[LINK] National Broadband Network - except it's not national.

[David Boxall]

On 11/05/2010 9:32 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
> David Boxall wrote:
>> On 7/05/2010 10:31 AM, Tom Worthington wrote:
>>> ...
>>> If the primary way to access the Internet is from a wireless mobile
>>> device, then most of the need for fibre to the home disappears.
>>> ...
>> That's a big if. ...
>
> Wireless mobile is becomming mainstream. ...
Mainstream perhaps, but primary?
> ...
> The cost of wireless Internet access is dropping and can drop much more:
> never mind mining, the government should put a super-profits tax on
> wireless Internet. ;-)
> ...
Yes, the price can come down. Can we realistically expect wireless to 
ever be as cost-effective as fibre?

As Stil and Richard have pointed out, wireless has inescapable limits. 
Can we expect wireless to ever carry the same bandwidth as fibre? As 
reliably?
> Many of the people I see each day have a mobile gadget in use much of
> the time, either a smart phone or a netbook computer, or both (few
> tablets so far). Admittedly these are early adopters, not a
> cross section of society.
> ...
On the hazards of being an early adopter:
<http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/mobiles/new-gadgets-could-add-to-high-cost-of-data-downloads-20100509-ulqm.html>:
...
> The first phone bill Samuel Nicolopoulos received after getting his 
> Apple iPhone gave him what people in the telecommunications industry 
> often refer to as ''bill shock''.
...
The relativities will undoubtedly change, but is it realistic to expect 
wireless to compete with fibre in cost, bandwidth and reliability? For 
the majority, is wireless ever likely to be the primary means of access?

-- 
David Boxall                    |  The more that wise people learn
                                |  The more they come to appreciate
http://david.boxall.id.au       |  How much they don't know.
                                                         --Confucius