| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 108620 | 2010-04-05 04:05:00 | Discussion: Why fibre to the door? | Chilling_Silence (9) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 873103 | 2010-04-09 00:47:00 | Telecom is the incumbent ex state owned enterprise Telco, given complete control of the local loop for many decades locking out competitors. Telecom largely got there market share from the taxpayer through the government regulation. Since local loop un-bundeling, Telecom have used there financial might if you will, to outsmart the governments with Cabintisation knowing much of the industry cant afford there own equipment (they keep control). Its nearly entirely political, however I would point out Labour were the the ones that started gunning for Telecom in government and didnt really succeed. National are only finishing the job. I cant dumb it down any further than that, if people cant understand the main motive for the government looking at FTTD then this thread is kinda pointless. Correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is Cabinetisation is required to provide good ADSL2+ speeds to those who are more than 2km or so from an exchange. Thus it is an inevitable move. If Telecom refused to Cabinetise, people would be saying they're underinvesting. What else are they going to do? Try to provide VDSL over a 5km loop? Also correct me if I'm wrong, that Orcon have plans to install their equipment in the cabinets. Having only two companies that can currently justify installing the equipment (as opposed to one) is a far cry from a monopoly situation. I am not actually disagreeing with you that this is their motive. I honestly don't know if that's true or not and therefore don't plan to argue with you - you may be right! But I am saying that they shouldn't. That it is a poor use of $1 billion. And for all we know, by 2021 there may be several more companies with equipment in the cabinets. |
george12 (7) | ||
| 873104 | 2010-04-09 02:45:00 | Especially considering when you look at the likes of Korea, everybody praises them as having FTTH for over 60% of their population, with 100m/bit speeds .. yet look at speedtest.net and you'll see their average is around 22m/bit. There's *so* much more than just FTTH to be considered and it's incredibly short-sighted to feel that its the solution to all the problems, or even the majority of the problems. As it stands right now, and probably into the future, the main prohibiting factor for NZ is the cost-per-GB. If I was the Govt, I'd be throwing my money at the Pacific Fibre cable rather than FTTH. Let FTTH happen in its own natural timing over the next decade without wasting my hard earned taxes. |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 873105 | 2010-04-09 04:39:00 | Especially considering when you look at the likes of Korea, everybody praises them as having FTTH for over 60% of their population, with 100m/bit speeds . . yet look at speedtest . net and you'll see their average is around 22m/bit . OMG Chilling_Silence Speedtest,net is NOT ACCURATE IT IS ONLY SINGLE SOURCE . If any ONE of the hops to "what ever" Speedtest . net server cant throughput any more than 22m/bit, then that will be the result! . yes that was yelling hopefully you got the message :) Why do people in this forum rely on Speedtest . net, makes me sad :( I can 100% assure you Korean FTTB blows ADSL2 out of the water, its not even polite to compare the two in the same sentence . |
Battleneter2 (9361) | ||
| 873106 | 2010-04-09 04:58:00 | What about IPTV? I'm no expert but can you imagine everyone watching HD TV over DSL? | davidmmac (4619) | ||
| 873107 | 2010-04-09 08:10:00 | Nope - you can keep the loop unbundled, have other ISPs put their gear in the exchange, and all Chorus would need to do is simply "pass through" the copper connection from the cabinet down the existing copper cables back to the exchange. Other ISPs still have access to the local loop - just not the new, non-government funded infrastructure Telecom has installed. There are technical considerations with this approach, but it was a model which can work, and was floated by one of the consultants involved in the original unbundling process. If telecom were to do that, they would still have to maintain the copper lines & that would probably end up costing them more than letting competitors use the fibre backhaul. |
Greven (91) | ||
| 873108 | 2010-04-09 08:41:00 | If telecom were to do that, they would still have to maintain the copper lines & that would probably end up costing them more than letting competitors use the fibre backhaul. Also they probably wouldn't get away with it as the competitors would be using longer loops and therefore providing slower speeds. |
george12 (7) | ||
| 873109 | 2010-04-09 13:53:00 | True, but considering the backhaul for both NZ and Korea is Fibre, you'd expect it to be decent, and reliable yes? If not, then what's the bloody point of wasting billions of dollars on our country rolling it out? | Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 873110 | 2010-04-10 00:33:00 | True, but considering the backhaul for both NZ and Korea is Fibre, you'd expect it to be decent, and reliable yes? If not, then what's the bloody point of wasting billions of dollars on our country rolling it out? The point is "to eliminate Telecom NZ continuing near monopoly", you got a better suggestion we are all ears??. Has the desirable "side effect" of giving NZ residential consumes a connection that will be extremely consistent and be suitable for decades unlike DSL2. Sure FTTD is hugely expensive but who's fault is it thats its come to this?, no point playing the blame game but the company starts with "T" :) I agree with you and others that back-haul to NZ/data charges has to be addressed also, but thats **another** part of the problem, Lastly a lot of those Tax payer funded 70's and 80's "think big" type projects have really paid off for NZ over the decades (heavily criticised early on). We are a small nation, the government is often the only entity big enough to pull it off. |
Battleneter2 (9361) | ||
| 873111 | 2010-04-10 05:44:00 | Right, "gas-to-gasoline" paid off hugely. Only for overseas Mobil investors, but them's the breaks. Marsden B continues to be one of our lowest carbon emitters. Some of the other schemes were not so good though. | R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 873112 | 2010-04-10 06:03:00 | See that's not entirely true. There's a few guys, rallied together and said "Hey we actually know better than the morons running the show, lets show them!" and they have and that's why we've got the Pacific Fibre project happening. They're now reaching out for further funding from other parties to help this venture. Yes, Fibre would "last for decades", but not without this Pacific Fibre project, or a dramatic cost reduction per-GB which doesn't look like happening any time soon. This isn't about breaking a monopoly, it's about a country running with a catch-phrase idea thinking it's going to herald in a new era of connections and solve everybodies issues. It won't. Why can the country not simply just get FTTH without the Govt's help? |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 | |||||