true but none the less they start out that way. I also think both sides have valid points to this argument about which is better or the right approach. The point i'd make is do you think this entire thing is going to last 1-2 more elections? as does anyone *ACTUALLY* think the NBN roll out will happen within 4yrs on time and under budget... moreover does anyone not think this will become a political football over the next 4-8yrs.
All of this is going to be moot post election day as if the polls are correct and if Abott can stay quiet for a few more days and not say anything stupid he's got this locked. So while you guys fight over Copper Good/Bad I'l continue to download on my FTTH :D --- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.riagenic.com On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Ken Schaefer <k...@adopenstatic.com> wrote: > Sure. But how do those turn out (compared to starting from requirements) > – especially the really complex ones?**** > > ** ** > > Cheers > Ken**** > > ** ** > > *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto: > ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Scott Barnes > *Sent:* Wednesday, 4 September 2013 1:09 PM > > *To:* ozDotNet > *Subject:* Re: [OT] NBN revisited**** > > ** ** > > To be fair a lot of teams/companies do often run their projects from the > "solution" first approach....**** > > ** ** > > Awkward moment.**** > > > **** > > --- > Regards, > Scott Barnes > http://www.riagenic.com**** > > ** ** > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Ken Schaefer <k...@adopenstatic.com> wrote: > **** > > **** > > **** > > *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**** > > **** > > 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%. **** > > **** > > And? What’s the context? Is the better or worse than expected? Without any > such information, the above is a meaningless number.**** > > **** > > You should know that, so stop being disingenuous. **** > > **** > > **** > > 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. **** > > **** > > Well, mine (residential unit) doesn’t. As I said before “sweeping > generalisation are all wrong”. **** > > **** > > But let’s just assume mine’s an outlier. You seem to be starting from the > solution again. Is that how you run all your projects?**** > > **** > > Cheers**** > > Ken**** > > **** > > ** ** >
