Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Ask RiotACT

Experts in Wills, Trusts
& Estate Planning

NBN not as expected

By ozdownunder 4 December 2014 50

Really disappointed that Nicholls still does not have NBN in the making, does anyone know when this will happen?

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
50 Responses to
NBN not as expected
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
rosscoact 11:31 am 09 Jul 15

fabforty said :

I don’t think anyone should get too excited about NBN. My home was connected about six months ago. All it gave me was a lot of unsightly boxes and hardware on my wall and an internet connection which is pretty much the same as before.

Did you previously have ADSL2 and have chosen a slower than maximum NBN speed?

In comparison to pre-NBN I have 11x faster download, 20x faster upload, 4x greater limits and $60 a month less cost for phone and internet combined. A massive difference by any comparison.

fabforty 10:53 am 09 Jul 15

I don’t think anyone should get too excited about NBN. My home was connected about six months ago. All it gave me was a lot of unsightly boxes and hardware on my wall and an internet connection which is pretty much the same as before.

rubaiyat 10:46 am 09 Jul 15

Here is how the “fiscally responsible” liberals handled a simple footbridge:

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/the-tibby-cotter-walkway-to-the-scg-a-bargain-at-1700-a-trip-20150708-gi7m6w.html

The truth is that almost all politicians show a remarkable ineptitude at managing everything except their own inflated egos.

ozdownunder 11:07 pm 08 Jul 15

rosscoact said :

switch said :

dungfungus said :

Ah, it’s John Howard’s fault then?

Nope, neither the Internet nor Google are John Howard’s fault.

I know it’s early days yet but this has to be the post of the year. 😀

Superb! Love that!!

dungfungus 10:20 am 25 Jan 15

JimCharles said :

OpenYourMind said :

rosscoact said :

OpenYourMind said :

rosscoact said :

OpenYourMind said :

The cost of that physical medium is enormous. Why run fibre to everybody’s home? I like fast internet as much as the next person, however every argument I’ve seen, current bandwidth can perform or the user is a gamer or needs to watch lots of TV. There’s no strong business case for FTTH and it’s hardly the infrastructure bet Australia should be making. Personally I think bandwidth for most will be a bit like music quality, we have actually given up a bit of music quality for portability with MP3s vs CDs. In the same way, the portability and flexibility of wireless will result in it being the product of choice over fibre. This has happened in Japan with FTTH. IT people (and I’ve worked in IT longer than some of you have been alive) often think that bandwidth is everything and fibre delivers the most, so it must be the best. As we see the rise and rise of wireless technologies, for most personal applications, wireless will be good enough.

Honestly, if you haven’t seen any business case that goes beyond TV and gaming then you haven’t read a single business case, not one. Or by business case do you mean “article in the Daily Telegraph’?

Try google or even look back at previous threads here. With research comes knowledge and with knowledge comes understanding.

I’m all ears. Name some significant nation building kind of business cases that justify fibre to the home. By the way, I successfully run a business from home using ADSL. All of the examples I’ve seen to justify NBN are already being done without FTTH. Certainly future generation wireless is going to meet any of these business needs without needing to dig up every street.

I find it amusing that some of you are saying that the biggest weakness of wireless is that people share it, yet Korea is investing so much in wireless is population dense. At the same time others say we aren’t population dense enough yet the NBN design switched to wireless as the users became more remote. Harden have just introduced a form of town wide cheap wireless offering 100M/bs. They manage that with an old shipping container and a big aerial and an aerial on each premise choosing to opt in.

I don’t think you are all ears, otherwise you would have already had a look yourself. But I’ll give you a bit of a leg up.

Telehealth + remote learning + the future

The first two justify proper NBN just in cost terms and are available now but need bandwidth.

The latter is however, the most important of all. Create the capacity and people will invent things that we are now only dreaming of. Think of the world 20 years ago and how much it’s changed.

Although I expect you’re going to dismiss all this because it doesn’t fit with your beliefs.

The demos I’ve seen of telehealth all look like they could be easily knocked off with ADSL type speed. eLearning has been going on for years without FTTH. My wife completed an online course only recently, again using ADSL and not even stretching it. As for the future, for most applications, the future will be wireless and will be cloud based. Much cloud based tech takes away the heavy footprint from the home and you only need enough bandwidth to present a screen session.

Look, I get fast fibre bandwidth when it’s needed, but the thing is that for most home users, it’s not worth betting the nation’s wealth on it. As an online home business owner (of an evening), the things that would improve my business are lower postage costs overseas, better freight systems, a better and fairer tax system etc.

Telehealth needs high bandwidth, you can’t do consultations over ADSL2 if your upload speed is so poor, even Skype suffers in Canberra and that’s not built for medical grade video, the first thing they do is compress the signal and prioritise sound over video so no good for any medical professional to examine or be able to give confident advice.
An interesting Telehealth development will be in insurance, and insurance companies investing in high bandwidth illness prevention forums linked to your medical history. Less illness, less to payout. You can’t do this over ADSL2….not because of downloading video’s but because ADSL2 uploading speed not being suitable for the interactive side.
Health apps are in their infancy yes, still quite basic, but then some online businesses only have low bandwidth requirements. Just because one can do it, doesn’t mean they all can. Basing a policy on a low requirement standard baseline is just foolhardy.

They could do with having a state plan for ACT so somebody can influence what the telco’s do. Never seen anywhere with such a fragmented non-plan and a combination of the superb and the appalling provision. You can have 100Mb across the road from 1Mb and it seems like pot luck how it ended up like this ?
You have the Transact VDSL2 supernodes now all updated, but patchy provisioning in Belconnen and the South only goes down to Monash, Oxley, Wanniassa…below that there are only 2 Telstra exchanges to cover the rest of Tuggerarong (?) so you’re left with a ruler measuring distances from the exchange to try and guess what speed you’ll get. Pity the poor sods on the outskirts of Theodore and Banks, Calwell, Conder…..and the gap in Nicholls where they’re pretty much surrounded by VDSL2 or NBN, but only get ADSL2 themselves?
It’s a great example of a lack of a coherent plan for the City, lack of control, interference, weak policy planning and not following things through to a logical end leaving this patchwork in existence today.

The ACT government is only interested in 100 year old “visionary” technology, AKA trams.

JimCharles 7:16 am 25 Jan 15

OpenYourMind said :

rosscoact said :

OpenYourMind said :

rosscoact said :

OpenYourMind said :

The cost of that physical medium is enormous. Why run fibre to everybody’s home? I like fast internet as much as the next person, however every argument I’ve seen, current bandwidth can perform or the user is a gamer or needs to watch lots of TV. There’s no strong business case for FTTH and it’s hardly the infrastructure bet Australia should be making. Personally I think bandwidth for most will be a bit like music quality, we have actually given up a bit of music quality for portability with MP3s vs CDs. In the same way, the portability and flexibility of wireless will result in it being the product of choice over fibre. This has happened in Japan with FTTH. IT people (and I’ve worked in IT longer than some of you have been alive) often think that bandwidth is everything and fibre delivers the most, so it must be the best. As we see the rise and rise of wireless technologies, for most personal applications, wireless will be good enough.

Honestly, if you haven’t seen any business case that goes beyond TV and gaming then you haven’t read a single business case, not one. Or by business case do you mean “article in the Daily Telegraph’?

Try google or even look back at previous threads here. With research comes knowledge and with knowledge comes understanding.

I’m all ears. Name some significant nation building kind of business cases that justify fibre to the home. By the way, I successfully run a business from home using ADSL. All of the examples I’ve seen to justify NBN are already being done without FTTH. Certainly future generation wireless is going to meet any of these business needs without needing to dig up every street.

I find it amusing that some of you are saying that the biggest weakness of wireless is that people share it, yet Korea is investing so much in wireless is population dense. At the same time others say we aren’t population dense enough yet the NBN design switched to wireless as the users became more remote. Harden have just introduced a form of town wide cheap wireless offering 100M/bs. They manage that with an old shipping container and a big aerial and an aerial on each premise choosing to opt in.

I don’t think you are all ears, otherwise you would have already had a look yourself. But I’ll give you a bit of a leg up.

Telehealth + remote learning + the future

The first two justify proper NBN just in cost terms and are available now but need bandwidth.

The latter is however, the most important of all. Create the capacity and people will invent things that we are now only dreaming of. Think of the world 20 years ago and how much it’s changed.

Although I expect you’re going to dismiss all this because it doesn’t fit with your beliefs.

The demos I’ve seen of telehealth all look like they could be easily knocked off with ADSL type speed. eLearning has been going on for years without FTTH. My wife completed an online course only recently, again using ADSL and not even stretching it. As for the future, for most applications, the future will be wireless and will be cloud based. Much cloud based tech takes away the heavy footprint from the home and you only need enough bandwidth to present a screen session.

Look, I get fast fibre bandwidth when it’s needed, but the thing is that for most home users, it’s not worth betting the nation’s wealth on it. As an online home business owner (of an evening), the things that would improve my business are lower postage costs overseas, better freight systems, a better and fairer tax system etc.

Telehealth needs high bandwidth, you can’t do consultations over ADSL2 if your upload speed is so poor, even Skype suffers in Canberra and that’s not built for medical grade video, the first thing they do is compress the signal and prioritise sound over video so no good for any medical professional to examine or be able to give confident advice.
An interesting Telehealth development will be in insurance, and insurance companies investing in high bandwidth illness prevention forums linked to your medical history. Less illness, less to payout. You can’t do this over ADSL2….not because of downloading video’s but because ADSL2 uploading speed not being suitable for the interactive side.
Health apps are in their infancy yes, still quite basic, but then some online businesses only have low bandwidth requirements. Just because one can do it, doesn’t mean they all can. Basing a policy on a low requirement standard baseline is just foolhardy.

They could do with having a state plan for ACT so somebody can influence what the telco’s do. Never seen anywhere with such a fragmented non-plan and a combination of the superb and the appalling provision. You can have 100Mb across the road from 1Mb and it seems like pot luck how it ended up like this ?
You have the Transact VDSL2 supernodes now all updated, but patchy provisioning in Belconnen and the South only goes down to Monash, Oxley, Wanniassa…below that there are only 2 Telstra exchanges to cover the rest of Tuggerarong (?) so you’re left with a ruler measuring distances from the exchange to try and guess what speed you’ll get. Pity the poor sods on the outskirts of Theodore and Banks, Calwell, Conder…..and the gap in Nicholls where they’re pretty much surrounded by VDSL2 or NBN, but only get ADSL2 themselves?
It’s a great example of a lack of a coherent plan for the City, lack of control, interference, weak policy planning and not following things through to a logical end leaving this patchwork in existence today.

rosscoact 11:08 pm 23 Jan 15

switch said :

dungfungus said :

Ah, it’s John Howard’s fault then?

Nope, neither the Internet nor Google are John Howard’s fault.

I know it’s early days yet but this has to be the post of the year. 😀

OpenYourMind 10:29 pm 23 Jan 15

rosscoact said :

OpenYourMind said :

rosscoact said :

OpenYourMind said :

The cost of that physical medium is enormous. Why run fibre to everybody’s home? I like fast internet as much as the next person, however every argument I’ve seen, current bandwidth can perform or the user is a gamer or needs to watch lots of TV. There’s no strong business case for FTTH and it’s hardly the infrastructure bet Australia should be making. Personally I think bandwidth for most will be a bit like music quality, we have actually given up a bit of music quality for portability with MP3s vs CDs. In the same way, the portability and flexibility of wireless will result in it being the product of choice over fibre. This has happened in Japan with FTTH. IT people (and I’ve worked in IT longer than some of you have been alive) often think that bandwidth is everything and fibre delivers the most, so it must be the best. As we see the rise and rise of wireless technologies, for most personal applications, wireless will be good enough.

Honestly, if you haven’t seen any business case that goes beyond TV and gaming then you haven’t read a single business case, not one. Or by business case do you mean “article in the Daily Telegraph’?

Try google or even look back at previous threads here. With research comes knowledge and with knowledge comes understanding.

I’m all ears. Name some significant nation building kind of business cases that justify fibre to the home. By the way, I successfully run a business from home using ADSL. All of the examples I’ve seen to justify NBN are already being done without FTTH. Certainly future generation wireless is going to meet any of these business needs without needing to dig up every street.

I find it amusing that some of you are saying that the biggest weakness of wireless is that people share it, yet Korea is investing so much in wireless is population dense. At the same time others say we aren’t population dense enough yet the NBN design switched to wireless as the users became more remote. Harden have just introduced a form of town wide cheap wireless offering 100M/bs. They manage that with an old shipping container and a big aerial and an aerial on each premise choosing to opt in.

I don’t think you are all ears, otherwise you would have already had a look yourself. But I’ll give you a bit of a leg up.

Telehealth + remote learning + the future

The first two justify proper NBN just in cost terms and are available now but need bandwidth.

The latter is however, the most important of all. Create the capacity and people will invent things that we are now only dreaming of. Think of the world 20 years ago and how much it’s changed.

Although I expect you’re going to dismiss all this because it doesn’t fit with your beliefs.

The demos I’ve seen of telehealth all look like they could be easily knocked off with ADSL type speed. eLearning has been going on for years without FTTH. My wife completed an online course only recently, again using ADSL and not even stretching it. As for the future, for most applications, the future will be wireless and will be cloud based. Much cloud based tech takes away the heavy footprint from the home and you only need enough bandwidth to present a screen session.

Look, I get fast fibre bandwidth when it’s needed, but the thing is that for most home users, it’s not worth betting the nation’s wealth on it. As an online home business owner (of an evening), the things that would improve my business are lower postage costs overseas, better freight systems, a better and fairer tax system etc.

switch 5:15 pm 23 Jan 15

dungfungus said :

Ah, it’s John Howard’s fault then?

Nope, neither the Internet nor Google are John Howard’s fault.

dungfungus 3:19 pm 23 Jan 15

switch said :

rosscoact said :

The latter is however, the most important of all. Create the capacity and people will invent things that we are now only dreaming of. Think of the world 20 years ago and how much it’s changed.

Yeah. Remember Google didn’t exist the last time the Coalition won government (in 1996). Now it almost is the Internet!

Ah, it’s John Howard’s fault then?

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site