On 2010-09-12 23:52, Ilya Chernykh wrote:
On Monday 13 September 2010 00:58:01 Carlos E. R. wrote:
This is completely standard not only for this city but for this country and for neighboring countries also.
Also for single-family houses or mostly in areas with higher concentrations? I'm surprised it was worth the extra investment in the infrastructure, but I guess xDSL wasn't suitable for some reason.
I guess that their phone network is older.
Can you please tell me why do you think ADSL is better than Ethernet? Why one should choose ADSL?
Where did I say that??? :-o
- ADSL requires installing of much of additional equipment on the abonent side - It requires modification of telephone stations - It has lower data rates - It it asymmetric - It has greather latency - There is no LAN for ADSL users so they have to pay for Internet in order to connect to each other.
It is cheaper and faster to install, because the cable (copper pair) is already there. The equipment is placed in the exchange, with lots of space, no need to go to the street and request permissions. It is a method to reuse what is already installed, with profit. Look. In my country (Spain), there was a moment when the government favoured the installation of new telephone companies, phone and cable, starting on the 1st of January of 1998. I remember, I was there, a diminute participant. To facilitate competitivity, the state forced the dominant Telephone company (previous monopoly) to refrain from offering advanced services, like fast adsl, or TV over the copper pair, or fiber to the home, so that the cable companies had time to start up. This restriction has finished, I understand. Well. In my home (not a flat), I have the cable box on the corner of the block, not more than 25 meters from my front door. Never the less, the cable company, when I wanted to hire service from them (TV, Internet, and phone) refused to give service because I was "too far" to lay the cable (year 1999). To this day, I have no option to use cable, a mere 25 meter lay. Several neighbours on the block were told the same, and one I know fought the decision - unsuccessfully. Apparently, as the corner house is a baby school, they need some kind of special permission or insurance. I know the school gave permission. Nevertheless, the cable company said "no". Even with the advantage given by the authorities to the cable companies, they do not give service unless you live on a high rise building, with high rentability. So... Is cable better? Undoubtedly, for the user. But I have no option: Copper pair phone and ADSL, plus satellite dish for digital TV (now we have terrestrial digital TV, free of charge, 20 or 40 channels, so satellite is less of a temptation). The copper pair was already in the house, I asked for adsl, got it immediately. That is probably the situation in western Europe (except that Spain is/was less developed than most of W.Europe). ADSL was faster and cheaper to install. And what I said is that my guess is that perhaps in Russia that was not the case perhaps because the network wasn't fully digitalized. It is an hypothesis, I do not know. I never said nor implied that ADSL is better. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 11.2 x86_64 "Emerald" GM (Elessar))