Sensational-Adelaide.com

No one is suggesting the Liberal plan is better than the current NBN. It clearly is not, but what no-body seems to mention is that the fibre optic system has a limited lifespan, from what I read about 30 years, then the speed starts to reduce and the system requires a complete rebuild. I guess my main concern is that NBN is spending maximum money at great speed (more imported workers) to install a system that in reality most households do not need, and will all need replacing in 30 years, unless wireless technology has equivalent speed and capacity by that time (quite possible).

claybro wrote:No one is suggesting the Liberal plan is better than the current NBN. It clearly is not, but what no-body seems to mention is that the fibre optic system has a limited lifespan, from what I read about 30 years, then the speed starts to reduce and the system requires a complete rebuild. I guess my main concern is that NBN is spending maximum money at great speed (more imported workers) to install a system that in reality most households do not need, and will all need replacing in 30 years, unless wireless technology has equivalent speed and capacity by that time (quite possible).

Fibre has a limited lifespan how? This sounds like FUD. Also 30 years is ages in terms of infrastructure. What you're describing actually sounds like copper, not fibre. Fiber is made of glass and light, copper is made of rusting metal and resisting electricity.

Maximum money at great speed? 2021 is a long way away.

The copper network is at capacity already. Many residential areas are experiencing congestion. Most households do need it.


Also DO NOT believe the rubbish being touted about wireless. Wireless is fine for just a few casual users, but under the congestion of a street full of users it will crawl to a halt with packet collisions. Wireless cannot deliver a broadband service. Ever tried to use data when there's a crowd of people around you?

monotonehell wrote:Fibre has a limited lifespan how? This sounds like FUD. Also 30 years is ages in terms of infrastructure. What you're describing actually sounds like copper, not fibre. Fiber is made of glass and light, copper is made of rusting metal and resisting electricity

The fibre optic cable being made of glass will theoretically last forever in a physical sense. Performance wise it does not. Just type in fibre optic lifespan in a search and read away. And as for 30 years being ages in infastructure???? Given the copper system has lasted twice as long, and coped with a massive increase demand and variety of use, with realitvely little maintenance of late, I would say it continues to serve us well given the little money spent on it now. Also given the rapid increase in speed and capacity of wirless in just 10 years, writing it off at this stage is a bit premature.

claybro wrote:
The fibre optic cable being made of glass will theoretically last forever in a physical sense. Performance wise it does not. Just type in fibre optic lifespan in a search and read away.

I did, and apart from several pages quoting the deceptive chain email that was going around in the runup to the previous election (was that the source of your info?) most of the results show it will last a lot longer. Do keep in mind that most of Australia doesn't have the climatic conditions that do most damage (when I investigated last election time, I found water getting in and freezing was what shortened cable life most).

And as for 30 years being ages in infastructure???? Given the copper system has lasted twice as long, and coped with a massive increase demand and variety of use, with realitvely little maintenance of late, I would say it continues to serve us well given the little money spent on it now.

It does, but it won't be anything like enough for future requirements.

Also given the rapid increase in speed and capacity of wirless in just 10 years, writing it off at this stage is a bit premature.

Not really - the increase was primarily the result of more of the radio spectrum being used than any technological improvement. There's a limit to how much more can be used, and it won't be enough for widespread use of mobile high speed broadband in urban areas.

claybro wrote:

monotonehell wrote:Fibre has a limited lifespan how? This sounds like FUD. Also 30 years is ages in terms of infrastructure. What you're describing actually sounds like copper, not fibre. Fiber is made of glass and light, copper is made of rusting metal and resisting electricity

The fibre optic cable being made of glass will theoretically last forever in a physical sense. Performance wise it does not. Just type in fibre optic lifespan in a search and read away. And as for 30 years being ages in infastructure???? Given the copper system has lasted twice as long, and coped with a massive increase demand and variety of use, with realitvely little maintenance of late, I would say it continues to serve us well given the little money spent on it now. Also given the rapid increase in speed and capacity of wirless in just 10 years, writing it off at this stage is a bit premature.

Pretty much everything you have said on this subject has been wrong. Or at least a fact that is applied poorly to reality. Not your fault. There's a lot of FUD being circulated from many sources. It relies on the fact that people don't understand "communications magic" so they can't critique the information they are presented with. You need to do some research from reliable sources. You need to understand the technologies. You need to understand the history of the copper network and how much maintenance has been ongoing up until the last ten or so years. You need to understand that any infrastructure isn't just sunk into the pits and forgotten, it requires ongoing maintenance and upgrades. Also wireless doesn't work the way you think it does. You also need to understand the business motives of the players in the game.

Telstra/Telecom of old have been constantly upgrading the copper network with new exchange technologies. In the past 30 years they went from fully mechanical switching to electronic controlled mechanical switching to fully digital switching (guess where I used to work I'll give you a hint it rhymes with Telstra Business Broadband Provisioning). In order for the copper to carry DSL the equipment in the exchanges has been changed progressively over the past decade or so. The copper cables themselves have been replaced many times progressively. Not many would be older than 15 years. Quite a few are much younger. The maintenance of the copper network is an ongoing cost that no business entity wants to carry. Copper is dead, it just doesn't realise it yet.

You say it continues to serve us well despite the poor maintenance. That's because you, like most, are ignorant of how it looks from the inside. The system is a mess. It's bandaids upon bandaids.


Wireless speed has been improved by allocating more spectrum. It is amazing what we can get out of it. But make no mistake, it's only good at serving piecemeal use. Wireless is useless at serving the baseload for multiple users. If you've been to a festival or similar recently, where there's a lot of people around, you may have noticed that the data service becomes unusable. This is because the system gets swamped. Not enough separate channels within the spectrum to sustain that many users. You may hear the term "fixed wireless" that is a way to get a signal across a valley for one or two remote users. Not good for suburbia.


Anyway - I'm off to bed.

And when you throw in the uses for businesses and for emergency services, it is a big no no. Atleast right now.

I have been following the discussion on the National Broadband Network with interest. The recent release of the Coalition policy has prompted widespread discussion of the Government NBN plan vs the Coalition policy. There was huge discussion on social media and the Whirlpool forum.
Tony Windsor (Independent) said, "Do it once, do it right". ie Fibre all the way to the Home /Premises FTTH /FTTP. I agree with this.

Fibre to the Node FTTN involves a mix of fibre to street cabinets and copper, with the ageing, costly to maintain copper network, to deliver broadband resulting in much slower speeds. If you want fibre all the way under the Coalition plan, you would have to pay a significant sum in the vicinity of $5000. If you live in a flat/apartment there are extra difficulties.

Here is a selection of articles, blog pieces and an excellent YouTube video that I found useful.

NBN Future Policy Outlook (PDF)
Simon Hackett (Founder of Internode)
http://simonhackett.files.wordpress.com ... h-fttn.pdf

If you have time - evening/weekend/multi-tasking.
NBN completely new paradigm for Internet/broadband delivery - 1hr University lecture/video - great visuals. (YouTube)
http://youtu.be/6a2ne1WKxek

Coalition broadband plan a 'lemon' - SMH
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-na ... 2hhw2.html

Coalition's NBN will need costly maintenance repairs - The Age
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politi ... 2hkdq.html

User pays for fastest access under Coalition - The Conversation blog
User-pays for fastest internet access under Coalition plan http://zite.to/XsZQkh

OMG Forget the tech. YaThink blog
http://yathink.com.au/error?oops=articl ... n-nbn-fail

Coalition NBN plan won't help flats: SCA
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/na ... 6617211919

Broadband is nation building infrastructure and has great benefits for our economy - business, industry, health, education etc and lifestyle. The FTTN model sells Australia short and will eventually have to be upgraded. Many other countries are currently implementing FTTH.

claybro wrote:(high speed porn for everyone).

Comments like that make me question if you even know what the NBN is for.

My household has three young professionals, all who regularly work from home. Our 10mbps ADSL 2+ connection isn't enough for that. It's choppy and slow, and forget about it when there's been heavy rain.

Typical. The Murdoch press, the Coalition's media patrners in marriage, are barely reporting on the Coalition's NBN policy at all.

Whereas Fairfax are at least reporting the issue, and highlighting the policy differences between the two.

With the additional report into high-speed-rail today, despite all of Labor's shortcomings right now, it reminds voters that Labor's strength and forte is in the long-term picture, pressing ahead with large scale, visionary nation building projects which will provide the infrastructure that this country so desperately needs. We need a fibre-to-the-home National Broadband Network. We need high-speed rail linking Melbourne to Brisbane.

I am not a Labor fanboy by any means. I despise Julia Gillard, and I despise Tony Abbott. Each party has their good and bad policies, and unfortunately, even worse parliamentarians, however, as the election campaign rolls on, one must remember, that you should vote on policy, not on persona. The NBN and HSR are two key policies which certianly have my support.

Answers to some of the queries, statements raised recently about broadband and the NBN in this thread can be found in:
Top Ten NBN Myths Debunked.
http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/

Vee wrote:Answers to some of the queries, statements raised recently about broadband and the NBN in this thread can be found in:
Top Ten NBN Myths Debunked.
http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/

Ok, so seems everyone here is convinced that every home needs high speed internet.Fair enough..We are also being told it will last a lifetime, and there is no other matching tech. Maybe so, I am not convinced.This has all the hallmarks of a Rudd/Gillard gravy train.Massive cost blowouts, waste, jobs for the boys etc..Yes it will be good, but at what cost? And given that performance and technology issues are supposedly "debunked" by wordpress, with links to ...the NBN co and various govenment agencies etc....it makes me very suspicious, when there are a number of other sites that do not paint such a rosy picture.

claybro wrote:

Vee wrote:Answers to some of the queries, statements raised recently about broadband and the NBN in this thread can be found in:
Top Ten NBN Myths Debunked.
http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/

Ok, so seems everyone here is convinced that every home needs high speed internet.Fair enough..We are also being told it will last a lifetime, and there is no other matching tech. Maybe so, I am not convinced.This has all the hallmarks of a Rudd/Gillard gravy train.Massive cost blowouts, waste, jobs for the boys etc..Yes it will be good, but at what cost? And given that performance and technology issues are supposedly "debunked" by wordpress, with links to ...the NBN co and various govenment agencies etc....it makes me very suspicious, when there are a number of other sites that do not paint such a rosy picture.

So what specific points do you still think are unanswered? You seem to have just waved all that was said above aside, that people have have put forward evidenced arguments for, with a general "I'm not convinced" statement. Or is it a case that you just don't like the messenger so you wont listen to the message?

monotonehell wrote:

claybro wrote:

Vee wrote:Answers to some of the queries, statements raised recently about broadband and the NBN in this thread can be found in:
Top Ten NBN Myths Debunked.
http://nbnmyths.wordpress.com/

Ok, so seems everyone here is convinced that every home needs high speed internet.Fair enough..We are also being told it will last a lifetime, and there is no other matching tech. Maybe so, I am not convinced.This has all the hallmarks of a Rudd/Gillard gravy train.Massive cost blowouts, waste, jobs for the boys etc..Yes it will be good, but at what cost? And given that performance and technology issues are supposedly "debunked" by wordpress, with links to ...the NBN co and various govenment agencies etc....it makes me very suspicious, when there are a number of other sites that do not paint such a rosy picture.

So what specific points do you still think are unanswered? You seem to have just waved all that was said above aside, that people have have put forward evidenced arguments for, with a general "I'm not convinced" statement. Or is it a case that you just don't like the messenger so you wont listen to the message?

Because everything juLIAR DILLard MUST be lies! Tony Abbot told us so!

Make up your own mind on this topic. I have researched the topic, talked to others and shared opinions.
Unfortunately, it appears that the NBN debate has become overly politicized.
Do your own research.
I know that I am keen to get the NBN with FTTH and will feel dudded with the alternative.

It would be great if more important issues of national importance had bipartisan support.
Politics does not need to be so adversarial.

Vee wrote:Make up your own mind on this topic. I have researched the topic, talked to others and shared opinions.
Unfortunately, it appears that the NBN debate has become overly politicized.
Do your own research.
I know that I am keen to get the NBN with FTTH and will feel dudded with the alternative.

It would be great if more important issues of national importance had bipartisan support.
Politics does not need to be so adversarial.

^ This.

Politics should not be a team sport. It's not a game with an outcome that doesn't matter. In sport you play to the grand final and then everything is reset for the next year - rinse, repeat. Politics affects society. People need to stop being dullard "supporters" and start paying attention to the important issues.