News After NBN Co announced that it would start testing XG.FAST-a new technology that is said to provide fiber-equivalent broadband speeds over copper wires-Australian Internet companies said that even if these claims are true, the network may still need to be updated to fiber future.
While welcoming NBN’s efforts to try new technologies, the group’s CEO Laurie Patton insisted that before deployment, any new technology must be guaranteed to provide speed and reliability comparable to fiber optics ( Upload and download) solutions, "now and in the future, and have a comparable return on investment".
"Otherwise, in the long run, we will still build a poor-quality broadband service that will not be applicable," Barton said. "Our concern with the (multi-technology hybrid) MTM model has always been that it will not last long and must be replaced at a high price by the future government."
He said that even if proven effective, XG.FAST will not eliminate the need to replace copper wires in the FTTN network within 10 to 15 years.
In addition, according to the CEO, XG.FAST is expected to only work within "very short distances", and the need to lay fiber to the edge of the house or driveway-this architecture is called fiber to the distribution point (FTTdp).
The Australian Internet stated that NBN should abandon fiber-to-the-node (FTTN) and rebuild "21st century broadband networks that can provide the two-way gigabit per second speed possible now, and will increasingly need this speed in the next few decades. . The life cycle of critical infrastructure".
In yesterday's announcement, NBN Co stated that it will conduct laboratory tests on XG.FAST in the "next weeks" and added that the technology has already provided a test speed of more than 5Gbps through a pair of copper wires in Europe.
The operator said that this promising technology has reached a speed of 5.6Gbps on a 35-meter copper wire in a BT laboratory test. Deutsche Telekom (DT) also tested the technology, reaching 8Gbps on a 50-meter copper cable.
NBN stated that if XG.FAST proves to be a commercially viable technology, it can eventually provide a "faster and more cost-effective" way to provide multi-gigabit speeds without the need for fiber to the premises (FTTP) ).
Related post: NBN company and Nokia are conducting XG.FAST test. All parties should stop "arguing" on NBN issue. Australian Internet company said that Australian Internet company once again called on NBN G.Fast to "hype more than reality", Budde NBN's G .Fast FTTB indicates that the test on the copper cable reached close to 1Gbps
We really need to stop arguing about copper once and for all. Copper has achieved its purpose, but optical fiber is the future.
If your goal is to get a sounding room called a monkey, then the task is complete. However, you may want to consider adjusting your comment section, which is very harmful here.
Although I agree, since Renai left, it does get a little hot here sometimes...
I guess you are opposed to naming and then naming yourself (calling the monkey’s room) contradictory rhetoric/hypocrisy that discourages you?
Finally they stretched out their hands. Fiber, fiber, fiber...
The 5gbps (8 in DE) copper technology with P2P options (not shared) is not good enough for screamers.
At the same time, the mute of each customer is reset to 1.09mbps CVC. It’s a bunch of clowns, it took a few years, but in 2016, your emperor was naked in front of your fans.
Technically illiterate, financially countless, and economically superficial.
Tell me if Squealer Fishyboy is more than 10 kilometers to reach 5Gbps
Except this is not even the system they are building. If they are building FTTdp, I wouldn't mind putting a little copper on the street in the next ten years; maybe two critical junctures.
But they are not. Therefore, all your excitement about this copper cable technology is unfounded, because they are using FTTN to build the wrong system, and the system cannot effectively use the technology to achieve the speed they claim (please note that in the perfect experiment This is also true under room conditions).
Not excited, showing more screams.
Although there is almost no demand for these speeds, but still want to build FTTdp? Use technology that has not yet been commercialized? Satisfied with the wrong solution;-)
Stupidly talking about all solutions in twenty years will be replaced at that time. Design for recent needs, quickly deploy, obtain most of the available income, and use profits to upgrade as needed.
Fanboys is still screaming about gigabit fiber, only a few NBNCo customers register (84% choose 25mbps or lower), with an average of about 33mbps AVC (continuing to decline year-on-year) and 1.09mbps CVC!
Lol fishyboy is very pleased to see that Fttn cannot even provide better speeds for half of the connections. "NBN's VDSL2 DSLAM: FttN Tier 1 achievable speed sees 33% of places can reach 80-100Mbps drop, 56% reach 30- 40Mbps."
Because you should be a digital person (but not very good at it). When the demand cannot be delivered, how much does it cost to upgrade at least half of the fttn to deliver. And hfc has 900 places on one cable.
Most people use 25Mbps because they cannot get faster speeds on FTTN.
Even if they can, most ISPs don’t offer 50Mbps plans, so it’s a fortune for 100Mbps or 25Mbps that they simply can’t achieve, because it makes logical financial sense-why do you want something you can’t get Pay?
Do you think it's silly to watch twenty years? The current government's decision-making and implementation actions are very slow. I would be surprised if anything changes in the next 20 years.
In addition, they did not deploy quickly at all (the node I should connect to has been delayed by 5 months). Build once. Build once.
@rl Your prediction requires speed to be destroyed by actual data, but it is too late. ACCC data shows that FTTP customers choose similar speeds (approximately 79% 25mbps or lower).
The Tier 1 speed data below shows the many speed options available to most FTTN and FTTB customers. They are choosing a low-speed layer.
RSP does not provide demand that they cannot see at a price they can provide (see 1.09mbps CVC).
Agree that the government is totally unsuitable for providing telecommunications services (in fact, most services). Waste and inability to guarantee. However, Morrow's FTTN is much faster than The Quigley's FTTP, which is half the speed of CPP, and has received most of the revenue with the speed to match demand and a large number of future upgrade options (fibers are already configured).
All the fibers in the final stage of their scream ;-)
Therefore, when the labor force is expected to achieve 20% at 100Mbps by 2026 and the alliance. It is estimated that 100Mbps will reach 30% by 2030.
But considering that Fttp customers only account for 5% of the labor target, but it is half of the alliance's target. Or Fttn customers account for only 7%, and 15% of Fttp is used for 100Mbps. So now we will go back to adsl days what the needs can be delivered to you lol.
@Richard Not fast and not cheap.
The government is not suitable for deploying this level of infrastructure, but at the same time, it cannot be trusted to do so by telecommunications companies.
I am also very angry that I should use NBN a few months ago (the node has been used on my street for more than 8 months) and I am striving for 2.5Mbps for my ADSL connection because my line is longer than 4 kilometers.
But why launch something that needs to be upgraded immediately? The "let it work" model does not work nationwide. Not to mention the huge expenses.
@rl Many Australians are dissatisfied with the current situation; the vast majority are caused by Conroy's NBN policy announcement and the stifling of all private sector telecommunications investments. As early as 2009 after Trujillo was sent away, he should rejoin the industry. Hundreds of thousands of people cannot access the fixed-line Internet, and the number of people waiting for NBNCo continues to grow.
The "invested" tens of billions of taxpayers' money will be written off. The loss continued to expand.
The actual situation shows all the technologies that can provide the required speed now and in the future; CVC growth is not the limiting factor of the first layer speed. More last mile fiber will not help (just more delays and money), there are many options in the long run
@Richard I agree that CVC is slow. And this project should really be run privately, even though I hate that big companies only chase dollars and screw up the little guys (they did), but now they are launching a system that should have been built for nearly a decade ago, the telecommunications company should be on their own Do.
Why should we build a system that a telecommunications company can do? Since we are doing this, why don't we do better than telecommunications companies?
politics. Not technology; politics. Abbott is an extreme right-wing dinosaur, who screwed us all up. My anger towards him is strong, and it is generalized to all the Liberals at this stage.
Lol Richard That's why we don't take you seriously, but the bold face lies without any support.
"Caused by Conroy's NBN policy announcement and the stifling of all private-sector telecommunications investments. As early as 2009, after Trujillo was dismissed, he should rejoin the industry."
So whether Conroy killed the investor or Trujillo didn't want to invest in the first place, neither of these two methods, haha.
Most people use 25Mbps because they cannot get faster speeds on FTTN.
Lol, if it's guessing why fttn doesn't have the same number as fttp?
@rl The right private sector telecommunications company (at Oz Telstra) is the only party capable of providing such upgrades. This was pointed out at the time.
The government is building this monster because it is their policy. Amendments to larger monsters. I am very disappointed with all of them.
International comparisons continue to highlight the huge waste of taxpayers' money. HFC CPP now 1600 + 700 = $2300 is not parallel. The cost of the 7330 FTTN cabinet (approximately US$70,000) to be placed on site is US$190,000. The cost of the 6k employee bill is more than 1.5 times the total revenue (year 8). 60+ people media team!
From the beginning it was a complete policy stupidly, delivered incompetently.
@Richard I have noticed that since Morrow took over, media/marketing expenditures have increased significantly (renamed...why?).
They waste more money and time claiming how they "repaired" NBN (they actually just made it an absolute cluster), while they could have continued to roll out fiber optics, repair business models, and switch more rural areas to Wi-Fi, etc., run this show better than before.
But they did not do so. They have a huge opportunity to improve deployment while reducing expenditures, and show that they can do it correctly; but they just make things worse. Enraged a large number of Australians and will anger them in the coming decades.
Instead, they invested in things such as rebranding and media teams to get angry with the Labor Party and claim that they did a good job while ignoring reasonable questions from customers (such as why the fuck was my Node delayed by 5 moon?).
Lol Richard, you pointed out the real reason for the investment failure, and why Telstra "gives away" cans and hfc as it is not worth the investment, haha.
@rl I wrote to the government when the LNP was promoted to tell the government that they should go away. However, they believe it is stupid.
Rebranding is a small (but unnecessary) cost, and media costs increase with the final start (but also unnecessary for monopolists). This is a political project; a lot of waste.
Of course, they can continue to introduce FTTH, but the cost will be much higher and the time required will be much longer; the end user speed does not matter (see CVC). FTTH is expensive, labor-intensive and time-consuming.
@Richard FTTH is very expensive upfront; but the ongoing cost is significantly reduced. It's like buying a second-hand car with a high mileage; of course it looks cheap on the surface until all maintenance costs start to rise.
CVC is a farce, and perhaps the biggest mistake of the Labour Party, its smell lingers. This is one thing that Libs can easily solve, but unfortunately, they don't.
@rl direct opex Discuss in this thread: https://delimiter.com.au/2016/01/04/detailed-analysis-of-nbn-cos-finances-shows-fttp-better-value-than-fttn/ #Review-712019
It doesn't help much in the case of FTTP.
As for CVC, they need money. There is no simple solution other than admitting that it will not repay taxpayers. The available income is much lower than their cost.
As the CBA indicated (why Conroy never did this), the "invested" money showed very bad returns.
@Richard "The Tier 1 speed data below shows the many speed options available to most FTTN and FTTB customers. They are choosing a low speed grade."
But do they know the level? Do they have any ideas for modems to see the "achievable rate" in modem statistics? It's amazing to find that most people do this.
@mh As predicted, they are not interested. They want an internet connection and are happy to spend a certain amount of money. Few people here understand internet data connections (see contention)!
None of this will change reality; the demand is in the low-speed layer (contrary to the screamers’ predictions, all technologies earn most of their revenue with a significantly lower CPP).
Therefore, Richard is not good at numbers again, he doesn't know that 66% of people choose to deliver to wholesalers the minimum speed required for nbn or higher is low speed.
Yes Richard and everything you want
@R I know you are not assuming the choices of thousands of moms and dads, which means there must be some data about the reasoning behind their choices? Given that large RSPs confuse speed grades to avoid paying more CVC? Any data on *needs* and uses? (Not only the frequently quoted usage data, these data are worthless because they ignore the ability to pay, *for *various* reasons instead of *choice* etc.*solve* specific levels) Has the survey been completed? anything? We would love to see something valuable.
Don't worry, I know how and to what extent they contend with people's plans, and these plans are still rewarded handsomely (not actually freebies, just in case).
@mh We don't need to learn; we have an operating market with 3 million venues and 1 million users, and they use their own funds to choose products that suit them from the available products.
The days of prediction are over; the actual data available now accurately shows what some of us pointed out, and those who screamed fell for Quigley and others.
@r You summarized a series of complex decisions? In this case, it has little value. Then the content you post has no value. No one is asking for forecasts, I am asking for data about the services you need, and you need this data to support your statement. It is still up in the air. Yes, the result is the same, the reality is the reality, the omnipotent reality, don’t worry about justice. Many people are satisfied with what is available. This is obvious. Both parties are guilty.
If you don't use big data to support large claims, what is the purpose of this discussion besides talking about the positive factors of nbn (short-term) financial performance? not any.
You are wrong... http://www.itnews.com.au/news/nbn-could-flip-300000-premises-from-fttn-to-fttdp-417081
@cs Good article, I did CPP: FTTN 1600 + 700 = $2,300 FTTP 2500 + 1200 + 700 = $4,400 FTTP(skinny) 2050 + 1200 + 700 = $3,950 FTTdp(skinny) +700 $3,950 FTTdp(skinny) +700
Conroy's generous $700 stand out :-(
Another technology added to the mix; more expensive and slower to deploy than FTTN, but useful outside of 1km and fw and some satellite areas.
Aha, Richard claims that we should not reuse infrastructure, haha
Fanboys is still screaming about gigabit fiber, only a few NBNCo customers register (84% choose 25mbps or lower), with an average of about 33mbps AVC (continuing to decline year-on-year) and 1.09mbps CVC!
The reason why people do not adopt higher speed plans is due to the absurd pricing structure of NBN. If the ISP brings enough CVC, they don't need to limit the bandwidth.
Private companies were, are and are required to invest in NBN-obviously there are no enthusiastic investors.
On which planet is FFTP more valuable than fttn and does not help FTTP? Optical fiber is currently as cheap as copper.
The cost-benefit analysis of FTTP and FTTN both show positive returns.
Correcting wholesale pricing has minimal returns to the government, but the overall return to Australia is 6-7%.
Have you really read the "Commission Entry Newsletter" report (2007)? Because if you do, you will know that the Labour Party has followed their advice. They determined that the entire copper network needs to be replaced, most of which have been in use for more than 50 years, and most of them are not even waterproof. I just like the way I lose the internet when it rains and have to deal with the dial-up speed on ADSL2+. Have you considered the ongoing costs of copper wiring, maintenance, and continuous power supply?
http://www.deridder.com.au/files/NBN%20traffic%20pricing-FINAL.pdf
@n Pricing aims to recover costs. CVC cost is only part of the RSP equation.
Before Conroy, the private sector invested billions of dollars. No one accepts his incompetent expression of interest; but he should re-engage rather than believe in his exaggerated views of his abilities.
Optical fiber is a cheap material (low cost component) like copper. Its disadvantage is that copper (large cost component) has been deployed.
CBA shows that the returns of MTM and FTTP policies are relatively poor. Today's actual data shows that the cost of use is much lower than the actual data, and the revenue is much higher than the actual data. Try to improve their model with known values.
The actual reuse of the copper network today refutes their suggestion. The actual situation is better than the forecast.
So Richard "no one accepts his incompetent expression of interest." Laughing out is no longer the best policy you claim.
But waiting for it apparently invested billions of dollars somewhere, but then it somehow disappeared from the tender. Then re-participate after the department does not want to be too priceless, haha.
According to this logic, we should still use a 300 baud modem.
Serious question, what kind of equipment/construction investment (scale and type, not dollar figures) do you think is needed to correct the CVC deficiency, and do you have a rough figure that you think is more appropriate? I am not proficient in technical details, I am choosing your brain reasonably :)
@tm Configuration CVC capacity is cheap and almost unlimited; the two endpoints are in the same physical location (PoI). This is a cost-recovery pricing decision (policy).
If NBNCo customers start asking for speeds, they will consider additional uplinks (hundreds per node, fiber is already configured) and potential additional transmissions (rented from third parties are expensive).
However, RSP will not purchase CVCs that exceed its network capacity (backhaul and IXP, international capacity). This represents a huge dollar; the regulated FAD domestic transmission capacity service gives instructions: https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/ACCC%20final%20report%20%28public%29_0.pdf
RSP offers their products to consumers at acceptable prices, and why 25mbps or lower is their most popular choice.
As for speed, I answered this question a long time ago; today there is generally low contention at 12mbps. Changing end user behavior (aka video) requires constant speed, and peak speed is not relevant. RSP faces a huge challenge, which is to educate users to re-compete with most laymen who focus on high-peak numbers (such as those screaming gigabits).
@tm was not ignored, I was told that my response is awaiting review
The claimed 5Gbps speed can only be achieved within <30 meters.
On a pair of glued cables. 100m @ 1gbps uses a single cable.
An obvious editing error was previously pointed out in this thread. https://delimiter.com.au/2016/09/01/nbn-co-conducts-xg-fast-trials-nokia/#comment-764640 What a group of clowns;-)
@n Obviously, who has other opinions?
These meters avoid the huge cost of entering the premises.
Except for fttn, 4 visits were made to meet the speed requirements, haha
"But he added that it took him four field visits to get his speed to a new level."
http://www.smh.com.au/business/malcolm-turnbulls-nbn-gets-newcastle-hooked-20150908-gjhk6c.html
Back under your bridge troll
You overlooked this.
He praised the Telstra technician who put him online.
"The two guys doing this are incredible," he said. "They go in and out here many times, it's not interesting until he reaches the speed he wants.
"[They said]'If we charge you these fees, you will spend a lot of money...
This is an early test trial site, not an example of what happens with every FTTN installation after the commercial release.
Own goal Ritz again, you and your sock puppet really need to improve your game and make better efforts.
Lol, the troll changed the goal again after the wrong 4 technical visits, lol.
Until then, when you have to pay nbn $300 for a visit, don't expect anyone to accept it
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/04/11/copper-wire-technology-whose-time-has-passed.html
Maybe one day it will even sink into it...
There is no doubt that Richard is trying to depreciate the dollar to increase his export business...this is how "capital" works today...
@tm makes it clear that you don’t know anything about how capital works.
Alex referred to the archived article without understanding them. He once popularly mentioned that Telstra's CAN was only within a few seconds of midnight prediction.
The problem with most fans is that those forward-looking predictions are historical today. We know that as shown by interest in newer standards such as g.fast and docsis, the age of copper has not passed. Telecom companies, such as Zhonghua, have abandoned their FTTH deployment to take advantage of the reuse of infrastructure. You were fooled (simple), deceived (pointed out at the time). Then it is easy to fool people with little knowledge and experience (they laugh at both).
It is very clear now, and the sad thing is that you have been blinded by the cult's hatred for everything outside the cult (to be exact, the refuted cult). You deserve our mercy, not our contempt.
If you are indeed "the open-minded, intelligent, and well-educated gentleman you claim" and not just a far-right, ideological, and Randian lunatic, you will...
1. Take start-up costs and time frame into consideration: NBNCo (now owned by NBN™) is included in your part of Richard's analysis. But you didn't.
2. The incumbents who agree to own copper will of course continue, as long as they can (pun intended) squeeze the last drop of blood from the bronze stone they were replaced. But you didn't.
By the way-ask Eastman/Kodak, how are they complacent and opinionated in the film industry, without emergency measures to adapt to progress?
3. You will not paradoxically say such things as "rapid technology development"-while continuing to push the copper price of 1,800 per day. But you did.
4. You also don't need to contradict yourself on the speed level, claiming that you don't need FTTP, because the speed is enough...At the same time, how fast g.fast, DOCSIS 3.1 add-on components, will enable MTM. But you did.
5. You will realize that your "reuse tag" is very short, because it is not as simple as reuse...because there are a lot of replacement and repair costs, maintenance costs (especially the 5 minutes to Telstra Midnight CAN-thank you Reminder) Node power cost and add cost (g.fast etc. to get the speed we don't need). But you didn't.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/nbn-clocks-up-more-than-au44m-in-new-copper/
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/business/break-news/telstra-signs-16b-nbn-deal/news-story/1724557025813d343201bb978abc3197
6. You will consider a "small detail related to costs, benefits, and time frames"...because everyone agrees (except you)...fiber is the ultimate goal. But you didn't.
7. You would not praise the cheaper [sic] Reuse MTM and find that its value is only half of its cost, because it is mainly made of outdated copper... but you do. http://www.smh.com.au/business/nbn-worth-27-billion-despite-56-billion-construction-cost-says-pwc-20160217-gmwbd5.html 8. Acknowledge that fixed-line investment is not prosperous Former NBN, because all participants are satisfied with the copper owner/visit, the current status of profit, through CAN at the cost of our expenses (in terms of money and technology), therefore, no one intends (no expensive taxpayers) outs) Make investments, whether before or during the initial NBN process...but you don't.
You yourself even contacted the ACCC in 2006 (iirc), saying that they were confused about Telstra's abandonment of the FTTN negotiation (this is also one of my contacts, you are welcome) and therefore refused to invest, but you still claim that the investment is sufficient? Newsletter: A company puts several DSLAMS into the Telstra exchange and uses Telstra's network. This is not a network investment.
9. You also agree that the previous FTTP plan to a large extent (if not completely) denied Telstra's complete control of communications in our country, which is a good thing (remember the ADSL2+ chaos-you should do what I am replying today Mention it again for you). This will promote the vigorous development of retail competition. In fact, some people have hinted that it will lead to more competition, especially for our rural friends. If there is no NBN, they only once and will always have Telstra and have no choice. But you didn't.
10. In the end, you will solve (rather than transfer, blame others, or evade) the shameful explosion of MTM promised in terms of cost and time-to provide 25Mbps to all Australians by 2016...but you don't.
So I reiterate that the saddest thing in all of this is that if you are indeed an educated and knowledgeable person, you can definitely see all of this, but you refuse to admit it because your ideological position is unshakable and you are not allowed to...
That being said, it is so easy to be deceived and brainwashed. In fact, it is believed that these cult beliefs are absolutely correct and never questioned them, so it largely denies and refutes any possibility that you are actually smart and knowledgeable. , Isn't it, Dick?
Yes, they don't seem to have negotiated with Telstra, but actually which wires can work. What do you think will happen when they patch the wires? They are replacing the dead with those who have almost no jobs. They will eventually conclude that they will need another 20 billion U.S. dollars to buy a new copper mine, or 90 billion U.S. dollars.
The knuckle draggers of copper fans screaming on various forums today have been confused. Spin. Spin. Spin.
When the argument suits them, quickly talk about FttP speed and quickly defend their beloved copper wire. Yes, it is amazing how fast it can achieve 8gbps on a 50-meter copper wire. Their assumption is that GimpCo will abandon FttN and roll out fiber closer to the premise to make it work. Alliance Clown and GimpCo clearly admit that FttN is not enough, after all, do you need fiber? (Yes) Well, we all know (there is one more to be added to the "list I told you") and we don’t forget to have a plan that not only matches and allows faster speeds, but also alleviates the endless need to increase Upgrading is a waste of time and money.
As always, they lack logic and vision. No surprises.
119 days to scream ;-)
That's it. We know that G.Fast and VDSL can do some good things in a relatively short distance. We know that if this route is adopted, FTTdp can achieve good results, but at this stage it can be achieved at a few hundred meters. What. We are using nodes, so we need to discuss these terms in the meantime.
You just need to know that Richard is from Hubert.
He "exported" "things" (as he told us many times about his taxpayer subsidized travel abroad).
What he wants most is to see a big increase in the Australian dollar to help his company become more "competitive" abroad.
Once you realize where he is from, his comments will become more logical and drive down the dollar so he can make more "money"!
Once you realize where he is from, his comments become more logical
It is indeed an iron gate. I think we all know where he comes from ;-)
However, I think his ultimate failure on Delimiter is too obvious because he cannot hide his jealousy of Quigley and now Budde...Considering the clusterfuck MTM he supports and all the stupidity of the Alliance Joker and GimpCo, It’s easy for me to be surprised that he fell because of this. RR even recognizes that my funny comment below is a fictional work (to calm down your stinky hairy breast knuckle procrastinator, it’s actually not true, it’s not Let you have hope). Obviously, that person is hurt, poor dear, they also need a flea bath :-(
116 days to scream ;-)
https://anonmgur.com/up/6d02c4b721b254a1a59de29324345520.jpg
So isn't that them?
That's not the case?
Of course I said it was so Rizz.
Learn how they have in-depth discussions on Australia's communications infrastructure.
Drool gave it too ;-)
Ah yes, I see...
You have been warned not to talk to yourself before.
So, when will your dream wedding with Rizz be held, or do you want a real wedding?
By the way, this Valentine's Day, did you get flowers from an anonymous person?
A person can really "depress the dollar" in Australia, really? It's been a long time, is this the best way you can come up with?
I think you need to rest longer.
A person can really "depress the dollar" in Australia, really?
Where do I say there is only him, eh?
I know some exporters and they all want the same thing. Maybe next time you try to think about something that takes longer than clicking "reply", you will look less stupid, eh?
Maybe next time you try to think about something that takes longer than clicking "reply", you will look less stupid
Tinman This is a real photo of alian and RR sharing a special moment in their natural habitat:
https://anonmgur.com/up/6d02c4b721b254a1a59de29324345520.jpg
Honestly, I don’t think they can :-(
Where do I say there is only him, eh?
Once you realize where he is from, his comments will become more logical and drive down the dollar so he can make more "money"!
Back to school Alan, your lack of English comprehension is shocking ;o)
Lol, is it Tinman_au for own goals (again)? , You have been following Ritz and his sock puppet own goal comment strategy.
https://delimiter.com.au/2016/08/17/turnbulls-nbn-hardly-target-says-labor/#comment-760880
https://delimiter.com.au/2016/08/17/turnbulls-nbn-hardly-target-says-labor/#comment-760989
Although they complained about the wrong copper size, "rotted" copper, and the need for 2-3 new power stations, the NBNCo node layer 1 speed data is arriving and the performance is stable: http://www.zdnet.com/article/nbn-eyes- gigabit-speeds-on-all-network-technologies/
The data shows that there are problems with FTTN. The bottom 7% of connections cannot meet SoE (requires 100% @ 25+mbps), and FTTB far exceeds SoE. FTTN: 93% above 28mbps, 64% above 54mbps (policy 90% 50mbps as soon as possible) FTTB: 100% above 28mbps, 98% above 54mbps.
Obviously 1% of FTTN connections have problems. The reasons/remedies/costs will be interesting.
Considering the international technology deployment, these data should not be surprising to most people. When NBNCo has more than 1 million office spaces, BT has already exceeded 25 million office spaces, and this is only a small part of the taxpayer's commitment. When Quigley leaves, all MDUs (FTTB) are at zero service level indefinitely (unable to order service). Without the help of Conroy and others, today's fixed network upgrade will be completed. What could it be :-(
1%? You mean 7%, as your own number says.
So suspicious boy, what you said has been less than 1 million FTTn connections in the past 3 years, while BT did 6 million in the same time frame.
"Without Conroy and others, today's fixed network upgrade will be completed.". We saw more hot air from fishyboy. However, if your claim is true, how can the best policy "what you claim" not accept the fttn tender. We who are easy to be fooled have many contradictions.
And that 7% (lol 1%) get anything because Sie has changed to wholesale. But obviously the copper wire speed has increased haha.
So suspicious boy, what you said has been less than 1 million FTTn connections in the past 3 years, while BT did 6 million in the same time frame.
This is not the same time frame, NBN FTTN was only released in September last year.
Go to more BS.
Lol troll, come back to me and I know you know when FTTp will start and we will talk about it
But you're talking about FTTN instead of FTTP. It's an own goal again, right?
Lol, this is our own goal, because you said that FTTP started in 2010, I just want to follow your logic again, or you want to oppose your own logic.
Go to more BS.
...And really formed the Rizz sock puppet.
When did fttp start to be launched?
By the way, when do you want to ask Rizz you are obviously in love with him, you can see him everywhere
...And really formed the Rizz sock puppet.
This comment alone shows that you scored Jason.
Please continue Alan, try some facts...
Mr. Turnbull actually announced the entire country before 2016.
It would be interesting to fish out the 7% copper that is currently unqualified. But I think as more networks fail, this will be a good habit in the future. Hey... they can run fiber optics at the same cost as replacing copper wires. But no, this is the only solution, not the fiber brigade, in which the continuous upgrade of future technology at a higher cost is the only solution, because the Labor Party is the only economically feasible solution.
Be careful that Rizz's sock puppet's efforts look like your other sock puppet, Jason K, at least try to make it look different.
Will not answer when fttp starts, please try again
Seek help seriously. Is it like "Becoming John Malkovich"? So far, you have climbed up your ass, is everyone like Rizz now?
Herpaderp I'm pretty sure he is in love with Rizz because he can see him everywhere. If he does not support ss marriage, it would be too ironic
I'm pretty sure he is in love with Ritz, because he can see him everywhere.
Ritz touched him in "that special place", he has never been able to forget...
All kinds of not to love?
Guys, I just developed a new technology called Xtra.GGG.Fasterer. Achieve 10 gigglybits within 5 meters. The launch is simple. Install smaller nodes at home. All legal, part of M in MTM, technically agnostic (important), and for nostalgic reasons (and very important) use existing beloved copper in the family. Many la la la. Check all boxes. Go to GIMPCO! ! !
The cost is too high. Copper needs to be at least 25 meters at home to reduce costs within the first second of use.
But dxm, you simply didn't put together enough pieces. GimpCo will cover these. They bought a bunch of copper, and they could install this extra copper at home to extend the length to 25 meters. Automatic cost reduction GimpCo style! Yeah! ! !
dxm, another sock puppet feed character eh Rizz, and HC.
He likes Rizz very much, but can't overcome the fact that Rizz is not by his side...
Leave and guess who is, now and continue to be a guy (not Dick, but his apprentice...Little Dick)
Welcome back Rizz... Oh wait, no, welcome back? :-)
Welcome back Rizz... Oh wait, no, welcome back? :-)
I suspect that Alian doesn’t even know, he lost contact with reality a long time ago :o)
Lol Rizz, we all love you but we don’t love you like Alan haha
As mentioned earlier, you have been "away" for a while...
Should I repost your ridiculous contradiction now to prove it?
So FOD quotation involves bypassing the node and running the fiber back to the nearest FAN. This means that XG-fast will need to run fiber through all nodes again.
How about XG-fast's upgrade path for FTTN?
@mr FAN has deployed multiple 12 cores (4 nodes, 8 upgrades) to the node fiber.
G.fast can be deployed in a variety of configurations, including line cards.
"G.fast can be deployed in a variety of configurations, including line cards."
Of course, for the more than a dozen premises that actually fall within the 250m maximum line length range of the G.Fast function...XG.Fast has an even shorter line length.
@r0 Write g.fast with a maximum line length of 250m. classic;-)
What we need is to start providing G.Fast for FttDP (front fence/lane) to get 500Mb/500Mb as a basic NBN overall service (price and time are equivalent to FttNode) and stop providing FttNode and Hybrid Fiber Coax (total waste) dozens One hundred million U.S. dollars). Then, we can use XG.Fast and FttPremises to elegantly upgrade to FttDP as needed, and easily organize the upgrade of the front lawn by using a certified private Techos/installer, without the need for NBNCo to perform special installations. The FttDP G.Fast client terminal will have the same 4 Ethernet ports and 2 VoIP ports as the FttPremises client terminal, so we will have a unified customer experience and a unified network to allow the development of many future services throughout the network The next few years.
@i FttDP G.Fast 500Mb/500Mb baseline, price and time are comparable to FTTN? Tell them he is dreaming.
Tell you you are dreaming... Other countries have done better...
https://fiber.google.com/cities/kansascity/plans/
https://delimiter.com.au/2016/08/30/telcos-want-write-guideline-broadband-speed-claims/#comment-763916
Richard cited Richard as an authority, a classic; o)
Indeed TM... ridiculous isn't it.
I'm right because I'm talking about Richard's whole argument... ROFL.
https://delimiter.com.au/2016/08/17/turnbulls-nbn-hardly-target-says-labor/#comment-760425
Why is it because Chase is you?
About 6 years ago, when I first started to humiliate you, emphasizing your own stupid contradictions and politically motivated comments, I felt a little worried, because after a short period of time, it is clear that you have an 8-year-old mentality.
Depending on your recent efforts, you are only 1 year old in 6 years...
Oh, happy 9th birthday.
One of the obstacles for G.Fast is obtaining regulatory approval. Over the years, there have been many attempts to compress high bandwidth into low bandwidth pipelines. The unfortunate fact is that the radio spectrum is already heavily used, and any unshielded system will leak, which will cause incoming and outgoing interference.
Coaxial TV systems work properly because of their good shielding effect (although they require a lot of maintenance to ensure that the shielding performance does not decrease). Similarly, optical fiber can work because it does not use radio signals.
Due to very real interference problems, VSDL and derivative products are strictly limited in the frequency range and allowable power level range. This is why VSDL is limited to such a short distance. Beyond a certain distance, external interference (and crosstalk between pairs) will quickly reduce the signal-to-noise ratio to an unworkable level. This limit can change daily and hourly.
Unfortunately, there are still some companies trying to violate the laws of physics. Our most recent example is Power Line Broadband (PBL). The knowledgeable radio frequency engineer said that it was impossible to work. Although it was hysterically publicized and authorized to conduct multiple tests, as expected, it caused a lot of radio interference and was shut down.
The hysteria of G.Fast follows the same script as the BPL. G.Fast attempts to interfere high-frequency signals into unshielded and poorly balanced telephone lines. It is true that the balance of the telephone line is better than that of the power line, but in order to offset the influence of the G.Fast proposal, it tries to use a wider frequency band and a higher power level.
It gets worse. In order to solve the RF leakage from the outside, G.Fast proposed to introduce a common mode signal, which aims to eliminate any differential imbalance. This will certainly work, but it will also greatly increase any outgoing interference. It's like trying to fix a leak in a hose by increasing the water pressure.
My prediction is that G.Fast will follow the same path as BPL. It will receive the hysterical support of the promoters, will receive limited and closely monitored trial approval, radio users will protest, and the trial approval will be revoked as a result.
Bottom line: If VSDL can't be expanded further (in distance or bandwidth), then G.Fast can't either, because it didn't try to solve the original problem-poor shielding and unbalanced wire pairs.
Or more simply, the laws of physics cannot be bypassed, and there is only one radio spectrum.
@j Calix announced that they already have commercial (non-trial) g.fast customers on their devices. This is alive.
It turns out that ACMA is very sensitive to complaints about interference with licensing services. Especially if it is emergency services. For example, firefighting, police, airplanes, etc.
If (when) G.FAST causes significant radio interference, it will be shut down.
@j The only response anyone gets from acma is that the commercial spectrum is affected. I experienced this comedy firsthand.
It sounds like another copper of the wrong size to me, 2-3 new types of power plants claim to be emerging...
Or g.fast is the next upgrade path hype expecting they need a new launch
So, how are the various BPL tests closed?
I have done some checks and it is clear that G.Fast has not yet been approved by the regulatory authorities in Australia. If unapproved trials occur, if there are interference complaints, they will be shut down twice.
Although the ITU proposed G.Fast standards, these standards could not be approved until extensive testing. In turn, due to the different radio frequency bands used locally, these must be further approved in each country.
I am very interesting about your comment, "The only response anyone gets from ACMA is that the commercial spectrum is affected." So what happens when G.Fast interferes with AM/FM radio or TV? Your comments clearly indicate that ACMA will take action.
Regarding the interference with emergency services, anyone in the industry will tell you that it will always trigger quick and decisive action by ACMA, as well as by the state and federal police and the Air Services Agency.
@jk stepped in and posted another unknowing meditation. Don't even know what is being discussed; his closest to emi is the fcc notifications in the latest iPad sale (yes, what do they mean).
The Hubert Brisy line stayed to make up the story to appear relevant. Where are Alex (Ritz) and Tinman? Looking back at the above, the stupid team fought together for the finale.
Bud is also arguing on his blog; still unable to admit the cost and time advantages of fiber alternatives accepted by the entire industry that he claims to analyze.
@j What regulatory approval do you specifically mean? What does an unapproved test mean?
There are local differences in EMI testing, but in fact there are two main (EU, US) standards that need to be complied with. g.fast can easily adapt to local spectral differences.
If the commercial spectrum is affected, ACMA will take action, but it is more likely to be a telecommunications company (they will find it first, big pockets). The strange thing is that you think we will not perform our own emi test to avoid this situation (why acma rarely targets anyone).
What industry? ;-)
Leave as usual, because Richard is still injured in the last/another actual beating I gave him...he must use my name...
Your motto is, Richard is right, because Richard and Richard's cunning numbers say so, exercise for you?
All the while, Dick still cannot solve the most basic problems, can you?
Let's get started, okay, I said start, but I have asked countless times (countless times = many Doudou boys), and by 2016, all Australians have asked at the rate of $29.5B @ 25Mbps, and you have been asking Deflection and/or evasion...
Then afterwards tell us again why we need to replace the wire, and at the same time tell us (seems to be straight-faced) why we need to keep the copper... ROFL
After I published G.Fast's post on the risks of radio interference, Richard came back with a series of questions that seemed strange and came from people who claimed to have expertise in the field.
In any case, these issues are worthy of in-depth discussion:
> What regulatory approval are you specifically referring to?
It takes a few pages to explain the lengthy ITU approval process, but in the G.Fast case, a small number of manufacturers proposed specifications. Next, it must be approved by various ITU agencies (other manufacturers, user groups, aviation, broadcasting, regulatory, military, etc.), and then must be modified in various countries to adapt to local conditions, and then finally approved (or ultimately rejected) ). After that, a prototype of the equipment must be built and tested for compliance, and then actually mass-produced.
Needless to say, the approval process for equipment used by telecommunications companies is much stricter than that for household and consumer equipment.
> What does an unapproved test mean?
One way to resolve the conflicting claims of opposing groups is to negotiate with local regulatory agencies and conduct trials under agreed conditions. However, if a company blatantly installs equipment without approval, and the equipment causes serious interference, then the company will almost certainly be prosecuted. At the very least, unauthorized trials will stop immediately.
> There are partial differences in EMI testing, but in fact two main (EU, US) standards need to be complied with. g.fast can easily adapt to local spectral differences.
Yes, the interference band can be disabled, but this requires detailed consultation with local authorities. Does the supplier agree to exclude local broadcasting bands (AM, extended AM, FM, digital FM, ethnic FM, TV), emergency services, shortwave, commercial broadcasting, aircraft, amateur radio, etc.? The point here is that each gap will seriously affect the available bandwidth, so these details have been heated and heated debates in the past. Of course, there are many other issues that need to be negotiated and agreed upon.
> .... But it is more likely to be a telecommunications company (they will find it first, big pockets). The strange thing is that you think we will not perform our own emi test to avoid this situation...
Yes, telecommunications companies absolutely must conduct their own tests (any manufacturer must do), but this does not allow them to bypass the approval process.
But how do you explain the farce of the recent BPL trial? We have repeatedly assured that BPL "is unlikely to cause any interference", but in fact the interference was so severe that the test had to be terminated abruptly.
> What industry?
Any RF design engineer who successfully guides the product through the approval process, any EMC engineer working in a testing and approval laboratory, or any ACMA supervisor responsible for tracking and eliminating radio interference.
But the really serious question is, if (as you claim) you have engineering experience in this field, why are you asking these questions?
Of course there are two possibilities: either you have no direct experience, or you are just a paid troll, and your job is to divert, confuse and frustrate those who are worried about Australia's future.
Finally, for those who are really interested in EMC compliance, a good beginner's reference is "EMC for Product Designers" by Tim Williams.
@j I don’t know about the bpl experiment; it’s a waste of time to compete with anyone with telecommunications knowledge. Why do you think they are related?
"ITU approval" is not "regulatory approval". No "local regulatory authority" granted approval for the trial. "Prohibited frequency bands" do not require any detailed (or other) negotiation with "local authorities". Our own testing (passing an accredited testing center) is the approval process (it has been a while).
The third possibility is that you have no experience with the emc process (here; eu or fcc) or acma. I have completed the process for many of the hardware products I have manufactured; including handling acma for non-compliant products installed by another party after I refused to distribute them (another story).
If necessary, we can compare the contacts of acma;-)
If the cost of fttp-mtm-fttp is compared as the original FTTp of labor, I know better than you. But this shows that your narrative doesn't count if it doesn't fit it.
But later because the average copper wire from the pillar to the node is 350m. How do I get to work with g.fast?
@jk Continue, discuss EMI (rofl)
Will that be the node you are discussing here? https://delimiter.com.au/2016/08/30/telcos-want-write-guideline-broadband-speed-claims/#comment-764315
Yes, he is really "informed" ;-)
Wow, Richard failed, what are you claiming here to be abandoned 5 I asked you not to answer lol
You will not comment on the first part fishyboy haha. How to wire and sinker, you claim you are smart, haha.
But let's go back to that discussion, there is no mention of how g.fast works beyond 350m of copper wire when it is not designed for lol. Oh, wait for your claim that the copper wire speed has improved at all lengths, why do we need nodes and then haha.
Yes, there was no notice lol. But please continue to deceive the murloc, haha
G.Fast was standardized by the ITU in 2014 and was commercially available globally in 2016/2017 (commercially launched in Taiwan in September 2015). If G.Fast causes any interference problems in Australia, then we can use G.Fast on the existing underground copper cable drop-in line (which will not cause interference problems), because the cost of the underground fiber-optic cable drop-in line is too high because of the lead-in duct. For example , The condition is not good or the copper lead-in wire is directly buried underground. It is no problem to install the optical fiber drop-in line in a good drop-in duct. It is installing new underground introduction pipes (each individual small civil engineering project), which is the biggest cost burden for NBN, regardless of whether the pipes are filled with copper or optical fibers. Since standardized mass production technology can be used with "fine fibers" etc., the fibers on the street are not a cost issue. Where the air lead-in is used, we can use a new optical fiber lead-in (close to the cost of the new air copper lead-in).
We can install a small FttDP fiber optic splitter/G.Fast terminal equipment in the lead-in pit outside the front fence, and provide the following for each house at the lowest cost: * Existing G.Fast copper lead-in underground copper cable lead-in Cable or * new optical fiber drop in the existing good lead-in duct or * new fiber drop in the new pipe where the existing copper wire and pipe are unavailable and the overhead lead-in is not allowed or * is allowed to be introduced in the air In the case of the use of new optical fiber over-the-air introduction.
Therefore, we can install at least 500Mb/500Mb of NBN for everyone at the lowest cost and quickly, using NBNCo-certified local technicians/installers (no need for NBNco itself to do particularly expensive door-to-door services for these upgrades).
I am now retired, but I spent most of my life in ACMA (as OIC in various regions), later as an RF design engineer, and later as OIC for a large EMC test facility. He even worked for the military and NASA before retiring. Regarding your supervisory experience, I can only say that you are talking nonsense. Over the years, there have been many controversial equipment trials, and BPL is only the most recent. Likewise, the negotiation of the test conditions was intense, involving many participants. I know, I am there. What is going on today are negotiations on the "blank" radio conditions in the unused TV spectrum, as well as the exact licensing conditions for adaptive and cognitive radio.
Richard believes that he is the center of the regulatory field, but it is clear from his post that he is completely unaware of many things that are happening. He even admitted that he knew nothing about BPL, but that was a hot potato for supervision at the time. For many of us, it heralds future attempts to circumvent interference repair through technical snake oil. However, it did not succeed.
> G.Fast was standardized by ITU in 2014
See http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2014/70.aspx The 1914 physical layer specification is finalized, but there is still a long way to go before final approval.
A European agreement has been reached on FM radio interference remediation, but no agreement has been reached for other services. My suggestion is that it cannot be approved by Australia until this issue is resolved. I haven't even contacted various local industry groups.
> If G.Fast causes any interference problems in Australia, then we can use G.Fast in the existing underground copper lead-in wires.
So guys, you have it. The sponsor anticipates interference issues. What they describe is that the background noise level in our suburbs is gradually increasing. And because it is broadband noise, it is difficult to determine the exact source. Things will stop working inexplicably, and of course the person in charge will just shrug and say, "But no one complains."
One thing is clear. We seem to have really touched our nerves about this G.Fast interference problem. They really don't want to have any discussion on this topic, do they? I hope we can hear more news now because they have released the cat from the bag.
One thing is clear. We seem to have really touched our nerves about this G.Fast interference problem.
It is not an unsolvable problem (assuming it is a problem). The BT G.fast trial in the UK is progressing smoothly, and it is not far from commercial release. I don’t know what interference issues hinder the trial.
Yes, Alan, let us fix it, so that we can have a better speed than ADSL, even if you swear that ADSL speed is not, it will not be needed...
The UK's BT G.fast trial is progressing well
So "advanced", they completed them earlier this year :o)
http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2016/07/bts-trevor-linney-reveals-g-fast-broadband-uk-trial-results-speed.html
It seems that they are mainly done using FttDP, and most of the runs are below 250m (it looks like they will provide 160 Mbps speed for people beyond that distance).
> I am not aware of any interference issues that hinder the test
of course not. You don’t know many things...
However, RSGB has a record of complaints against OFCOM, even though OFCOM has made it as difficult as possible for people to register complaints.
A study by RSGB showed that less than 1% of affected people lodged a complaint.
The main difficulty is that VSDL/G.Fast interference is broadband noise, so even technicians can hardly understand why their equipment stops working.
Similarly, when people use radio transmitters nearby, the people locked by the VSDL/G.Fast modem also have complaints.
In Australia, we received an ignition static report from a Postie motorcycle locking a VSDL modem. Similarly, there are countless reports of other interferences from VSDL, such as solar inverters. And to be sure, G.Fast (wider band) will encounter the same problem or worse.
This is a technical report on how to identify VSDL radio interference http://www.southgatearc.org/news/2016/july/vdsl-interference-a-guidance-leaflet.htm
In Australia, we received an ignition static report from a Postie motorcycle locking a VSDL modem.
Is there anything unique about Australia Post’s bicycles?
I am sure to immediately stop FTTN deployment or replace postal bicycles.
Regarding your supervisory experience, I can only say that you are talking nonsense.
He often does this. He also likes to call himself an authority (among other things). I suspect he is one of the best trolls on the Internet!
He did admit that he was insightful (Oh, my rudeness, I actually mean deceptive;) comments got extra hits on Delimiter, so...
@j What "total cramps"? EMC testing and RCM compliance are exactly the same as described (the test report meets the appropriate standards (self-identification), the compliance folder is maintained, and stickers are attached). What do you think of this process? Name the local authority that NBNCo applied for approval of its trial? (Rove)
I don't admit that I don't know anything about bpl, but I have never conducted any experiments. There is no interest in this technology, it has never had a future.
Who is proposing to improve background RF? Compliance requires us to be below a certain level. that's all.
It is not surprising that you work for acma; in fact, this experience reflects the "quality" of the services they provide on a daily basis.
Another example is the nonsense response to an authority reply when caught. Runny nose, deflection, deliberate misinterpretation and cheap pot stickers.
@mh But I am right. The process is exactly as I described (completed). Looking forward to the imaginary EMC process;-)
It can't be the words I said * and * at the same time. Logic gets in the way.
Another example of nonsense response...
You didn’t point them out, but abuse will fill in the blanks, will it?
There is one more, wow... some people just don’t learn, do they?
The abuse you are talking about is actually just a response to point out that it cannot withstand censorship and fails to resolve what you said. "Richard's" reaction is a faltering example. If so, please meet up with John's post at the same level, or just let it go and leave.
In your humble and fair opinion as a hater of MtM, what do you mean.
@ Smitten MTM lover, Alan... ROFLMFAO
It's like accusing someone of hating cancer...Of course, we hate the despicable MTM stupidity and this insidious disease...
MTM = complete inferiority complex (FTTP is the recognized ultimate goal anyway), outdated, the people who launched it even called it FRAUDBAND, increased OPEX, required expensive additional components to exceed our use of ADSL, required expensive remedies Measures, many billions of dollars on the $29.5B promised, 4 years promised to everyone in 2016, no cheaper/no faster, the whole shebang is an incomparable chaos... Stomach, let alone love?
Therefore, I am proud that I am a hater of MTM, because looking at the above facts, any MTM lover is...
A. A complete idiot B. A poor political lackey C. All of the above
I will ask you who you are, but it is not necessary.
It's like accusing someone of hating cancer...Of course, we hate the despicable MTM stupidity and this insidious disease...
Therefore, I am proud to be an MTM hater
@"Reality" "In your humble and fair opinion as an MtM hater, what do you mean."
http://www.speedtest.net/result/5612056440.png
This was taken on my MTM NBN FTTN one minute ago, when my roommate was playing online TV in the bedroom. I won the node lotto. This is obviously a zero deviation zone. I showed you mine, so you showed me yours.
I'm curious how many validations a technology needs to make more tests redundant.
Wow, they can achieve 5Gbit/s with dual-strand copper cables.
It would be great if the fiber could not reach 40Gbit/s... Each channel, each chain has up to 200 channels...More than hundreds of kilometers... No need to retransmit...
If we really want to compare Apple and Apple, in a laboratory environment, on test equipment, Corning reached 1,050,000 Gbit/s at a speed of more than 54 kilometers in 2012. So copper can fuck himself.
Delimiter has always been able to reverse a huge progress and prove their position more wrong, so much so that we still need fiber. FTTdp is excellent, and XG.FAST means that there is no real difference between fiber optic products and FTTdp products in the short term. If the copper wire fails, you will be able to easily unplug the copper wire and insert the fiber optic lead. This is a choice that consumers can make at the time. This is also a good answer, allowing this kind of upgrade to actually happen without much cost. The price of FTTP is more than twice the original price! The government needs to double their investment. When Optus just announced that the price of 200GB was $80 higher than 4g, I doubted it would become a DOA! This is just the beginning. Transmission efficiency is improving year by year. There is no reason why the same plan next year cannot buy 400GB for $80 or even unlimited prices. Even if most people use Netflix, they will not exceed 200Gb. (If they don't use 4k).
No, Chris, you have a cart in front of the horse (suitable for MTM, eh?) Same as some of the others here...
Most people at Delimiter, even 3 years after it ceased, are still surprised by the endless unfounded attacks related to FTTP, which are for all intents and purposes only because of their political dogma/submissiveness.
Instead, they promote smaller ones, ranging from $29.5B to as high as $70B, depending on whose data you believe in the league or NBN level, which is what is promised to everyone in 2016-now 2020.... .. but they support it, no matter what happens...
To be cheaper/faster, eh?
Knowledgeable people also said that we only need 15Mbps (iirc) in mid-2020, so why are they laughing at all the noise about this speed now? Obviously only FTTP is not good at speed? Everything else is faster than the snail paced copper, great
But apart from these facts, which FTTdp are you referring to?
FTTdp and NBN are arguing about a possible answer (3 years have passed, now they may have an answer...haha) or FTTdp that the government explicitly rejected a few months ago?
https://delimiter.com.au/2016/05/16/fantasy-fiber-coalition-explicitly-rejects-nbn-fttdp-model/
Or maybe the government changed its mind again, and (essentially) now admits that their FTTN plan used to be, and is now, we all said it would be and is now wrong, um, after all, is it true to FTTdp?
Chris Even though you replied to the wrong post, the article you linked was returned in March, and Rizz linked to an article in May
Okay, later... http://www.zdnet.com/article/nbn-technology-road-map-will-see-fttn-shift-to-fttdp/
You can view the NBN financial results file at any time. This clearly shows that they are trying it out. Or they use its statement again and again. http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/nbn-financial-results-FY2016.pdf
"...Which FTTdp are you referring to?
FTTdp and NBN are arguing about a possible answer (3 years have passed, now they may have an answer...haha) or the FTTdp that the government explicitly rejected a few months ago? "
Yes, Chris, we know that NBN is talking about FTTdp (as I said), but the alliance AFAIK is still not, this is a problem.
I hope they do this (it is not as good as FTTP but...) As we have always said, this clearly admits that FTTN is not good enough...
But Chris, when people say "...Luther's magical napkin" and so on, let me copy/paste from it, and again...
"Most people at Delimiter, even 3 years after it ceased, are still surprised by the endless unfounded attacks related to FTTP, which are for all intents and purposes only because of their political dogma/indecency."
Of course, that's not you.
Rizz, let me reply to you using your website comments to support your comments. Wow study!
Have you read the link? NBN is investigating FTTdp not talking about it. The alliance has actually stated that MTM is the responsibility of NBN, and they have proposed the best combination of technologies. Shorten tried to push the alliance into desperation. Just stupid politics.
This is another unreasonable argument that you continue to make. People who think FTTP is not the best solution do not think it is the best technology. No one thinks. We think it is too expensive. As I have the link displayed irrefutably. The last few meters on someone’s property are the most expensive. FTTdp is a better solution, if it is close to the cost of FTTN, it is a better choice because it lays fiber on the street without entering everyone's house (the most expensive part). Then, if tenants like fiber and think that 5Gbps is not fast enough, they can pay an extra thousands of dollars for the last few meters. It sounds like a win-win to me.
As for the political statement. I think all our major parties have failed us in important things, so I disagree with any of them, so it is foolish for me to agree just because of my political choices.
Your argument follows zero research, just making stupid assumptions for the purpose of using an excuse to verify your point of view. The reality is that I give you the facts. Tell me how you came to the conclusion that it is cheaper or faster to dig everyone’s front yard and install fiber than to lay the fiber to the side of the road and piggyback it on the existing copper wire. I'm only interested in this question, don't talk nonsense, actually use your brain and try to refute my argument.
Wow, it is indeed Chris, thank you, after two attempts, you finally answered my simple question.
So you said the league changed its mind? According to NBN's advice (wow, maybe the NBN reserve team knows something after all)... Is FTTdp a spectator?
I don't think this is a difficult question TBH, but at least unlike the others here, you finally answered it.
So thank you again... progress is now being made (usually nothing to do with the others here, they say things like "Rudd's napkins" and want to be taken seriously)...
Therefore, if your information is indeed legal, then NBN does seem to have some truth, and even tell you that there is no government with FTTdp...Finally can grasp the benefits of semi-decent topology without having to admit that others have indeed gotten the best use of it The topology...cool.
This is a win-win situation, kind of...
But if this is the case, the fact that they upgraded from FTTN clearly admits that they were wrong, otherwise, they will stick to the cheaper/faster (cough cough) FRAUDBAND plan, right?
Of course I prefer FTTP, but it has been completely messed up during the anti-every political period... So with a little magic of Fred Hollow, maybe the blind will see the stupidity of FTTN and introduce FTTdp.
However, having witnessed the collapse of their inferiority complex, coupled with multiple outbreaks of $b and the time frame about 4 years later, I will not hold my breath.
But hey, things won't get worse... are they?
Thanks again for your information.
Of course I prefer FTTP, but in the political period against everything, this is really messed up...
Let go of the 2010-2013 Labour Party. They tried their best but failed.
Let go of the 2010-2013 Labour Party. They tried their best but failed.
So you mean NBN failed? ;o)
I understand what you mean by contradiction with him now, Ryze!
HFC failed... HFC is great...
FTTP will fail like HFC...
ADSL speed is good enough...wow, fast, DOCSIS 3.1...
Alan’s endless list of idiots continues...
For example, it is interesting to see him wriggle when he blurts out, for example... CP16 modified $29.5B so everything is ok, and then he has his own comment on building a house a few years ago, when the expansion and expansion are not completed , Was thrown back to him... ROFL
He just whimpered (unusually) absolute SFA said, and then repeated the same BS in the next article to earn his check...
I want to know why he is so discredited and why he is still on the payroll;)
First, this article from the real news team shows that FTTdp is happening and plans to replace FTTN. http://www.itnews.com.au/news/nbn-could-flip-300000-premises-from-fttn-to-fttdp-417081 Secondly, MTM is for NBN to come up with the best solution. They set prices for each option and found that FTTN was much cheaper. Check their last report to find information. FTTP Brownfields $4,411 FTTP Greenfields $2,608 FTTN $2,257 Fixed wireless $3,559 http://www.nbnco.com.au/content/dam/nbnco2/documents/nbn-financial-results-FY2016.pdf (page14) So assume Rudd’s magical napkin The person who implements it understands the reality of implementation costs better, which is totally unreasonable and points to your "political dogma/compliment."
What they are talking about is that the price of FTTdp looks (not yet specific) cheaper than FTTN! This is a very important thing. This means the fiber goes to the curb, so if the copper is removed, it only needs to be replaced from the curb! For most people, speeds above 12Mbps are not a real problem. Anyone can exceed 100Mbps, but 5Gbps means you can run a data center at home! As I have said many times. Look at the requirements after conversion. The history of the Internet shows the digitization of every element in our lives. Video is the last element. Even if 4k bandwidth is required, it is only 15 Mbps, so even at 100mbps, you can watch more than 6 streams! 4k is about the largest video that the eye can record with 20/20 vision!
The reality is that "the faster the better" is only true if it has an effect. Most of the technologies we talked about with NBN go beyond this point. Just as the need for continuous improvement of the PC has ceased (except for gamers), so has the Internet speed. The current limitation is cost, not speed. With Optus launching their new wireless home product, 200GB for $80, I will soon see that the fixed line has nothing to do with the Internet, just like the current phone call.
Even if 4k bandwidth is required, it is only 15 Mbps, so even at 100mbps, you can watch more than 6 streams!
It would be great if it was as simple as you think. Obviously you don't know anything about video compression.
4k is about the largest video that the eye can record with 20/20 vision!
Actually I understand compression. What compression do you need to explain? I actually do use a streaming system, so I know it better than most people. What's wrong with the example I gave you? Elevated. It is actually not relevant in this example. Or do you want to send uncompressed 4:2:2 RAW directly to your front door? This brings you zero revenue. I guess you need uncompressed 4k@120fps, right? (24Gbps). When the government considers cutting down on social welfare programs, it is naive to expect the government to pay for your irrational demands!
It's actually true. Here, read and become smarter... http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/eyesight-4k-resolution-viewing
Obviously you don't. You can compress the video to any bitrate you like, but that doesn't mean it is the best. See Youku.
It's actually true. Here, read things and become smarter...
You provided a link, but I doubt if you read or understand any of it. Red is known for its high-resolution cameras (actually over 4k), and the app it talks about has nothing to do with your initial simple misstatement. In any case, Red always sets 4k as the minimum value instead of the maximum value for the best results (they planned to release a 28k camera)
What is a juvenile is to put forward logical fallacies in your argument. This is what you have done here and responded to other people many times. Therefore, I have no interest in talking with you again.
"It is naive to expect the government to pay for your irrational demands?
Motivation becomes clearer and clearer, Chris...
Let me ask, why in your opinion (yes) the government can introduce MTM with additional components-FTTN or FTTdp, the price is about 54B USD... but there is no charge for FTTP, which is less than (previous cost) 50 USD or even $60B or $70B?
Why does the acceptable cut-off point for people like you always shine in the cost calculations of the league? You can spend $54B now, but anything over $30B three years ago was a waste, a white elephant. curious
Why is the debate about acceptable costs constantly changing and rising with each MTM revision, but the cost of FTTP is considered naive?
Your motives are confirmed again, I'm afraid Chris
Why does the acceptable cut-off point for people like you always shine in the cost calculations of the league?
This is of course curious Ryze. Like all other curiosities in the disastrous League Joker GimpCo saga.
Then it is shameful to spend billions of dollars to provide a future-proof FttP solution, which should be used for flood recovery in Queensland.
Now, even if billions of dollars are wasted on substandard solutions that need to be upgraded before completion, more time and money are needed to achieve the ultimate goal of FttP, which is completely acceptable.
I think it's a lot like the speed we need to argue with that Alliance Joker and GimpCo like to use. It always happens to be the ability of copper. They moved the goal posts around. If they are not politically motivated hypocrites, we will never see GimpCo announce such a thing. At least not until they first provide 25mbps to everyone.
115 days to scream ;-)
Indeed, the HC of the fanatical MTM supporter, the contradiction and stupidity of keeping in line with politics is delicious.
So let's join politics, just for shit and giggles, okay?
Think about it, they "only (laughs)" support the alliance's FTTN-based MTM because it "launchs cheaper and faster (not because of politics)"... and opposes the Labor Party's FTTP, well, because it is "slower" , More expensive" and well, we don’t need to be faster than FTTN, so they are a waste of resources (not because of politics).
But now they support FTTdp and XG. Fast, HFC with DOCSIS 3.1 upgrade, due to any political obedience, they again do not support, but they are wrong now, support, well, not so fast, not so cheap, they want faster speed, after all... ..
It would be great if Libs did FTTP...We would all become friends.
Interestingly, although I obviously prefer FTTP, because FTTP is not an option in the Brownfields of the current government alliance, I certainly prefer FTTdp as an alternative to FTTN.
So look here, my preferences (different from theirs) actually don't always magically align with political parties.
I think NBN should not exist. This is a complete waste of time and money. And it will be useless when it is fully put into use. It is silly to say that FTTP will be cheaper. There is no other word to describe it, and it may be totally rejected. I just support completing this stupid project as cheaply as possible so that we can reduce taxes that could have been spent on hospitals or education!
Compression can be completely lossless, but it is not that beneficial outside of the editing room. People's understanding is limited, and this is where many compression algorithms are located. Say I don’t know because, in fact, you did not give a reason, you just because you have zero proof, any link you have to prove your point of view? I went through the entire linked article, and it even has a beautiful picture for you to see the intersection of the viewing restrictions, which is easy to understand even for you. Yes, you can input more into your eye nerves (this is what I knew before reading), but this requires a larger field of view. You need to be about 64 inches away from the 80-inch screen and have "best vision" to see 8k! Doesn't sound feasible to me!
As for RED, there may be other companies that want to grow bigger. of course! they need! As a director, you need as many choices as possible. If you can shoot 24k video, you can use digital zoom to get a perfectly framed video in post-production. it's great! But you will throw most of your shots into the digital trash can. Will we see 8k? Yes! In the theater and at home. But it will be very limited on the actual 8k continent, because the revenue is very small, and it will only take up resources without real revenue. VR is where it is, yes, it will stream better than 4k, but it is likely to use virtual space, which means a higher compression rate because it can be sent as a formula instead of the final video result. We are about to reach our hard limit, and most people will be satisfied with what they have in the next few years. I hope we can find a place to place bets, because I will become a rich man and you are so obsessed with an infrastructure project that is useless until it is completed.
@Chris These applications require constant tens to hundreds of Mbps *per subscriber*, and there are hundreds of thousands to millions of subscribers in the suburbs. You need to propose an alternative to fixed lines to meet this requirement. Even in fixed lines, the list of options is very short.
More logical fallacies. I'm still not interested.
Interestingly, the CPP cost of Fttn is half that of Fttp, but if they continue to launch Fttp, the peak funding will be $8B less than the last estimate.
Yes, it is definitely interesting. What's more interesting is that you seem to believe that the cost from then on is accurate. ;-)
Therefore, when cpp is 500 dollars higher than the current cpp of fttp, the highest (lol Alain) $54B is compared with the fttp of SR s2. But what do you claim it is now?
Of course, we shouldn’t believe that Quigley’s numbers fluctuate very little, and were even approved by those who oppose Quigley in the CBA...
We should believe the numbers after FTTP NBN, as shown below...
If I missed one of the MTM hat draws, please add it next to the other "thorns in the dark"
No matter how precise, from such a fair source, I have no doubt about their financial qualifications...
I heard anyone mentioned 2020 too?
Jason K (No1 Rizz sock puppet),
"It's very interesting" how the Labor Party calculated their 2016 NBN policy funding to be $57B, which will be completed by 2022.
This is to increase the deployment from Coalition NBN MtM to FTTP by only 2 million, but still use a considerable part of the lower CPP and deploy FTTN, FTTB and HFC more quickly.
So, by 2021, how can you extend the expensive CPP FTTP to 93% of Australian residences at a price much lower than $57B?
Lol the simple answer to your question is never to switch to mtm in the first place lol
https://delimiter.com.au/2016/09/01/xg-fast-wont-obviate-need-copper-replacement-says-internet-australia/#comment-765892
"So, by 2021, how can you extend the expensive CPP FTTP to 93% of Australia's residential properties for a price well below $57B?"
When every other CPP launched overseas is only a small part of the citation. (Ridiculous, that.)
What do you mean by the launch? US$57B is the Labor Party’s estimate in 2016. Are you saying that they made a mistake?
By 2016, 25mbps – 29.5B USD will of course be launched...
Although we already know it, tell us how bad it is?
"FTTdp is great, there is XG.FAST"
Yes, yes, but NBN does not use FTTdp and made it clear that they have no intention of starting any major FTTdp deployment.
So... when XG.Fast can't be used with FTTN, why do copper fans keep chatting about XG.Fast?
@r0 wrote "When XG.Fast cannot be used with FTTN?". It can, another classic ;-)
Yes, you are right, it can be used for a small part of the FTTN user base because the copper loop is too long.
I forgot how pedantic you are.
I shouldn't bother you back, your quarreling and picky little points, instead of really discussing what people are commenting on.
I will continue to enjoy my gigabit fiber in Japan.
@r0 Maybe you prefer this: https://delimiter.com.au/2016/04/04/new-leaked-docs-show-fttn-delays/#comment-727714
Digression. Your comment is invalid.
You should jump to the NBN blog and straighten them!
To be clear, in order to deploy XG.FAST, we need to drive our optical fiber deeper into the network and use XG.FAST to migrate to the fiber to the distribution point (FTTdP) network architecture, using only the last 30-100 meters of copper to enter A place.
They seem to think that they need FttDP to make it work... Go make them tiger!
@tm wrote "Can't FttDP be used with FTTN?". It can (NBNCO says it will), another classic;-)
I never said that I can’t, I just pointed out that the company did not use it through FttN. I can't find anyone trying to use xg.fast via FttN. The closest is to use FttC's BT, and everyone else wants to use it via FttDP.
I would be interested in any link/information that anyone you know of using it via FttN anywhere?
"I can't find anyone trying to use xg.fast with FttN anywhere. The closest is to use FttC's BT" LOL FTTC = Fiber to the cabinet. Same but different. It doesn't matter how they look at FTTdp using XG-Fast instead of FTTN, because if they need to replace a 20-meter copper cable, this may save them costs and increase fiber optic space, thereby reducing costs for people. All copper wires will disappear, which will mean a more reliable system, because the problem is those connections and not the copper wires themselves
NBN did not say yes, they said no; o)
http://www.nbnco.com.au/blog/the-nbn-project/xg-fast-tests-puts-nbn-in-vanguard-of-global-telcos.html
Interesting... FTTdp is still happening. With existing technology. Existing technology will pave the way for exactly the same result. The reality is that the fewer copper terminals, the better. And the closer the fiber is to the premise, the better, as long as it does not significantly affect the cost like FTTP.
FTTdp is still happening
Indeed, they will deploy it to (at least) 300k. nbn™ is also talking about it more and more, so if expanded trials can show the cost savings due to economies of scale, things should become very interesting.
The real question is not whether FTTN or FTTP is faster. This is about reliability. I have seen optical fibers operating in the field (mine) for more than 20 years. Although they are privately operated links, they have never missed a beat since they were installed in the 1990s.
The home line I deployed in the 90s was absolutely disgusting, and almost every other technician was watching it because I was disconnected from the cunning, low-cost, cheapest winning contractor who got the job that day.
I personally think that the government should set goals purely. X connected for X months. Let NBN decide what technology/when to deploy it instead of letting the shadow/current prime minister decide what should be installed and what percentage.
The reason it is so fragmented is that the issue has been politicized. The Liberal Party does not want the Labour Party to have a good idea because it seems that they are very weak. Rather than working together, putting aside the absolute circus, and creating a better future for Australia, they would rather sell it now, make a small profit, and literally sell the future of the next generation for their current interests... oh wait Wait, they are all baby boomers, and of course this is what they are going to do. Selfish bastard.
There is no Bob. Its cost has nothing to do with politics "we won't because they did".
"I personally think that the government should set goals purely. X connects for X months. Let NBN decide what technology/when to deploy it, instead of letting the shadow/present prime minister decide what should be installed and what percentage." In fact, the Liberal Party has already Don't let it go. Especially now that Malcolm is the leader. NBN was also left to actually complete the work they were hired for. This includes researching emerging technologies to see if they can make the process cheaper or faster while achieving established goals. FTTdp with XG-Fast seems to be able to achieve this goal.
"No Bob. Its cost is not politics "We won't because they did"
Well, yes, obviously...
If it's about cost (and just cost-shh never mentions B in CBA, it's a CA) when MTM starts to skyrocket at $25B, it should be scrapped immediately.
The fact that it exploded so shamefully in terms of time and cost (B less) is convincing.
Why would MT convene someone who only publicly opposes FTTP to form a review team to make a fair CBA, when they package FTTP and praise their own MYM...Want to know? Then move on before FTTN/MTM reaches the inevitable just (lol) conclusion.
This is how the opposition operates in the Abbott era, opposing for the sake of opposition. If you don’t see this, then your motives are clear, IMO.
TA even admits that they oppose and should support Gillard's "boat people" solution. This is a good idea, because doing so is politically expedient...
After being filled with FTTP NBN, Conroy, Quigley and others kept on, regardless of whether it was worth it (usually not), it is absolutely impossible for TA or MT to adopt FTTP and there is no foul smell of hypocrisy...
At the end of 2013, the launch of the Labor Party’s NBN FTTP had to be reduced by 50% from the original target, so it is not difficult to convince voters that a faster and more cost-effective MtM model is the way to go, especially when the Labor Party pays Telstra and Optus Shut down their copper cable and HFC broadband infrastructure so they can overbuild it with expensive brownfield FTTP.
If the existing fixed line BB infrastructure is not completely shut down, there is no reason to launch FTTP.
The MtM strategy has been recognized twice, and it became the preferred NBN model again in 2013 and 2016.
It is an illusion that the Labor Party's NBN FTTP will reach 93% by 2021.
Lol, except for faster and more cost-effective models that have missed 75% of the original goal. Not to mention that the price has almost doubled, haha. There has never been a new one. The best deal is to spend more than the original one, haha.
However, the actual US$29.5B launched in 2016 is cheaper/faster (rather than your poor transfer).
The reality is that FTTP will never be completed in time within its stated budget. It is silly to use it as a reason, and the cost calculation proves reasonable doubt that it will cost more. Create evidence to the contrary! The fact is that the only political factor is the time and cost that are lower than the Labor Party’s nonsense, because idiots believe their weird claims. The Liberal Party didn't want to build NBN at all, but people like Delimiter and other "I want" groups forced them to build white elephants. Before it is built, wireless networks will be faster and cheaper. This is just the reality of technology. Given that the upgrade of wireless technology is easier and cheaper, it will beat the fixed network in terms of cost and speed in the next few years. Optus has already provided 200Gb@12/1 at a price of $80, and I did not pay for the fixed line service until last month! By 2020, we will be completely wireless. It will be realized before any FTTP is built. It is more likely to be completed in 2030, when wireless will far exceed the Gbps limit. (The last two sentences are my beliefs, and the rest I can prove)
The reality is that FTTP will never be built in time within the budget it is talking about
"I could have gone to the hospital and education"
You forgot the road, Rolls-Royce solutions, and napkins (oh no, you already said napkins, yes).
And none of them (obviously anyway) mentioned the current launch... MTM collapsed, from $29.5B to (at most) $70B-by 2016, now to 2020, for a completely poor quality network.
Like this Chris, your state of passing the fact-check is just another poor, politically loyal believer. This is a desperate, factless crusade.
Therefore, you now have...
@Chris “Optus has already offered 200Gb@12/1 for $80.” The speed and price are like returning to ADSL2+ 10 years ago, and the speed will vary from house to house. Said that this solution can replace the fixed network, ignoring today's demand, let alone 2020's demand.
I would like to see some alternatives to NBN, but this will not cut wasabi for any type of users in the suburbs. The number of users and the capacity of each user are everything.
"You forgot the road, the Rolls-Royce solution, and the napkins (oh, no, you already said napkins, yes..."
@Chris Companies like Telstra will find (some kind of) high-speed last-mile networks profitable and attractive. Neither terrestrial TV nor cable TV is suitable for any 4k channels. The only option is online. As people buy 4k TVs everywhere, the market is waiting for service.
If such a network is not attractive, it is actually a white elephant, and there are very few telecommunications companies operating in the world. A nationwide last mile network, nothing can be done in vain? Turn on your brain and look around. Tony Abbott must be a fool to say this. It was debunked many years ago.
@CS: "Liberals don't want to build NBN at all, but people like Delimiter and other groups I want force them" How stubborn these Libs are... They need to cultivate a couple and stop catering to everyone. On this website... Before Libs was forced to start making analysis charts and sock puppets against their will, I said let's shut up... Could anything happen to poor Malcolm? Classic Planet Gundam ;-)
+1 Rude. Libs has never been forced to do anything. They proved that they did not have the courage to apply their policy agenda (consistent with "Richard"'s idea of how the government "should" force the private sector to implement network upgrades in the UK). What are the benefits of Libs? I hope those men in suits have b@lls and do what they think is suitable for the country.
Lol, Chris, the cpp of CP16 is smaller than the cpp of SR of S1 or s2. It proves without a doubt that it will cost more, haha.
But before fttp spends $90B, let's take a look at your side view. Fttn will cost $29B.
SR came in and pointed out that FTTP will cost $64-$71B, which is a saving of $19-$26B compared to the new mtm of $41B or the cost increase of $12B.
Then CP16 claimed that its cost of $46-$56B increased by $5B-$15B. It also shows that the cost of fttp is lower than the cost claimed in the SR. Most importantly, it shows a counterfactual (lol Richard), which is $74B-$84B y26-y28. Except for that counterfactual (laughing Richard) including the blowout cost of switching to mtm and then back to fttp. Now we know that we have a delay of 2 years to switch to mtm and then fttp y24-y26. This delayed the switch back to fttp y22-y24 by another 2 years. Therefore, it is 1-3 years behind the original Y21 target, but it is still better than we are now 4 years behind.
Do you really understand how the mobile internet works? How many users are the tower's spectrum allocated? The more people there are in the tower, the slower it becomes.
However, the good news is that Optus showed a move because the 4-year delay of nbn is invalid, and the new nbn is aimed at areas that are already well served rather than underserved.
@All corrections above: "ACCC data shows similar speeds selected by FTTP customers (approximately 79% 25mbps or lower)."
ACCC data @ 30JUN16 actually shows customers 25mbps or less: FTTN 88.98% FTTP 81.37% https://www.dropbox.com/s/he6dtqmfci8fg1a/speed-actuals-v-forecast.pdf?dl=0
The low-speed customer preference of FTTP is also growing: 76% in FY2014 and 78% in FY2015.
Drawing (they still don’t understand): https://www.dropbox.com/s/czgeacakaqb5ugr/speed-actuals-v-forecast-chart.pdf?dl=0
Fiberartzi should ignore all available data and continue to think about their fanciful customer speed profiles (known to have 1 million users), the gigabit requirements when configuring 1.09mbps CVC, and the need for higher uploads (when few people choose Time).
Maybe they want to check FTTP deployment performance and explain the advantages of Conroy's GBE to hundreds of thousands of people who don't have any fixed-line Internet options today: https://www.dropbox.com/s/2cpmjufh576l5ch/brownfields-actuals- v-forecast .pdf?dl=0
Lol, why did you delete the plateau from your chart, Richard because it was so embarrassing?
Tell us how the plateau operates Rizz, and why it completely invalidates Richards' scores?
The absence of the plateau that Richard amicably removed indicates that MTM stopped all FTTp contracts shortly after joining the league. So until fttn finally announced that it was 2 years later than its start date, there was no increase
Why don’t you verify Dick’s productive analysis, on the contrary...
Because, as we’ve said many times, his constant picking of cherries increases his reason for narcissism, which is right, because I said, it’s ridiculous at best...
In fact, the only thing more ridiculous is your constant pug antics, and more importantly, your delicious contradiction...
Do I want to post more now?
@r Don't care too much about the weak. JK is talking about my chart, which shows the actual v forecast before EFY. I have continued to pass in the same place in the past few weeks (meaningful, accumulated and never declined). The idea is to emphasize the progress of the goal. It doesn't make much sense now that there are 12 months left before the next goal.
Below he simply fabricated things. We know that he cannot use the spreadsheet.
@"Richard" is for reference only: $17.50/Mbps will offset all the content you posted, and you won’t see it. Talk about mentally retarded.
@mh CVC pricing does not exist or the reason for the delay in launch? (Rove)
Yes, Richard, I can use spreed sheets, but at least I don't need to keep making up.
Can't even support your claim that Conroy is stifling investment, this is just a pie falling from the sky. Or B dollar was invested, haha, there is nothing to support that. Or ghost threats are used to access pipes and pits, instead of preventing Telstra from upgrading hfc, haha, it can't even generate references to any of them. It’s just a lie that you have been talking about buying and buying for a long time, and you may start to believe them.
Come on, Richard reposted your previous chart, but we all know you don't have this little girl.
By the way, CP16 fttp cost artificial original launch I need to laugh again haha. Hook wire and sinker.
The current cost of CVC dropped a bomb on the project. It twists everything. It questioned the feasibility of paying all fees so that we can obtain (financially fabulous) upgrades and the feasibility of retail customers who want and decide to pay. If you don't admit this, it will go to disaster. You make it as attractive as possible to people to pay, otherwise it will be full.
After this point has been mentioned repeatedly, how can you continue to draw dishonest conclusions about the received data? When you are a paid person, that's it.
@mh No conclusion is needed, the data has been released.
You have nothing, zero, zipper. There are many companies here...
Richard, however, you have changed your release chart to fit your narrative.
You continue to draw these conclusions, no matter what you or I say or publish, they will be dishonest and unfair.
The @mh data (quote) shows what it shows. What other conclusions can be drawn from this?
"Dishonest and unfair": Is this the latest leftist doctrine? "Unfair" data analysis is nothing strange these days (stupid everywhere). I look forward to hearing more ;-)
https://delimiter.com.au/2016/09/01/xg-fast-wont-obviate-need-copper-replacement-says-internet-australia/#comment-765873
Feel free (cherry) to choose any number... Of course, except Quigley, this is the only number that doesn't fluctuate sharply.
https://delimiter.com.au/2016/09/01/xg-fast-wont-obviate-need-copper-replacement-says-internet-australia/#comment-765394
"Dishonest and unfair": Is this the latest leftist doctrine? "Unfair" data analysis is nothing strange these days (stupid everywhere). I look forward to hearing more ;-)
There is also Richards’ "Abuse and Bile" ;o) Classic
Not only his abuse and bile, but also his crazy insistence on his distorted and refuted ideology at all costs...
This is why he cannot and will never accept or even give a minimum of trust to the "Left FTTP", even if it is 100% correct for Oz (as we know it)...
The McCarthyism/Red Man under the bed is still full of such dinosaurs.
I am sad when people are so messed up by ideology that they can only open one eye.
@"Richard" They are not suitable for accounting, so they do not exist in "Richard" Land. But tell a business owner who went bankrupt after losing his contract on the unreliable Internet. What is the actual situation.
25mbps or lower customers...haha...thanks Matthew...
N How much are your cherries?
"The State of Frustration" by Delimiter publisher Renai LeMay is the first book to delve into how Australia’s political sector systematically manages technological change and crushes the hope that our country will become a digital power and innovation home in the world. Book.
Click here to purchase "Depressed State".