Print 47 comment(s) - last by Zshazz.. on Dec 9 at 1:45 PM

Will contribute to cord cutting

Verizon Communication's CEO Ivan Seidenberg believes that his company's 4G LTE network could one day become a "modest substitute" for traditional cable and Internet, The Wall Street Journal reports.

Seidenberg had previously predicted the trend of cord-cutting -- eschewing wired cable TV in favor of Internet entertainment consumption -- to take hold. And, in fact, cable companies felt the loss of more than 500,000 subscribers in the third quarter of 2010 alone. The cable companies deny cord-cutting is a growing trend. 

While Seidenberg said that he doesn't predict an immediate consumer jump from wired internet services to Verizon's LTE, he did say that some will make the switch. Particularly because Verizon's LTE network can deliver comparable speeds to traditional wired cable Internet. However, Seidenberg made no mention of how Verizon's monthly data caps would affect the outcome of his predictions.

As for Verizon's wireline business, Seidenberg says he feels better about it now than he has in the last five years, thank to the company's investment in FiOS. He said that with the higher speeds FiOS can offer, Verizon is in a position to change the model for services, someday possibly delivering TV and Internet as a single service.

Seidenberg is set to retire in the second half of 2011, when Lowell McAdams will take over as Verizon's top executive.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

With a 5GB cap?
By fleshconsumed on 12/8/2010 8:29:12 AM , Rating: 5

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By ultimatebob on 12/8/2010 8:53:55 AM , Rating: 3
Exactly. LTE won't be competing with any type of residential broadband until they raise the cap to a reasonable level.

It's not 1999 anymore, guys... people do more with their broadband than check their e-mail and surf the web now. I have no interest in a service where I can blow through my entire monthly cap by downloading a big .ISO file, or watching half a dozen HD Netflix movies.

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By Spuke on 12/8/2010 9:47:19 AM , Rating: 3
Exactly. LTE won't be competing with any type of residential broadband until they raise the cap to a reasonable level.
This would be perfect for those of us that live in areas that the ISP's don't give a crap about. I'd switch off my slow ass wireless in a heartbeat if the cap wasn't 5GB. That's just ridiculous.

PS - I still know people on dial up.

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By Samus on 12/8/2010 2:27:41 PM , Rating: 3
Not for $50/5GB it wont.

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By quiksilvr on 12/8/2010 9:14:20 AM , Rating: 2
They have mentioned that this is just a testing number (5GB). As the LTE network matures, they'll see statistics and numbers (how much internet do people use?) and see if their network can make such a transition to LTE.

In my opinion, I don't see that happening entirely until 2020. Yes the LTE speeds are impressive, but as it stands you can have someone watching youtube, someone surfing the web, and someone playing games online (with little ping) with one wired FiOS connection.

I don't think LTE has that capability (yet) but we'll just have to wait and see what happens.

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By MeesterNid on 12/8/2010 9:38:53 AM , Rating: 2
I didn't see anything about the 5GB cap being some sort of a test as you state, though granted I hadn't spent much time reading Verizon's announcement of LTE, so you may be right.

So if 5GB cap is in fact some kind of beta then this brings up 2 points:

1. The price is waaaay high for the beta

2. The first impression to potential future customers will be that it's too expensive and that they should stick with cable/DSL

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By mcnabney on 12/8/2010 10:12:40 AM , Rating: 2
How is the price too high?

EVDO was priced at $59.99/mo with a 5GB bucket.

They are now selling LTE(backwards compatible to EVDO and 1xRTT) for $49.99/mo with a 5GB bucket.

They are also selling a 10GB bucket for $79.99/mo (which was the original price of EVDO by the way)

And the people on this board expecting unlimited and Ivan thinking that this will replace wired internet are smoking crack. While LTE can be as fast as a cable connection, it does not have the data capacity that wired networks offer. Current LTE capacity is a maximum of 380mbs for the tower using all of the recently leased 700mhz spectrum (20mhz). A lot of people have to share that and 20 idiots running a bittorrent client would destroy the experience for everyone else. The idea that HDTV could be serviced to a wide market is just not honest.

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By MeesterNid on 12/8/2010 10:21:16 AM , Rating: 2
...I was speaking from the perspective of LTE being a cable/DSL replacement at the given price point.

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By DanNeely on 12/8/2010 10:28:47 AM , Rating: 2
I've been trying to make that point here for the last few weeks. LTE towers and docsis 3 cable nodes have about the same bandwidth, and the nimbies will never let us have a cell tower every couple blocks.

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By mcnabney on 12/8/2010 10:58:12 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, cable has the advantage of just being able to split node when they need more capacity.

I would like to volunteer something very positive about Verizon and LTE. LTE is an ideal technology for rural broadband. It is cost prohibitive to drag cable or DSL out to rural communities, but the range of LTE and 700mhz spectrum is impressive. I imagine that a lot of farmers and people who just like peace and quite have a lot to look forward to, if they don't do a lot of Netflix streaming or PTP. Verizon has stated from the beginning that they are going to quickly cover their entire footprint with 4G.

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By DanNeely on 12/8/2010 1:29:20 PM , Rating: 2
That's true. I'm in a semi-rural area and have a few coworkers who don't have any access to landline broadband. One was still on satellite the last time we spoke; the second dumped his dialup connection for verizon 3g earlier this year. OTOH in some flatter rural areas fixed antenna wireless broadband has been available for at least a decade.

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By rudy on 12/8/2010 2:01:21 PM , Rating: 2
This is one of those things that only ever works out when trying to convince people. BUt where are all the LTE roll outs? Big cities. So in the big cities where people already have access to multiple ISPs they will get another option but it will be years maybe a decade before they bother with rural areas.

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By repatch on 12/8/2010 10:41:19 AM , Rating: 2
Why are people who USE their internet connection in ways you don't (people who use bittorrent) idiots???

I always use bittorrent when the option is given, I can grab a Ubunutu ISO way faster as a torrent. I'm an idiot because I want things faster?

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By mcnabney on 12/8/2010 11:00:08 AM , Rating: 3
Wow, I found the only person on the Internet who actually uses Bittorrent both legally and for its intended legal use.

Nice to meet you.

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By wolrah on 12/8/2010 12:44:01 PM , Rating: 2
How about any user of World of Warcraft or Starcraft II? There are millions of provable legitimate Bittorrent users thanks to Blizzard alone, never mind all the smaller projects using it for the same reason.

Now that said, I have no doubt in my mind that even with those uses counted the vast majority of Bittorrent traffic on the internet is illegitimate.

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By The Raven on 12/8/2010 1:45:36 PM , Rating: 2

I also use it when the option is there to reduce hosting costs to the organizations that I weeze FOSS off of. I think there are more people using torrents legitimately than this guy thinks.

I think the big guys can afford to (and pass on the costs to the consumer BTW) use slow direct DLs without offering to seed their products. That is why you don't hear about it much. Plus on the consumer side of it, it is maybe more complicated to the layperson who has no torrent DL experience. But it should be used more often in my opinion as it is more efficient.

I sure could use a torrent to help Adam Carolla with his podcast's bandwidth cost as I can only buy his book so many times :-)

RE: With a 5GB cap?
By Shig on 12/8/2010 10:48:38 AM , Rating: 3
Give the original poster a 6 please.

By Anoxanmore on 12/8/2010 8:14:05 AM , Rating: 3
The day LTE can match my 50/10 mbps cable connection for $35.00/month. Is the day I switch as well.

It'd be nice for it not to matter where I move to, in order to get internet access and be able to game and other things.


RE: Yes...
By AntiM on 12/8/2010 9:09:17 AM , Rating: 2
He did say "modest substitute", so I would imagine the data caps will remain. Heavy bandwidth users will need to look elsewhere.

RE: Yes...
By Spuke on 12/8/2010 9:37:34 AM , Rating: 2
The day LTE can match my 50/10 mbps cable connection for $35.00/month. Is the day I switch as well.
Some of you guys don't know how good you have it.

RE: Yes...
By protosv on 12/8/2010 9:47:31 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah seriously! I pay $50 for a 15/2 connection (that actually runs at 15/2) and I thought I was getting a good deal!

RE: Yes...
By mcnabney on 12/8/2010 10:15:14 AM , Rating: 2
Mine tests at 8/.5 and it costs me almost $50/mo after fees.

RE: Yes...
By Anoxanmore on 12/8/2010 10:28:56 AM , Rating: 2
Move to a cheaper area? ;)

I realize that isn't feasible for other people and it is one of the very few pirks of where I live.

RE: Yes...
By mcnabney on 12/8/2010 11:06:12 AM , Rating: 2
My 3000 sqft house on an acre backing to a city park cost me $170k. Top schools in the state too.

/no, I don't live in Mississippi or Alabama

RE: Yes...
By geddarkstorm on 12/8/2010 1:38:31 PM , Rating: 2
I pay >50 for a 7/1 mbps connection.

Clearwire is already doing this though, they already offer 4G internet access, with no data caps or anything. Their speeds are comparible to mine above (in this area, though faster uploads) while being 20 bucks cheaper.

RE: Yes...
By Acanthus on 12/9/2010 3:34:34 AM , Rating: 2

tests at 15/0.9

Fastest available in my area.

RE: Yes...
By wolrah on 12/8/2010 12:48:30 PM , Rating: 2
Seriously. $35/mo? I have 50/5, the top package offered by my cable company, and I pay $145/mo for it. I'd love another 15mbit/sec upstream for $110/mo less.

That said, from what I've been able to determine my config file has an uncapped upstream. Downstream hits 50 and basically runs in to a wall on tests, but I've seen my upstream hit 8.5mbit/sec. Same results at a customer of mine who has the same speed package. I assume it's an oversight when the cable company was building the config for this plan, but I'm not complaining.

RE: Yes...
By wolrah on 12/8/2010 12:50:02 PM , Rating: 2
I should also note I'm not complaining about what I pay, having paid $65/mo for "1.5/768" DSL which did 800/256 on average in the past I'm quite satisfied with what I have now.

RE: Yes...
By Anoxanmore on 12/8/2010 1:06:40 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, seriously. $36.99 with taxes included.

I bought the modem so there isn't the extra $5 dollar fee they charge for rental of the DOCIS 3.0 or whatever. :)

It is one of the very, very few pirks of living where I do.

RE: Yes...
By Dark Legion on 12/8/2010 2:04:11 PM , Rating: 2
Perks, and nice, what company actually gives you that?

RE: Yes...
By Anoxanmore on 12/8/2010 4:04:17 PM , Rating: 2
Midco, (Regional-ish Telecom) they use the same type of modems are ComCast does.

So yes comcast subscribers, you too can have faster interwebs if they wanted you to. :)

RE: Yes...
By wolrah on 12/8/2010 6:33:30 PM , Rating: 1
So yes comcast subscribers, you too can have faster interwebs if they wanted you to. :)

On this note, DOCSIS 3.0 compliance requires being able to bond at least four channels in each direction. This means that at minimum any DOCSIS 3.0 compatible modem can handle 171.5mbit/sec down, 122.88 mbit/sec up. Each DOCSIS 3.0 channel is equal to a DOCSIS 2.0 channel (downstream per-channel hasn't changed since 1.0 actually), the big difference is channel bonding.

I'm currently running 4 bonded on the downstream, one upstream. Though two channels could easily handle my speed class, I assume my ISP uses four to balance the load and make it less likely I can kill an entire channel or a heavily loaded channel would nuke my speeds.

I wish my ISP allowed and offered a discount for owning your own modem. I had a Surfboard 5100 with my last ISP, but until I got the DOCSIS 3 plan these guys had me stuck with a SB4200 which was shit by comparison.

RE: Yes...
By LordanSS on 12/8/2010 10:21:07 AM , Rating: 2
What about latency/ping times though?

I haven't dabbled with these type of connections for a while, but for the short time I toyed with one of those 3G connections on my machines, things I'd get 50-100ms pings on my ADSL were upwards of 400ms on 3G. As far as gaming goes, that's pretty bad stuff.

RE: Yes...
By mcnabney on 12/8/2010 11:03:50 AM , Rating: 2
LTE is about 30ms
My cable is 50ms
My current EVDO is about 220ms

Latency alone makes it worthwhile.

RE: Yes...
By Jeremy87 on 12/8/2010 12:49:13 PM , Rating: 2
Over here it can, and it will soon replace my VDSL2.

Latency of Wifi versus hard cable?
By XZerg on 12/8/2010 9:23:10 AM , Rating: 2
How would the latency aspect of LTE stack up against cable internet? Heck if games lag on at home Wifi then how much better would LTE be or how could it be better?

By aharris on 12/8/2010 12:36:13 PM , Rating: 2
If games lag at home on wifi, you're doing it wrong. =\

By Zshazz on 12/9/2010 1:45:11 PM , Rating: 2
Tell your neighbor to stop stealing your wifis.

By DanNeely on 12/8/2010 8:28:27 AM , Rating: 3
5/10GB per month won't do more than chip away at the margins due to the bandwidth needed for streaming video at PC resolutions.

Yes, but
By HoosierEngineer5 on 12/8/2010 9:52:54 AM , Rating: 2
I'll bet this blows away dial-up or satellite (that's the only thing available to us in Comcast-land).

By p05esto on 12/8/2010 10:06:02 AM , Rating: 2
We don't want any stinkin caps!

Wireless broadband is the future...
By vshin on 12/8/2010 10:23:26 AM , Rating: 2
Which is why it is imperative that net neutrality apply to ALL forms of broadband, not just cable.

Net Neutrality
By aharris on 12/8/2010 12:35:31 PM , Rating: 2
Which is exactly why it's BS that the FCC agreed to let wireless remain unaffected by the new regulations. Verizon must be ecstatic that the FCC actually went along with their plan.

By btc909 on 12/8/2010 1:24:26 PM , Rating: 2
With a 5GB or 10GB cap it isn't going to happen in large numbers. I talked a customer looking to dump Time Warner (cable) over this. "with a 5GB cap you will probably go over this). No sale, she is sticking with Time Warner for now. Imagine a household with multiple computers on a 5GB cap, come on. The price is garbage as well, especially on a 10GB cap. $10 per 1GB over, piss off LTE. Get out of your 3G pricing structure.

Oh goody...
By LeftFootRed on 12/8/2010 3:01:37 PM , Rating: 2
"He said that with the higher speeds FiOS can offer, Verizon is in a position to change the model for services, someday possibly delivering TV and Internet as a single service."

No thanks. Not unless you can't throttle competitive offerings.

Yeah right
By 5150Joker on 12/8/2010 5:36:35 PM , Rating: 2
Unless they can get the latency down to single digit numbers, they don't have a prayer.

The caps are pretty 1990's
By FXi on 12/8/2010 8:28:26 PM , Rating: 2
I can clear 10GB a month without much effort, and that's not even tons of working from home which can double that figure. I'm never going to eat up 100GB but 5GB is just insanely low.

I'd take slower speed (of LTE) with:

Price parity. 30-50/mo for ALL lines, not PER phone
100GB cap would still be less than half of Cable's limits, but way more than plenty and would encourage people to switch.
A router that we can plug a home modem into

"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings

Most Popular ArticlesFree Windows 10 offer ends July 29th, 2016: 10 Reasons to Upgrade Immediately
July 22, 2016, 9:19 PM
Top 5 Smart Watches
July 21, 2016, 11:48 PM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki