About Pete Neumann Expertise I have experience as a residential telephone technician and especially enjoy troubleshooting, everthing from static, radio noise, what you can and can`t do about modem speeds, etc. I can also provide installation advice and help avoiding common pitfalls for the do-it-yourselfer.
Experience 2 1/2 years all phases installation and repair.
Expert: Pete Neumann Date: 7/24/2001 Subject: What do you think of this tech, 52 mbps over 26g telephone wire
Question I am just beginning to investigate this situation. New Visual Corp.(NVEI)
I interviewed CEO Ray Willenberg, Jr. & am impressed. If the technology I'll describe to you here can effectively be commercialized, this will indeed be a sleeper. I try to identify emerging technology companies that have huge market potential -- this situation certainly appears to qualify.
In a nutshell, NVEI is developing core technology that will provide fiber-optic speeds over phone lines -- it can provide fiber-optic (OCx) rates of data transfer over copper wire. It's called Cu@OCx, meaning that it will provide extremely fast broadband access to the Internet at a speed of 52 megabits per second (as well as high-definition TV signals) through existing copper lines.
If you get access to AOL through dialup, for example, you usually get access speeds of from 28,000 to 32,000 bits per second, even if you have a faster modem. That's ok for occasional use, but think of how fast your downloading of sites & graphics would be at 52,000,000 bits per second -- that's about 1,625 times faster than 32,000.
Last week I was on the road & had to use dial-up at 28,000 bits/second. It was agonizingly slow. I'm used to broadband access via cable modem, where I get access speeds in the 1 to 3 megabits per second range. At 2 megabits, that's about 71 times faster than 28,000. Its hard to imagine how fast the response would be at 52 megabits per second, or 26 times as fast as I get now.
You may have heard the term "last mile" bandied about in the communications field. It is usually used to specify the raw data rate that can be achieved within a mile of the telephone central office location. The current rate achieved by VDSL (Very high bit rate Digital Subscriber Line) is 52 megabits per second (Mbps) at 1,000 feet, or 26 Mbps at 3,500 feet.
Lucent NetworkCare Professionals verified NVEI's technology in February 2001 at 52 Mbps at 9,000 feet using 26 gauge copper wire, a 900% distance improvement over competing technologies in the VDSL marketplace.
NVEI's technology utilizes a chip covered by a patent application in the U.S. -- one chip is installed in the telephone box outside the building, & a second one inside at the computer (or TV). The data signal conveyed to the telephone company's box via fiber-optic cable is converted to a signal that can be carried over 26 gauge wire to the chip in the building at the computer (or high definition TV set).
The market is not only home computers that access the Internet, although that is certainly a very big market. Consider an office building where the occupant businesses want fast access to the Internet, to WANs (Wide Area Networks), & to LANs (Local Area Networks). Willenberg told me the cost of installing fiber-optic cable within a building is about $25 per foot. Telephone cable is already in the building. If you can deliver optical quality data speeds to computers in the building using existing telephone cable, the savings would be substantial. That's what NVEI's technology does.
The key is the ability to do so over a longer distance than that achieved by such industry leaders as Texas Instruments, Alcatel, & Broadcom. I understand that Texas Instruments can retain top performance up to 1,000 feet. NVEI's Cu@OCx can do it up to 9,000 feet. 80% of all businesses fit into the 9,000 foot limitation. What I like is the fact that NVEI has mated old technology (existing telephone lines & LAN cabling) with a new invention (NVEI's Cu@OCx).
You read about the growing need to provide broadband performance to businesses & homes. To do it using fiber-optic or even the slower coax cable would take decades to accomplish & a tremendous amount of capital. To do it using the existing approximately 750 million copper lines in the world could speed up the process immensely & keep the cost reasonably low. One clear advantage is the ability to not only utilize existing phone lines, but also the existing technical, administrative, & managerial experience of the telecommunication companies throughout the world.
Deployment of this technology, once commercial related development is completed, could give telephone companies a quantum jump in providing video teleconferencing, TV, & video-on-demand services, as well as broadband Internet access. NVEI management expects development to be completed by the end of Q1 2002. My opinion is that NVEI will be pursued by some large multi-national corporations & select a major partner for the deployment of this technology. In this vein, keep in mind that some acquisitions of broadband technology situations have cost the acquiring companies in the billions of dollars.
I suggest you check this one out yourself. As I've told my Conservative Speculator readers for many years, I dig up these high appreciation potential situations, but you have the responsibility to make your own investment decisions -- do not give up that responsibility. Check into these situations -- do your own homework -- do not just take someone else's word; not even mine.
Answer Very good if it works. The real world is a little different however. A rule of thumb is; the more you try to extract from, in this case, telephone plant, the more disruptable it is. Therefore it will always be more limited than DSL.I expect that this technology may function as an added layer to existing options in urban areas but that by the time it may be ready for wide deployment, other technologies such as wireless and satellite would leapfrog it. It will probably become an upgrade to DSL and an alternative to the installation of fiber in some commercial areas. Unlike DSL or cable broadband, it will also require a technician on every installation. It will never replace or experience the market demand like the less expensive broadband.
