Is Rogers planning to go FTTH in a near future?
The simple answer is no, except for new builds.
The phone cos had to go to FTTH because the most you can get into a home with DSL is maybe... 50 megabits/sec? And if you want to offer TV, that's coming out of that pool.
With current technology, an 860MHz cable plant like Rogers' has over 5 gigabits/sec of capacity per node, split between digital TV (broadcast, SDV, VOD), phone (one channel), and the rest for Internet. (Formerly about half of that capacity was used for analog cable but that's shut down now)
Already today, you can offer gigabit residential Internet with 32-channel DOCSIS 3 modems out of that plant... so that's a gigabit shared by a couple hundred homes (and easy to split to smaller groups of homes).
Bottom line: you can match everything the FTTH guys offer except the upload speeds using the existing coax plant with a few adjustments, so I don't see a business case for Rogers stringing fiber to existing neighbourhoods... to offer the same services.
I know Bell has FTTH but not Rogers. If you search google, with the title you provided, you will see the link to Bell's website. I can not put the link up here as it will be deleted.
Here are some other links i found!.
I do not get what you mean by that. Agreed that Bell & Rogers take all the money but they offer more money + they have monopoly on stuff like this. Bell offers FTTH as i showed the links on my post. Rogers on the other hand does not seem to offer it & hopefully they do soon!
It takes time to get FTTH as a internet provider. They will soon tho!
I mean that most of their profits aka the bills you pay go towards paying the ceo.... example the ceo of rogers get 18.5 million dollars for retirement.... barely is used for upgrades... look at google fiber who offers 1 gigabit connections. it took them less than 2 years to wire half the city of kansas city... and they are still expanding into other cities in the usa... austin texas and provo utah...rogers and bell can't wire cities like london which has barely fttn or fttn. just regular ****** dsl connections and shared cable connections. no wonder why canada is in 39th place for internet speeds...
Rogers does have FTTH.. VERY small area, but there is the ultimate fibre.
Alot of it, comes down to cost. And while yes more can be spent on it.. it still is going to take a LONG time, to get it everywhere.
All depends on how/where the lines run to an area.
Suspended from poles, is actualy simpler to get from A to B with minimal impact (though not sure if fiber has issues with being suspended).
Underground.. thats a whole nother ball game.. there is lots of stuff to deal with getting it from A to B, across streets, then even across lawns, etc.
We have Fibre direct into our work building here (into a cisco fibre router). It was in the area, about 600m away (under a major street). So we had to pay to get it from there, into the building. Our cost, was about 20,000-25,000 for it. Now, i am sure there is a margin of proffit in there too. But even if you halved it, you are still talking 10+k for that short distance.
Now, imagine a whole subdivision, where there are no poles, all burried, etc? Thats a BIG job... if there is not any infrastructure there to easily run it. (IE majore streets may have conduits to run it easily alongside other stuff.. not so much in a subdivision)
Dont get me wrong.. i am ALL FOR FTTH, faster speeds, etc.
Having seen it done and whats involved, i know its not going to be a speedy/instant process.
Your more likely to see it come more available in NEW areas, being put in as they are built, pre wired for it.
Is it true FTTH?
Or are you talking about that you have access to bell Fibe?
As bell Fibe, is not FTTH, its just like rogers, FTTN, then copper the last mile.
If it's a 3 year old house, it could easily be real FTTH.
That being said, FTTH is useless. 860MHz coax (like Rogers runs) is capable of providing something like 5 gigabits/sec to each node; now, a lot of that capacity is currently used for analog/digital cable and only about 25 channels (20-21 D3, maybe a couple D2) are doing Internet. 20 channels of DOCSIS 3, as currently deployed by Rogers with the CGN3, delivers 760 megabits/sec to that node. Fiber (of the Verizon FiOS or Google Fiber kind) would not actually provide any real advantages over that...
Keep in mind that we live in a world where it is difficult to max out the 150 megabit Rogers plan (except with torrents or CDNs).
A 3 year old house, in the RIGHT location 🙂
There are new houses down the street from me in a new subdivision.. and i know that they dont have FTTH.. since the whole town doesnt even have bell FTTN here yet 😛
But overall your right.. generally cable in the end, COULD provide much the same service under the right conditions.
I think a D3, could max out a single connection at just shy of 1gbps down (though i think up is maxed at like 300odd?)
MORE than most would need anyways.