National Broadband Network

[Power Raid]

The laws of physics will still be the same in 20 years as what they are today.

that may be the case but will the equivalent of the bit be the same?

 

[Power Raid]

So much facepalm in here... bloody libs arguing for the sake of arguing

Actually officially a Labor man now! but have concerns our infrastructure needs of tomorrow will not be compatible with the technology of today. As such, I prefer the concept of building a horses for courses model rather than a single big project.

I also see this as a "never" ending project rather than a one of project. It just makes more sense from a gearing up, roll out and budget perspective.

 

[Power Raid]

I'm sorry your actually suggesting that we follow the fibre to the Node plan, so we later upgrade to even more expensive wireless nodes at greater cost whilst still providing slower speeds and adding atmospheric interference, noise, dead spots, oversubscribitions and all the other associated problems with wireless.

Your entire argument up until now has been price yet your arguing for ever increasing costs to achieve (in 20 years time) speeds we can get today.

All of your arguments are nonsensical and getting worse, even when we have better data packaging that will still mean fibre is a superior product.

Not to mention your actually arguing to move away from light based frequencies in favour of........."something"

It seems your against fibre to the home just for the sake of being against it.

I think it is better interpreted that I am open to the most appropriate solution available at that point of time.If that is fibre, wireless or some other technology who knows.

It seems you are very closed minded and only want what some muppet government promised to buy votes but knew the nation simply couldn't afford. Otherwise they would have billed property owners for the infrastructure upgrade as per any other infrastructure upgrade or installation to a property. But they knew people would reject the proposal if they actually had to pay for it.

 

[yibbida]

Gee thanks for that advice Pip. What's your next speech? HSVs are faster than Holdens, so the government should give everyone a free HSV.

They are giving us a tricycle for the cost of a BMW.

 

[yibbida]

It is almost as stupid as someone comparing a minimum speed to a maximum speed.

Turnbull?

 

[yibbida]

Of course it will deliver faster speeds, that isn't being argued. The current discussion is about getting an actual cost benefit completed to determine whether it is worthwhile spending the extra money to get said faster speeds, along the way calculating what those extra costs are.

Though, it is nice of Microsoft to step in to the debate. Despite the fact they pay very little tax here and make an already accepted argument for the model that costs the taxpayer more and benefits them.

Sure FTTP may end up being the best model, but they're not really adding to the debate in any meaningful way.

Turnbull isn't doing a CBA on Fraudband. Keep up.

 

[TheMase]

Actually officially a Labor man now! but have concerns our infrastructure needs will be compatible with the technology of today. .

Not really understanding what you have said here ?

 

[Sydney Bloods]

Why not? The NBN Co then have greater flexibility about how the NBN is expanded in the future without over-committing.[/qoute]

No it doesn't it just increases the overall cost and delays the inevitable role out.

Except it wont be the NBN Co (Government funded) rolling out wireless access points, but rather private Telcos that pay for the extensions themselves and plug into the NBN.

Once again leading us back to monopolys, overpricing and stalled improvements.

As opposed to adding more hanging wires, posts, underground cables, fragile data fibres, expensive repair bills, under-utilisation and all the other associated problems with optic fibre.... am I doing this right?

You might have a point if they actually strung shit from a telegraph pole, underground cabling has proven time and again it's cheaper stronger and more reliable then any other means, that's why we put fibre in it. As for this under utilisation rubbish you do understand the idea is to make it FUTURE proof? You know plan for tomorrow? Not play catch up for the foreseeable future.

You do realise that radio waves and light travel at the same speed, don't you?

You do realise I made an entire post explaining what "speed" means in terms of internet speed its down to how much data can be transmitted at one time, light based frequencys are far superior then radiowaves when it comes to this (hence why fibre is faster )

*** to all ***
FTR I am not against Fibre, heck I'm a geek and I love the shit... but, as a tax payer I like seeing our $$$ well spent. I am yet to see one reason why a FTTP model is $ well spent in Australia:

- Fibre based NBN backbone... of course... derr.
- FTTN/A... sure, it's probably the BB4Y$ cut off point.
- FTTP... hmmm WTF for??? show me one reason why we specifically need fibre for this?

Spending half the cash for a qtr of the speed and denying many Australians access to it based on how much they earn isn't money well spent.

The plan will also lead artificially high internet plans and lock in contracts as telcos will once again own the final points of access.

Even the liberals have admitted this by reneging on the promised cost to benefit analysis by the productivity commission

 

[clogged]

It is impossible to predict timescales.

Not really. Most scientific discoveries take at least 50 years before they reach a consumer level application.

Analogies can get a bit tortured but I'll go with your flow. In hindsight, building railways was good for the nation but the government didn't build a rail line to everybody's house. Which was a good thing because the unknown unknown of the motor car came along and rendered such a requirement obsolete.

The motor car was known when much of Australia's network was constructed. Despite this, they still built rail to towns which in only a few decades were no longer serviced.

It is quite likely

Also, I am very suspicious of people who talk about quantum mechanics. It is like people who throw up quantum computing as a solution to the problem of electron tunnelling in transistor junctions, when quantum computing is a completely different kind of computation.

 

[Lester Burnham]

A PIONEER of the National Broadband Network, former Tasmanian Labor premier David Bartlett, has urged a national shift to roll out fibre by overhead cabling, as NBN Co confirmed the idea would be considered.​

​

Mr Bartlett, credited by federal Labor as a key driver of the NBN, said yesterday that shifting the fibre-optic rollout from expensive new underground trenches to existing power poles should be considered nationally.​

​

He attacked the government company rolling out the network as a "big bureaucratic machine" whose decision to abandon aerial cabling in regions including in Tasmania, in favour of a uniform national underground rollout, was to blame for the network's problems.​

​

"I think it (overhead cabling using power poles) should be looked at broadly across Australia," Mr Bartlett told The Australian. "The reason the Rudd government selected Tasmania as the first rollout was because we had proved that you can do this in the most cost-effective and efficient way, using our state-owned (power) company.​

​

"Between the time that decision was made by (then-prime minister Kevin) Rudd, and NBC Co frankly becoming a fairly big bureaucratic machine, that idea seemed to get lost in the mix."​

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-of-the-trenches/story-e6frgaif-1226754575808#

 

[Sydney Bloods]

That could be catastrophic in terms of maintenance costs.

 

[Admiral Byng]

Overhead cabling would not be very neighbourhood friendly. We've already had that public debate.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

A PIONEER of the National Broadband Network, former Tasmanian Labor premier David Bartlett, has urged a national shift to roll out fibre by overhead cabling, as NBN Co confirmed the idea would be considered.​

​

Mr Bartlett, credited by federal Labor as a key driver of the NBN, said yesterday that shifting the fibre-optic rollout from expensive new underground trenches to existing power poles should be considered nationally.​

​

He attacked the government company rolling out the network as a "big bureaucratic machine" whose decision to abandon aerial cabling in regions including in Tasmania, in favour of a uniform national underground rollout, was to blame for the network's problems.​

​

"I think it (overhead cabling using power poles) should be looked at broadly across Australia," Mr Bartlett told The Australian. "The reason the Rudd government selected Tasmania as the first rollout was because we had proved that you can do this in the most cost-effective and efficient way, using our state-owned (power) company.​

​

"Between the time that decision was made by (then-prime minister Kevin) Rudd, and NBC Co frankly becoming a fairly big bureaucratic machine, that idea seemed to get lost in the mix."​

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-of-the-trenches/story-e6frgaif-1226754575808#

The old lets cut costs now and pay for it in the future.

Just do the whole thing properly underground now and we wont have to worry about it for 50+ years.

EDIT: Also guess who stands to make money out of overhead cabling, the state owned power company who own the power poles.

 

[Pessimistic]

Gee thanks for that advice Pip. What's your next speech? HSVs are faster than Holdens, so the government should give everyone a free HSV.

The analogu should be the roads not the car really. How many lanes, plus roads are easier to upgrade

 

[kaysee]

Possibly. For it to work as advertised you're going to have to build a network of n APs where n is the number devices, and each will have to have a signal power equivalent to what you would need to get the maximum channel capacity for a single device. This is the important equation.

Where B is analogue bandwidth, S is signal power and N is noise. All DIDO does it increase the signal power of the entire network by a factor of n, with a centralised server processing the locations of each device in real time in order to mitigate the effects of the interference from each AP. You can only imagine that as n gets very large how much the complexity increases as well as the power requirements.

There's nothing in it that is revolutionary aside from whatever processing algorithms they have in background, which may indeed be quite clever, but don't do anything at all in the way of beating the limits on channel capacity.

So yeah, anyone touting this is basically waving one big rubber dildo in the air.

You seemed to have skipped over DIDO's most important feature, but don't let that get in the way of your misdirection.

 

[kaysee]

Here's a nice video (in layman's terms) about LightRadio and the future for wireless networks. Enjoy.

http://www.alcatel-lucent.com/solutions/living-breathing-innovation-series-lightradio

I see no-one has provided any examples of why Australian households required 100Mbps connections... aside from the general comments that we need to "build for the future"!

Interesting that we should disregard proposed wireless technology until it is commercially available and yet at the the same time we should install FTTP everywhere just in case something comes along in the future. Meanwhile all those fibre cables everywhere (with households struggling to even use 30Mbps) sit around deteriorating over time.

 

[TheMase]

Here's a nice video (in layman's terms) about LightRadio and the future for wireless networks. Enjoy.

http://www.alcatel-lucent.com/solutions/living-breathing-innovation-series-lightradio

I see no-one has provided any examples of why Australian households required 100Mbps connections... aside from the general comments that we need to "build for the future"!

Interesting that we should disregard proposed wireless technology until it is commercially available and yet at the the same time we should install FTTP everywhere just in case something comes along in the future. Meanwhile all those fibre cables everywhere (with households struggling to even use 30Mbps) sit around deteriorating over time.

So, considering the debate has moved on in regards to the government funding a cable based (largely) NBN (since both have committed to it), you would prefer them waste 30 billion dollars on technology that won't be able to compete with wireless?

Mobile data and fixed services complement each other IMO and both technologies will be crucial in the future and probably sold as a package.

My wireless for my work laptop is pretty average by the way (Telstra)!

 

[Lester Burnham]

Overhead cabling would not be very neighbourhood friendly. We've already had that public debate.

I don't think they are talking about new poles, so they would just be running more overhead cabling alongside existing cables. No impact to the neighbourhood.

It appears to be a cost effective and fast way of delivering cable to many premises. It deserves consideration.

As people have mentioned, maintenance costs should be factored in. Overhead cables can be brought down, underground cables can be dug through. But any difference in maintenance costs is going to be vastly outweighed by the much cheaper cost of installation by overhead cabling.

 

[Admiral Byng]

I don't think they are talking about new poles, so they would just be running more overhead cabling alongside existing cables. No impact to the neighbourhood.

It appears to be a cost effective and fast way of delivering cable to many premises. It deserves consideration.

As people have mentioned, maintenance costs should be factored in. Overhead cables can be brought down, underground cables can be dug through. But any difference in maintenance costs is going to be vastly outweighed by the much cheaper cost of installation by overhead cabling.

Likely to come up against community opposition on the grounds of it being unsightly to have all these extra cables in the street, especially if they are a little thicker than standard electricity wires. Besides, we are slowly moving replacing all our overhead electricity wires with underground power anyway, for the same reasons why it is desirable to have communications underground.

 

[kaysee]

So, considering the debate has moved on in regards to the government funding a cable based (largely) NBN (since both have committed to it), you would prefer them waste 30 billion dollars on technology that won't be able to compete with wireless?

No! I am not suggesting the Government (through the NBN Co) spend tax payers $ on a wireless solution. They should roll out a network that is cost effective and flexible to change to demands placed on it. A FTTN/A model suits this best.

Then private wireless providers build their own wireless network (on the back of the FTTN/A) providing overall broadband competition for broadband services. The consumer will then have:

- a reasonable minimum level of fixed line service of 12Mbps to 25Mbps.
- the option of going wireless-only with a 12Mbps to 50Mbps, which they will already recieve in their mobile contracts, but extend the data packages.
- the option of a user-pays FTTH connection for luxury premium speed (provided they have no bottlenecks elsewhere on the internet... ie host).

If the day comes technology needs FTTH the network can be extended out to meet that demand with having fibre sitting around under-utilised for decades.

Remember: wireless broadband doesn't have to compete technically with fibre... it will simply compete for consumers. As wireless improves to a level where it meets consumer's expectations in speed, reliability and cost... consumers will prefer a mobile service over a fixed one.

...
Mobile data and fixed services complement each other IMO and both technologies will be crucial in the future and probably sold as a package.

Sure, currently... but mobile phone and fixed-Line phone services complemented each other once too, now users are moving away from fixed-line services in droves. The main reason they remain today is to serve up fixed-line broadband.

...
My wireless for my work laptop is pretty average by the way (Telstra)!

I know how you feel... I plugged in my 58.6k modem the other day and BF took so long to load.

 

[clogged]

You seemed to have skipped over DIDO's most important feature, but don't let that get in the way of your misdirection.

I haven't skipped over anything. I have seen you misunderstand the basic physics behind this time and again (for instance, lulz at not knowing who Maxwell is). Tell me, does DIDO magically create more power for the S part of the S/N equation, or does it still have to obey the laws of thermodynamics and signal theory. All DIDO does make it such that two powerful signals don't interfere but combine. Which is fine for a small number of devices, in a controlled environment (this is how MIMO works). But increase the number of devices, have them moving, in an environment that is changing (moving objects, other signal noise from competing devices that share the spectrum) and the ability to use the maximum channel capacity decreases quite dramatically. But the most hilarious part is this all relies on an exceedingly powerful set of processors in 'the cloud' that in real time is able to detect and calculate all noise effects in a vast environment!

Are you always taken in so easily?

 

[Pessimistic]

Here's a nice video (in layman's terms) about LightRadio and the future for wireless networks. Enjoy.

http://www.alcatel-lucent.com/solutions/living-breathing-innovation-series-lightradio

I see no-one has provided any examples of why Australian households required 100Mbps connections... aside from the general comments that we need to "build for the future"!

Interesting that we should disregard proposed wireless technology until it is commercially available and yet at the the same time we should install FTTP everywhere just in case something comes along in the future. Meanwhile all those fibre cables everywhere (with households struggling to even use 30Mbps) sit around deteriorating over time.

But the current copper stuff hasnt deteriorated ?

Time for replacement and fibre is the stuff to use.

Im all for people judging the best technology to use in an area, but to wank on about one ot the other becasue one party or the other nailed their colurs to the masthead is crazy.


Turmbull himself proposed a range of technologies including wireless and fttp

 

[Pessimistic]

Here's a nice video (in layman's terms) about LightRadio and the future for wireless networks. Enjoy.

http://www.alcatel-lucent.com/solutions/living-breathing-innovation-series-lightradio

I see no-one has provided any examples of why Australian households required 100Mbps connections... aside from the general comments that we need to "build for the future"!

Interesting that we should disregard proposed wireless technology until it is commercially available and yet at the the same time we should install FTTP everywhere just in case something comes along in the future. Meanwhile all those fibre cables everywhere (with households struggling to even use 30Mbps) sit around deteriorating over time.

But the current copper stuff hasnt deteriorated ?

Time for replacement and fibre is the stuff to use.

Im all for people judging the best technology to use in an area, but to wank on about one ot the other becasue one party or the other nailed their colurs to the masthead is crazy.


Turmbull himself proposed a range of technologies including wireless and fttp

 

[Power Raid]

But the current copper stuff hasnt deteriorated ?

Time for replacement and fibre is the stuff to use.

Im all for people judging the best technology to use in an area, but to wank on about one ot the other becasue one party or the other nailed their colurs to the masthead is crazy.


Turmbull himself proposed a range of technologies including wireless and fttp

spot on

a one size fits all just doesn't sound right

 

[yibbida]

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2013/11/14/technology/avoiding-nbn-witchhunt

There are, however, some balancing factors that indicate a more impartial outcome. First of all, the NBN is now this government’s problem; and, secondly, 70 per cent of the population is in favour of it. So if they make a mess of things – creating a digital divide, delivering a sub-standard infrastructure, not delivering on their promises, etc – then the government will have a problem at the next election, which will take place only three years from now.

When every premises in Australia will have minimum of 25Mbps connections.....

In the end the NBN is the critical infrastructure we need for our country. Any modern digital economy requires an infrastructure that has lots of capacity; is robust, reliable and secure; has low latency; is ubiquitous; and, above all, is affordable for its users.

Any review of the cost of the NBN should be looked at in the context of Australia’s needs for its digital infrastructure future.

Spot on.