequencies RF does not penetrate much below the skin so internal heating is not a concern. I've done a lot of work at MM wave frequencies up to 96Ghz and some high power near MM wave on DirecTV Ka band uplinks at 28GHz.

In fact the US military has a heat weapon you might have seen on TV that is run from the back of a HUMVEE. It puts out tons of power in the roughly 50GHz range and a modest size antenna at that frequency will have a lot of gain and a very narrow beam. Its been tested on many people including journalists who were being recorded while hit with the beam and it makes their skin hot very fast and there is no other risk. MM wave frequencies are a lot safer than the frequencies your cell phone operates at.

The people complaining that MM waves from new 5G equipment is not safe are the same ones wearing aluminum foil hats and claiming that the Govt is raining "heavy metals" on us from chem trails.

Same frequencies xrays use...its not a myth

Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!
 
Emphasis on Dish doing it, but not if ATT does it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 3)

Top