[LINK] Demand 'still not there' for 1Gbps: NBN Co
linkdb at boxall.name
Mon Feb 13 20:50:57 AEDT 2017
On 13/02/2017 12:48 PM, JanW wrote:
> At 11:55 AM 13/02/2017, David Lochrin wrote:
>> Given that we're dealing with broadband Back o' Bourke and not greater Sydney, the cost of providing 10 Mbit/sec in remote areas is likely to be orders of magnitude less than 1 Gbit/sec. While I'm no fan of the current Government's approach, all governments have to make package decisions - what is worth doing within the country's economic constraints.
I guess it depends on perspective. What scares Conservatives is big
numbers. Look at building a fibre network to Woop-Woop and that's what
you get. Thing is, optical fibre is so durable that I'm told 60-year
guarantees are not difficult to negotiate commercially these days. Most
commentators agree that a century+ service-life is not unrealistic.
Take that Big, Scary Number; amortise it over a century; it isn't scary
any more. Even less so if we look at the nation as a whole, rather than
obsessing over worst-cases. Given the accelerating rise in demand
growth, what will be the demand in a century? How will comprehensive
high-quality telecommunications infrastructure benefit the nation? How
will the nation suffer for lack of it? That's my perspective.
In the early 1950s, I saw overhead phone lines in the Southern Highlands
of NSW. Those lines had been put up by local farmers. The PMG could only
provide service a certain distance from the exchange. Beyond that was up
to the customer, so they built their own party lines.
By the early 1960s, the PMG had put all of those lines underground (and
given subscribers individual numbers). That was investing in the future.
It was done under the Conservative government of Robert Menzies.
> Oh, one more thing. I think you're right, David Lochrin - the focus on the technology muddies things - a lot. ...
Yes and no. Characteristics of the technology are fundamental to the
debate. Some foul their nappies over the cost. Others view cost over
time as negligible.
David Boxall | When a distinguished but elderly
| scientist states that something is
http://david.boxall.id.au | possible, he is almost certainly
| right. When he states that
| something is impossible, he is
| very probably wrong.
--Arthur C. Clarke
More information about the Link