National Broadband Network

[Rorschach]

Hope you're not expecting sanity IQS...

Malcolm's Gizmodo article linked by mel doesn't prove anything she says.

If in 20 or 30 or 40 or 50 years time when some copper needs replacing. If fibre is the way we are still doing things it will be replaced by fibre.
No biggy.
It does as Malcolm pointed out make things less expensive now... NOT AS EXPENSIVE AS THE ALP POLICY at all.
So in the future when hopefully we pay off the current governments debt the periodic replacement or maintenance replacement will be less painful.

oh 1 extra point... in case you missed it in IT technology gets cheaper over time, not more expensive.

[Super Nova]

IT technology gets cheaper over time, not more expensive.

Need to be careful with that statement.

As processing and disk space technology get faster the same spec get's cheaper. New emerging technology replaces last years space at a similar price. Modern software ...etc requires the lasts technology so it tends to remain the same if you are keeping up with the latest (leaving mainframes aside).

Yesterday kit... is cheaper.

[mellie]

Malcolm has already admitted his lackluster NBN could cost just as much as Conroys NBN.

No, he didn't

Frankly I'd prefer it if the coalitions policy was sack the entire NBN Co and sell off what is left in the ground but the ALP fucked that up with handing Telstra a massive windfall at taxpayers expense...so the coalition will have to mould the giant expensive turd into something not quite so brown and smelly.

http://delimiter.com.au/2013/04/16/the- ... ternative/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Coalition’s rival policy is a sensible alternative to Labor’s National Broadband Network project, based soundly on its traditional principles of liberalism and support for the free market, but also pragmatically taking into account the situation which the the current Federal Government will leave the Coalition with if it takes power in September.

Found a use yet for 100Mb/s yet Mel?
How about 50 then?
Try 25?

Off you go...

The Coalition is running its broadband plan up the flagpole as a cheaper solution for nation-wide high-speed internet that will be delivered to us faster. It’s interesting to note, however, that the architect of the policy, Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull is now saying that the cost to connect each home could end up being the same as the price it is to connect to the government’s National Broadband Network (NBN), sort of.

Turnbull’s plan will see the nation connected to high-speed broadband via a fibre-to-the-node strategy. That means that instead of running fibre down every street to every home in Australia like the Government’s more-expensive fibre-to-the-home plan, fibre broadband will be run to boxes or “cabinets” at the end of just about every street. The last-mile between the node and the home will be connected up via the existing copper network so as to save some cash and get broadband delivered faster.

The Coalition has said that its plan will cost the country $29 billion compared to the Government’s planned $37.4 billion, mostly because the Coalition’s plan cuts down on labour costs.

The Coalition’s entire broadband plan is based on the idea that nobody needs 100Mbps broadband piped into their house right now. If you do need it, then you can shell out some cash to your local telco who will connect your house up to the node via a fibre connection rather than saddling you with the copper. Therein lies the rub: the Coalition doesn’t really know the remaining life of the nation’s copper network, and when it eventually fails — which it will — it will replace the lines with fibre anyway.

It’s for this reason that Turnbull thinks it might actually end up costing exactly the same in the long term. In a doorstop interview yesterday, Turnbull told CIO that a conservative estimate to connect fibre to the node would be about $900, while the cost of connecting a home to fibre to the home would be $3600.

Turnbull argues that because the average household doesn’t need more than 25Mbps right now, the company deploying the network isn’t going to see a return on investment on the FTTH investment for some time, and the extra few thousand dollars per home can be invested somewhere it’s actually needed first.

Sound theory, but he added that once the copper does need to be replaced with fibre it’s going to cost exactly the same, it just won’t cost that right now.

Turnbull said that by prolonging the switch to FTTH, you get more flexibility in how you actually want to deploy your network.

Read the full piece over at CIO for more info. [CIO]

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/04/turnb ... h-a-catch/

[IQS.RLOW]

Still cant do it eh?

Let try something even easier.
What could you do with the internet now if you got 2x the speed you get now?

[mellie]

Still cant do it eh?

Let try something even easier.
What could you do with the internet now if you got 2x the speed you get now?

I have a question for you...


Whats the remaining life of our nation’s copper network?

And wont we be phasing copper out anyway?

[mellie]

Oh and IQ's...

Scroll to the bottom of this article to view some of the responses coming from those who are a little more switched on when it comes to this sort of thing than yourself, who cant even impress an image within it's posts. Eh Mr Tech man??


http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/04/turnb ... h-a-catch/


Sorry grandad, but I think you're a little past your expiry date on this issue.


It's a bit like trying to gnaw through a T-bone steak with a set of false teeth ....and like Malcolm's NBN, it aint gonna happen.


Malcolm knows it's shit.


We all know its shit.


It's time you accepted it for what it is.


Shit!

[mellie]

Do you agree with this?

[IQS.RLOW]

Why do you refuse to answer the questions already put to you?

[mellie]

Still cant do it eh?

Let try something even easier.
What could you do with the internet now if you got 2x the speed you get now?

Why build an NBN with copper lines we have no idea when they will require replacing, and when they do, this may be added to the tally.







I figure we might as well invest a bit more in infrastructure that we will require tomorrow, this opposed to making tax payers pay twice, when eventually, copper will be phased out soon enough anyway.


A simple analogy.... If you had a baby would you spend $150 on a pram that would be suitable until your child was 6 months old.

Or $200 on a pram that would last them until they were age 4?


My primary concern is the old copper wiring needing to be replaced anyway.

The Coalition still cant advise how long it will last.

[Rorschach]

IT technology gets cheaper over time, not more expensive.

Need to be careful with that statement.

As processing and disk space technology get faster the same spec get's cheaper. New emerging technology replaces last years space at a similar price. Modern software ...etc requires the lasts technology so it tends to remain the same if you are keeping up with the latest (leaving mainframes aside).

Yesterday kit... is cheaper.

Took that for a given
but also new kit is cheaper once the technology is widespread and new kit become old kit rapidly..