Replacing fibre with the next gen fibre

So now it seems our fibre is 'so last century' and in the future may need replacing with OAM compatible fibre which could up the data throughput by 100 times.

It has always been the case - anyone that thinks fibre is truly "future proof" doesn't understand technology. However, current fibre can suit the majority of needs for a good number of years, it will however need to be replaced at some point though with whatever the "new" thing is (some think it will be wireless technologies but I would still put my money on some sort of new "cable" going in the ground).

Current generation of fibre in the ground has several speed iterations left, the optics that generate the light may need changing but lots more speed can be squeezed out of it

So no panic needed unless you are someone selling the latest and greatest and want higher sales figures

In reply to a post by burble:

So now it seems our fibre is 'so last century' and in the future may need replacing with OAM compatible fibre which could up the data throughput by 100 times.

OAM = Operations, Administration and Management: this applies to the electronics at each end, not to the fibre itself.

Existing single-mode fibre (e.g. G.652.D) can carry 10Gbps over tens of kilometres. With DWDM you can send many 10Gbps channels over the same strand. And the technology to light the fibre is continually improving.

Not quite sure what prompted your comment, but this was in the guardian today

Also from a year ago https://www.gla.ac.uk/news/headline_555908_en.html

Their picture also makes it clear that this is aimed at the core network rather than the final drop to homes and business which is how a lot of the non scientific press is covering it.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Also from a year ago https://www.gla.ac.uk/news/headline_555908_en.html

Their picture also makes it clear that this is aimed at the core network rather than the final drop to homes and business which is how a lot of the non scientific press is covering it.

Yes I'm sure it is being considered mainly for core network, but who knows where we are going, it's not long ago 56k dialup was state of the art, then when 512k broadband came along it was 'wow', now my 4MB connection is considered by many to be totally inadequate. In fact I've just remembered when we got the first IBM PC in the office, the choice had to be made between 10,20, or 30MB hard disc.

In reply to a post by burble:

In fact I've just remembered when we got the first IBM PC in the office, the choice had to be made between 10,20, or 30MB hard disc.

I used to sell micro-computers before (and after) the IBM PC was invented, before hard discs for such existed. When they did come on the scene, a 5MB hard disc added approximately £1000 + Vat to the selling price.

A 128GB SD card to go in my dashcam now costs £39.99 from Argos!!!

Mind-boggling for those who were there.

My first hard drive was I think 10 - 20MB which took up 3 5.25inch bays and required its own ISA Controller Card.

There was no optical drives and my floppy drive was a single sided 5.25 inch drive, so that was all my bays taken up.

Also back then there was no internet, all we had was BBS to call and play, message on.

Ah those were the days

Look at the Hard drives now, 8TB each, SSD @ +2TB, RAM 32 - 128GB upwards, its just mind blowing how much has changed over the last 10 to 20 years.

Paul

Edited by PaulKirby (Thu 25-Oct-18 08:13:45)

I agree, however it is really terrifying how inefficient things appear to have become. 512K of memory and a 20Mb hard disk used to be able to achieve an incredible amount.

One of the biggest drawbacks as I see it is that now everybody is expected to have massive storage/ massive memory and a high speed internet connection for downloading huge updates. Luckily I do live in a high speed BB area, however I dread to think what one of these updates does to a slow rural connection. That is quite apart from the help systems moving on line, including those to do with connection problems.