A Broadband Future for Australia

Discussion in 'Networking, Telephony & Internet' started by Fuema, Sep 12, 2007.

  1. Fuema

    Fuema Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    187
    Location:
    Brisbane, Australia
    If everyone signs this ... some action may be taken... I mean come on! We have ~13mbit cable and ~20mbit adsl 2+ while the US has 160mbit wideband cable etc...

    Code:
    http://www.alp.org.au/action/broadband.php
     
  2. Primüs

    Primüs Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    3,357
    Location:
    CFS
    hrmm, if i was voting, i think i would be voting labor BAHAHA.

    In some places you can get 100mbit / 100mbit and wont be long, till a specific 'fibre town' being developed will offer 1Gbps (i think thats it) to business connections via fibre optic.
     
  3. nanolimit

    nanolimit Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Messages:
    1,004
    Location:
    wagga wagga
    pfft, I can't even friggening get ADSL2 here yet. Screw spending more money on the citys interweb! Send it out into rural australia and atleast get us upto date on the speed.
     
  4. dakiller

    dakiller (Oscillating & Impeding)

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    7,742
    Location:
    Gippsland
    What is the obsession with wanting to have faster internet? Why do we need faster than 13mbit cable or 20mbit adsl? They are perfectly fine for just about anything you want to do on the internet these days. The biggest problem I have with the current shape of broadband in Australia is the ridiculous data quota's that we have, why would you want a 100mbit connection when you know they'll charge you through the nose for a 3gb quota that you can completely download in only 5 minutes! Taken to the extreme, but extrapolate it out it's still 20gb in ~30min. Yet I have yet to see why anyone would be limited in what they can do on the internet due to the bandwidth limit of some of the better currently available technologies.

    Sure many will say, "I got 20gb and I never use 1/2 of that anyway, why should anyone else need more apart for illegal content on p2p?" Yet there is so much more to it than that. there are heaps of free TV shows available, stuff exclusive to internet broadcast as well as the ABC over here putting some of their shows on their website as well as plenty of other TV networks in other countries offering their content free online (though some are limited to those geographic locations, its a bit of a moral question if you circumvent that :Paranoid: ) as well as offering streaming live content in video and audio is still increasing and there is an endless supply of that available (Joost comes to mind as he big emerging one). So the excuse that we dot need high download limits is not a valid one these days, the current culture of limiting our internet quota's in Australia has really restricted us from exploring and discovering the real rich media that is available and really limited the spread of its popularity.

    I propose that you instead lobby to have ISP plans to be capped at a 10gb minimum limit and throw out this 200mb rubbish that the big ISP's offer that are really just to lure in mum and dad users who really don't know about how easy it is to use all that up and charge through the nose for exceeding their limit and then have them change up their plan after doing that. 10GB at least gives people some freedom to start exploring these rich media contents available and will really promote growth of the internet as a whole in Australia.

    Sure our current infrastructure wont be able to handle the massive increase, plenty of ISP's are buckling under the strain of the current use as is especially when they offer big quota plans, so the backbone infrastructure really needs to be upgraded. But the current connections to the end users really is adequate and the quota's currently placed on the bigger ISP's are really the big restrictions we have at the moment.
     
  5. Primüs

    Primüs Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    3,357
    Location:
    CFS
    Well said, and i agree, even though we may have the higher bandwidth capabilities to the home, bandwidth internationally for ISP's are not going to get much cheaper (if at all) because of this, causing the crappy download limits. We need MOAR FIBRE! (Undersea cables.)
     
  6. mordy

    mordy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    5,100
    Location:
    melb
    I wrote in the comments that fttn is a waste of time because ultimately the copper is a dead network and we should be investing in ftth in order to be good for a good few decades.

    I also mentioned that the government should be the ones rolling it out, not a private company, cause theres no real financial incentive to do it, it should be a government roll-out and only later be privatised.
     
  7. Dezza Bot

    Dezza Bot Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    4,609
    Location:
    Central Coast, NSW
    fftn is the first step you really need to take before you upgrade the quality of the last mile. There's no point in you being synced at 99gbps if the backhaul can't take it.

    All exchanges should have ADSL2+ or READSL2 enabled and there should never be a lack of ports however. All this costs money unsurprisingly.

    We're on a little island in the southern hemisphere, so its not surprising that asia/europe/americas have faster/cheaper connections.

    Lol at copper being dead. With 2 more wires going to my house and a few more twists in the cable, I could sync at 1gbps or faster over a few hundred metres if there was a gigabit siwtch in the distribution unit.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2007
  8. mordy

    mordy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    5,100
    Location:
    melb
    theres no reason that australian sites cant be syncing at 5MB/sec ... none at all, my internet (optus cable) wont give me even a touch over 500KB/sec to australian sites ... why? why should it be so slow? RMIT computers can do it at 3MB/sec, whats the diff?

    If you want to whinge about overseas sites, thats another story.
     
  9. rade

    rade Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2002
    Messages:
    344
    Ive got adsl2 at ~23mbit, its all fun and games for aussie sites but I havent seen many international sites go faster than 10mbit. I think 100mbit is excessive for a single user in australia until theres more local content like iptv and so forth. For this reason i'd rather have unlimited 8mbit than capped adsl2

    just my 2c
     
  10. Beaner

    Beaner Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2001
    Messages:
    737
    Location:
    Sydney
    Thats why you use multiple streams. 10 streams from a news server = full bandwidth utlillised.
     
  11. Wilf

    Wilf (Banned or Deleted)

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2002
    Messages:
    2,328
    Location:
    Sydney
    care to post a link to all those 160Mbit wideband cables all over the USA...
     
  12. MrRevhead

    MrRevhead Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2002
    Messages:
    1,610
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    http://www.verizonbusiness.com/us/about/network/?link=topnav --> Click 'View Map' (formally WorldComm's old network prior to going bankrupt). Chicago & New York data centres & Sacromento's hub may be of particular interest.

    Displays bandwidth available on the major backbones within the country, which can be resold commercially.
     
  13. MR CHILLED

    MR CHILLED D'oh!

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2002
    Messages:
    136,478
    Location:
    Omicron Persei 8
    Yes it gets to a point whereby it is only an issue of time when downloading files. But we are a now society as credit debt shows us, people don't want to wait, they want it yesterday.

    I'm fully utilise my 20mbit cable and it is way faster than I need it, don't get me wrong though I think it's awesome, but there are other priorities such as availability (blackspots) and quotas. Why increase the speed when quotas are a little stagnant.
     
  14. Damn_Good

    Damn_Good Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,649
    Stuff the cities, Adsl2+ is fine.

    My parents can only get dial up slightly ouside of a town of 15k. Spend the money to bring the rest of the country up to speed before giving urban areas unnessecary and excessive speed.
     
  15. Jaker

    Jaker New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2007
    Messages:
    637
    Location:
    Melbourne
    I agree that the quota's need to be increased (or lowered in price, same thing).

    I also agree that it's probably fair to bring the rural areas up to speed rather than giving the cities excessive speed; I'm very happy with my ADSL2+ connection (just got today), and while 100+Mbps sounds cool I really don't need it, and wouldn't think that too many others do too.
     
  16. dakiller

    dakiller (Oscillating & Impeding)

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    7,742
    Location:
    Gippsland
    Yes, some patience really needs to be instilled back into our society, its quite worrisome when my landlord starts bashing the mouse on the desk because his internet banking site doesn't pop up instantly (anything more than 2 seconds, seriously :shock: ) and yells out "why is this internet so bloody slow, this stuff is meant to work at the speed of light!!!"

    It is only when you start loosing real money for the time things take that you should really start caring about your connection speed. Otherwise that 500mb download can take 30min and you shouldn't mind waiting that long, not too long ago it would have been 2 days
     
  17. orgone500

    orgone500 Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2003
    Messages:
    181
    Location:
    Northern Rivers NSW
    Well said Dezza. In the backbone stakes, Telstra owns the majority of the regional network backhaul, and charges a fortune for data over it, so there is no benefit to an ISP or Council upgrading to ADSL2 or installing WIMAX when they get killed on the backhaul. This fibre network was paid for by tax payers before the sale of Telstra.

    On the last mile scene, the thing that kills me is that Telstra is already doing FTTN. It's called a RIM, and Telstra rolls them out to nearly every new development it can. They are cheap and make business sense. One long run of fibre with 0 loss and multiple short runs of copper to the node. The scary thing is that once you are one a rim, you are locked out from *ANY* competitor adsl2 network. Want adsl2? Its Telstra or nothing. If Telstra enables the exchange, which they are only doing at the moment if a competitor has already installed adsl2 hardware. There is no room in a rim for competitors equipment, and who is going to install hardware for a portion of the 150 rim users.

    In my opinion, the only way out of this mess is for Telstra to be split between wholesale and retail. The wholesale side should be funded by the government, but charged to ISPs so that it is cost neutral. The Government can then fund & control the upgrade of networks without playing ISP favourite, and Telstra can no longer screw over the public with its monopoly. I think the Government (either side) spending money for a single ISP to build a network and profit from it is just a waste of tax payers money.

    Sure adsl2 is fine for the next 5 years, but then what? How do you bring pressure onto Telstra to keep the network upgrades coming if its a provately owned company?

    My 2 cents....
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2007
  18. Leopard

    Leopard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    1,642
    Location:
    Brisbane 4005
    We've been 'fully compensated' by the privatization of Telstra, so please ditch this mentality.

    I put that in brackets 'cause I think it should not have happened, but hey - I didn't vote for the political party that did it...
     
  19. hoges25

    hoges25 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    606
    Location:
    Victoria
    The main need for fttn/ftth is for small businesses. I know there are a lot of businesses who can't even handle voip with their speeds, much less video conferencing.

    We need a unified, national system instead of the sprawled out patchyness we've got now. Fibre isn't really cost effective for anything outside of inner-city suburbs, so no private company is willing to take it on.

    The problem is that now telstra has shareholders, it wants to outdo the oposition and exceed budgets. It owns a majority of the equipment and makes other telcos pay through the nose for it. Telstra's currently pissed off at the government because they awared the $1billion to optus and co, taking away some of telstra's influence.

    Basically, without proper intelligent government influence, we will never see a decent broadband network. Unfortunately, the current government doesn't have a good rep for technology (DTV anyone?), so it will take a long time. Until the government realise the importance of infastructure, we will just keep getting further and further behind the rest of the world.
     
  20. banshee343

    banshee343 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,195
    Location:
    Perth
    I spend alot of time on the internet and on my computer but even i can see that you wouldnt vote for labour just because they are going to supposedly upgrade the internet everywhere.

    To all the country bumkins who are complaining about not being up with the city people, move to the city or shut up. We dont annoy you wanting more trees so stop trying to steal our internets :Pirate:
     

Share This Page