I'm sure at one time the idea of paving all roads was 'stupid'.Dilbert_X wrote:
For the average person the NBN won't make a scrap of difference. 100MBs or 25Mbs, its invisible.
A solid backbone and getting decent rates out to some of the more remote areas would be useful, FTTH for everyone who doesn't want or need it - its stupid.
somebody doesn't understand how fiber works.Dilbert_X wrote:
For the average person the NBN won't make a scrap of difference. 100MBs or 25Mbs, its invisible.
A solid backbone and getting decent rates out to some of the more remote areas would be useful, FTTH for everyone who doesn't want or need it - its stupid.
Which part exactly?Cybargs wrote:
somebody doesn't understand how fiber works.
this cannot be a serious postDilbert_X wrote:
Many of Australias roads are still unpaved and the country seems to function perfectly OK.......
It'll ruin the shoes of my horse!Jaekus wrote:
I'm sure at one time the idea of paving all roads was 'stupid'.Dilbert_X wrote:
For the average person the NBN won't make a scrap of difference. 100MBs or 25Mbs, its invisible.
A solid backbone and getting decent rates out to some of the more remote areas would be useful, FTTH for everyone who doesn't want or need it - its stupid.
It's the majority of his posts that make me think he's constantly trolling or just really that dense.Spark wrote:
this cannot be a serious postDilbert_X wrote:
Many of Australias roads are still unpaved and the country seems to function perfectly OK.......
they still need to lay down the fiber lines don't they? the difference between providing 25mb/s and 100mb/s on fiber is network capacity.Dilbert_X wrote:
Which part exactly?Cybargs wrote:
somebody doesn't understand how fiber works.
technically you can get about 20-22Mb/s out of old copper telephone infrastructure.Cybargs wrote:
they still need to lay down the fiber lines don't they? the difference between providing 25mb/s and 100mb/s on fiber is network capacity.Dilbert_X wrote:
Which part exactly?Cybargs wrote:
somebody doesn't understand how fiber works.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2013-04-09 05:55:13)
fibre to 'node' boxes i think at the end of streets or the like, i don't know how much copper the coalition is saying you'll need to the premises but it'll be a fair bit.Cybargs wrote:
they still need to lay down the fiber lines don't they? the difference between providing 25mb/s and 100mb/s on fiber is network capacity.Dilbert_X wrote:
Which part exactly?Cybargs wrote:
somebody doesn't understand how fiber works.
you know why people approve of the NBN? because people remember the times when the rest of the world had broadband and we were still stuck on dial up.Dilbert_X wrote:
So we need FTTN and a very high bandwidth backbone, FTTH - not so much really.
lol, this is like the myth about Gates' saying 640k will be enough for anyone.Dilbert_X wrote:
So we need FTTN and a very high bandwidth backbone, FTTH - not so much really.
The difference between ~20Mbs and 100Mbs for the typical user is almost meaningless, the difference in the amount of infrastructure work is immense, there's just no way to justify it.
Because Dilbert doesn't need to download porn any faster he can't possibly conceive why anyone else would need faster speeds either.Spark wrote:
Youtube already has options which require close to 25MBps.
He hasn't browsed any HD sites I guess.Jaekus wrote:
Because Dilbert doesn't need to download porn any faster he can't possibly conceive why anyone else would need faster speeds either.Spark wrote:
Youtube already has options which require close to 25MBps.
Watching youtube is hardly a national priority.Spark wrote:
Youtube already has options which require close to 25MBps.
yeah because australia is going to replace new york, london or tokyo as one of the major financial hubs any time soon.AussieReaper wrote:
And the financial industry - seriously getting information fractions of a seconds faster than other markets can make a difference, as many trading platforms execute entirely automated.
yeah nobody gives a shit about the ASX. that really hurt uzique. i guess those traders don't use the internet to make trades in nyc or london right?Uzique The Lesser wrote:
yeah because australia is going to replace new york, london or tokyo as one of the major financial hubs any time soon.AussieReaper wrote:
And the financial industry - seriously getting information fractions of a seconds faster than other markets can make a difference, as many trading platforms execute entirely automated.
100Mbps will surely give you the edge.
well done on missing the point.Dilbert_X wrote:
Watching youtube is hardly a national priority.Spark wrote:
Youtube already has options which require close to 25MBps.
100Mbs to every home would be nice to have but I would have thought a dual-lane highway or a quality rail network - where trains can go >50kmh and pass by without one of them having to stop - between the major cities ought to come first really.
