OT: Streaming Netflix

[jamesgang]

Most of your calls end up on voip before they reach the other end anyway. You think the telcoms are still multiplexing over copper? Think again.

[Higgs Boson]

WHATTTT???!!!!

Are you saying that Verizon FIOS (tfui,tfui, tfui..

IS NOT REGULATED BY YOUR STATE'S PUC? (In California that's what it's called: Public Utilities Commission.)

Are we talking about phone? Or FIOS package? .

Which part of phone svx is regulated by State (I thought) and which by Feds (if..?

Is copper regulated differently than fiber? Confused.

Please confirm, or kindly refer me to a source.

TIA

HB

[...]

[Scott Lurndal]

ATM, surely.

[trader_4]

Just because it's not sent over copper doesnt' mean it's VOIP. The telcoms were sending voice over high speed fiber before there was VOIP. It's the nature of how the call is established and switched that is the key difference. With the tradional phone system, once your call is set-up, you have a time slot connection from source to destination, guaranteed, through each switch and line from source to destination. You're guaranteed that each voice sample, every 128 usecs gets from source to destination. That route stays fixed, essentially an open channel, for the duration of the call. With VOIP, you have no such fixed arrangement and there is no guarantee on the timing of any particular packet, the order or the routing. A lot of work has gone into trying to fix the problems in voice quality caused by the latter, but it's an inherent and substantial difference in the design of the two systems.

[bob haller]

the sales reps must be paid on commision, honestly if another one ever shows up here I am erecting a big sign fios sucks and inviting the media.

[Robert Green]

That's my understanding, at least in the Washington, DC area. For the longest time Verizon has been complaining that they are held to a much higher standard of service reliability with copper than Comcast with VOIP. And they DON'T like it one bit. They've conveniently forgotten the massive tax breaks and monopoly status they've enjoyed for years providing the copper phone network.

Yet with a sweet deal like that, they're whining about how much it costs to maintain copper lines already in place. Oddly, though, they steadfastly refuse to say *exactly* how much it costs, citing "unfair competitive advantage" that might result. Oddly, again, no one seems to want to build anymore copper phone networks, so just who's going to get a big leg up knowing what it actually costs to keep copper for the people that want it or will have no choice but wireless? Even MORE oddly, rather than reveal that data, they withdrew their plan to replace copper with wireless on Fire Island, NY after Sandy hit and gave them FIOS instead. I suspect that's what they always wanted to do. Their capitulation surely suggests they are hiding something - IMHO it's that they are grossly overestimating the cost of continued maintenance of the existing copper phone network.

Most news articles I've read say that VOIP is *not* regulated by the states' PUC/PSC's but I can't speak for all of them or even anything outside of Maryland/DC.

Why is that important? Because PSC can set minimum levels of service such as how long it takes to repair outages, overall service reliability and quality of service. In addition the PSC can settle billing disputes and insure that the elderly and the ill won't have their service cut off for late or non-payment. As far as I know, no Verizon rep has ever pointed out that the FIOS phone service is battery operated, not regulated and can cause problems with existing equipment like dial up modems, credit card processing equipment, etc.

The FCC is running a test in two cities to determine whether they will support the Telco's plans to pull the plug on copper but telecom sites seem to think FCC approval that will end copper service is a done deal and the test is just window dressing:

to-lose-rules

Hmm. Sounds like the fix is in to me!

State officials wrote there "is no present or imminent contract award that could be impaired by the disclosure" and that the state Freedom of Information Law is based on a "premise that the public is vested with an inherent right to know and official secrecy is anathematic to our form of government."