Newsmaker: Verizon technology chief talks fiber

Verizon Communications is finally starting to reap the benefits of its aggressive fiber-to-the-home strategy with more than 1 million subscribers.

Mark Wegleitner, Verizon's chief technology officer, has been championing this strategy for the past three years. The network, called Fios, takes fiber directly to the side of people's homes and provides near-limitless bandwidth that can be used to deliver a "triple play" of services including high-speed Internet connectivity, telephone service and TV. The company already offers Internet service that runs at 50 megabits per second. And it's testing service at 100Mbps.

The largest phone company in the U.S., AT&T, has taken a different approach, only deploying fiber farther into neighborhoods and using existing copper to deliver it the "last mile." Wegleitner and other Verizon executives were adamant that a fiber infrastructure, in the long run, would be better. Critics of the strategy said that the budgeted $18 billion to build the network was too expensive. But with more than 1 million Fios Internet customers and nearly 500,000 Fios TV customers signed up, it looks like Verizon's strategy is working.

Wegleitner recently sat down with CNET News.com to explain why the company chose this aggressive route, and where he expects the company to go from here.

Q: You and AT&T are upgrading your networks to deliver TV services so you can compete against cable operators. AT&T has chosen to take fiber to the curb or neighborhood, but Verizon is spending billions to bring it to people's doorstep. Why?
Wegleitner: There are pros and cons to every technology. In our analysis, we saw that bandwidth demand seems to be going nowhere but up. And we think in the future that more people will be using Internet technology concurrently. It won't be just one PC surfing the Web to check a flight status. More people in the home will be online at once, and it will be a full multimedia experience. The Internet will become the delivery mechanism for entertainment, especially video and other related entertainment. So we needed to develop a network that was robust and flexible. And we wanted to put in a physical infrastructure that we wouldn't have to dig up for another 15 years. We came to the conclusion that fiber-to-the-home was the only infrastructure that would give us the necessary headroom.

I wouldn't say that AT&T has gotten it wrong. DSL is a good technology. Our concern was more about what happens a few years out. And that's why we picked fiber.

So do you think AT&T's strategy of extending fiber loops only as far as the neighborhood and using existing copper infrastructure to deliver advanced DSL services was the wrong choice?
Wegleitner: I wouldn't say that AT&T has gotten it wrong. DSL is a good technology. Our concern was more about what happens a few years out. And that's why we picked fiber. And I can't really predict how other technologies will grow, but we know that fiber gave us the headroom we needed.

I just want to make it clear though, I think AT&T is on a path that has a lot of promise. As I said before, there are pros and cons to every technology. And we weighted some of these things differently than they did. We also didn't want to wait for the IPTV technology or the VDSL 2 technology to mature. BPON technology (which is the technology used to deliver data over fiber) was already pretty well understood. And that also factored into our decision process.

Right now, Fios TV is based on a hybrid of technologies. It uses IP to deliver interactive services like video on demand, and regular broadcast programming is delivered over what looks like a traditional cable infrastructure. But you've said that you see this overlay broadcast network eventually going away and Verizon will use an all-IP network to deliver all video. So why move to IP if what you're doing now works?
Wegleitner: There are a few reasons for us to move to IP. It brings certain capabilities that aren't as easily provided through a traditional linear network. The classic example that's used for IPTV is offering multiple camera angles for sporting events. The other thing is that IP will allow us to offer a nearly unlimited number of channels and content packages. And because all this content is delivered over a homogenous network, it makes it easier and cheaper to add new content and services. It's also easier to manage.

More Newsmakers

[olderthandirt51]

Provide basic service to rural areas, first.

I've been a Verizon customer for 11 years. Until recently we
couldn't even get voicemail or caller ID. We have a hybrid switch,
not full digital and they have no plans to upgrade. SWB provides
high speed internet (not satellite) to their customers just 4 miles
down the road. Verizon needs to send some of that 18 billion our
way and bring us some 21st century technology.

[burkeen]

Verizon still too fragmented/confusing

Look at the Verizon Web site and just try to find a single page where you can create a simple package that mixes all the Verizon services: wireless, land line, Internet, fiber, tv, etc.. It's impossible. As you navigate the site it's clear that all those separate divisions made their own web pages. This is a good indication of what their company and service is like - fragmented.

The design of the Web pages is also indicative of Verizon's concept of their customers. All the Fiber pages look and feel like TV advertisements loaded with animation fluff, simplistic slogans and generalized project descriptions. You have to dig through several pages to find any technical details. Clearly Verizon is hoping that people buy tech services the same way they buy shampoo.

I get flashbacks to having Verizon DSL which I eventually dropped because customer service was a nightmare. You had to be transferred around to several depts., none of whom communicated with each other, to find someone who could help. Now they've added a fiber/tv dept. to their balkanized company. They should invest some of that fiber money in reinventing their internal organization.

[bkedersha]

Verizon is feeling the icy cold tip of competition

It started a few years ago, but today Verizon is feeling the icy cold tip of competition. Granted it is from the equally worthless, lazy, mental midget cable companies, but still, they are being threatened. This is the sole reason they are deploying fiber. Otherwise, they would have continued to be their lazy selves. They have no touched their POTS lines in years, yet they continue to increase their phone fees? PLEASE! Next up, Sprint and WiMax, and hopefully, this will continue the trend of getting Ma Bell 2 working.

[morningowl]

while in a remote area..surrounding towns have it, we don't

Living in NH, I guess I should expect ancient services, but with each town only 6 or 8 miles on either side of me with high speed internet, I wonder to this day why we cannot be "wired" as well. I realize the ROI may not be optimum, but I am sure if someone lobbied our small town, we would be happy to assist with the upfront costs. We can't even get a cable company out there although 6 miles away there's cable service.

[CharlesRovira]

How about its because we've been paying for it for YEARS!

We've been paying a surcharge on our freakin' telephone bills since the mid-nineties.

The only ones who ever saw any benefit was the telcos who laid so much fibre that most of it is dark because its not necessary (Remember the Global Crossing debacle?)

And the amount of fibre laid to our door, in feet and inches, was 0'0"

The telcos have been ripping us off for years with promises and surcharges.

We're finally seeing some fibre because its cheaper to replace broken copper with fibre than to keep trying to patch it with solder.

The fibre replacement policy, which we, the consumers, have been paying for since the begining, with surcharges for things that the telcos never intended on delivering, has been a complete rip-off since the beginning.

[Uptown Guy]

Big Cities?

There are a LOT of folks in some big urban areas that have been shabbily treated by the cable guys who are ready to jump to FIOS. But nowhere do I see or read about Verizon's "strategy" for multi-user dwellings. Will we be able to get fiber inside our apartments? Can building owners prevent us from getting fiber into our apartments?

We already know that for at least 5 years, cable has been fiber to the street outside our buildings. We already see areas of the same city where the FIOS is going to be available sooner getting treated to aggressive measures to the point where they get 20% MORE HD channels for the same rates the rest of us pay... but if Verizon does the same thing, we'd be subject to the very same restrictions, rendering the use of fiber pretty much moot because Verizon won't "go the last mile (which is more like 200 feet)."

[coover]

So Where Is the FIOS?

Verizon has been advertising it's FIOS service in my area for a couple of years, now. So when I call them and tell them I'm ready to sign up, they say they'll notify me when it's available, and suggest that I sign up with Directv. I don't want Directv. I want fast internet (present Verizon DSL gives me 1.2 MBps - certainly not fast enough for my purposes.

So I ask when FIOS will be available in my neighborhood. And they won't give me an answer, making me assume that it won't be available for a long, long time. Come on, Verizon. You could be honest with your customers, but you (evidently) cannot. I'm a big boy. I can take it. If you aren't going to install FIOS in my area, tell me.

[ralfthedog]

50 or 100 up / only 5 down?

Lets get a bit more symmetric.