Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NBN compulsory switch over timeframe

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Any of my clients without their own domain (i.e. running *.com, *.net or whatever service) have always been on one of the many free email providers - usually "myway" (better privacy) or "yahoo" (needed a lot of filtering to remove spam back then) historically. The only issue I have ever had was when myway shut down with one month or so advance warning. It was one hell of a busy time for my company... After nearly 20 years with iinet, not having a "locked in email" also stood me personally in good stead when TPG took them over / trashed the brand. Moving ISP was trivial - as it should be.

    NBN: I am now with "mate telecomm" as are a number of my clients. Cheap, cheerful, Oz call centre and no contracts. As yet they have not pissed any of us off, so it has been over a year with no complaints for any of us. Mind you, we are mostly using top quality routers (Netcomm) which they provided at a fair cost. I still tend to use Netgear routers to replace "no router / cheap Chinese piece of crap routers", however the Netcomms have been good so far. At up to 50MBits/sec they are rock solid - no way for me to test beyond that at any site here thanks to the politically inspired nuking of the NBN throughput. Not one of my client sites in W.A. can do better than 75MBits/sec actual line speed. "Fraudband".

    Oh, and for those who think the current mess is a cheaper way to do it than the original plan - wrong, wrong, wrong. The major cost is actually digging all the holes in the ground, which should be a one off exercise. The current mess (particularly the HFC - even worse than FTTN in lieu of FTTP) will cost oceans in maintenance. If I were not semi retired, I would be making squillions on every breakdown and fixing them all properly with FTTP anyway... which a number of NBN techs are actually doing "under the radar" right now (quite a few of them in the west are guys I trained and some I even employed). "Do it once, do it right" is always the cheapest long term option.

    Mind you - if the 1990 rollout of "replacement of faults with fibre" plus "all new rollouts will be fibre" had continued, we would all have a real broadband by early 2000's at negligible extra cost. Such are the clueless idiots in Canberra (both major parties) and their "policies". To quote despair.com on government: "If you think the problems we create are bad, just wait until you see our solutions".

    Comment


    • #32
      TPG now compensating clients for low speeds - iiNet and Internode to compensate 11,000 NBN customers for slow speeds - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by TampIt View Post
        Oh, and for those who think the current mess is a cheaper way to do it than the original plan - wrong, wrong, wrong. ....".
        for sure the relavent Government of the day has to take responsibility for the numerous dud decisions along the way, but i do wonder who were the technical "expert" advisors proposing the options and recomendations to the relavent decision makers ?
        Im no expert myself , but i cannot help thinking that this whole wasted investment in "holes and wires" is going to be made redundant by some even faster wireless/satelite based system in the not to distant future.��

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by blend52 View Post
          i cannot help thinking that this whole wasted investment in "holes and wires" is going to be made redundant by some even faster wireless/satelite based system in the not to distant future.
          No, I don't think so. Satellite is still very expensive and only used where it isn't feasible to run cables or mobile networks - there's also the lag generated by signals having to travel ~36000k and back between earth and satellite. Wireless can't reach everywhere even with the mega-speeds of 5G.
          The current nbn MTM is hamstrung by relying on the old copper access network (CAN) and HFC. Technology has just about wrung every available bit of bandwidth out of copper, especially the CAN. HFC still has potential as the DOCSIS standard is developed (currently up to ver3.1) but the coaxial part of the network still requires maintenance.
          We are better off investing in fibre; proper FTTP.
          For example, a lot has been said recently about meeting the infrastructure demands of a growing population. Providing a proper fibre only network could help solve that by people working from home both in metropolitan and regional areas, thus reducing pressure on roads and transport.

          flynn "former telco employee" aus

          Comment


          • #35
            Sure, but The key word there was "future"..!
            I have no idea what that technology might be, but i have total faith in the ingenuity of the human mind.
            its not that long ago since the first telephone call was made, now we are all constantly contactable by cell technology, not just voice but full data , video , gps, etc.
            in that context , copper cable, and fibre, just seem a little.... "Dated" !

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by blend52 View Post
              Sure, but The key word there was "future"..!I have no idea what that technology might be, but i have total faith in the ingenuity of the human mind!
              That could cut both ways. The future may lie in developing new technologies or improving existing ones. These days, or for the foreseeable future, it's more about the latter. I agree that copper appears to have had its run but I think there's plenty of potential in fibre and laser technology.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by flynnaus View Post
                That could cut both ways. The future may lie in developing new technologies or improving existing ones. These days, or for the foreseeable future, it's more about the latter. I agree that copper appears to have had its run but I think there's plenty of potential in fibre and laser technology.
                +1. One of the many true strengths of fibre is that it is not inherently speed limited. Later in the '90's Melbourne Uni developed multiplexing on fibre and their testing had 64 simultaneous channels of data using the same piece of "glorified fishing line" (i.e. standard fibre) at 1Gb per channel. Technology sold to Cisco at a pittance at the time (another political bit of myopia). Reputedly Cisco recouped the cost in one quarter! They probably boosted the raw 1Gb speed a lot after that - 256Gb/sec per data stream was also available at the same time. The laser transceivers were actually not the bottleneck at that time, it was the electronics needed to feed the gaping maw.

                The other issue in Oz is the maximum distance between fibre transceivers. Another Oz political giveaway was the development of special fibre cable which massively reduced the total internal reflections to near zero. End result: distance between transceivers could be around 200Kms if I recall correctly. The early "across the Nulla" fibre cable had roughly 10Kms between transceivers. Quite a difference in costs when rolling out over long distances.

                Add both of those tech's together and the need for cables as thick as your wrist disappears, as does the tyranny of distance.

                Unlike copper, another of fibres strengths is that you cannot detect the signal and / or cable with metal detectors or any such toy. No hostile entity (not that the world has any of those these days...) could detect where the main communication links are buried or do any "wiretapping" (monitoring) with cheap gear. Splicing into large scale fibre cables is tricky, expensive and easily detected. Of course the downside is that any pleb with a digger can nuke an underground cable without realising it. One such idiot took out the entire SW of WA for a few days a while back, completely ignoring the numerous signs on the surface warning of underground cable nearby. Sigh. A certain Telco starting with "T" could not see the point of using a spiderweb layout instead of a straight line with no redundancy. Hopefully NBN learnt that lesson.

                The amount of sheer garbage being broadcast via wireless these days is actually affecting a lot of sensitive gear, resulting in things like the square kilometer array telescope finding it difficult to find "RF quiet" areas to operate across the whole planet. Add to that the immense power hunger (due to inefficiency) of wireless (energy crisis, what crisis?) and fibre looks increasingly attractive.

                Newer technologies may make all that redundant however the development of the motor car did not remove the need for roads...

                TampIt

                Comment

                Working...
                X