Talk:Hybrid fiber-coaxial

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing: Networking Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Wishlist for this article[edit]

1. Diagram showing a typical HFC architecture

2. A typical frequency chart showing where services are located in the frequency band. For example, in North America, typically 50-550MHz is 79 Analog Channels and 550MHz+ is for digital TV, internet data, telephony and VOD. Maybe this better belongs in the article for Cable television

3. Examples and photos of actual optical nodes.

Unforgettable fan 16:24, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

4. A chart identifying the bandwidth capacity of the different technologies with a comparison of FTTX to HFC in mbps or gbps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.219.96.73 (talk) 03:43, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removing too american[edit]

I'm removing the "Too American or Canadian" tag from the article because there is no content here that explains that tradition. I'll modify a few sentences with "US and Canadian" to at least partially mitigate the concern, but if you're going to complain, you could at least complain in the right spot... User:kah13 15:54, 5 August 2007 (Pacific Daylight Time)

Some of the facts here would be true in NTSC-based countries, but would be false in countries that are based on PAL or SECAM. Channel 2 is centered around 55.25 MHz in NTSC-based countries, but it probably is diffrent in countries based on PAL or SECAM. I will try to globalize this best I can tonight when I have the energy to do so. Yesterday, I did not have the energy to fix this. Jesse Viviano 02:41, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have improved this to the best of my ability, but I doubt that a product data sheet for a residential cable amplifier would be accepted as a source, so I had to leave this off and mark this article as unreferenced. I might be able to source the forward and return path for NTSC-based countries, but I do not know where to source the PAL-based countries forward and return path. Jesse Viviano 03:26, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Australia this is just one of several solutions for getting general Internet access -- including on-demand, streaming television -- to the masses, not just for "cable" television (ain't that phrase quaint?). Presently ADSL2 and coax "cable" are being replaced by:

ADSL2
Fibre to the premises (FTTP)
Fibre to the node/basement/building (FTTN)
Fibre to the building/basement (FTTB)
Fibre to the curb (FTTC)
Fibre to the distribution point (FTTDP)
Fixed wireless (FW)
Hybrid fibre-coaxial (HFC).

These should be cross-referenced in all article relating to these distribution methods. --Hedley 02:41, 13 October 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hfinger (talk • contribs)

Fibre?[edit]

Fiber. Fresheneesz (talk) 02:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fibre. :) 203.206.93.6 (talk) 13:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the article spelled Fibre? Alphachimera (talk) 21:54, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See: Optic fiber. What's going on here?!? Alphachimera (talk) 21:57, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Should standardise the spellings - change fiber to fibre to match the title, or move the entire page to 'Hybrid fiber-coaxial'? 124.169.195.78 (talk) 10:22, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is a concerning issue that's been unaddressed for 2 years. The entire page has the term spelled one way but the title makes it completely contradictory. It can't always be this way. FosterHaven (talk) 10:56, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The word is spelt "fibre" in countries that follow the British tradition (African countries, Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, Indian sub-continent, etc.), and "fiber" elsewhere (USA, Phillipines, etc.). Why not insert "fibre (also _fiber_) in the introduction, and use "fibre" throughout. Hedley 02:18, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 29 July 2019[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. (non-admin closure) – Ammarpad (talk) 19:33, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hybrid fibre-coaxial → Hybrid fiber-coaxial – The entire article uses fiber but the title is fibre which results in confusion and inconsistency. Either we should use fiber throughout, including the title, or we should change fiber into fibre everywhere. Either solution is fine with me, but I feel that moving the article is less disruptive since the entire body of the article refers to fiber Rockstonetalk to me! 19:03, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support Like nominator, I'd be happy with either solution to bring the text and title into harmony, but I agree with their logic for proposing the title change first. Also, I'll note that "hybrid fiber-coaxial" gets 8,820 results on Google Scholar whereas "hybrid fibre-coaxial" gets 837. Colin M (talk) 21:41, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support for WP:CONSISTENCY with the main article at Optical fiber cable. Rreagan007 (talk) 16:09, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.