It was said over 20 years ago that there is no way around glass.

And with every jump in speed on copper, even well-known scientists have claimed that the physical limits of this medium have now been reached. That was already the case when the modem speed was increased from 1200 bps to 9600 bps. Then 64 kbps was the end of the line, then 2 Mbps, etc.

Speeds will continue to increase with copper, glass, mobile and Wi-Fi.

Ultimately, it makes no sense to discuss whether glass or copper or wireless is the better solution and where the future lies.

The best and most economical solution lies in the sensible combination of the three media or using the most sensible medium in each case.

The right medium at the right time, in the right place…

This brings us to some of the 6 R’s of distribution marketing…

If everything in the supply system were set up according to these rules, nothing would exist except in Zurich and Basel 🙂

My glass connection has been running for years without any problems and will continue to do so for decades, with ever-increasing bandwidth. I allow myself a gloating Nelson-style haha ​​for every customer problem on copper. And they get worse with each expansion stage. Decades-old in-house copper cabling is simply not made for gigabit speeds.

It’s not surprising that Swisscom fans like Hed echo the Swisscom saying 1:1 - but I hope such people aren’t at the controls when it comes to our future. Even as a Swisscom shareholder (I invested almost 20k in shares), I allow myself to think long-term. If ideas such as cantonal FTTH expansions suddenly become commonplace, Swisscom’s patchwork network will suddenly be worth less, which will have a negative impact on the share price and dividend. From an investor perspective, a solution like mabu1 suggests would be very interesting. No additional capital commitment and cheaper in the long term. What do you think why pure fiber internet offers are cheaper? As a provider, you have fewer support cases => more profit per customer => more potential dividends. If Swisscom has to finance the entire investment itself, it’s a different story from an investor’s perspective.
But you should also have the size to take off your investor hat or fanboy hat and think long-term. But I’m probably in the wrong forum - it seems to me that the majority of my fellow citizens have lost this ability a long time ago.

@doom2

You get the feeling that your suggestions are the best and everyone else is a know-it-all and totally wrong with their technique.

The technicians and developers certainly thought something through when they partly switched to the fiber optic / copper variant.

In Baden, free fiber optics were pulled into the apartment in the city and the surrounding area with the easiest way through the electrical installation, but now there were some problems because some of the old electrical installations were still there with lead pipes and old cables and some of the electrical installations had to be replaced because the old installation was destroyed by the fiber optic insertion.

Now there are discussions about who will pay for the repairs, so the easiest way is not always the best and completely re-routing the fiber optic cables in the apartments can result in very high costs.

The fiber optic/copper variant was also used in my Swisscom area and 50m away from me, users get good performance with around 300-400 Mbit/s. So the system isn’t totally wrong.

Yes, then let’s get the politicians to create the appropriate legal basis.

For example, homeowners must install FTTH for each apartment from the plot boundary at their own expense as soon as a telco requests this.

You can imagine what kind of uproar that would cause. Also from the tenants, who are likely to cover these costs indirectly. Technically it would be the ideal solution.

As long as copper delivers sufficient or comparable performance at lower costs, nationwide FTTH expansion remains illusory.

@WalterB

Yes, I also have the problem with the lead pipes in my apartment. There simply isn’t enough space for additional cables. With great difficulty I was able to replace the old TN-C with contemporary TN-S wiring with higher conductor cross-sections. Nevertheless, the installation obviously does not comply with current regulations in all aspects. But you can’t replace the pipes without tearing up walls and ceilings.

One way would be to completely replace copper (telephone) with glass. However, this would also require cooperation between the telcos. Otherwise there would be the same resistance as with the vectoring issue in Germany.

Well, in the NIV revision from January 1, 2018, the control period for such old installations after zeroing Scheme III will be reduced from 20 to 5 years.
Hopefully this will soon significantly increase renovation morale.

@hed

This is whining at a very high level.

No matter what comparisons and rankings you take regarding broadband coverage, Switzerland is always at the forefront in a global comparison.

Of course it is still faster, but ultimately it is a question of effort and benefit. of economic efficiency.

In my opinion, this is not whining on a high level. Swisscom advertises its portfolio directly with fiber optic (technology) and misses no opportunity to compare 1Gbit Internet offerings with the competition.

No matter where Switzerland ranks in a ranking regarding broadband coverage, the focus must and may only be directed to one side - forward. Compare yourself with better people in order to become better and not the other way around. What I often notice in this forum is that Swisscom’s comparison per person voted is reversed. Give the disappointed person an example with less bandwidth and you should consider yourself lucky with xyz Mbit.

The Pareto principle plays a particularly important role here. An 80% solution can be achieved with 20% effort, for the remaining 20% ​​you would have to invest 80% effort.

The principle is well known, unfortunately Swisscom itself has set a goal of 90% ultra-broadband access with at least 90 Mbit by the end of 2021 (85% with 100 Mbit). With this justification, with the same resources, an expansion with 100% fiber optic would take at least 4 times the construction time since the start (2008?). In Switzerland the expansion has not yet reached 80%, which can be managed with the 20% effort. I would like to see @hed in 40 years, as soon as it too is opened up with fiber optics and no longer has to be held up with empty phrases.

Ultimately, no one (neither private individuals nor companies) can expect that the optimal infrastructure will always be provided. Just as with issues such as proximity to public transport connections or direct access to the motorway, it may be necessary to move to where there is a corresponding offer if there is a high bandwidth requirement.

Accordingly, an investment in a fiber optic network would be analogous to the initiative of Glasfibro Zuerich

necessary at national level.

@hed

It was said over 20 years ago that there is no way around glass.

If the focus had been on fiber optics 20 years ago, we wouldn’t have to develop, buy and install these error-prone and sophisticated technologies like (N)G.fast today.

_And with every jump in speed on copper, even well-known scientists have claimed that the physical limits of this medium have now been reached. That was already the case when the modem speed was increased from 1200 bps to 9600 bps. Then 64 kbps was the end of the line, then 2 Mbps, etc.
_

Speeds will continue to increase, with copper, glass, mobile and Wi-Fi.

Hopefully the speeds will increase, we agree on that for once. But is it really necessary to make investments at all levels? The providers have already confirmed unisolo that there is no way around fiber optics in the future. Nevertheless, technologies like NG.fast are developed in cooperation. This is completely incomprehensible to me because the benefit is not available for me:

In 2016 Swisscom’s expansion with fiber optic technology was promised, somehow carried out in 2017. The Anschluss should have speeds of up to 100Mbit. After nothing happened, I was informed by @Anonymous that there was a problem with my apartment unit. That’s why neither vectoring nor a higher speed can be switched. Further clarifications by Swisscom’s network construction came to nothing and I heard nothing more.

Now the apartment is available for Swisscom in the statistics with up to 100 Mbit, the checker gives 70 Mbit and in reality I still have 55 Mbit.

Should G.fast come along, same game with (500/300/100).

Ultimately, it is pointless to discuss whether glass or copper or wireless is the better solution and where the future lies.

It is nonsense to claim that it is nonsense to discuss it.

_The best and most economical solution lies in the sensible combination of the three media or using the most sensible medium in each case.
_

The right medium at the right time, in the right place…

It is rarely the case that the best and most economical solution in the short term coincides. Hence the proposal for subsidies or loans from the federal government.

It’s interesting, the people who are always looking for more freedom. who scream for a free market economy, net neutrality and as little government as possible, now want state-mandated nationwide access with FTTH. And of course the federal government should (pre-)finance all of this.

In addition, some freaks here are obviously based on their own needs that are not representative of the rest of the population. I know a lot of people in the city of Basel, including power users and owners of SMEs that are connected to FTTH. Interestingly, not a single one has a subscription with 1 Gbps but a maximum of 100 Mbps or less.

Ultimately, the market must be geared to the needs of the majority and not to the few per thousand users who will never have enough bandwidth, regardless of whether they really need it or not.

Logically, you also have to take medium and long-term needs into account. But this has obviously not been done so badly so far, otherwise we would currently have much lower bandwidths. Furthermore, no company or state can afford to expand the infrastructure in such a way that special interests like those of @mabu1 are satisfied.

The opinion of top international companies is also interesting in this context. One of the reasons given again and again as to why top companies settle in Switzerland is the high level of telecommunications infrastructure.

Are you sure “glass” is all about speed? 100down and 100up would be much more comfortable for me. Home office and cloud connection to the school send greetings.

“Mabu1’s particular interests cannot be taken into account”, I now find quite amusing, true to the motto “be happy that you get something and dare to demand more”. Sorry, but in my opinion that is a completely wrong way of thinking.

Deriving majority needs from the current expansion standard is just as wrong as assuming that glass only has a place for “freaks” and speeds beyond 100mbit/s.

And precisely because the top international companies are of the opinion that our country is very well developed in terms of telecommunications technology and that is a reason to settle here, this suggests that the nationwide FTTH expansion is competitive for everyone involved (providers and customers). brings advantages.

Thomas

My entry into the Internet world was back in the early 90s, back in the days of CompuServe, i.e. before the dynamic storm of the Word Wide Web.

Of course, a lot has changed in the meantime, and the Internet as a whole has developed into one of the most important infrastructures of all, without any central authority really planning it.

But what has never changed at all: increasing transmission bandwidths have always been “eaten up” by new applications within a short period of time.

In my opinion, every “rationing discussion” is based on the false assumption that the only benchmark is the known demand at a certain point in time.

For example, it was once thought that 2 Mbit/sec would cover all needs for a very long time.

In the meantime, with 2 MBit/sec you are of course already considered to be under-supplied with batteries.

What you simply shouldn’t underestimate:

In the industrial age that has actually already been “overcome”, oil was one of the most important factors for economic development. If we now really want to develop successfully in the information age, it is no longer the fuel oil that is the limiting factor, but rather the networking capabilities and the Bandwidths, and the fiber optics are a very important part of it.

If industrial and energy policy were previously the focus for a state or an economy, in the future this will increasingly shift to the challenges of the “information society”.

Once you have accepted that, the idea of ​​legal regulation of private telco access monopolies, or of government investment support for a future-proof and secure basic Internet infrastructure, is no longer so far-fetched…

This is the only way we will be able to sustainably secure our prosperity in the future.

@WalterB: You keep coming back with your bad feelings, but you have no idea why the in-house cabling was done the way it was done. You should have made the effort to ask your professional colleagues when they were developing your property, not badmouth them afterwards without any background information. But of course, it wasn’t Swisscom who built it, that must be bad 😉

Less than 5 years ago, Swisscom made a complete strategy reversal and switched from FTTH to FTTS. Glass is not necessary in every house. And now, you switch again and go to FTTB, which means glass in every house. That must raise questions.

Variant 1

Loop out the FTTC cabinets and lay the glass up to the DP.

Install active hardware in the Dp.

Negotiation with the homeowners to be allowed to install active hardware (and it is then powered locally => discussion point about electricity costs)

Place glass between DP and house

Rip mCAN out of DP and replace FTTH hardware in every house.

Variant 2

Negotiation with the homeowners to be allowed to install active hardware (and it is then powered locally => discussion point about electricity costs)

Unplug FTTC cabinets and lay glass from the control center into the house.

Install FTTB hardware in every house

Less points, less costs, right?

FTTS didn’t come before FTTB… that came at the same time. Whether you should install glass in every apartment is another topic of discussion - I can understand that the builders are reluctant to pay the homeowners for the cabling. Ultimately, the network operator’s responsibility ends with the house connection. In the case of FTTH buildings, not all of the buildings were developed, but only those that were built before 2012 - so in fiber cities there are individual properties where there is fiber all around, and in the new house you are bobbing around with DSL. But that’s the homeowner’s problem and not Swisscom’s fault. But if the homeowner participates, it is certainly in Swisscom’s interest to have a real FTTH - regardless of the speed, a pure fiber solution costs less to operate and maintain. So a cost split would actually be the fairest solution because both parties benefit.

Since it’s about Swisscom, you always have to think about the competition - and suddenly a few thoughts come to my mind that fit into the Swisscom scheme:

The way FTTH is being built in Switzerland, in the open access model with 4 fibers, gives the competition the opportunity to rent unlit fibers. Since it is not illuminated, the price of this cannot be a function of the offer that is actually posted. This means that Swisscom will earn more from every NGFast line rented to the competition than from a pure unlit fiber - and it also controls what kind of offers can be made. If that isn’t motivation…

@Anonymous: Sometimes it wouldn’t be a bad thing to force the dead to find their own happiness. This would be particularly appropriate for homeowners when it comes to environmental protection.

@Thomy22: Infrastructure could of course also mean investments in the backbone. All the antennas also have to be connected somehow with glass.

@hed: You can’t mean that I’m talking about less government and a market economy - I’m a socialist and have always advocated that the telecommunications infrastructure should be regulated by the state. The bottom line is that that would also be financially more intelligent than operating several parallel infrastructures. Today we have coax, copper, glass, sometimes even several glass infrastructures in parallel. This may be more interesting for companies that only look for themselves, because whoever controls the network can discuss the prices. But anyone who has ever ordered or been offered a dual homing Anschluss with 2 separate supply lines knows that this fun costs a lot of money. And these parallel infrastructures go in exactly the same direction.

And net neutrality is also something that is regulated by the state, not by the market economy. The example of Netflixgate has shown us well that self-regulation of the market does not work - after all, in Switzerland we actually have a duopoly in the telecommunications sector and it is the two big ones that have shown that they clearly put their own financial interests above those of their customers.

---

…

Swisscom constantly boasts that they invest 1 billion a year in the infrastructure, I’m just wondering where they do that?

…

---

@Thomy22

There is not only the line connection network, but also mobile, landline telephony, TV, All-IP, backbones, data centers, cloud solutions, new services, security, mail, web hosting, Bluewin, and much more.

Is there any information as to when a higher bandwidth can be expected in Thun (Schorenstrasse)? @Anonymous I once sent you my address via PM. Thanks for checking!

Directly in the city center, most of the buildings seem to be connected to glass, but in my case (approx. 2km from the train station) unfortunately no more than _30Mbit/s is possible.

Here’s a slightly different view of supposed progress.
This time even with different voices than Küenzler’s.

https://mobile2.tagesanzeiger.ch/articles/5a132311ab5c377364000001

https://bazonline.ch/schweiz/schweiz-top-eustudie-flop/story/21822480

Interesting author…

Deför chame de at least cheese….