🚀 go-pugleaf

Let's face it...ISDN is dead as it is.  With a max 128kbps throughput it's 
just a bandaid until we get to the cable modem (600kbps, 4mps, 10mps).

Let-em have it.  They don't even have a clue what it is to begin with.  Even 
if ISDN was affordable if you talk to any US West insider they'll tell you 
that over half of the CO's are not capable of supporting it.  By the time all 
the CO's are upgraded the cable modem will be the new thing and will totaly 
bypass ISDN.

I don't know of very many providers that are willing to put up the cost to 
even support it to begin with.  The equipment is still unreasonably expensive 
where a 10mps cable modem will come out on the market for about $200 even and 
it will do your voice, data, vidtel, cable, etc.

just 2 cents worth.

newhere-in-time (enid@heavan.org) wrote:
: Let's face it...ISDN is dead as it is.  With a max 128kbps throughput it's 
: just a bandaid until we get to the cable modem (600kbps, 4mps, 10mps).
   
   Yeah, but most of us have about as much faith in cable modems coming 
along soon and providing a really god measure of EFFECTIVE bandwidth as 
we do about having affordable ISDN. ;)

   The fact of the matter is that ISDN is a very plausible technology.  
It's possible for US West to impliment it at reasonable cost, make a 
decent profit off of those of us who are willing to pay for it, and not 
absolutely gouge the consumers.

: Let-em have it.  They don't even have a clue what it is to begin with.  Even 
: if ISDN was affordable if you talk to any US West insider they'll tell you 
: that over half of the CO's are not capable of supporting it.  By the time all 
: the CO's are upgraded the cable modem will be the new thing and will totaly 
: bypass ISDN.

   If we were in nevada, I'd ask you to wager on that one. :)  I'd rather 
bet on a technology I know can be implimented _right now_ than one 
that's still in pre-beta testing.  If/when cable modems come along -- and 
I'm not disputing that using coax has much more promise than our happy 
twisted pair bandlimited phone lines -- we'll jump to them too.

: I don't know of very many providers that are willing to put up the cost to 
: even support it to begin with.  The equipment is still unreasonably expensive 
: where a 10mps cable modem will come out on the market for about $200 even and 
: it will do your voice, data, vidtel, cable, etc.

   We'd love to support it.  As a matter of the initial equipment outlay, 
all of our terminal servers are ISDN-ready.  Now.  Not tomorrow.  Today.  
I need to buy the interface board for them, and that's it.  You might ask 
why I haven't already done so?  Because at our ratio of 10 users per 
modem, if I have to *pay* US West $180 per month per ISDN line.. well, 
you can figure it out.  That's $18 off the top for providing ISDN 
service.

   Most providers in Utah charge between $15 and $25 per month for 
individual access.  When your phone line charges are between $15 and $18 
per user, we'd need to charge exorbitant fees to provide ISDN services.  
Add that on top of the $180 our customers would pay for the line in their 
home, and it's ridiculous -- who wants to pay $220+ just to have ISDN 
when you could get a frame-relay 56k connection for a bit more and have 
full time access?

: just 2 cents worth.

   My $184/month worth. :)

     -Dave Andersen

--
angio@aros.net                Complete virtual hosting and business-oriented
system administration         Internet services.  (WWW, FTP, email)
http://www.aros.net/          http://www.aros.net/about/virtual/
(PGP Available)   "She totally confused all the passing piranhas"

In article <4fub69$7mf@vodka.intele.net>,
newhere-in-time <enid@heavan.org> wrote:
>Let's face it...ISDN is dead as it is.  With a max 128kbps throughput it's 
>just a bandaid until we get to the cable modem (600kbps, 4mps, 10mps).

You need to understand that with a cable modem, you're *sharing* that
bandwidth with tens or hundreds of other people (at least), whereas
with ISDN, that 128Kbps is dedicated just for you.


>Let-em have it.  They don't even have a clue what it is to begin with.  Even 
>if ISDN was affordable if you talk to any US West insider they'll tell you 
>that over half of the CO's are not capable of supporting it.  By the time all 
>the CO's are upgraded the cable modem will be the new thing and will totaly 
>bypass ISDN.

Well the cable plants have to be upgraded as well, and from what I understand
that can be a bigger job than upgrading a CO, because the cable systems
were all built to be uni-directional and you have to upgrade the whole
system instead of just the central office.


>I don't know of very many providers that are willing to put up the cost to 
>even support it to begin with.  The equipment is still unreasonably expensive 
>where a 10mps cable modem will come out on the market for about $200 even and 
>it will do your voice, data, vidtel, cable, etc.

That's in the same range that an ISDN TA is now, and the ISDN TA's will
no doubt be at least that cheap by the time cable modems are widely available.
ISDN routers are of course more expensive, but no doubt cable routers
will be as well.


--
Steve Kanefsky

In article <4fuou8$cvc@news.aros.net>, angio@fluffy.aros.net says...

>   We'd love to support it.  As a matter of the initial equipment outlay, 
>all of our terminal servers are ISDN-ready.  Now.  Not tomorrow.  Today.  
>I need to buy the interface board for them, and that's it.  You might ask 
>why I haven't already done so?  Because at our ratio of 10 users per 
>modem, if I have to *pay* US West $180 per month per ISDN line.. well, 
>you can figure it out.  That's $18 off the top for providing ISDN 
>service.

Well, it's not really *that* bad, even in USWorstland.  The proposed USW
tariff for BRI is only, I think, $39/month to *receive* calls.  SO if you're
a typical ISP, you don't make any calls on the line anyway, and $39 isn't
so bad for two B channels. 

The $180 rate is for unlimited use, but very few "normal" people use more
than 200 hours/month.  For that, the $69/month rate is only, say, twice what
it should be, but not surprising given how much money USWest must spend 
giving POTS lines to ranchers in Buffalo Commons for around 1/10 cost.  I
mean, even we Massachusetts subscribers effectively pay our EUCLs to US West.

Anybody who "nails" an ISDN line 7x24 is obviously SOL, but USWest's Frame 
Relay is only around $70/month.  You know which service they *want* you to
buy :-( .   The $184 service should have been labeled "ISDN Semi-permanent
connection".  I think Telstra and maybe Deutche Telekom do that.  It's a
dialable leased-line tariff through the ISDN switch.  (That's a funny way
of saying "We expect this line to be used all the time and set a flat rate
appropriate for that.")

Now as an ISP, it's PRI rates I'm more concerned with, and that's one
area where compaints about US West are certainly warrnated!
-- 
Fred R. Goldstein   k1io   fgoldstein@bbn.com   +1 617 873 3850
Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission.