Talk:Cable modem
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
modulation and demodulation is required, this is wrong... I'm not sure what to replace it with, though. The reason a modem isn't considered a modem, I believe, is that it does much more than a regular phone modem. (Acts as a router, bridge, etc) someone please expand. - Booyabazooka
- It's also awfully chatty, but I don't know enough to fix it, nor is it marked up correctly. (I'm glad I'm not working on wikipedia at 56k though!)Ortolan88
This page is lacking a detailed description of the cable modem architecture (or I might have missed it somewhere in Wiki). The DSL article is a good example of what we can have. --claus
cable router, instead of modem.
[edit] Disadvantage 2? - commercial practice rather than technology
Disadvantage '2' seems to be a matter of the structure and practices of the industry in the US rather than any disadvantage with the technology itself. Outside the US, for example in the UK, this practice of 'bundled pricing' exists with providers of DSL+Satellite TV (BSkyB) and now IPTV services (BT) as well as with cable. Generally, prices in the UK for standalone access on cable are as good as for standalone DSL.
Perhaps a compromise is to say something like "In some areas, cable companies' monopoly over their own infrastructure reduces the competitiveness of the medium when compared to unbundled DSL services, particularly if the customer only wishes to buy internet access."
Though IMO this is still a matter of commercial practice in specific areas rather than technology and it's relevance here at all is debatable. 86.131.33.172 01:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Modem.
I think the cable modem is in reality still a modem, in the literal sense of the word: MOdulator, DEModulator. It modulates the date it receives (from USB, ethernet, etc) into the analog signal used to transmit across the line. This is what I knew from 2002, and it might have changed to digital since I last looked.
"This network ran parallel to the newer DOCSIS system for a number of years, in 2004 the CDLP network was switched off and now is exclusively DOCSIS."
This also looks like a runon. Anyone want to fix it?
- I went ahead and modified it. I removed the cable-modems-are-not-modems paragraph and wrote a small "cable modems in the osi layer" section. --Octavio.
[edit] Speed
How fast are people getting cable modem in the US? Here in Honduras I only get 128K maximum and I wondered if it was a limitation of Honduras or cable modems, as at that speed VoIP is fine computer to computer but not good for callas to other telephones, SqueakBox 21:53, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
I get around 8.5 Mbit/s down and about 1.2 Mbit/s up, although I'm in Sweden, not in the US. Init 15:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I live in New Zealand and am on a 10mbit/2mbit plan. I typicaly get at most 9.1mbit down and ~2mbit up. I usually only hit 2mbit uploading when uploading to my places, such as when using bittorrent. Mirddes 08:08, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
NTL cable in the UK are said to be trialling 50Mb services; currently 10Mb is the fastest they offer. 86.131.33.172 01:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
I have Comcast in GA (USA), and have a plan with 8Mbps down and 768Kbps up, and with Comcast Speedboost which lets me actually connect as high as 12Mbps(advertised), I've actually downloaded at 14Mbps for about 10 minutes straight using bittorrent... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.155.223.3 (talk) 20:01, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Working in different locations
Will a cable modem work with any cable line? They installed a seperate line for my modem, but that may be so it doesn't tie up the TV's.
[edit] Can cable internet and satellite TV coexist?
Out of curiosity i was wondering if someone who has satellite TV could also get cable internet or would it be impossible because of the seperate signals? thx-AERODARt
- i just had cable internet installed yesterday, through comcast. i also have satellite tv service through dish network, and i haven't experienced a problem yet. they actually both work pretty well; i'm never going back to dsl. :) 69.246.162.12 11:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Answers to some of the above questions
Regarding the question about whether 128 kbps speed being achieved from the cable modem is a result of the cable modem, no, cable modems have a maximum bandwidth of single digit and possibly upto double-digit mbps (as mentioned in the article too). The 128 kbps maximum bandwidth you are getting would be controlled from the ISP end (sucks doesn't it)
Regarding the question whether a cable modem will work with any cable line, no, it requires a coaxial cable (one used to provide cable TV) of a greater thickness than a mere cable TV line. Also it needs proper insulation from electromagnetic interference. Of course cable TV can be provided over the same cable too but then it can also be provided over a cheaper, less stringent and of course less thicker cable.
Regarding the question about cable internet being possible through satellite TV, cable internet is just a method of mixing the TV signals and the internet signals over cable TV cables and transmitting it to user-premises. You'd need a way to get the internet signals from the satellite here which is another technology called satellite internet.
-- 221.135.246.115 18:54, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Section: Cable Modems and VoIP
This section includes a reference to a disambiguation page. As someone who knows nothing about this technology (other than, how to turn it back on when my kids turn it off ;) ) I don't know which link I should follow when I hit the page MSO. Could someone who knows this stuff please point this link directly to the intended destination? Thanks Garrie 11:52, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
- Fixed. --67.190.126.219 07:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I removed the entire 'comparison' section. They why should be obvious. This article is about Cable Modem/Internet. It is not about DSL, nor is about comparing each technology.
[edit] Splitting into Cable modem and Cable internet
It seems like the physical piece of hardware known as the cable modem should be described in this article and cable internet service should be described in a Cable internet article. It's odd that the Cable modem article serves as the main article for cable internet Dav2008 14:20, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
- Agree. Eric Wester 21:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
- Far as I see, the cable internet section hasn't been written yet, and this article is short, so there's nothing yet to split off that will make much more than a stub of a new article. Perhaps either that section should be written in this article and split off when it's ready to fly on its own, or the separate article should be started with plenty of new material and any scraps from this article that may be useful. Jim.henderson 03:17, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- For that matter, the DOCSIS page contains a lot of material that isn't DOCSIS related (such as an endlessly updated list of who is selling what where and for how much), but would fit better on a cable internet article.--67.190.126.127 05:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, so the information is already present, but the articles are not linked by categories, See alsos, or inline links. This one, for example, has two cats for the digital side of things but none for the CATV side, while DOCSIS is linked to articles about its components but not to ones about how it fits into other systems. And several of these articles slop over natural boundaries into each others' territory. So, what's needed is not so much another article, and especially not a split of this article, but better connections and more precise distribution of information among existing articles. If there's a need for splitting an article, it's to make a list article for the various national DOCSIS implementations. As it happens, it's all a bit outside my technical expertise (telephone worker) but needs attention from an insider. Jim.henderson 16:31, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- I support the proposal to split (but please be sure to cross-link); as I almost always support article splits but oppose article mergers; splitting allows knowledge to be found (searched & discovered) more effectively and categorized most concisely (even if there is much redundancy), and most completely. Inclusion over deletionism! Shanoman 17:31, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- Split what? Where's the section in the present article that belongs in the proposed new article. Perhaps you mean split some other article? Jim.henderson 21:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- Split out the "cable internet access" to the "cable internet" article and merge in the transfer rates section from DOCSIS. I went ahead and did it, mainly to fix the DOCSIS article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.8.35.172 (talk) 22:41, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Split what? Where's the section in the present article that belongs in the proposed new article. Perhaps you mean split some other article? Jim.henderson 21:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- I support the proposal to split (but please be sure to cross-link); as I almost always support article splits but oppose article mergers; splitting allows knowledge to be found (searched & discovered) more effectively and categorized most concisely (even if there is much redundancy), and most completely. Inclusion over deletionism! Shanoman 17:31, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, so the information is already present, but the articles are not linked by categories, See alsos, or inline links. This one, for example, has two cats for the digital side of things but none for the CATV side, while DOCSIS is linked to articles about its components but not to ones about how it fits into other systems. And several of these articles slop over natural boundaries into each others' territory. So, what's needed is not so much another article, and especially not a split of this article, but better connections and more precise distribution of information among existing articles. If there's a need for splitting an article, it's to make a list article for the various national DOCSIS implementations. As it happens, it's all a bit outside my technical expertise (telephone worker) but needs attention from an insider. Jim.henderson 16:31, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- For that matter, the DOCSIS page contains a lot of material that isn't DOCSIS related (such as an endlessly updated list of who is selling what where and for how much), but would fit better on a cable internet article.--67.190.126.127 05:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- Far as I see, the cable internet section hasn't been written yet, and this article is short, so there's nothing yet to split off that will make much more than a stub of a new article. Perhaps either that section should be written in this article and split off when it's ready to fly on its own, or the separate article should be started with plenty of new material and any scraps from this article that may be useful. Jim.henderson 03:17, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- I've changed the Cable Internet redirect to Cable internet rather than this page, and added inter-wiki links from this page to the other. Additionally, I updated and cleaned up the introduction to the other article somewhat. (I also changed a peculiar capitalisation issue in that article.) Dan Villiom Podlaski Christiansen (talk) 19:25, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Needs a mention of Sigma and TCNiSO
They conquer articles that aren't NPOV, but this article is very pro-cableco POV. --TIB (talk) 18:54, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

