AT&T Fiber

Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by JohnR, Apr 17, 2019.

  1. JohnR macrumors member

    JohnR

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Location:
    Louisville, Kentucky
    #1
    Going to switch from Spectrum Cable internet to AT&T Fiber 1GB internet tomorrow. Got a damn good price ($55/month vs $65 for spectrum), so I am very excited.

    Google Fiber came to town, installed in some neighborhoods, but pulled out of our city entirely. All due to them trying this new method, called micro trenching, which ended up being entirely TOO stupid of an idea. ( https://techcrunch.com/2019/02/07/google-fiber-pulls-out-of-louisville/ )

    Anyone else have any experience with AT&T fiber?

    My speed tonight, on my 2013 MacBook Air wirelessly:
    [​IMG]
     
  2. Darth.Titan macrumors 68030

    Darth.Titan

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2007
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #2
    I use AT&T Gigapower service. Fiber comes right into my garage. Three years now of very dependable service.
    This is a wired connection to my 2018 Mac Mini.
     

    Attached Files:

  3. Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #3
    I prefer your legacy operator at the 400 Mbps plan. I can't justify getting the gig service unless it's to brag about it. We're over provisioned to about 450-460 Mbps and the speed is sweet! It was the evolution of the legacy 300~ speeds. A max download rate of 58 MB/sec on an open, non-throttling server is plenty fast for us.

    I do have experience with FiOS Business and it's very fast and dependable at two locations. Excellent customer support, truck rollout within 20 minutes of a call for a major issue, etc. I just wish Verizon's consumer side was just as good.
     
  4. JohnR thread starter macrumors member

    JohnR

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Location:
    Louisville, Kentucky
    #4
    I assume that what I'm getting is the same thing you have. So they stopped at your garage? Why? I'm wanting to have it next to my TV so that I can hardwire my AppleTV to it and run everything else wirelessly.

    How's your speed over wifi?
    --- Post Merged, Apr 18, 2019 ---
    If I hadn't gotten the discount, I probably would have gone with their 300MB/s plan. But this was too good to pass up! Free install, free equipment, no data cap, price good for a year, then we renegotiate. Either way, I get $15 off per month no matter the plan.
     
  5. willmtaylor macrumors G3

    willmtaylor

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2009
    Location:
    A Natural State
    #5
    Competition is always a good thing for the consumer.
     
  6. velocityg4 macrumors 601

    velocityg4

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2004
    Location:
    Georgia
    #6
    I switched to their gigabit plan last May. It has been very reliable. While it is much faster than my old 100 mbps Comcast plan. Real world differences aren't noticeable. Web pages are too small, servers are limited and streaming uses too little bandwidth to matter.

    Where you would really notice a difference is upload speed. As it is gigabit up and down. Also if your ISP's DNS servers suck. Assuming AT&T in your area doesn't. Although I manually configure DNS for Google. As the are the most responsive here .
    Another benefit is no data cap. Handy if you move a lot of data.

    Real world speed ranges from the high 500's to high 900's depending on the time of day.
     
  7. Darth.Titan macrumors 68030

    Darth.Titan

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2007
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #7
    Fiber runs to the garage, then it transitions to copper to run into the house to my structured wiring panel.
    Wireless access is great as well, but I don’t use the AT&T’s wireless modem as it’s mounted in a wall panel to feed my wired Ethernet. That’s why I only provided the wired speeds.
     

    Attached Files:

  8. Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #8
    That's one of the reasons I don't want fiber but want similar downlink speeds. I don't want a mass of cables coming into my garage or whatever and taking up space. Or even inside the home. There are some methods of coax providers giving high speed download and upload, but it involves major investment into the network itself as well as new hardware, and they don't go for that. It also requires a hybrid mess of fiber and coax. It's a lot of sunk that neither provider nor consumer wants to pay for. Not sure how prevalent fiber is in Europe at typical consumer levels and not what you can get from your hotel or vacation rental home.
     
  9. A.Goldberg macrumors 68020

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #9
    Personally I think this 1Gbps and 2Gbps services are a bit of a sham. If you get equal upload speeds and need that speed it might be worth it. In real world practice, even 802.11ac rated at 1300mbps+ in reality will only achieve 600-7000mbps. If you pay for 2Gbps like Verizon offers, I think it is more for marketing than anything knowing most people can’t utilize that speed. Unless you’re using Cat6+ and have the appropriate network cards you’ll max our around 100mbps-1Gbps. It’s funny how a lot of these companies send/install modems with Cat5 (not Cat5e or Cat6) with 100mbps+ service, I presume to effectively limit the bandwidth for their benefit.
     
  10. Zenithal, Apr 19, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2019

    Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #10
    This is both a limitation of the current wi-fi version and the throughput issues and overhead affect even the fastest AC3200+ router can process data with a high end processor. With a decent AC router, it's possible to hit gig speeds repeatedly when wired in. The rest of your post is odd, because even built-in Intel NIC chips on a motherboard you can buy off the shelf can handle up to 1 Gb speeds with no issue. It's speeds after that, that become a little iffy. And as prices have fallen, it isn't hard to upgrade. That said, unless your home is in the middle of nowhere without any wi-fi interference from a router, a phone, etc. and there's at least 10 miles between you and other homes, you won't hit any higher in wi-fi speeds on a gig service. You use a wired connection to test these. Hands down I recommend Intel NICs over anything else. These have the ability to process data instead of handing it off to your computer's CPU.

    Most servers that are set up to allow max speed generally aren't set up the same for the inverse. For most use cases, 60-120 Mbps upload is plenty, the latter half approaches 15 MB/sec. Even if you were uploading DSLR photos, it's toughly 1-1.5 seconds per photo on average. Hardware prices for home use have fallen considerably, so the expensive argument goes out the window. Cat6A would be the wiser wiring choice for these. They suffer no speed loss up until 100 meters while previous forms of Cat6 lose speed at half or less than half of that distance/length.

    Companies utilize cheaper cables to prevent cost overruns. You could effectively buy higher quality coaxial cable online than whatever your cable company runs through your house from a pole outside. It's a cost benefit to them, and not necessarily a means to jip you on your service. The other issue with your post is that unless there is demand, these services will never get cheaper or expand. It's highly unlikely for physical media to make a resurgence, even if they can stick 1 TB of data onto a disc. It's an extra cost to master and record copies and ship them out. As quality improves and tech advances, you'll soon run into problems with stagnant services. 100 Mbps download speeds aren't as common as you'd like to believe either. Triple A games don't distribute with physical media anymore to my knowledge. Many of them hover around 50-120 GB a download. This number is expected to double in the coming years.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 19, 2019 ---
    There are some use cases for faster speeds. This one may interest you more.

    https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/...et-fastest-home-internet-in-the-united-states

    To use Comcast's 2 Gb connection, you do need to invest some money. The biggest cost and hurdle will be sourcing the switches you need to use to handle those speeds. There was an article that came out 2 years ago about some guy doing that when Comcast was beta testing it, but I can't find it and the costs may have come down then.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 19, 2019 ---
    The ISP I use recently began moving their lowest speed customers from 100 Mbps to 200 Mbps. 100 Mbps was their fastest speed a decade ago, which is what I ordered then. It then became 300 Mbps, and now it's 400 Mbps. Except the real fasted speed is their Gig Service or rather 940 Mbps. Which avoids the false advertisement issue. People regularly maximize their bandwidth on this speed.

    Even with the advent of fast AC devices, most of them still come with an ethernet port somewhere. New smart TVs have one on their small hub or behind the TV in a hidden panel. The fact that Apple didn't ditch the port on their 4K unit says a lot.
     
  11. A.Goldberg macrumors 68020

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #11
    I'm not talking about router processing power or wired ethernet in reference to 600-700mbps, I'm talking about WiFi bandwidth a totally separate issue. With WiFi you will have interference- 2.4ghz you're more prone to interference from other radio waves, 5ghz your signal suffers with walls and such.

    I was also saying if you pay for 2gbps service and your wired ethernet adapter can only hand 1gbps and your wifi in reality can only accommodate 600-700mbps, paying for 2gb service vs. 1gb service essentially wouldn't have a lot of benefit unless you had a large amount of users which probably wouldn't be happening at a residential address.

    The other problem is when you download something from a web server, you're probably not going 1gbps from that server. So again the >1gbps service is a bit silly for most residential use.

    Well, Cat6 and Cat6a can both operated at 100m, Cat6 maxes out at 1gbps though vs 10. If we want to add to the list of problems many homes (and businesses for that matter) aren't wired with ethernet and if they are its usually Cat5e due to the cheaper cost and better flexibility. So again, with Cat 5e you max out at 1gbps. And Cat5 is in a lot of older places (100mbps max) and found in lots of patch cables, secretly slowing speeds. That's what I was talking about, modems are sent out Cat5 cables despite easily outpacing the 100mbps limit of the cable.

    I looked into Comcast Fiber for my company since we have up to 28 patients streaming 24/7. I forget how much they wanted... $4000? just to bring the fiber into the building from the street (literally 10 yards). As you know I use Ubiquti Unifi... The switches I have can accommodate fiber + 2.25gbps per port, though I think I would have to upgrade the router (currently 1gbps max) which I think would be a few hundred. I believe Comcast supplies the modem, which probably also has the router but I prefer to use my own. But as I had estimated when I finished installing all the access points the 250mbps cable internet worked just fine, the bottleneck was at the access points. If you think about it, 5-10mbps is plenty to stream, 250mbps is plenty for now. Clinical staff have their own separate network entirely.
     
  12. Zenithal, Apr 19, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2019

    Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #12
    --- Post Merged, Apr 19, 2019 ---
    A person paying for 2 Gb service usually knows they'll be investing more money into their hardware. And unless much has changed, it's 500+500 install and $299 a month.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 19, 2019 ---
    As the discussion was mainly about 2 Gb speeds, you're both right and wrong. You're correct, to a point. Cat6 offers up to 100 meters, however, this is ill advised on gigabit networks, including home use. You want to stick to around 60 meters for that, and half that for more complex builds where more interference may be present. Cat6a alleviates these issues and offers superior performance at 100 meters. Using Cat6a is just smart for future proofing a network for up to 5-7 years, as it's ready for 10 Gb networking. Cat6a is the way to go if you're building a new home, remodeling, or demoing/building a new business location.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 19, 2019 ---
     
  13. A.Goldberg macrumors 68020

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #13
    This was back in 2016 I believe when I asked. But if I recall it was 1000 IF there was a close enough fiber connection. Okay so to be fair the building would need 10 yards to the street and probably another 30 to get ton main road. Still outrageous pricing.

    You’d be surprised. My parents have 150mbps service and when I had to call them to activate their new router they tried to upsell me saying that 150mbps was insufficient for 2 adults in their 60’s which is nonsense... especially considering that up until that point they were paying for 100-150mbps for YEARS despite having a DOCSIS 2.0 modem from the cable company that could only accommodate 35mbps (I believe original to the house in 2001). They (Spectrum) love to do this and pretty much everyone in town that’s had the internet for 10+ years. Cox did the same thing at our beach houses.

    They try to sell people on BS all the time.

    My point is in reality 2Gbps for most consumers is not yet really a practical service. And I think they market 2Gbps because most other services advertise 1Gbps.
     
  14. Zenithal, Apr 20, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2019

    Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #14
    So here's where I do agree with something you said. Comcast is a huge rip off on their business side.

    I'm not completely sure how it turned out, but when we were building out location #1 over a decade ago we used a cable ISP which also happened to be my own ISP I used at home. I forget the details but it was so-so quality and it was fine because it afforded us internet and TV services and we were much smaller then. I think a year or two passed before FiOS biz was available and we dumped the coax provider ASAP.

    Locations #1 and #2 serve over 120 employees, there's multiple lines coming in + TV service and our bottom line costs a drop in the ocean This includes internet, phone services, plus TV with DVR boxes. Service is fantastic. If we have an issue, a truck is rolled out within 20 minutes. I can't say the same for our previous provider. Some of our competitors in the area use Wave Band, which is very good and used by corporate clientele, but they didn't meet the little things we wanted. We were rather lucky with both locations as the city we're in already has fiber built out for companies to use. Verizon's installers said we'd probably be looking at costs in excess of $40,000 for all our drops.


    We're eyeing up a third location that'll house 200 employees but current land prices and wanting to be in a different area is making estimations tricky. Ideally, we prefer to build out once the economy takes a nose dive. It's cheaper to buy up and build, but it also injects cash flow into local contracting companies and developers. Also very easy to get build and site permits as cities are eager to make it look like everything is okay.


    We found a lot of ways to legally offset costs we'd incur by investing in greener tech for our locations.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 20, 2019 ---
    Do'h. My apologies. I was referencing consumer side/home use. I'm sure it's pricier on the biz side. No idea what personal consumer/home use FiOs costs.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 20, 2019 ---
    Spectrum does do that. But so do all providers, and even back when they only offered cable in the early 90s they did that, too. The reality is the sales people are asked to push it. 150 Mbps is enough for two people, but use case matters more. I know people your parents age, such as some neighbors down the block from us, who... and I'm not sure how to say this without coming off as ageist, don't come off as their age. You would think they're two 30 year olds with however much net stuff they do. They're on the same 400 plan as us and use most of its bandwidth. I've seen the logs the husband keeps. I forget what his background is, but he was some tech exec who retired early. Being both retired, they stream several terabytes of data a month at 1080p to adjusted 4K.


    However, you've told me enough about your parents for me to believe the immense eye roll you made after hearing that 150 Mbps line. Though Spectrum doesn't offer 150 Mbps. It's likely it's a 100 Mbps plan that's been way over provisioned. Which is a very good thing. Within the next year your folks should get a health standard upgrade to 220-250 Mbps at no extra cost as Spectrum is slowly dumping 100 Mbps base for 200 Mbps base.

    Yeah 2 Gbps by Comcast is pure beta testing. Their pricing says it all. 1 Gbps costs me a negligible amount more than what we pay now. We stream a lot of stuff, and as of now in the last 24 days we've streamed 679 GB of data while transferring roughly 30 GB which were uploads of files into the cloud. If the kids were old enough to stream, I suspect that our use case would be higher. I'm pretty happy with a hardwire speed of 400-450 Mbps on an open server.

    I generally prefer this ISP because they don't have limits and they aren't nosy about much. If you give them a heads up you use TB of data for streaming, they're fine with it and make a note on the account. Though they do want to move onto fiber in the future. I believe their network is a somewhat hybrid network at the moment.


    I'm guessing if I opt to use a FLAC streaming service like @AustinIllini, our use case would be higher.
     
  15. A.Goldberg macrumors 68020

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #15
    I never said not to buy 6a... but I’d probably say you might as well get CAT7 if you’re starting from scratch. The point is a lot of new homes don’t have Ethernet because of WiFi, especially now with MESH, and a lot of the existing stuff is Cat5/5e/6. That aside, most houses don’t have 100m runs unless it’s an install after the fact. Even in my company’s 4 story building I think the longest run is probably 125ft. In the case of large businesses though where you might have hundreds to thousands of runs and pennies count, the cost difference between 6/6a could add up. And it wouldn’t necessarily make sense on shorter runs to use 6a.

    I wouldn’t build a new house without putting in Ethernet, but a lot of people won’t spend the money to do it. The wire is dirt cheap, but paying an electrician is not. When we renovated my apartment we used Cat7 (solid copper) due to better shielding and most importantly it has the potential of 40gpbs at 50m, and I don’t have runs even close to 50m in an apartment/condo. Flexibility isn’t a concern especially since the wires come into a patch panel and you can use whatever CAT you please to patch to the switch. IMO CAT7 seemed like the best case for future proofing. My parents house, built in 2000, has Cat6 plus fiber. WiFi wasn’t really popular then and the mobile market isn’t what it is today. The expectation was fiber would replace Ethernet. I’m guessing in 10-15 years Cat7 will be obsolete. Home networking altogether might be obsolete.
     
  16. Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #16
    This isn't actually an approved standard or recognized by a body as a viable choice. Even at that, it offers very little over Cat6a. Cat8 is the next official standard, but as of now its use is very limited due to limitations the base standard has.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 20, 2019 ---
    If you're going to do it, you go all out to save money in the long run. Alternatively, it is somewhat cheaper when you're remodeling. Which is what we did. Swapping the cables out in the future is also easier because of how the electricians set it up. If you recall, our remodel was a teardown of a teardown remodel I did when I bought the house about a decade prior to the 2nd remodel, if that makes sense?
     
  17. A.Goldberg macrumors 68020

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #17
    Yeah, they are. My company’s clinical staff has a business account... it’s absurdly priced but thankfully our EHR and email doesn’t take much bandwidth. Somehow one of my colleagues finagled Comcast to providing the patient side of the program with residential service which is a much better value even without the gaurenteed up/down.

    Strangely, no, see above. I think it comes down the legal technicality we use to not have to be considered a medical facility. Basically we separate the clinical from the housing. The clinical office just so happens to essentially rent space from the residential program. If both were technically the same then we’d be a psychiatric medical facility and basically have to tear down the building and rebuild it to insane requirements unnecessary for the level of care we provide.

    As for speeds, 3-5mbps is needed for 1080p, 25mbs for 4K. So even if you have a family of 5 all streaming 4K individually (unlikely) 150mbps is more than enough.

    My parents own 2.5 beach houses in Rhode Island (the other 0.5 is owned by my relatives). They finally realized paying $200 a month for 3 houses is absurd. The finally switched from Cox to Fios last year. So I’ve been tasked with putting them all on one network. One house is 150ft away from the main house, the other about 225ft. I’ll probably use a Unfi system as I am so fond of them.

    Jeeze... 700gb in a month. Is all you do watch 4K? Ahh I forgot about the kids. I think I use at most 1/10th of that. I guess that makes sense since in the past 12 days my 22-or-so patients have used 620gb... though not a lot of porn lately surprisingly.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 20, 2019 ---
    Yes, but it’s not really a big deal as it’s backwards compatible. Cat8 is also extremely expensive. As in like $700/500ft vs $200/500ft.

    Well, I’d say it depends on how long you plan on living in your house and how flexible one’s budget is. It also assumes that in 10-15 years Ethernet will be the standard. It’s entirely possible cell technology replaces WiFi for consumer products. Musk and Bezos have their dreams of (affordable, fast) Satellite internet (I think we’re a ways away from that that being mainstream)
     
  18. Zenithal, Apr 20, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2019

    Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #18
    The first part of your post had me keen on trying that with Verizon biz but that second part squashed that idea. I don't think I could even come up with a clever enough way of convincing them to remove biz TV and install home TV. I doubt we'd see much of a price difference though.


    700 GB is a lot.

    The router I use can't differentiate between what downloaded what, but I have an idea of what it is. With Spotify premium, I've clocked it using anywhere from 100-150 MB/hour using a piece of software I have and only running Spotify on it and using a software firewall to block inbound and outbound access to other network accessible software. On any given day Spotify is used at our home for at least 10-15 hours a day spread out. That alone is probably around 50-60 GB of use a month. 1-3 GB/hour for Netflix depending on quality, the latter is HD. No idea what higher quality uses without referencing their help files. I don't use Netflix as much, but it is used daily. No idea what YouTube Kids uses but I can't imagine it being slim. Prime is like 2-3 GB/hour for HD, and 5-7 GB/hour for UHD. We'll sometimes work from home and thus send and receive large protected files. It all adds up really. I myself go through maybe 20-40 GB of videos on YouTube a week at night. I usually opt for 1080p unless 1440p is available.

    Given that I almost never work Fridays, I have Fridays to catch up on a lot of stuff and maybe work from home. I'll sometimes have nothing to do and with the kids at school I can easily watch through 5-6 feature films. I'd love to see our usage when I decide on some 4K UHD televisions to replace our main ones.

    There's probably other services we use that I can't recall right now. If I play an online game, it uses less than 100 MB/hour which is nothing. I rarely play for more than an hour and rarely play more than a few times a month. In the last 24 hours we've used up about 20 GB.

    Edit: Going by an article, Tidal's hi-fi service would use 1 GB per 1.5 hours.


    Edit 2: And sometimes on match weekends, I'll watch 3-4 matches live via streaming apart from what's on TV through my provider or a third party provider I subscribe to. Usually always watch in 720p as a minimum, prefer higher quality if it's available. Easy enough to burn through a lot of bandwidth.


    Looking at the 30 day table, I can mark out which days were match days where the data used ranged from 25-48 GB.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 20, 2019 ---
    Make friends with an electrician/network specialist and buy off of them at just above wholesale. :D
    --- Post Merged, Apr 20, 2019 ---
    Musk and Bezos' plan is more for middle America and regions where current wired net is ridiculous and expensive. It won't do much for us coastal elites. :p Though at the rate of mobile development I suspect that won't pan out for all consumers.

    For us it was pure convenience. Changing out the cables in the future will be a breeze because of how they were encased behind the walls. That's the beauty of redoing all your walls. Well, apart from the sheer initial cost of that. I very much doubt we'll ever sell this house because I'm too attached to it and the time I've put into it myself. It's likely we'll either build or buy a third house provided it has what we want. This area has always been recession proof and climbs in value over time.

    Generally love the area because there's no pollution, little noise, people mind their own business even if we have celebrities living here, schools are very good, almost no crime, etc. Let's be real about my want for a large coastal house. I'd just love to have 20-30 acres in the back overlooking the sea just to plant multiple fruit trees, berry bushes, roses and whatnot and make it a small oasis. I already own land and orchards across the country, but I sure as hell would never move there. Not even Napa. Do you know what it's like to be in those places with allergies? Hell. Worse than hell. Also I don't like NorCal people. They're an annoying bunch.
     
  19. A.Goldberg macrumors 68020

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #19
    Yeah, I have an electrician in the family so to speak. CAT8 isn’t really a non-wholesale product considering it’s cost and limited application to high end equipment. I don’t think it was even really available until a year or so ago. Dollar per foot it’s still way more expensive than even fiber.

    My apartment/condo renovation ended up with ~18 Ethernet runs I believe. The runs weren’t particularly long though. All the wire apparently was all leftover supplies from a commercial job that the clients didn’t want. That’s a project I have yet to finish. Long story short we need to figure out the game plan for the living room first (funiture vs built-ins vs built-in + redoing the fireplace facade).

    Yeah, Elon wants something like 4500 satellites. Bezos ~3300. Good luck with that. Zuckerberg is exploring the same idea- clearly “space crafts”, as I call it, is what billionaires do for fun in their spare time. Control space, control the internet, control the world?

    Between 10,000 satellites in orbit (especially if they’re large), their associated space debris, natural space debris, countries like China and India blowing up their satellites with missiles as a show of military force, etc, Goodbye space programs, Hello Kessler Syndrome.

    As for alternative internet options are a couple services in Boston that use antennas for internet. NetBlazr and Starry... but they have very limited service areas. Basically they put antennas on top of the Prudential Center or other skyscrapers and they communicate with an antenna you put on your roof- essentially super long range WiFi. Apparently it’s very reliable. Pricing isn’t bad, $60 for 300mbps-1000mbps depending on location, but the benefit is symmetrical speeds UL=DL speed.
     
  20. Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #20
    Which is why you run Cat6a. Cat7 is neither a recognized standard or supported by any telecommunications body. It also costs a premium when there's no real standard adherence to quality. C6A should be good for another decade depending on general speed developments. The only worry you might have with in wall guiding is the coating cracking, but that really shouldn't be an issue.

    It's a little early so you lost me here. Built in what? TV and book stand built in or are you talking about a wall run?
    --- Post Merged, Apr 20, 2019 ---
    I've heard of this, not by name, but what it was. Last time I was in NYC for business someone told me about it but it made no sense to me. I don't think I ever looked into it. How does it work exactly?
    --- Post Merged, Apr 20, 2019 ---
    Oh, is it anything like those wifi hotspot things wireless providers offer or offered?
     
  21. A.Goldberg macrumors 68020

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #21
    Cat7 is ISO/IEC approved and standardized, just not by a couple other organizations. So yes, it actually does have standards. It's also backwards compatible and can use RJ45 jacks. You can get bare solid copper CAT7 for essentially the same price as bare solid copper CAT6a. By the time we get to 40Gbps in our homes doubt we'll still be using ethernet. I'm not sure why you'd assume it would crack, its in a wall, not moving, not being strained. But this conversation is getting exhausting for me.

    Built ins... referring to built in cabinetry, bookcases, possibly space to put a TV on in the case of a living room. The alternative is to put the TV over the fire place and do the same, which would also require redoing the fire place facade. Doing the former might lead us to do the same anyways. Alternatively we could buy furniture for a similar look.

    Basically a similar concept to a wireless backhaul it seems, except maybe more omnidirectional. I believe it uses 5GHz. Works like any other receiving and transmitting antenna idea I suppose. They have infrastructure on tall buildings to send/receive. They install an antenna of sorts on your roof that either plugs into some modem-type device or possibly your router directly. It might actually be the the latter as they advertise no modem rentals... unless the modem is built into the antenna on your roof. I just know the general concept and that it's not available in my street.
     
  22. Zenithal, Apr 20, 2019
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2019

    Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #22
    Anything can be ISO standardized. It means **** all. There are ISO standards for how to brew instant coffee (ISO 24114) or a method of shoe testing (ISO 22774). These mean nothing. The TIA and other actual ethernet bodies don't recognize Cat7 as a viable standard over already known standards, as it doesn't have any real advantage. When 40 Gb ethernet actually becomes a "thing," those Cat7 cables will be worthless and Cat8, a recognized standard, will be able to perform properly. You can keep arguing day and night for cat7, but because it isn't a recognized standard or one set forth by any body who makes the decisions for these cables and standard, it doesn't matter. It generally isn't recommended to use cat7 over cat6a because it offers almost no benefit, isn't recognized as a standard, costs a lot more, etc.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 20, 2019 ---
    Right. We have built ins in our den. My general take is don't bother unless you have room to sacrifice. I generally don't like built ins. I think they were great, historically, but they serve little purpose these days for living rooms. I don't mind the den because no one ever uses it except me and that's rare. There is a small hallway at the back of the kitchen that leads out to the rest of the house that has a built in for extra plates and other stuff. That I don't mind as no one can really see it unless they walk up to it. There was an oak built in at the entrance way/foyer when I bought the house. I had it removed and sold the oak scrap to the contractor who wanted it.

    My take is if you guys spent the money remodeling, I'd be wary of having a built in built for the living room which may affect resale value down the line because of how quickly tastes change especially from older generations to yours. Unless you see yourselves living there with kids. The only other area I kept the built ins were the home library and that's because it was built well to support a few thousand pounds in books.

    There were some other areas but their size was so small it didn't matter. Whether I kept it or not.
    --- Post Merged, Apr 20, 2019 ---
    They might take on the cost of a modem. Who knows. It sounds really cool, though. I'd love to see how it works in bad weather, but it is a viable choice for older buildings that would cost too much to retrofit without substantial outside investment. And having been to Boston myself in the past, many of the buildings are beautiful, but old and need tremendous work to be brought up to modern standards. I assume you can't use the service on your phone when you're out and about in any supported area?


    My ISP used to charge a modem rental fee. They scrapped that. Bill price never went up. I think it was $4-6 a month. You can run your own modem but I see little benefit in doing so these days.
     
  23. JohnR thread starter macrumors member

    JohnR

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Location:
    Louisville, Kentucky
    #23
    Wow...majority of this conversation is way over my head! ha

    So we have had the gigabyte service for over a week now and honestly, I don't see much difference. But it's cheaper than what I was paying Spectrum, so can't complain.
     

Share This Page

22 April 17, 2019