Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 104593	2009-11-02 02:20:00	Breaking news: No need for FTTH!	Chilling_Silence (9)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
826379	2009-11-02 03:46:00	Sure there are some cases where if you're transferring large files from site-to-site, such as HD Video and things, then it'd be nice if it happened in seconds rather than minutes ... but aren't we spending billions for the special few who are the exception rather than the rule? I think this is one of the more interesting objections to the FTTH/FTTP proposal. Again, the only way to look at it is from a long term perspective. Right now, there are only a small minority who need high network capacity, and in some cases they will make arrangements accordingly to ensure they get it - e.g. Weta Digital having fibre laid from Miramar to a DC in central Wellington during the production of LOTR. Over the longer term, demand for the network capacity that fibre provides will be much more widespread - not that long ago, something like Skype was only used by a small minority. Since acceptable broadband internet access became more widespread, the number of users have jumped, and uses like video conferencing over Skype are now being used by all sorts of businesses.	somebody (208)
826380	2009-11-02 03:47:00	Nice post Somebody. If we all got our line speeds in real time download and upload, all would be gravy, however that just isn't the case. Even then... if you have say a TV in the house streaming high-def video over an IPTV service, your internet speed for web browsing etc. will suffer significantly - that's assuming that the ADSL2+ connection will be reliable enough for high-def video streaming..	somebody (208)
826381	2009-11-02 03:51:00	Great post Somebody :thumbs:	davidmmac (4619)
826382	2009-11-02 04:56:00	Great post Somebody :thumbs: Absolutely agree with that - I can't think of anything more to add there, you've expressed my thoughts perfectly.	Erayd (23)
826383	2009-11-02 05:22:00	Just the kind of argument post I was looking for, and you present some very good points indeed, many of which I secretly agree with ;) Ahh. So you're a closet troll. Your secret's out now! :D	johcar (6283)
826384	2009-11-02 07:16:00	The way I see it, it's like roads; build it and they will come. After initial costs, the running costs would be small enough to justify lower prices, to the point where 1080p IPTV would be a reality. Provided that the private sector didn't cripple us with caps, that is. Copper is a dead technology. With NZ as it is, with cables dating back to the 50's still abundant in rural areas, fibre really is the only long-term solution. It can be easily multiplexed, so when your 100Mb/s connection isn't getting the job done anymore, you can just upgrade the modem, and you're away. Speed doesn't degrade over distance, so you don't need to live in town to get a half-decent connection. Provided that ISP's have the backhaul, I think that FTTH could fundametally alter the way we compute.	ubergeek85 (131)
826385	2009-11-02 07:20:00	My downstream copper speed is 12.1 Mb/s and, like Chill, I would be more than happy with that for the foreseeable future IF my end-to-end experience wasn't limited by the domestic backhaul and Southern Cross. IMHO, the govt should put the money into a new submarine cable to Hawaii. From Hawaii to upside-up-land, there are plenty of cables, plenty of competition and good prices. From NZ to Hawaii there is only Southern Cross and they are the people who are SCREWING us all.	decibel (11645)
1 2