[LINK] Broadband billions left hanging as wireless bites back

Richard Chirgwin rchirgwin at ozemail.com.au
Sat Jan 23 12:14:42 AEDT 2010

Tom Worthington wrote:
> Bernard Robertson-Dunn wrote:
>> Broadband billions left hanging as wireless bites back Ari Sharp 
>> January 13, 2010 SMH 
>> http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/broadband-billions-left-hanging-as-wireless-bites-back-20100112-m4u7.html
>> Take up of wireless broadband technology by Aussies more than doubled
>> last financial year. ...
> My Virgin/Optus 3G has been behaving more erratically over the last few
> weeks, slowing down in the mornings. Wireless is a good idea, but we 
> need enough infrastructure to make it work. We can't just pile everyone 
> on to the current mobile phone network. Also the mobile phone companies 
> are not willing to lower the price of wireless Internet down to that of 
> wired. So you pay a premium of somewhere between 10 and 100 times for 
> wireless.
> One option I have suggested is to put wireless on the end of the NBN. 
> Since many people will be doing this anyway, it might as well be managed 
> as part of the network. The box NBN Co. install in your home could have 
> wireless which could be used by you, your electricity meter, or your 
> neighbours.
Coming in late...

Doesn't the "home wireless" idea break the wholesale-only model of the NBN?

Regarding "enough infrastrcture" to make it work: I agree that 3G 
suffers overcrowding. I can see the huge difference between Lilyfield 
(fast) and Crows Nest (dead slow).

The problem is not just the number of base stations, but the backhaul 
from those base stations.

In essence, if you want "one-to-one"-like speed, I would not be 
surprised to find that in many locations, the cost of wireless begins to 
approach parity with the cost of wired.



More information about the Link mailing list