"John Smith" wrote

300,000 with a 10:1 data compaction is already at 3,000,000... due to the
fact we KNOW NOTHING of the data compaction methods they are using (most
likely trade secrets) we can't even guess what they are capable of... I'd
venture 10megs or more...

You guys seem to think in terms of brass keys...

You think way too small, John (if you've even thought about this at all).

A single subscriber just might (doubtful, but maybe) be able to be served via an
under-300KHz pipe at xDSL-like speed (which is decidedly slow by comparison to
other "broadband" delivery options available).

But we're talking about scores of subscribers (maybe hundreds in a high density
housing area) sharing that power-line "trunk". Every BPL scheme that I've heard
about extends from around 2MHz up into the low VHF range at 60MHz or higher.

Take the time to examine the technology before you embarass yourself more.

Beep beep
de Hans, K0HB

https://www6.adc.com/ecom/hier?EXPAND=Y&NODE=OND27297

K0HB:

I just love you guys, now you have me claiming that I know how it is going
to all work and am a "hardware authority."

Only homebrew here is linears, antennas, swr meters, and various other
"little projects" (and yes, I know, my SWR meter actually measures the
proper loading of the transmitter and NOT real SWR--but hey, I think they
keep my finals running a LOT cooler--kewler too.) Line radiation, take
off angle (because of mismatch), and increased losses don't give me
nightmares anymore.

NOPE not me, I am a software engineer (I like the title "White Hacker"
better, coder has a "ring" to it too.)

Read my past posts, I say the hardware/software guys working on BPL have
some ideas to check out, they are doing that now. If it is feasible it
will come to use, if not, it too will go the way of the dodo bird. I am
saying any number of "authority hobbyists" which don't know a fifo, lilo,
circular queue, linked list, doubly-linked list or binary tree from a
banana tree don't count. And, most likely, don't even have the beginning
of knowledge to make a statement on its' feasibility.

On RFI, they are collecting data, re-thinking, re-engineering and
re-working algorithms--after "real world data" I would imagine testing
will move indoors and be done in software--mostly... I will take a look at
the data--when it has been explored throughly (well, I might not, not that
interested really--if there is noise I will know it.)

But, your argument seems to me that you are more qualified and
knowledgeable and should be telling them not to even bother, go tell them,
see what they say... I am telling you, I know better than to do that!

You feel somehow a group of idiots got in charge of BPL and no one is
noticing, I think you are wrong. If my past experience is any indication,
they are the very best designers, R&D people, engineers, mathematicians,
etc. which have the confidence of the industry, that it should at least be
investigated.

But, what do I know? Maybe they got three mexican laborers--one with a
wire, one with a calculator and one with an old TV they are going to use
for parts. Hey, ya never know!

Too bad they didn't consult with arrl and you--would have prevented them
from looking like the fools you claim and expending uncounted bucks!
Yanno, someone save them that kind of money, they might consider making
you their CEO! Maybe it isn't too late!

I am saying, data compression will be the real key in the end, no
matter what the medium of transmission... and I do know that! It will be
the guy which knows the difference between a binary tree and a banana
tree...

John

On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 00:53:13 +0000, KØHB wrote:


"John Smith" wrote

300,000 with a 10:1 data compaction is already at 3,000,000... due to the
fact we KNOW NOTHING of the data compaction methods they are using (most
likely trade secrets) we can't even guess what they are capable of... I'd
venture 10megs or more...

You guys seem to think in terms of brass keys...

You think way too small, John (if you've even thought about this at all).

A single subscriber just might (doubtful, but maybe) be able to be served via an
under-300KHz pipe at xDSL-like speed (which is decidedly slow by comparison to
other "broadband" delivery options available).

But we're talking about scores of subscribers (maybe hundreds in a high density
housing area) sharing that power-line "trunk". Every BPL scheme that I've heard
about extends from around 2MHz up into the low VHF range at 60MHz or higher.

Take the time to examine the technology before you embarass yourself more.

Beep beep
de Hans, K0HB

https://www6.adc.com/ecom/hier?EXPAND=Y&NODE=OND27297

"John Smith" wrote


Read my past posts, I say the hardware/software guys working on BPL have
some ideas to check out, they are doing that now. If it is feasible it
will come to use, if not, it too will go the way of the dodo bird. I am
saying any number of "authority hobbyists" which don't know a fifo, lilo,
circular queue, linked list, doubly-linked list or binary tree from a
banana tree don't count. And, most likely, don't even have the beginning
of knowledge to make a statement on its' feasibility.


Wasn't arguing it's feasibility --- it's proven to work.

I was challenging your expressed notion that the frequency of operation could
likely be held under 300KHz.

73, de Hans, K0HB
Product Development Manager http://www.adc.com

Dee:

Let me appeal to your feminine side, that side where "religious
zealot-ism" is absent.

My grandfather claimed the first phone companies used peoples' barbed wire
fences, metal buildings, abandoned wiring, railroad tracks, etc. for the
very first phone lines. I wasn't born back then, and have just taken his
word for that, until someone points out is false, I like dreaming about
it. It is darn near as good a story, to me, as a romantic novel is to
heart sick teenager!

Now, what these old amateurs see as the "frankenstein monster", I see as
hope. I am wondering if we are not seeing history repeat itself and
people in the future may reflect back on the first crude methods we
implemented in BPL? And, what will BPL become when we are able to stop
using the "fences and railroad tracks?"

And, surely, you realize someone able to hold a "third-person point of
view" here would see all the players here, the self-serving, the petty,
the liars, the special interests, the con-artists, those of a "good ole
boys mentality", etc.

Gawd, haven't you ever had to sit though such a boring play that it almost
brought you to tears. Look at the opportunity here, free entertainment,
raw emotion, evil doers, the protagonists and the antagonists... you
could never purchase a ticket to such a show. And, it is real, it
is/"will be" history.

Enjoy the entertainment and keep in the mind, whatever the outcome, most
probably, we ALL win... this is not the end of the world...

John

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 20:21:22 -0400, Dee Flint wrote:


"John Smith" wrote in message
news
Dee:

I say, if it is technically possible, we WILL have it, if not, we WILL NOT
have it--I hear "authority hams" on the bands--I avoid them--what they say
just doesn't matter... if you really want to look into that crystal ball,

If it is economically viable, it will happen. If it is not, it won't.
Technology is seldom the driving force as to whether or not something is
implemented.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

K0HB:

I see BPL as spokes on a wheel, no matter what degree they are measured
in the circle, they all return to the central hub, the internet. How many
users a "spoke" can accommodate, that is what we are finding out and the
evil doers attempting to halt. You are just attempting to play the end
game, there are many moves in between.
We can't even argue that point before the real data is ALL in...

If those who jumped the bandwagon, over-reacted, already attempted to try
BPL as if it where on trial, and ended up looking self-serving are
correct, well, won't they crow as roosters that "WE WERE RIGHT!"

But, if they are wrong, a way is found, let us see if they can behave as
gentlemen and accept the criticism...

Frankly, I think you are all wet on what to get worried and upset about...
I am much more concerned how such a system could be used to spy on the
citizens of this country--and I am voicing that in other forums... a
hobby I can abandon--if ABSOLUTELY necessary.

My freedom I cannot, and my attempting to maintain that/those freedom(s)
and oppose counter forces could easily kill me...

John

On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 02:28:35 +0000, KØHB wrote:


"John Smith" wrote


Read my past posts, I say the hardware/software guys working on BPL have
some ideas to check out, they are doing that now. If it is feasible it
will come to use, if not, it too will go the way of the dodo bird. I am
saying any number of "authority hobbyists" which don't know a fifo, lilo,
circular queue, linked list, doubly-linked list or binary tree from a
banana tree don't count. And, most likely, don't even have the beginning
of knowledge to make a statement on its' feasibility.


Wasn't arguing it's feasibility --- it's proven to work.

I was challenging your expressed notion that the frequency of operation could
likely be held under 300KHz.

73, de Hans, K0HB
Product Development Manager http://www.adc.com

KØHB wrote:
"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...


The plug into the outlet thing is kind of a day late and a dollar short IMO.
My desktop computers are plugged into the walls, but all of the family laptops
are wireless. So it might be a hard sell to tell someone that they will just
have to plug into the wall socket to get their internet, when they now don't
have to connect to anything!



Your laptops would likely continue wireless via your home network. But just
like now, somewhere you'd need to "plug in" to connect to your ISP.

Correct, they would have to plug in somewhere. But it sure takes the
wind out of that "advantage" of BPL. Right now, I plug into my cable.
The only selling point is that they could run into your house without
having to physically come into your house. Big deal. Gimme the fiber!

- Mike KB3EIA -

Dee Flint wrote:
"KØHB" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...


The plug into the outlet thing is kind of a day late and a dollar short
IMO. My desktop computers are plugged into the walls, but all of the
family laptops are wireless. So it might be a hard sell to tell someone
that they will just have to plug into the wall socket to get their
internet, when they now don't have to connect to anything!


Your laptops would likely continue wireless via your home network. But
just like now, somewhere you'd need to "plug in" to connect to your ISP.



But once you have a wireless router, then it doesn't usually matter where in
the house you have it as none of the computers need to be connected directly
to it. Thus the "plug it into any power outlet" for the ISP becomes moot,
i.e. it has no extra sales value over a cable, DSL, etc connection.

Bingo! All it means is that you plug your router into the wall, and get
your net from there. I for one would prefer to get mine from a source
that doesn't have high voltage on it also!

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote

Big deal. Gimme the fiber!

Don't hold your breath!

FTTP and FTTC ("Fiber to the [business] Premise" and "Fiber to the Curb") are
both burgeoning because of the "bundling of users" which is possible, but nobody
seems to able to make a viable business case for FTTH ("Fiber To The Home"),
primarily because there is no residental "killer app" out there which demands
the bandwidth of a PON.

No market demand = no telco is motivated to make the capitol infrastructure
investment.

73, de Hans, K0HB

KØHB wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote


Big deal. Gimme the fiber!


Don't hold your breath!

FTTP and FTTC ("Fiber to the [business] Premise" and "Fiber to the Curb") are
both burgeoning because of the "bundling of users" which is possible, but nobody
seems to able to make a viable business case for FTTH ("Fiber To The Home"),
primarily because there is no residental "killer app" out there which demands
the bandwidth of a PON.

hmmm, must not be enough people out there with my problem. The more BW I
get, the more my kid hogs up. I have the ultimate solution though. When
he gets to using too much of my BW, I reach over and unplug him from the
router for a while. And no, he is not amused! 8^) What I would prefer
though, is some sort of Ethernet throttle.

No market demand = no telco is motivated to make the capitol infrastructure
investment.


- Mike KB3EIA

Mike:

Look into NetLimiter, you can run it on any computer you wish to limit
upload/download speeds on, can also run it on a computer which is serving
as a router--it will do what you want I believe...

Google netlimiter and read about it.

What these devices are is "bandwidth throttles" or "shapers", google with
those terms and it will give you quite a bit to look at.

Linux has many methods, windows is a bit limited, I ended up using
netlimiter for home use...

John


On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 00:50:18 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:

KØHB wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote


Big deal. Gimme the fiber!


Don't hold your breath!

FTTP and FTTC ("Fiber to the [business] Premise" and "Fiber to the Curb") are
both burgeoning because of the "bundling of users" which is possible, but nobody
seems to able to make a viable business case for FTTH ("Fiber To The Home"),
primarily because there is no residental "killer app" out there which demands
the bandwidth of a PON.

hmmm, must not be enough people out there with my problem. The more BW I
get, the more my kid hogs up. I have the ultimate solution though. When
he gets to using too much of my BW, I reach over and unplug him from the
router for a while. And no, he is not amused! 8^) What I would prefer
though, is some sort of Ethernet throttle.

No market demand = no telco is motivated to make the capitol infrastructure
investment.


- Mike KB3EIA