WSRL Telco Page

WSRL.ORG / Rural Telephone Companies - July. 2005 - Revised Nov. 2008 - Page 1

In the form of an investor owned utility, telephone companies typically look after their own interests first including very large retirement payouts to executives not to mention things like exclusive and free use of private corporate jet aircraft. Stock holders are usually next with the lowly rate payer, usually being the most exploited in the chain. The COOP or publicly owned companies, on the other hand, are typically the most responsive to rural rate payer needs and are often head and shoulders above investor owned companies in terms of cost of services and performance of services delivered.

Typical TDS RT & Cross Connect

Methods of Service Delivery -

Old school telephone companies (ie. Qwest, TDS) have adopted a broadband service delivery method that uses their existing and often badly deteriorated metallic cable resources rather than installing new fiber facilities. In my view, this approach only frustrates the educational and economic development of communities and reduces general property values. For many old school telcos, DSL is the delivery method of choice. The reach of a typical rural DSL circuit is approximately 18,500 cable pair feet or a little over three miles. These circuits are typically delivered from existing central offices or remote terminals. For the fortunate, remote terminals are fed with high speed high capacity fiber. This is generally not the case, however, for old rural installations. In contrast, a typical fiber distribution circuit is good for approximately 12 miles or approximately four times the distance but supports infinitely higher data rates than any DSL service.

Cable & U-Verse -

Major players here are Time Warner/Comcast & AT&T. For a technical explanation of the latest cable technology, search

AT&T U-Verse Cabinet - Rear

Google for "DOCSIS 3.0". Details of AT&T's/Microsoft's U-Verse technology can also be found by searching Google for "U-Verse". Many feel that the DOCSIS 3.0 technology, once fully implemented, will clearly out class and out perform the U-Verse technology. Neither, of course, approach the capabilities of a well designed all fiber system. Real world experiences of customers trying to use the U-Verse are available on the TMCnet blog site. In my view, neither technology is appropriate for rural areas because of the distances involved in rural environments.

Rural Fiber -

While virtually all current rural Colorado operators, including Qwest and TDS, invest as little money as possible in their rural systems to deliver the least acceptable service possible, a few companies are achieving what really neeeds to be happen. A recent report on Jaguar Communications, a Minnesota based rural telecom provider, shows what can be accomplished when you really try. The Indiana rural fiber project is another example. It's certainly unfortunate that Colorado State and local governments allow the despicable performance of current suppliers to continue.

Equipment Manufacturers -

Again, old school telcos typically purchase equipment from manufacturers that have supported their past obsolete wire facilities. Bell related companies typically purchase from the Alcatel/Lucent manufacturing group (products are currently designed and produced elsewhere). Non-Bell, non-public telcos use manufacturers such as Advanced Fiber Communications (now defunct and replaced with Tellabs). COOPS and public companies typically purchase from domestic sources such as Occam Networks.Bell and non-Bell telcos have resisted using any type of wireless technology to deliver broadband services. This has not been the case for public telcos.

Typical Qwest RT

Two-Faced Policy -

Both Qwest and TDS heavily promote the Windows® operating system. Anyone, however, that uses the FireFox® web browser with the "Server Spy" plug-in knows that both TDS and Qwest use the Apache® server software package for their Internet servers. Apache is a free and open source server software package that is used mainly with the Linux operating system but there is a Windows version as well. The simple truth, however, is that Qwest and TDS both push expensive and buggy Microsoft products to the public while internally taking advantage of reliable and no cost open source software. As a side note, the same is largely true of local and State government server sites. It certainly is unfortunate the neither TDS or Qwest feel obligated to publicize the type of software they use internally for providing Internet service. There is good evidence that TDS even hosts "a software repository for the popular and free Ubuntu Linux operating system but, for whatever reason, does not generally make this known to their customers.

Colorado Rural Broadband -

Rather than support public broadband or publically owned infrastructure, the State of Colorado, in it's infinite wisdom, entered into a partnership with Qwest to build a statewide mostly rural fiber network. This network is known as the "Colorado High Speed Digital Network". The original intent was to provide broadband services for rural schools, governments, libraries and hospitals. The public could also use the network for a price. Compared to the Utah system, however, the CHSDN has proven to be much less lucrative for the general public. A recent failure of the CHSDN has brought the reliability of Qwest provided services into question.

Rural Power Companies -

Rural, publicly controlled power companies (ie. REA's) certainly have the ability and the opportunity to support the transport of fiber based circuits but have shown little or no interest in this endeavor. This in light of a reported one billion dollars in Federal moneys that have gone largely unused for such purposes. Investor owned power companies have also shied away from such opportunities.

Please continue to next page - - Broadband < -- > TDS

Telco Links
Updated January 2009