Wednesday, March 24. 2010100 mbps Fibre Speeds.........John Linton ........I can't tell the difference. We are staying in a recently built hotel in the centre of the Ginza which has internet connectivity via a 100 mbps fibre link (as does virtually every other building in Japans central districts and, as far as I know, most of Tokyo's residential districts. The result for an end user such as me? It works just fine but no better than my home 10 mbps ADSL2 service nor even my wireless broadband service in the places around Sydney that I use it. I very much doubt that there are that many hotel customers and staff using the internet service at 6.15 am but even if there are I don't detect any difference at any of the times I have used the internet over the past two days. I am not drawing any meaningful, or come to think of it any, conclusions from this untimed/unmeasured experience but it is another 'pebble on the beach' piece of 'evidence' that the cost of building a 100 mbps fibre network around Australia will need some more serious justification than getting a political posturer off the hook for involving himself in things he hasn't got a clue about. When you subtract out all the clap trap about 100 mbps speeds being so useful for "on line hospital surgery" (the hospitals already have 100+ mbps fibre and those that don't (if there are any) can get it from Optus and Telstra (or if they want it at a lower cost from Exetel) or any of the other nonsensical scenarios that are 'winged' by people who write justifications for spending tax payer money on the 'NBN2' you have to reach the conclusion that the 'NBN2' is only being built to provide some percentage (and no-one can even estimate what that percentage is) of residential users with a facility that will only be used for 'recreational' purposes. I must be wrong in that estimate but I can't see where. Business users in all capital cities and an increasing number of regional cities can get, today, data connections of up to 60 mbps at a non-taxpayer subsidised very affordable cost. Exetel has been selling 50 mbps links to large schools, student accommodation, medium sized companies and even a few government departments at a steadily increasing rate for over 6 months now. Telstra and Optus have been providing 100+ mbps services to Australia's largest companies and government users for many years. So it seems very unlikely that any of these business and government organisations will be eager users for the 'NBN2' service that is going to be limited to 100 mbps at a time when they are looking beyond 100 mbps for the larger operations and already have the infrastructure in place to deliver it. I keep reading about how "Mrs Jones who runs a small business in West Galagagong will now be able to compete internationally because of 100 mbps internet" - but what will she be able to do with it that she can't already do? What new services will become available in the future that will require such speeds and why does she need to be subsidised by Australian taxpayers to run her own business? If she is inconvenienced by not having some facility to run a business then she should move to somewhere that has the facilities lacking in the place she currently operates from. I don't expect to have Mosman Council extend Mosman Oval so I can run a dairy herd and I'm prevented from doing that because Mosman lacks basic rural facilities (like 1,000 hectares of arable land) - I move to West Galagagong. I realise I have used a wildly exaggerated comparison to sledge hammer home my point but FCS - its only to oppose the current stream of nonsense being used to justify an unknown tax payer expenditure on an unknown service at an unknown cost (and please stop describing it as a national 100 mbps network now the government has admitted that it will drop to 25 mbps (or less) in 'certain areas' meaning a lot of areas. The point remains that 100+ mbps fibre is already delivered to most if not all of the users who want it at this time and those speeds will increase and those costs will decrease over the coming months and years on already established infrastructures. The CBA, The War Department and Mrs Jones do NOT either need nor should they want to be subsidised by me and you. If they want a facility they should pay for it and if they can't get it where they have chosen to operate (through poor planning) then they should move. Now, I'm off to Kyoto for the day. Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
Having 100Mb/s available to such a large population (Japan has 1Gb/s fibre to the home for $50US since 2005) will result in services being provided that make use of that bandwidth. We will be unable to use (or be limited in the use) of those services until we have matched those speeds. It will take us 8 years (if the Government comes in on time) to achieve that goal. If we wait until we need it, then it will be way too late. In my opinion, the fact that it is already in place in some countries will mean that we will need this in the medium term.
As for the drop to 25Mb/s in some areas. Once the fibre is in place, it would not be such a massive task to increase these to 100Mb/s later. I see it as a good thing that the high-speed fibre can be put in while realising some savings at the end points. I am assuming that 25Mb/s will be a significant increase in these communities from what is currently available. Comment (1)
I've been saying this for some time now, compared to my 13Mbit ADSL2+, how much better will 100mpbs be?
Even now, few websites are able to max out my connection, streaming content rarely uses more than a couple mbit, and only CDNs like Akamai, local peers or P2P fully utilise my connection. However, that’s just my Internet usage. I believe as ‘triple play’ services are increasingly offered to Australian’s (IPTV, VoIP, and Internet) we will begin to have more demanding bandwidth requirements. Even then, 50 mbit would be generous, unless we’re talking about simultaneously streaming multiple 1080p content. Then there’s the argument that 100 mbit for all is ‘future proofing’ and while all Australians don’t need it now, it could be necessary for the future. As far as using the Internet for business purposes, I think a few mbit is plenty for now. I worked at a large organisation which had retail branches using 512kbit Telstra lines, over 20 clients and POS sharing the same service. 100 mbit is not the answer for it, ADSL2 would have been! (Considering it was literally next door to the local, ADSL2+ Optus enabled exchange). Comment (1)
My brother lives in Tokyo and has 100m fibre to the home, he gets great speeds to anywhere within Japan but pointing a browser to anywhere outside of Japan still provides they same kind of speeds I get at home on my ADSL2 connection, any network will only be as strong as its weakest link I guess which would be the international transit
Comment (1)
JL,
How I envy you on your current trip! I've been wanting to get back to Japan for 13 years. Comment (1)
Very well said. The Australian economy does not depend on private individuals being able to download entertainment at blistering speeds. The focus should be on making the current services more affordable to bring them into line with the rest of the world. Low income earners and pensioners should have no difficulty affording a reliable and usable internet service. Data costs need to be dramatically reduced to free people from the shackles of quota limits. There are many ways to do this and the NBN is not one of them.
Comment (1)
One example is Krudd's/La Guillotine's statement that Australian schools will benefit from the 'NBN2' by getting higher speed access.
Al of the Catholic schools in NSW (and maybe Australia) are now getting a high speed fibre network from Telstra without the taxpayer spending a cent. Doubtless that school system is paying too much for the service but the point is they have embarked on a commercial contract that makes financial sense to them. Just as the law enforcement, hospital and other essential service operations have. "Future proofing" the Australian communications infrastructure will NEVER happen by entrusting that function to a government monopoly. Is it possible that all Australians are so stupid they have forgotten why the past governments got out of supplying communications services? Comments (2)
"I can't tell the difference."
Oh good grief, Why not then join the 'other 50 per-cent' indicated in Exetel subscribers who only get some "1.2" mbps-speeds, or downgrade to a laggard 256k'line... I'd imagine DSL1_via_TLS is available inside a 'Mosman' (or should that be 'a museum'?) near you if speeds today are so reasonable. but these are disgraceful speeds we are talking about here that have been minimised artificially and deliberately set restrictive for longer than anyone cares to remember; of course ADSL1 is so outrageously overpriced it costs DOUBLE-to-THREE times the cost others pay to receive broadband. 10 mbps is broadband yes ; if your exchange supplies ADSL2+, which many don't. "...facility that will only be used for 'recreational' purposes." None so blind as those who will not see. but, irrespective of whether for "recreational/productive" use, the technology most likely will find use in the telepresence field. Imagine yourself a senior and struggling with mobility - the offspring are too busy to pay pa a visit - 'TELEPRESENCE' may be your one solution. 'Senior networking' "...now the government has admitted that it will drop to 25 mbps (or less) in 'certain areas'" Well iiNet's release of indicative TAS pricing information hardly looked spectacular to me; but who's to say that precludes a different company supporting 25/25 mpbs +'unlimited' in the future - which fibre is meant to handle easily. The "25 mbps or 1/4 speed" most likely relating to your "businesswoman in W.Galagagong" probably would only get broadband by the e.g. Combination of both fibre + WiMAX technology to be economic, or receive the service by only satellite, where distance is the shaping factor (no one suggests fibre be used exclusively). Telstra will help fit out some 'remote' people with access undoubtedly through its remote service obligation. But if there still exists a few shareholders disgruntled about the whole NBN Co deal ocurring, well.. a bit like the user dissatisfied with h/her broadband service - you point them to "[Stockmarket] Choice" where one may choose from any number of companies to invest dough in. Well I'm off to read http://www.tpg.com.au/about/pdfs/TPG%20Telecom%201H-10%20Presentation.pdf to see how they approach the new decade - there must be good reasons they are swimming while T$ sinks. Comment (1)
Why don't you read what I actually said?
1,000 MBPS FIBRE IS ALREADY AVAILABLE FROM THE TWO LARGEST CARRIERS IT NEEDS NO TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO WIDEN THE COVERAGE OF THAT FIBRE WIRELESS IS/WILL BE AVAILABLE AT VFS ALMOST EVERYWHERE IN AUSTRALIA AT LOWER COSTS THAN FIBRE. Understand now? Comments (2)
And JL when more than 1 person uses wireless what happens?
Oh that's right, the speed halves, add 2 more on and it halves again. In no time you have a situation where you can't even get 256k. Wireless is a secondary option and at the moment does not beat a fixed line. Sure 43 billion is a lot of money, however if we always worried about cost, nothing would ever get done! Comment (1)
"Sure 43 billion is a lot of money, however if we always worried about cost, nothing would ever get done! "
That will be a consolation to those of the next couple of generations paying the tax debt that funds this travesty. Comment (1)
The fastest internet I can possibly aquire as a consumer (apart from Telstra NextG) is 5Mbit ADLS2+. Split between 6 devices (four people) this is .83Mbit.
My internet will not get faster, I and I cannot use IPTV or any data-intensive multiple-user technology without an infrastructure upgrade. FTTN - fine, up to 24Mbit - but why limit the build to a copper last mile when you should just get it built fiber-right in the first place? Comment (1)
I can accept that no home users need 100mbit right now, but then again noone needed more than 640kb of memory either right?
All multimedia content is increasing in quality and size, and the amount of legally accessible content is growing at a fast pace as well. Comment (1)
|
Calendar
QuicksearchArchivesCategoriesBlog AdministrationExternal PHP Application |