# How much cable bandwidth is left?



## gusmahler (Aug 1, 2006)

I was telling a friend about the new D* channels and how they merely launched a satellite and we have a bunch of new HD channels. He asked me a question that I didn't know the answer to and I thought someone here can answer:

Can cable do the same thing? Is there room on the cable to fit more HD channels, should the cable companies want to match E* and D* as far as quantity?

I remember when I was in Phoenix, there were some areas that simply didn't have any channels because they hadn't laid fiber optics yet. So it appears that adding bandwidth is tougher for cable companies because they need to do a lot of digging. (Then again, launching a satellite can't be cheap.) But with cable companies handling more data traffic than ever, can they go to 70 or 100 HD channels? Do some cable systems already have those kind of numbers?


----------



## Walter_81 (Oct 2, 2007)

cable will not be able to keep up with satellite until they run fiber to the home. Most cable companies and some phone companies already have fiber on utility lines and underground.....but not to the home. FIOS by verizon will be the first. 

To answer you question.....cable cannot even come close to providing the same anount of HD channels as satelitte because they only have so much bandwith using a copper cable (only so many RF's you can fit in).

Hence the reason im jumping ship, 12 hd channels is all i get here......and they all suck.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

It's really simple. Any cable company can easily match satellite. Analog removal. The bandwidth for 1 analog channel is that of two HD channels. All cable companies have to do is start removing analog channels, but with that comes backlash from analog only subs. TW here removed ESPN Classic in analog last month, National Geographic Channel should be next. I have 21 HD channels right now from TW and six more (CNN HD, TBS HD, Food Network HD, HGTV HD, History Channel HD, LMN HD) are to be added sometime this month.


----------



## antioch (Oct 3, 2007)

Walter_81 is correct. The only way that cable can get more bandwidth is by pumping more power through their cable. The problem is, more and more are using it and it's a shared signal. So, they're putting power onto it to pump up signal more, but that's also causing more interference since it pumps up good and bad signals. I am a Verizon FiOS technician and so far we're the only ones doing overlay of Fiber Optics to the customer premises. Others will do it on new homes (greenfields), but right now Verizon is the only one placing new fiber in old areas.

AT&T is doing basically what cable does, but they have even more limits with theirs I think. Cable and AT&T are running fiber to their hubs, nods, or bboxes (whatever you want to call them)... From there they send it on copper to the house. Not a good way to get top quality service.

Satellite needs to launch more birds in the sky to keep up with the HD channels, but I'm not sure how long that's going to keep up either.

Steve Mehs states they can match satellite, which is true... But, they can't match true fiber to the premises yet. Word on the street is that cable and AT&T are talking about placing fiber to homes in overlay areas now.

Blessings,
Thomas


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

We have to remember, that even if cable dumps analog channels, they still are pretty much at their capacity. They run voice, data, and TV off the copper they bring into the house. They might be able to squeeze several more channels from their current implementation, but they will not be seeing 70+ HD channels anytime soon. Fiber is where they will need to eventually be, but that comes with extreme costs. Hence they are trying to make all the money they can before they are "forced" to upgrade the home connection.


----------



## antioch (Oct 3, 2007)

phat78boy said:


> We have to remember, that even if cable dumps analog channels, they still are pretty much at their capacity. They run voice, data, and TV off the copper they bring into the house. They might be able to squeeze several more channels from their current implementation, but they will not be seeing 70+ HD channels anytime soon. Fiber is where they will need to eventually be, but that comes with extreme costs. Hence they are trying to make all the money they can before they are "forced" to upgrade the home connection.


As an employee of the first company to do this... I know. I drive a 1987 Dodge van with no AC or Radio. We are required to pinch every penny while doing our installs. Right now the average install costs Verizon about 600 dollars I believe... At least the last I had heard. That's with equipment (ONT, BBU, PSU, Wiring, Router) and the technician. But, when cable gets hit hard by the phone companies, they'll do what they have to do. Fiber is almost limitless!


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

Agreed, if/when they go fiber, they will by far be able to carry anything they wish. Problem being is rolling out fiber to everyone who wants it will take literally decades. There are still places that don't even have support for data and voice over copper. For those on the first wave of getting fiber to their house, it will be nice. They will by far be the minority for a good many years though.


----------



## antioch (Oct 3, 2007)

phat78boy said:


> Agreed, if/when they go fiber, they will by far be able to carry anything they wish. Problem being is rolling out fiber to everyone who wants it will take literally decades. There are still places that don't even have support for data and voice over copper. For those on the first wave of getting fiber to their house, it will be nice. They will by far be the minority for a good many years though.


Yes... In my area we've installed in Chino, Chino Hills, Ontario, San Dimas, LaVerne, Corona, Fontana, Etiwanda.

Other area's nearby are almost all of Temecula Valley (Murrieta, Lake Elsinore, Temecula), Banning, Beaumont, Redlands, Huntington Beach, Long Beach, Westminister, Garden Grove, Santa Fe Springs, Whittier, Norwalk, etc.

So, we're rolling out fast... But, that's Southern California only. But, I think we're trying to roll out as fast as we can.


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

antioch said:


> Yes... In my area we've installed in Chino, Chino Hills, Ontario, San Dimas, LaVerne, Corona, Fontana, Etiwanda.
> 
> Other area's nearby are almost all of Temecula Valley (Murrieta, Lake Elsinore, Temecula), Banning, Beaumont, Redlands, Huntington Beach, Long Beach, Westminister, Garden Grove, Santa Fe Springs, Whittier, Norwalk, etc.
> 
> So, we're rolling out fast... But, that's Southern California only. But, I think we're trying to roll out as fast as we can.


In the grand scheme of things, thats barely scratching the surface. So Cal is what, about 30-40% covered? I think that might be high. I am speaking total households. Thats just So Cal, forget about the rest of California. I understand its a tedious process to rollout fiber, which is why it will take so long to get everyone on board. From what I remember they started in 05. It will come, they just have a lot of work to do.


----------



## antioch (Oct 3, 2007)

phat78boy said:


> In the grand scheme of things, thats barely scratching the surface. So Cal is what, about 30-40% covered? I think that might be high. I am speaking total households. Thats just So Cal, forget about the rest of California. I understand its a tedious process to rollout fiber, which is why it will take so long to get everyone on board. From what I remember they started in 05. It will come, they just have a lot of work to do.


yes, it will take a while. job security =D


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

antioch said:


> yes, it will take a while. job security =D


That is for sure! Used to belong to a "group" and the moto was, "don't do it on your time, do it on over time". lol


----------



## Ext 721 (Feb 26, 2007)

the latest trend is SDV...switched digital video...which means the cable box requests a channel from a router, typically located withing a block or two. the router, which has more channels than can fit through customer-end rg-6, carried either by fiber or by heavier cable and higher frequencies, will send that channel through using a "blank" channel area. This works quite well so long as at least half the block is watching the same 100 or so channels. If everyone on a block of 300 homes watched a different channel, you might get a "please wait for that channel to become available" message. Similar to how airline booking correctly predicts that 5% (or whatever) of everyone holding a ticket won't show, and thus books 102% of the plane's capacity...SDV "bets" on the idea that most people watch the same few programs.


----------



## phat78boy (Sep 12, 2007)

SDV seems like more of a "patch" to me then a solution. Where their fiber from the CO to their hub might never reach capacity, from the CO to your house its still copper. If enough people in the area are still using phone, internet, and TV, capacity will still be reached by the limits of copper.


----------



## Walter_81 (Oct 2, 2007)

Basically, right now and probably the next 10 years.....if you want maximum HD content, stick with dish. Period.

Once fiber to the home becomes common.......itll be a whole other ball game.


----------



## jimmyv2000 (Feb 15, 2007)

Walter_81 said:


> Basically, right now and probably the next 10 years.....if you want maximum HD content, stick with dish. Period.
> 
> Once fiber to the home becomes common.......itll be a whole other ball game.


$1,400 just to run fiber *UNDERGROUND*From the street to the side of my House.I have to foot the cost 
Ain't Happening
now that verizon has sold all thier landlines in NH,VT and ME my hopes have run out.
The new company is FAIRPOINT Communications 
they have palns to offer tv service BUT*IT WILL BE OVER COPPER*.
Verizon was going to offer Tv service here in NH but pulled out at the last minute then a week later(back in may of 06)announced the sale of all the landlines.
I will stick with D*
and CRAPCAST forget it

Just My 2¢


----------



## antioch (Oct 3, 2007)

jimmyv2000 said:


> $1,400 just to run fiber *UNDERGROUND*From the street to the side of my House.I have to foot the cost
> Ain't Happening
> now that verizon has sold all thier landlines in NH,VT and ME my hopes have run out.
> The new company is FAIRPOINT Communications
> ...


Yes, we have noticed some strange movements by VZ Engineering and Management. I just hope that the somewhat "strange" decisions will be beneficial in the long run with you guys (the customers).


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Steve Mehs said:


> It's really simple. Any cable company can easily match satellite. Analog removal. The bandwidth for 1 analog channel is that of two HD channels. All cable companies have to do is start removing analog channels, but with that comes backlash from analog only subs. TW here removed ESPN Classic in analog last month, National Geographic Channel should be next. I have 21 HD channels right now from TW and six more (CNN HD, TBS HD, Food Network HD, HGTV HD, History Channel HD, LMN HD) are to be added sometime this month.


Um Steve, cable is limited to approximately 850Mhz or .85GHz thru copper to the home. DIRECTV has in-space satellite capacity of ~4.5GHz with permanent licenses to deliver 7.5GHz to the home. Cable has only one immediate hope, switched video and one long-term hope of fiber. Both involve lots of upgrades and cable as an industry is way, way behind both the dbs providers.

Yes, there is some sloppy figuring with my current capability numbers in that the Spaceway's can't deliver the full 1GHz each to a national audience. D10 and D11 come closer with their repeating spotbeams, but don't either. But the point is still valid, DIRECTV has more bandwidth in one licensed slot than cable can deliver via copper.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## CableSux (Oct 7, 2005)

Good info Tom.



> the latest trend is SDV...switched digital video


In the satellite world, that's called a receiver 

A satellite dish picks up the entire bandwidth that Tom mentioned. It's the receiver that tells the dish which frequency and which satellite to tune to, kind of like you tuning in a radio station, and send that signal down the coax to the receiver.


----------



## AntAltMike (Nov 21, 2004)

Tom Robertson said:


> ...cable is limited to approximately 850Mhz or .85GHz thru copper to the home. DIRECTV has in-space satellite capacity of ~4.5GHz with permanent licenses to deliver 7.5GHz to the home. Cable has only one immediate hope, switched video and one long-term hope of fiber. Both involve lots of upgrades and cable as an industry is way, way behind both the dbs providers.


But cable carries five times as much programming as does DBS satellite over the same bandwidth. One 30 MHz, DirecTV or DISH QPSK transponder can be "transcoded" into one cable TV 64QAM channel. That efficiency makes DirecTV and cable about even.

DirecTV has to tie up a significant portion of its bandwidth to carrying 1,600 local HDTV signals, whereas each cable system only carries a dozen or so, and I think 256QAM presently stuffs three broadcast HDTV signals into one 6MHz channel.

What little residential work I still do has involved customers who can afford whatever TV services they want, but even their personal assistants hound me over the fact that it winds up costing them $1,000 or more to have DirecTV as the source for a multi-satellite, multiple HD-DVR home service.

Unless DirecTV has some kind of exclusivity agreement on some of its new HDTV programming, then the recent resurgence in interest in DirecTV for residential HDTV will be short-lived. I occasionally install DirecTV in multiple dwelling units for residents who want The NFL Sunday Ticket or who already own their DirecTV redceivers and are too busy to learn someone else's menu's and remotes, but other than that, most of the others are for people who are too busy to have discovered that their local franchised cable system now has more than 36 channels. There are millions of people presently subscribing to DBS satellite who do not realize that they would be better served by franchised cable.


----------



## lowspeed (Oct 8, 2007)

I'm curious. Verizon fios uses a single fiber ? or do they have a bundle of fibers?

How many HD channels can one fiber carry ?


----------

