I still haven’t heard anything from you that convinces me David.
The NBN is likely to bring in A$105 billion dollars to A$237 billion dollars. That’s a lot of economic activity. A lot of business. A lot of jobs. Even if it breaks even we will be ahead. I think you most definitely fit into: 1) They come infected with the limited thinking aligned with their business Japan already have 2Gbps. The US have large areas with 1Gbps now. And you are proposing 100Mbps? As a limit? Theoretical maximum for copper is around the 1Gbps mark, and they are only advertising download speeds, not upload. The rest of the developed world are moving to 10Gbps. 23) It is worth visiting China, Japan, Korea, Singapore, Scandinavia, Jersey +++ to see the actuality and their plans to move up to 10Gbit/s to the home. We in IT are supposed to be driving economic growth through technology. 25) This country has its back to the financial wall and needs to focus on the GDP enabling technologies and those members of the population that can invoke +ve change to the benefit of all. And that’s supposed to mean us in IT. Yet the antique thinking from some in our own industry is astounding. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of David Connors Sent: Wednesday, 4 September 2013 12:54 PM To: ozDotNet Subject: Re: [OT] NBN revisited On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Ken Schaefer <k...@adopenstatic.com <mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com> > wrote: On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Ken Schaefer <k...@adopenstatic.com <mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com> > wrote: Um, since when am I a “FTTP nutjob”? Your antipathy to the current NBN is well known. I have an antipathy for piling up money and setting it on fire. I think that’s called a “straw man” argument – no one’s advocating the mass burning of money. All you’re doing here is drawing a debateable equivalence. Current batting avg: 0.5% of the outcome for 12%. Sorry no. If you can deliver something of benefit today for good value, then you should do it. If you have existing infrastructure that is servicing millions of people with 100mbps then you shouldn't pull it out and replace it - that's dogma. So, you’re basically advocating keeping this 100mbps kit, even if it doesn’t meet future requirements, or isn’t fit for purpose? Nope. I am advocating leaving existing perfectly operational 100mbps services in place rather than replacing them with equivalent speed services with precisely zero difference to the end punter. Moreover, HFC has plenty of juice in it yet and can go well past 100mbps. Any high density resi unit block built in the last half decade or more will have copper in it that can push at least 1gbps to the MDF. Surely any decision on what to do should start with requirements, and work from there. Not start with the solution and work backwards. If you have the fiduciary duty of spending a metric pantload of someone else's money, then you should start with some sort of business case or cost benefit analysis. David
