Do we even need a fibre National Broadband Network?

[Don McKenzie]

Here is an interesting article that has picked up 485 reader responses already:

Do we even need a fibre National Broadband Network?
===================================================

The following post is by Sean Kaye, a senior Australian IT executive. It first appeared on his personal blog, Sean on
IT, and is re-published here with his permission. Kaye also blogs at Startups Down Under.

opinion As someone who is very pro-technology and likes to be on the cutting edge, I find myself staring at many of my
colleagues and acquaintances in the industry with disbelief when the topic of the National Broadband Network comes up.
People I know (and some who just email or tweet me) ask if I’ve bumped my head and forgotten what I do for a living. It
even has had me re-thinking my views, but ultimately I keep coming to the same place.

Here’s what I think …

First of all, $43 billion is a ridiculous sum of money to spend on anything. It is even crazier when the country finds
itself coming off a $22 billion surplus and staring down the barrel of $100 billion of debt. I don’t think this is at
all right now about need, but is entirely about our ability to cover the cost of such a thing.

The full story and responses at the following URL:
http://delimiter.com.au/2010/08/10/do-we-even-need-a-fibre-national-broadband-network/#commenting

Cheers Don...



--
Don McKenzie

Site Map: http://www.dontronics.com/sitemap
E-Mail Contact Page: http://www.dontronics.com/email
Web Camera Page: http://www.dontronics.com/webcam
No More Damn Spam: http://www.dontronics.com/spam

USB Isolator 1000VDC For Protecting Your PC OR Laptop
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/usb-iso-low-full-speed-usb-isolator.html

These products will reduce in price by 5% every month:
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/minus-5-every-month.html

 

[Rob]

On 16/08/2010 3:34 PM, Don McKenzie wrote:

Here is an interesting article that has picked up 485 reader responses
already:

Do we even need a fibre National Broadband Network?
===================================================

The following post is by Sean Kaye, a senior Australian IT executive. It
first appeared on his personal blog, Sean on IT, and is re-published
here with his permission. Kaye also blogs at Startups Down Under.

opinion As someone who is very pro-technology and likes to be on the
cutting edge, I find myself staring at many of my colleagues and
acquaintances in the industry with disbelief when the topic of the
National Broadband Network comes up. People I know (and some who just
email or tweet me) ask if I’ve bumped my head and forgotten what I do
for a living. It even has had me re-thinking my views, but ultimately I
keep coming to the same place.

Here’s what I think …

First of all, $43 billion is a ridiculous sum of money to spend on
anything. It is even crazier when the country finds itself coming off a
$22 billion surplus and staring down the barrel of $100 billion of debt.
I don’t think this is at all right now about need, but is entirely about
our ability to cover the cost of such a thing.

The full story and responses at the following URL:
http://delimiter.com.au/2010/08/10/do-we-even-need-a-fibre-national-broadband-network/#commenting


Cheers Don...

Wireless LTE 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps coming out mid next year

LTE - Long Term Evolution
LTE does a min of 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/191005/verizon_lte_blazing_trails_for_wireless_broadband.html

I do wonder if this NBN is a big mistake. And how much of Australia will
be covered. How come they are able to install this in smaller towns.
Cities all ready have fibre.

 

[will s]

liberal

 

[atec77]

On 16/08/2010 5:56 PM, Rob wrote:

On 16/08/2010 3:34 PM, Don McKenzie wrote:

Here is an interesting article that has picked up 485 reader responses
already:

Do we even need a fibre National Broadband Network?
===================================================

The following post is by Sean Kaye, a senior Australian IT executive. It
first appeared on his personal blog, Sean on IT, and is re-published
here with his permission. Kaye also blogs at Startups Down Under.

opinion As someone who is very pro-technology and likes to be on the
cutting edge, I find myself staring at many of my colleagues and
acquaintances in the industry with disbelief when the topic of the
National Broadband Network comes up. People I know (and some who just
email or tweet me) ask if I’ve bumped my head and forgotten what I do
for a living. It even has had me re-thinking my views, but ultimately I
keep coming to the same place.

Here’s what I think …

First of all, $43 billion is a ridiculous sum of money to spend on
anything. It is even crazier when the country finds itself coming off a
$22 billion surplus and staring down the barrel of $100 billion of debt.
I don’t think this is at all right now about need, but is entirely about
our ability to cover the cost of such a thing.

The full story and responses at the following URL:
http://delimiter.com.au/2010/08/10/do-we-even-need-a-fibre-national-broadband-network/#commenting



Cheers Don...





Wireless LTE 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps coming out mid next year

LTE - Long Term Evolution
LTE does a min of 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/191005/verizon_lte_blazing_trails_for_wireless_broadband.html


I do wonder if this NBN is a big mistake. And how much of Australia will
be covered. How come they are able to install this in smaller towns.
Cities all ready have fibre.
The ideal thing is fibre distribution and copper or wirelss last mile

,it means very little additional construction need be done

--
X-No-Archive: Yes

 

[Rod Speed]

Rob wrote

Don McKenzie wrote

Here is an interesting article that has picked up 485 reader responses already:

Do we even need a fibre National Broadband Network?
===================================================

The following post is by Sean Kaye, a senior Australian IT
executive. It first appeared on his personal blog, Sean on IT, and
is re-published here with his permission. Kaye also blogs at
Startups Down Under.

opinion As someone who is very pro-technology and likes to be on the
cutting edge, I find myself staring at many of my colleagues and
acquaintances in the industry with disbelief when the topic of the
National Broadband Network comes up. People I know (and some who just
email or tweet me) ask if I’ve bumped my head and forgotten what I do
for a living. It even has had me re-thinking my views, but
ultimately I keep coming to the same place.

Here’s what I think …

First of all, $43 billion is a ridiculous sum of money to spend on anything.

We have however spent that sort of money on other things like say hospitals.

It is even crazier when the country finds itself coming off a $22 billion surplus and staring down the barrel of
$100> billion of debt.

We could however spend part of what was raised by flogging off Telstra on the NBN.

I don’t think this is at all right now about need, but is entirely about our ability to cover the cost of such a
thing.

Its perfectly possible to pay for it using part of what was raised by flogging off Telstra on the NBN.

Corse that may be better spent on other stuff like say hospitals etc.

The full story and responses at the following URL:
http://delimiter.com.au/2010/08/10/do-we-even-need-a-fibre-national-broadband-network/#commenting

Wireless LTE 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps coming out mid next year

LTE - Long Term Evolution
LTE does a min of 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps.

The significant difference is that it isnt shared with other users with FTTP.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/191005/verizon_lte_blazing_trails_for_wireless_broadband.html

I do wonder if this NBN is a big mistake.

More likely its not that big a mistake.

And how much of Australia will be covered.

Thats already been specified.

How come they are able to install this in smaller towns.

Because its just a matter of running the fibre down the streets.

Cities all ready have fibre.

So do all the smaller towns, almost all the phone exchanges and RIMs etc are connected by fibre now.

There isnt that much fibre directly to the individual houses tho.

 

[keithr]

Rob wrote:

Wireless LTE 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps coming out mid next year

LTE - Long Term Evolution
LTE does a min of 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/191005/verizon_lte_blazing_trails_for_wireless_broadband.html

Do you want to give a cite for that 1gig wireless connection?

 

[Arm's Length]

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 15:34:37 +1000
Don McKenzie <5V@2.5A> wrote:

Here is an interesting article that has picked up 485 reader
responses already:

Do we even need a fibre National Broadband Network?
===================================================

The following post is by Sean Kaye, a senior Australian IT executive.
It first appeared on his personal blog, Sean on IT, and is
re-published here with his permission.

His job category and position doesn't automatically make his assessment
correct other than in his own mind and in the minds of those who concur
with the point of view.

First of all, $43 billion is a ridiculous sum of money to spend on
anything.

While the figure could be reduced through greater efficiency, sourcing
more practically and not paying those like the CEO of the NBN such
exorbitant sums of money, nonetheless it could have been argued by
the citizens or any section of the community that the money spent at the
time on the electrical network, the telecommunications network and the
transportation systems around the nation should have been spent on
something else and that Australia should do without them.

Fortunately for us, it did not work out that way. Imagine if it had, we
would be still sending letters to each other by horse or horse and
carriage, we would be doing things by candlelight and heaven knows
what else we would have to put up with. Progress is sometimes
financially costly, but the practical benefits and economic benefits can
be huge if properly enacted.

 

[Don McKenzie]

On 16/08/2010 8:04 PM, keithr wrote:

Rob wrote:

Wireless LTE 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps coming out mid next year

LTE - Long Term Evolution
LTE does a min of 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/191005/verizon_lte_blazing_trails_for_wireless_broadband.html

Do you want to give a cite for that 1gig wireless connection?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_Term_Evolution
I think covers it.

Cheers Don...




--
Don McKenzie

Site Map: http://www.dontronics.com/sitemap
E-Mail Contact Page: http://www.dontronics.com/email
Web Camera Page: http://www.dontronics.com/webcam
No More Damn Spam: http://www.dontronics.com/spam

USB Isolator 1000VDC For Protecting Your PC OR Laptop
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/usb-iso-low-full-speed-usb-isolator.html

These products will reduce in price by 5% every month:
http://www.dontronics-shop.com/minus-5-every-month.html

 

[Rod Speed]

keithr wrote

Rob wrote

Wireless LTE 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps coming out mid next year

LTE - Long Term Evolution
LTE does a min of 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/191005/verizon_lte_blazing_trails_for_wireless_broadband.html

Do you want to give a cite for that 1gig wireless connection?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTE_Advanced

 

[Rod Speed]

Arm's Length wrote

Don McKenzie <5V@2.5A> wrote

Here is an interesting article that has picked up 485 reader responses already:

Do we even need a fibre National Broadband Network?
===================================================

The following post is by Sean Kaye, a senior Australian IT executive.
It first appeared on his personal blog, Sean on IT, and is
re-published here with his permission.

His job category and position doesn't automatically make
his assessment correct other than in his own mind and in
the minds of those who concur with the point of view.

First of all, $43 billion is a ridiculous sum of money to spend on anything.

While the figure could be reduced through greater efficiency, sourcing
more practically and not paying those like the CEO of the NBN such
exorbitant sums of money, nonetheless it could have been argued by
the citizens or any section of the community that the money spent at
the time on the electrical network, the telecommunications network
and the transportation systems around the nation should have been
spent on something else and that Australia should do without them.

Yes, but we arent talking about whether to have any broadband at all,
we are talking about whether FTTP when we already have very decent
broadband available to most who want it.

Fortunately for us, it did not work out that way. Imagine if it had,
we would be still sending letters to each other by horse or horse
and carriage, we would be doing things by candlelight and heaven
knows what else we would have to put up with.

That claim is completely silly. We arent discussing whether to have
broadband or not, we are discussing whether to have FTTP or not.

Progress is sometimes financially costly, but the practical benefits
and economic benefits can be huge if properly enacted.

And that cant be claimed for FTTP. The most most residential
consumers might get from it is making downloading of DVDs
more viable than driving to the video rental store.

You can make a better case for FTTP for business, but it makes
absolutely no sense to be spending anything like $50B to provide
FTTP to 97% of residential houses when they mostly have very
decent broadband available if they want it.

 

[keithr]

Don McKenzie wrote:

On 16/08/2010 8:04 PM, keithr wrote:
Rob wrote:

Wireless LTE 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps coming out mid next year

LTE - Long Term Evolution
LTE does a min of 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/191005/verizon_lte_blazing_trails_for_wireless_broadband.html


Do you want to give a cite for that 1gig wireless connection?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3GPP_Long_Term_Evolution
I think covers it.

Cheers Don...

Maybe you can see something that I can't, this is the highest speed that
I see there:-

Peak download rates of 326.4 Mbit/s for 4x4 antennas, and 172.8 Mbit/s
for 2x2 antennas (utilizing 20 MHz of spectrum).

 

[keithr]

Rod Speed wrote:

keithr wrote
Rob wrote

Wireless LTE 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps coming out mid next year

LTE - Long Term Evolution
LTE does a min of 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/191005/verizon_lte_blazing_trails_for_wireless_broadband.html

Do you want to give a cite for that 1gig wireless connection?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTE_Advanced


Peak data rate that you might get if you are standing under the antenna,

and nobody else is trying to use it. Unlikely to be seen in practice.

 

[son of a bitch]

On 16/08/2010 3:34 PM, Don McKenzie wrote:

Here is an interesting article that has picked up 485 reader responses
already:

Do we even need a fibre National Broadband Network?
===================================================

The following post is by Sean Kaye, a senior Australian IT executive. It
first appeared on his personal blog, Sean on IT, and is re-published
here with his permission. Kaye also blogs at Startups Down Under.

opinion As someone who is very pro-technology and likes to be on the
cutting edge, I find myself staring at many of my colleagues and
acquaintances in the industry with disbelief when the topic of the
National Broadband Network comes up. People I know (and some who just
email or tweet me) ask if I’ve bumped my head and forgotten what I do
for a living. It even has had me re-thinking my views, but ultimately I
keep coming to the same place.

Here’s what I think …

First of all, $43 billion is a ridiculous sum of money to spend on
anything. It is even crazier when the country finds itself coming off a
$22 billion surplus and staring down the barrel of $100 billion of debt.
I don’t think this is at all right now about need, but is entirely about
our ability to cover the cost of such a thing.

The full story and responses at the following URL:
http://delimiter.com.au/2010/08/10/do-we-even-need-a-fibre-national-broadband-network/#commenting


Cheers Don...

Well, Yes

If it doesn't get done now, it never will

If only, so you don't have to call somebody in India every year to
them your Line is Fucked yet again.

If you had to build a Harbour Bridge, Metro Rail System or Oprah House,
if would never get build today because of the Cost.

At least the People in 1924!!, had a Vision for a Sydney Harbour Bridge.
I doubt even they envisioned how much traffic would be flowing across
it today. But today, it barely copes and it's still used more than the
Harbour Tunnel. Imagine in 1924 when somebody said we need to build a 8
Lane Bridge!, if it was designed today with today's whiz kids, it would
have 2 lanes each way.

So yes, we to step into the 21st Century and get out of the 20's

 

[Rod Speed]

keithr wrote

Rod Speed wrote
keithr wrote
Rob wrote

Wireless LTE 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps coming out mid next year

LTE - Long Term Evolution
LTE does a min of 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/191005/verizon_lte_blazing_trails_for_wireless_broadband.html

Do you want to give a cite for that 1gig wireless connection?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTE_Advanced

Peak data rate that you might get if you are standing under the antenna, and nobody else is trying to use it. Unlikely
to be seen in practice.

We'll see...

 

[Clocky]

Rob wrote:

On 16/08/2010 3:34 PM, Don McKenzie wrote:

Here is an interesting article that has picked up 485 reader
responses already:

Do we even need a fibre National Broadband Network?
===================================================

The following post is by Sean Kaye, a senior Australian IT
executive. It first appeared on his personal blog, Sean on IT, and
is re-published here with his permission. Kaye also blogs at
Startups Down Under. opinion As someone who is very pro-technology and
likes to be on the
cutting edge, I find myself staring at many of my colleagues and
acquaintances in the industry with disbelief when the topic of the
National Broadband Network comes up. People I know (and some who just
email or tweet me) ask if I’ve bumped my head and forgotten what I do
for a living. It even has had me re-thinking my views, but
ultimately I keep coming to the same place.

Here’s what I think …

First of all, $43 billion is a ridiculous sum of money to spend on
anything. It is even crazier when the country finds itself coming
off a $22 billion surplus and staring down the barrel of $100
billion of debt. I don’t think this is at all right now about need,
but is entirely about our ability to cover the cost of such a thing.

The full story and responses at the following URL:
http://delimiter.com.au/2010/08/10/do-we-even-need-a-fibre-national-broadband-network/#commenting


Cheers Don...





Wireless LTE 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps coming out mid next year

LTE - Long Term Evolution
LTE does a min of 100Mbps and up to 1Gbps.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/191005/verizon_lte_blazing_trails_for_wireless_broadband.html

I do wonder if this NBN is a big mistake. And how much of Australia
will be covered. How come they are able to install this in smaller
towns. Cities all ready have fibre.

It's not a mistake. If Australia wants to stay in touch competitive in the
world and be more productive and develop smart technologies we need to spend
big to get decent infrastructure for the future and not waste money on
patchjobs like the Liberals are proposing which ultimately will cost a lot
more and will still find us struggling to be competitive on the global
market.

 

[John G]

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 22:37:59 +1000, son of a bitch
<bitchin_2008@yahoo.com> wrote:

On 16/08/2010 3:34 PM, Don McKenzie wrote:

Here is an interesting article that has picked up 485 reader responses
already:

Do we even need a fibre National Broadband Network?
===================================================

The following post is by Sean Kaye, a senior Australian IT executive. It
first appeared on his personal blog, Sean on IT, and is re-published
here with his permission. Kaye also blogs at Startups Down Under.

opinion As someone who is very pro-technology and likes to be on the
cutting edge, I find myself staring at many of my colleagues and
acquaintances in the industry with disbelief when the topic of the
National Broadband Network comes up. People I know (and some who just
email or tweet me) ask if I’ve bumped my head and forgotten what I do
for a living. It even has had me re-thinking my views, but ultimately I
keep coming to the same place.

Here’s what I think …

First of all, $43 billion is a ridiculous sum of money to spend on
anything. It is even crazier when the country finds itself coming off a
$22 billion surplus and staring down the barrel of $100 billion of debt.
I don’t think this is at all right now about need, but is entirely about
our ability to cover the cost of such a thing.

The full story and responses at the following URL:
http://delimiter.com.au/2010/08/10/do-we-even-need-a-fibre-national-broadband-network/#commenting


Cheers Don...





Well, Yes

If it doesn't get done now, it never will

If only, so you don't have to call somebody in India every year to
them your Line is Fucked yet again.

If you had to build a Harbour Bridge, Metro Rail System or Oprah House,
if would never get build today because of the Cost.

At least the People in 1924!!, had a Vision for a Sydney Harbour Bridge.
I doubt even they envisioned how much traffic would be flowing across
it today. But today, it barely copes and it's still used more than the
Harbour Tunnel. Imagine in 1924 when somebody said we need to build a 8
Lane Bridge!, if it was designed today with today's whiz kids, it would
have 2 lanes each way.

So yes, we to step into the 21st Century and get out of the 20's

Yes but they could not build an INCREMENTAL bridge or Tunnel.

What we need now is better Broadband to the bad places but very little
change to the bulk of the big cities that are well served already.

And we certainly do not need to change ALL the plain old telephnes to
some complex Network temination device with back up battery etc etc at
each house.

John G.

 

[Clifford Heath]

keithr wrote:

Do you want to give a cite for that 1gig wireless connection?
Peak data rate that you might get if you are standing under the antenna,
and nobody else is trying to use it. Unlikely to be seen in practice.

I'm friends with the guy who ran the trial which made a world record
recently, 100Mbps over >70km, using Siemens Erikkson LTE equipment.
Want me to ask him what conditions are required for 1Gbps?

 

[keithr]

On 17/08/2010 9:16 PM, Clifford Heath wrote:

keithr wrote:
Do you want to give a cite for that 1gig wireless connection?
Peak data rate that you might get if you are standing under the
antenna, and nobody else is trying to use it. Unlikely to be seen in
practice.

I'm friends with the guy who ran the trial which made a world record
recently, 100Mbps over >70km, using Siemens Erikkson LTE equipment.
Want me to ask him what conditions are required for 1Gbps?

Go on then, remember that others have used unmodified wifi routers over
a distance of 125 miles, doesn't prove that its a practical disribution
system though. Come to that, I took part in a experiment that tracked a
20 watt transmitter from across the other side of the solar system
through the outer reaches of the sun and that was back in the 60s. That
did help prove something - parts of the theory of relativity.

None of this has anything to do with providing reliable high bandwidth
connections in an urban environment.

 

[terryc]

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 21:16:03 +1000, Clifford Heath wrote:

keithr wrote:
Do you want to give a cite for that 1gig wireless connection?
Peak data rate that you might get if you are standing under the
antenna, and nobody else is trying to use it. Unlikely to be seen in
practice.

I'm friends with the guy who ran the trial which made a world record
recently, 100Mbps over >70km, using Siemens Erikkson LTE equipment. Want
me to ask him what conditions are required for 1Gbps?

naah, Fist ask him how high he and the other end were?

 

[son of a bitch]

On 17/08/2010 10:27 AM, John G wrote:

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 22:37:59 +1000, son of a bitch
bitchin_2008@yahoo.com> wrote:

On 16/08/2010 3:34 PM, Don McKenzie wrote:

Here is an interesting article that has picked up 485 reader responses
already:

Do we even need a fibre National Broadband Network?
===================================================

The following post is by Sean Kaye, a senior Australian IT executive. It
first appeared on his personal blog, Sean on IT, and is re-published
here with his permission. Kaye also blogs at Startups Down Under.

opinion As someone who is very pro-technology and likes to be on the
cutting edge, I find myself staring at many of my colleagues and
acquaintances in the industry with disbelief when the topic of the
National Broadband Network comes up. People I know (and some who just
email or tweet me) ask if I’ve bumped my head and forgotten what I do
for a living. It even has had me re-thinking my views, but ultimately I
keep coming to the same place.

Here’s what I think …

First of all, $43 billion is a ridiculous sum of money to spend on
anything. It is even crazier when the country finds itself coming off a
$22 billion surplus and staring down the barrel of $100 billion of debt.
I don’t think this is at all right now about need, but is entirely about
our ability to cover the cost of such a thing.

The full story and responses at the following URL:
http://delimiter.com.au/2010/08/10/do-we-even-need-a-fibre-national-broadband-network/#commenting


Cheers Don...





Well, Yes

If it doesn't get done now, it never will

If only, so you don't have to call somebody in India every year to
them your Line is Fucked yet again.

If you had to build a Harbour Bridge, Metro Rail System or Oprah House,
if would never get build today because of the Cost.

At least the People in 1924!!, had a Vision for a Sydney Harbour Bridge.
I doubt even they envisioned how much traffic would be flowing across
it today. But today, it barely copes and it's still used more than the
Harbour Tunnel. Imagine in 1924 when somebody said we need to build a 8
Lane Bridge!, if it was designed today with today's whiz kids, it would
have 2 lanes each way.

So yes, we to step into the 21st Century and get out of the 20's





Yes but they could not build an INCREMENTAL bridge or Tunnel.

What we need now is better Broadband to the bad places but very little
change to the bulk of the big cities that are well served already.

And we certainly do not need to change ALL the plain old telephnes to
some complex Network temination device with back up battery etc etc at
each house.

John G.

Your still thinking like a Liberal, the Internet is used for Email and
looking up STUFF!!

If you look back 10 years and what the Internet was doing then and
compare that to 10 years from now, that's the deal.

Apart from Email and Porn....
True Video Conferencing
Off-site Backups that doesn't take a week to do
Transferring Information and Data between Offices as easy
and fast as if your on the same Floor
Cable TV would become Obsolete, replaced with Live Streaming of
any Moofie for your Home Theatre. And possibly able to watch
any TV station live in the world.
More Retail shops become obsolete changing to Online Shops
More part-time Office workers working from home via remote access
Hospitals / Doctors could do live video training of procedures to
anywhere. And so on......