* Posts by rebekkap

2 posts • joined 11 May 2016

nbn™ says nobody needs gigabit internet, trumpets XG-Fast at 8Gbps anyway


Re: Why Nobody buys 100mbs

Plus think of the spectrum we could free up for the ever-increasing demand for mobile data if we switched free to air television to a completely streamed service across metropolitan areas - something we could easily do if we had an all-fibre NBN

A modest proposal: dump the NBN mess on Telstra


Re: Get over it!

"As a tax payer I do not want to fund a fibre connection to every premise especially when there isn't a generally defined need"

Clearly you have failed to understand how the NBN v1 was paid for, i.e. it was self-funding and not paid for by taxpayers.

You have also clearly failed to understand how good planning for infrastructure projects works - you don't just build things for today's demands, you build them for the next 50 years. Someone with your lack of vision would have built the Sydney Harbour Bridge with one lane in each direction!

"The latest NBN status reports states there are near enough to 2 million premises read for service, yet there are less than 1 million active connections. That clearly says that not all premise occupiers require the speed that FTTN provides, let alone FTTP. "

Maybe they don't today, that doesn't mean they won't in five years, ten years or 15 years.

"Obviously at some point they will all be forced to move over."

Not obvious actually. It was obvious on the NBN v1, where the copper would be decommissioned, that everyone would have to move over (one of the reasons why the NBN would have been self-funding) but it's not obvious now the copper's not being decommissioned - which is one of the reasons why this version will be vastly more expensive for taxpayers. It's got crap speeds, especially upload speeds, compared with FTTP, and it's easier to just stay on ADSL than to organise a new install, if you're relatively happy with your service.

None of this has anything to do with being a "purist", it has to do with recognising that it's really, really stupid to spend billions of dollars on an infrastructure project that's based on technology that's already out-dated at the start of the project, rather than spending perhaps a touch more (debatable at this point) but having the project be self-funded over the medium term and future-proof, because the fibre will last 50+ years, and can be upgraded by replacing the boxes at either end without touching the network itself. Nothing faster than the speed of light, so no chance of something physically faster coming along, only faster ways of sending the data thanks to new developments in compression, ability to send different streams of data simultaneously without interference, etc.


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021