Discussion in 'Networking, Telephony & Internet' started by Akh-Horus, Dec 21, 2016.
Comparing apples to oranges..
You cant compare a 300/300 service to a 100/40, thats stupid.
my real point is other countries are already at 1000/1000 for fiber...why not Australia...oh right cos the government botched the NBN!
HFC can also do 1000/1000. We've always been behind the 8 ball in regards to our telecommunications, largely because they've been owned by T$ pretty much..
Also not defending the nbn rollouts, its proper shit.
NBN fibre (not fiber) can do a range of speeds up to 1000/400 now. there is very little demand for anything above 100/40, and that's fact. tell me how it's botching anything to not bother spending money building something that people don't buy.
I hope he means they should've futureproofed the entire network and just fibre'd the whole thing, and fucked off the copper for some of the installs (fttc or w/e its called)
not sure Canada's retail internet/telecomms is something to aspire to - Bell/Rogers/Telus are able to offer 300/300 type plans thanks to having achieved a level of regulatory capture and market control beyond even Telstra's wildest aspirations.
pretty much that!
We had the chance for full fibre, and thanks to democracy we voted it out. Whether or not something "should" have been done (in your opinion) is utterly irrelevant. Please stop pushing your shit uphill, and return to reality.
the reality is the current infrastructure is fucked.
Pre, and during the remediation period. They were hard faults, taking out the cable Foxtel at the same time. Curiously to find whether there was a local fault I'd have to check a neigbouring suburb, not our own postcode.
Since remediation the only unscheduled outages have been of short duration.
(re: stepdaughter's HFC problems)
True: it still noticably less stable. Mind you many of the outages seem to be more ISP related (EG: VoIP works, data doesn't sort of deal..) Telstra. Naturally.
we didn't vote for that, because not enough people cared to change their votes over it.
Yeah, they were more worried about Gillard's dress sense.
It's pretty bloody moot whining about it now in any case. As it stands, there is zero chance the network is just going to change wholesale to an fttp network, so wishing for it does us no good at all. An incremental upgrade to fttc maybe sure, especially as g.fast modems support an rg6 lead-in now in addition to twisted pair. But I wouldnt hold your breath wishing for it any time soon. As caspian said, it's not like a majority of voters seem to consider it a vote changing proposition. And hell, as a person who vocally supported the original fttp plan, I'm not even sure they SHOULD. There actually are larger issues in the federal government sphere atm.
Yeah we really only had one shot at it, the finances are pretty cooked. I think the best we can hope for is what you've suggested, and either a significant upgrade of the Fixed Wireless network, or move as many people as possible back onto some sort of fixed line.
I know this, i was just posting what i thought old mate meant.
I suspect more people were thinking about stuff like wages, interest rates, the economy and balance of payment, traffic congestion, cost of living, population growth and immigration policy, public health and hospitals, law and order, education standards and school funding etc. the NBN is important but it's just one of many factors that I hope very much that people take into account when they vote. if anyone is seriously voting on the basis of the NBN then they have a very shallow viewpoint indeed.
One could argue that with a reliable internet infrastructure in place, things like traffic congestion could be reduced by remote work, health and hospitals could be improved by tele-diagnosis and even remote surgeries etc, economy/education could also benefit from a more connected populace. I agree that choosing your vote primarily on whether full FTTP is offered is a little shallow, however again with the devil's advocate, you could also argue that it's better to base your vote on (even just one) policy rather than whatever scandal the media has cooked up to sway voters. The number of people who vote along party lines because "I like/don't like $leader" is troubling, because such opinions are really only able to be fostered en masse courtesy of the media which seems to be increasingly partisan.
I agree that a universal HSI network would alleviate some concerns, but what proportion of people would actually be able to change their business or personal habits for more bandwidth? the vast majority of people can and do achieve what they need to now, universal HSI would mainly make it a little cheaper and easier. that's not to be disregarded but I really don't see it as the game changer that it is touted as, most of the complaining I hear is that typical copper speeds won't support 4K streaming TV.
I'm sure I have read before that something like 90% of people vote for the same crew they are most ideologically aligned with no matter what, and the recent commentary in the media about the high rates of pre-voting seems to correlate with that. that leaves a relatively few swing voters, which includes me - I will be voting against my normal inclination this time. I have less of an issue with people voting as a popularity contest on the party leader, because effectively that's what you are getting regardless of what party hack represents you locally. as to partisan media coverage, it seems we have long since abandoned any idea that the media might actually report the facts. as I saw recently -
the media used to report the facts and you made up your own mind about how you felt about it. now the neo-media tells you how you should feel about something, and you need to make up your own mind whether it actually happened or not.
Trumpism phrase regardless, "fake news" seems to be very much the new norm, all the way from ignoring stories that don't suit the organisation's preferred narrative, to selective reporting, to active and deliberate misinterpretation and misquoting, to just flat out making crap up.
it is indeed a worry that some people make up their minds on the basis of a single source, and potentially one that doesn't trouble them to do much in the way of critical thinking.
So we're finally getting NBN, even if it is HFC. There's no paytv cabling in this house so I rang TPG (current ISP) and they said it can go through the phone line, which currently syncs fine with stuff all dropouts ever at 14500kbps down/1020 up on ADSL2+. (snarky comment about copper being 1950's technology here)
I'm looking at unlimited 50mbit plans, is there any real difference between the cheap $60/mo (Exetel) and more expensive $70-80/mo options? Slowdowns, dropouts etc
As a benchmark for what I'm willing to put up with I've had no complaints about TPG's customer service, possibly because I've had very little to complain about in 10 years
Also, spam calls have been relentless ever since the connection status was pencilled in for June, 2-3 per day of the same recorded message from "Nicole from the Australian Broadbank Network" telling me my internet will be disconnected in 24 hours.
this is wrong- if you are HFC, you must have coax ie the "pay tv cable".
Are you in a house or an apartment?