NBN Pricing - Page 6

cheap · 31-07-2011, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by snappy

http://www.rearden.com/DIDO/DIDO_White_Paper_110727.pdf

It would seem in a press conference 3 days ago , That this inventer steve pearlman has made a wirless network that would outdate the nbn.

In a nutshell so far he has made a mukti user wireless system that has the ability to travel at the speed of light

I'm not a fan of NBN simply because the ROI has never been published, then there is the issue of it being basically being run by Government, where is it bound to cost 300 times more than it should, and work 200 times less reliably than promised. Take up rates are simply appalling.

Those objective criticisms aside!

Mandating a prescribed fixed solution like NBN's fibre and expecting the world to sit still is plain crazy. Steve Perlman may or may not have the silver bullet, but rest assured there will be an alternative technology which will make NBN toast.

When that happens, Telsta with their free (thanks again NBN) $11 billion dollar war chest is going to eat NBN alive.

sgt_doofey · 31-07-2011, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheap

Mandating a prescribed fixed solution like NBN's fibre and expecting the world to sit still is plain crazy. Steve Perlman may or may not have the silver bullet, but rest assured there will be an alternative technology which will make NBN toast.

Until someone comes up with a way of transferring large amounts of data at speeds greater than the speed of light, then fibre will not be surpassed.
That DIDO presented by snappy might be an alternative where fibre isn't feasible, but it still doesn't address issues that arise with wireless technology such as needing line of sight and other atmospheric interference. What's the range on the wireless network in your house? What's the data transfer rate like on the fringe of that wireless range?
One more question, what would be needed to supply data the DIDO wireless transmitters? Fibre!

flappist · 31-07-2011, 10:56 PM

One small question.

These soopa doopa high powered transmitters that send data up to 250 miles?

What do I need at my end to send data back?

fmc351 · 01-08-2011, 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

One small question.

These soopa doopa high powered transmitters that send data up to 250 miles?

What do I need at my end to send data back?

cheap · 01-08-2011, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sgt_doofey

Until someone comes up with a way of transferring large amounts of data at speeds greater than the speed of light, then fibre will not be surpassed.
That DIDO presented by snappy might be an alternative where fibre isn't feasible, but it still doesn't address issues that arise with wireless technology such as needing line of sight and other atmospheric interference. What's the range on the wireless network in your house? What's the data transfer rate like on the fringe of that wireless range?
One more question, what would be needed to supply data the DIDO wireless transmitters? Fibre!

Maybe you should repost, as you've inadvertently violated the laws of physics (or is faster than light next years NBN feature

)

As for transferring large amounts of data without fibre, lets see, in the past I've found micro-wave to be quite good, of course there are always those stories of nasty seagulls flying through the micro-wave and disrupting data. But we'll just hire lots of boy scouts with bb guns to defend the beam...

In all seriousness, we've deployed micro-wave to transfer blue chip corporation data centre quantities of data (gazillions of bytes over thousands of KM's) with utmost reliability. Disaster recovery sites with sub-second response time, end user response times and performance which is virtually indistinguishable from the local production servers. We've deployed these solutions in weeks, at a fraction of the cost of fibre. We'd be up and running before the teleco's had begun their site/fibre feasibility plan.

GTpilot · 02-08-2011, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheap

Maybe you should repost, as you've inadvertently violated the laws of physics (or is faster than light next years NBN feature

)

As for transferring large amounts of data without fibre, lets see, in the past I've found micro-wave to be quite good, of course there are always those stories of nasty seagulls flying through the micro-wave and disrupting data. But we'll just hire lots of boy scouts with bb guns to defend the beam...

In all seriousness, we've deployed micro-wave to transfer blue chip corporation data centre quantities of data (gazillions of bytes over thousands of KM's) with utmost reliability. Disaster recovery sites with sub-second response time, end user response times and performance which is virtually indistinguishable from the local production servers. We've deployed these solutions in weeks, at a fraction of the cost of fibre. We'd be up and running before the teleco's had begun their site/fibre feasibility plan.

Hahaha. Seagulls thats funny
So microwave is the answer you reckon. That easy huh. So. How many frequencies you think it would take to accomplish microwave to the node, Without interference from any other house in the street. You done many microwave links in built up areas. Such as capital cities???
Seagulls.

z80 · 14-08-2011, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheap

Maybe you should repost, as you've inadvertently violated the laws of physics (or is faster than light next years NBN feature

)

As for transferring large amounts of data without fibre, lets see, in the past I've found micro-wave to be quite good, of course there are always those stories of nasty seagulls flying through the micro-wave and disrupting data. But we'll just hire lots of boy scouts with bb guns to defend the beam...

In all seriousness, we've deployed micro-wave to transfer blue chip corporation data centre quantities of data (gazillions of bytes over thousands of KM's) with utmost reliability. Disaster recovery sites with sub-second response time, end user response times and performance which is virtually indistinguishable from the local production servers. We've deployed these solutions in weeks, at a fraction of the cost of fibre. We'd be up and running before the teleco's had begun their site/fibre feasibility plan.

Transferring streams of data is not an indicator of a state of the art network.

Australia currently has the worst backchannel speeds on any first world nation.

By that I mean you can download at significantly higher speeds than you can upload.

But someone somewhere has to upload...and the whole network speed is governed by the weakest link.

In terms of your example of transferring gigabiga bytes over microwave I can guarantee you that I can transfer more terra-giga bytes in one direction in 24hours faster than any microwave network you can find anywhere in australia.

Since it is a one way data transfer I could just express post a box of 300DVD's by 6pm and they would be in sydney by 10 am the next day.

Same result....let's call it half duplex to be precise

Franco Cozzo · 14-08-2011, 11:42 AM

I did a new PC for a family friend the other week, and unfortunately we found out the hard way that dialup isn't supported on Windows 7 64bit anymore, he had a dialup connection, but he wanted to upgrade anyway and it gave him the perfect excuse.

So we rushed off to the local Telstra store and he signed up for one of their homeline ultimate bundles, which has their best home phone plan with their best internet connections, it was $128 a month without the Tbox, with 200GB of downloads and a choice of cable or ADSL2+, we opted for cable knowing it can be slightly faster than ADSL2+.

1 week later, they come and do the install at his place, no problems. I do a speed test on his internet connection:

My god, certain areas in Melbourne get close to 100mbps connections on Telstra's HFC network, which they rolled out in the late 90s?

Obviously it lacks compared to the NBN in upload speed, but thats not bad, going from downloading at about 5KB/s to now 12MB/s from local servers.

I wonder how much a big rollout of HFC would be compared to fibre? The only bad part there is the upload is fairly crappy compared to the download speed, but I'd be happy with that if I could get that at my place.

I don't think wireless is a good solution for anyone who would be getting fibre, laws of physics win for fibre, no interferrance, etc. Might make a good solution for people in remote areas, by remote, I mean like my friend who lives in Cherokee, its within the Macedon Ranges, close to other towns with access to Telstra Next G network, ADSL2+ etc, but theres probably 30 or 40 people living in the town, on big acerage, theres no mobile phone networks that cover the area at all, theres no internet connections other than dialup, and the phonelines run underneath the middle of the dirt road up to my mates place, when it rains, there is no home phone, no dialup internet connection and no mobile phone reception (because nothing covers the area).

Wireless would be a good solution for them, not worth running Fibre to 30 or so people, but they wouldn't miss out on a decent connection via wireless.

None of this satellite BS, costs way too much, barely any downloads and latency of 800ms+, plus when its a stormy/cloudy day, no internet.

**Professor Farnsworth** · 14-08-2011, 12:01 PM

yeah i'm on that same plan. except mine is 500GB of downloads - and the maximum the connection does at this end is 14.66MB/s from Youtube or Apple. Is he running the Netgear or Cisco modem?

it's running a bit slower at the moment due to the weekend traffic

I'd still prefer the NBN for the uploads as that can bottleneck during peak.

Franco Cozzo · 14-08-2011, 12:27 PM

Not sure didn't take any notice, its not the wireless whiz bang one though they tried to sell him for an extra $200 or something.

XWGT · 14-08-2011, 01:28 PM

All lovely unless you live 160 north west of Melbourne.
Then your stuck with satellite forever, and still no voice coverage. All with a shinny new Telstra exchange not 1 kilometer away.

$38 billion for 3 gb per month.....cant believe my luck really :-)

Spanrz · 14-08-2011, 01:37 PM

I wish I had even 5% of this speed.

ILLaViTaR · 14-08-2011, 07:16 PM

Not many people at all will have that speed, bloody impressive though and Flappist the people currently on the NBN just use their existing ADSL2 modem/routers, although you need the fibre cable/socket installed to your property/wall.

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum...?t=1675276&p=2

flappist · 14-08-2011, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILLaViTaR

Not many people at all will have that speed, bloody impressive though and Flappist the people currently on the NBN just use their existing ADSL2 modem/routers, although you need the fibre cable/socket installed to your property/wall.

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum...?t=1675276&p=2

You do realise that DSL is a copper technology.

Those two people in the whirlpool thread are using an ethernet port on their routers and while the 7800 has a DSL port it would not actually be connected.

So they are not using modems at all.

Franco Cozzo · 14-08-2011, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

You do realise that DSL is a copper technology.

Those two people in the whirlpool thread are using an ethernet port on their routers and while the 7800 has a DSL port it would not actually be connected.

So they are not using modems at all.

WAN port, right?

sgt_doofey · 14-08-2011, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Damo

WAN port, right?

Correct. My Fritz!Box has the option of using LAN port 1 as a WAN port. I'd assume the 7800 must be the same?

ILLaViTaR · 15-08-2011, 01:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

You do realise that DSL is a copper technology.

Those two people in the whirlpool thread are using an ethernet port on their routers and while the 7800 has a DSL port it would not actually be connected.

So they are not using modems at all.

I realise that I was just stating you can use your existing modem/router combo instead of buying super dooper ultra expense hardware for your end. I was just trying to answer your question without confusion.

flappist · 15-08-2011, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILLaViTaR

I realise that I was just stating you can use your existing modem/router combo instead of buying super dooper ultra expense hardware for your end. I was just trying to answer your question without confusion.

Well actually I suspect you actually increased confusion as the vast majority of DSL CPE does no have an ethernet wan port and you mentioned ADSL2.

In actual fact you do not NEED a dedicated router of any description although it will be a lot easier and more flexible to use one.

Basically wait until you have some form of NBN access and then read the documentation provided as to what CPE you can use on the tail provided.

Ethernet only wifi routers are common in Harvey Lee Mayne Smith Guys for $50-$100 so cost will not be a major issue.

ILLaViTaR · 16-08-2011, 06:14 PM

http://delimiter.com.au/2011/08/15/i...milar-to-adsl/

Knew it was expensive, good to see internode are getting put in their place. They were once the best ISP you could have, until a few months ago when they changed their game to become competitive with the other ISP's. So basically quality control and customer support get replaced with marketing. They used to focus on quality connections (you sure payed for them but it was worth it), with no plans to have customer bases as large as the others, I remember them telling me first hand they had limits of customers per area as they were on a private network and the idea is to keep it at optimal speed/quality. Amazing what they'll compromise for a quick buck. That said looks like fair competition is coming to bite them back in a way that's only fitting.

Franco Cozzo · 16-08-2011, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILLaViTaR

http://delimiter.com.au/2011/08/15/i...milar-to-adsl/

Knew it was expensive, good to see internode are getting put in their place. They were once the best ISP you could have, until a few months ago when they changed their game to become competitive with the other ISP's. So basically quality control and customer support get replaced with marketing. They used to focus on quality connections (you sure payed for them but it was worth it), with no plans to have customer bases as large as the others, I remember them telling me first hand they had limits of customers per area as they were on a private network and the idea is to keep it at optimal speed/quality. Amazing what they'll compromise for a quick buck. That said looks like fair competition is coming to bite them back in a way that's only fitting.

That article is iinet? Unless you meant that in the first place.

I used to be an Internode customer, great service, but then I ditched because Telstra installed some ADSL2+ equipment in my exchange and at the time Internode couldn't get near the value Telstra was offering (for Telstra whole sale ADSL2+).

Franco Cozzo · 16-08-2011, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sgt_doofey

Correct. My Fritz!Box has the option of using LAN port 1 as a WAN port. I'd assume the 7800 must be the same?

Has a separate WAN port for that

EDIT: Oops can a mod merge my two posts please? Thanks

ILLaViTaR · 16-08-2011, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Damo

That article is iinet? Unless you meant that in the first place.

I used to be an Internode customer, great service, but then I ditched because Telstra installed some ADSL2+ equipment in my exchange and at the time Internode couldn't get near the value Telstra was offering (for Telstra whole sale ADSL2+).

Yes along with exetel and others will follow and may be even cheaper again.
Internodes monopoly only lasted around a week lol.