your thoughts?

These mediums aren't comparable as you need one (fibre) for the other (cellular) to work.

5g is not a standard yet and hasn't been ratified.
1 gigabits a second may sound impressive - until you realise that that is per cell and there may be hundreds or even thousands of users per cell.
There are also spectrum and data limitations (fixed connections have 500gb a month versus wireless with 4gb a month).
Finally - if you want fast wireless internet, you need a fibre backbone anyway.

Anyone who thinks everyone can use cellular without congestion issues, data issues and drop outs needs to do some research - it's against the laws of physics and won't be possible for the foreseeable future.

but time the NBN rolls past my place the 5G network will have come and gone. I'm happy with the speed i have now. what justifies the cost to the Australian Tax payer when the Private sector will render the NBN obsolete?

BlOoDy RiPpEr

I know many people who live in 4G areas in Sydney are now replacing their ADSL with a a 4G connection as the get faster speeds than their ADSL which is determine by the distance from the exchange.

Where I life there is no 4G (it starts about 5-10 km down the road) I get about 6-8 MB/sec out of my ADSL which does the job for me at a very low price.

5G is a way off and may indeed replace 4G ... but this technology is expensive and takes time to roll out. 4G is only partially rolled out and mostly around the capitals, so effective 5G good be a long time off.

What the NBN (Fibre to the home) or the alternative cheaper fibre to the node will deliver is better delivery from the server side of the equation which ADLS/Cable and mobile BB does not deliver. Often that is not the problem with slow speeds, popular websites often its the server farm capacity does not match the volumes that occur. NBN won't solve that problems, IT platform costs are growing rapidly to the point where there is boom in hosted environments with high grade servers and high speed infrastructure. Its a booming cost for many of the big corporates and governments who are now looking a leasing such as opposed to building and owning.

My view is the NBN is just another phoney war the ALP are trying to create.

There is no crisis in the Internet connection and usage.

Fit of Absent Mindeness wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 8:18am:

These mediums aren't comparable as you need one (fibre) for the other (cellular) to work. 5g is not a standard yet and hasn't been ratified. 1 gigabits a second may sound impressive - until you realise that that is per cell and there may be hundreds or even thousands of users per cell. There are also spectrum and data limitations (fixed connections have 500gb a month versus wireless with 4gb a month). Finally - if you want fast wireless internet, you need a fibre backbone anyway. Anyone who thinks everyone can use cellular without congestion issues, data issues and drop outs needs to do some research - it's against the laws of physics and won't be possible for the foreseeable future.

iceyone

Good Post :-)

ADSL/Cable/4G are all retail products and nothing to do with the backbone infrastructure which right now seems ok but yes it needs to evolve. We should first evolve to Fibre to the node which will improve services .... but on the server side, everyone would also (as most are) beef up their capacity.

BlOoDy RiPpEr wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 8:33am:

but time the NBN rolls past my place the 5G network will have come and gone. I'm happy with the speed i have now. what justifies the cost to the Australian Tax payer when the Private sector will render the NBN obsolete?

The private sector has had years to build a version of the NBN. I know telstra was kicking the idea round back in the day, but the upfront capital costs are simply too great for private enterprise, plus there is very little incentive for them to extend the network to 95% of Australians, when it would be more profitable to simply build the network in the capital cities and once again, bugger the bush over.

My 4G works perfectly in Bowral NSW and surrounds, which is fairly hilly.

donincognito wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 9:58am:

BlOoDy RiPpEr wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 8:33am: but time the NBN rolls past my place the 5G network will have come and gone. I'm happy with the speed i have now. what justifies the cost to the Australian Tax payer when the Private sector will render the NBN obsolete? The private sector has had years to build a version of the NBN. I know telstra was kicking the idea round back in the day, but the upfront capital costs are simply too great for private enterprise, plus there is very little incentive for them to extend the network to 95% of Australians, when it would be more profitable to simply build the network in the capital cities and once again, bugger the bush over.

donincognito

They have developed a solid fibre back bone which is doing ok Job, there is no crisis nor is there a need for an NBN..... its a nice to have. The risk with the NBN roll out is whether it will become legacy very soon, as a retail fibre to the house its both not necessary and will be under threat from cheaper technologies.

bogarde73 wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 9:59am:

My 4G works perfectly in Bowral NSW and surrounds, which is fairly hilly.

bogarde73

It depends on what is in the hills other than toothless hill billies :-)

I have a hill near me that seems to have a high iron content and it causes a dean zone about 1KM long, yet to see any goat loving hill billies in it.

FYI I get about 3MB/sec with my Telstra mobile BB (3G) and 6-8MB/sec with my ADSL ... both are fine. I mainly use the Telstra 3G BB in my car with an dash mounted Android Tablet.

RightSadFred wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 10:52am:

donincognito wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 9:58am: BlOoDy RiPpEr wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 8:33am: but time the NBN rolls past my place the 5G network will have come and gone. I'm happy with the speed i have now. what justifies the cost to the Australian Tax payer when the Private sector will render the NBN obsolete? The private sector has had years to build a version of the NBN. I know telstra was kicking the idea round back in the day, but the upfront capital costs are simply too great for private enterprise, plus there is very little incentive for them to extend the network to 95% of Australians, when it would be more profitable to simply build the network in the capital cities and once again, bugger the bush over. donincognito They have developed a solid fibre back bone which is doing ok Job, there is no crisis nor is there a need for an NBN..... its a nice to have. The risk with the NBN roll out is whether it will become legacy very soon, as a retail fibre to the house its both not necessary and will be under threat from cheaper technologies.

You must be kidding.

We are relying on equipment stamped with logo for a company that hasnt existed for 20 years. We are relying on copper runs in tunnels that flood. We are relying on outdated, rotting infrastructure that is purposely being left unfixed because its cheaper to do that and fix the faults as people complain than it is to do preventative maintenance.

We either (1) spend a shitload of money fixing all the problems in the existing network (which still doesnt reach all the way to the bush and has huge technical limitations like distance from the node and such) and then spend a shitload of money to update it to the latest technology. or (2) Spend a shitload of money to update to the latest technology.

Would you like to spend a shitload of money once, or twice to achieve the same outcome? poo, the head of Telstra said "Do it once, do it right, Do it with Fiber."

And make no mistake, the opportunities given by this are immense. Think of all the different uses of the road system. The NBN is going to be more revolutionary than that. There is no threat from cheaper technologies. There is no threat of obsolescence. Private enterprise cannot and will not do this.

donincognito wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 11:48am:

RightSadFred wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 10:52am: donincognito wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 9:58am: BlOoDy RiPpEr wrote on May 17th, 2013 at 8:33am: but time the NBN rolls past my place the 5G network will have come and gone. I'm happy with the speed i have now. what justifies the cost to the Australian Tax payer when the Private sector will render the NBN obsolete? The private sector has had years to build a version of the NBN. I know telstra was kicking the idea round back in the day, but the upfront capital costs are simply too great for private enterprise, plus there is very little incentive for them to extend the network to 95% of Australians, when it would be more profitable to simply build the network in the capital cities and once again, bugger the bush over. donincognito They have developed a solid fibre back bone which is doing ok Job, there is no crisis nor is there a need for an NBN..... its a nice to have. The risk with the NBN roll out is whether it will become legacy very soon, as a retail fibre to the house its both not necessary and will be under threat from cheaper technologies. You must be kidding. We are relying on equipment stamped with logo for a company that hasnt existed for 20 years. We are relying on copper runs in tunnels that flood. We are relying on outdated, rotting infrastructure that is purposely being left unfixed because its cheaper to do that and fix the faults as people complain than it is to do preventative maintenance. We either (1) spend a shitload of money fixing all the problems in the existing network (which still doesnt reach all the way to the bush and has huge technical limitations like distance from the node and such) and then spend a shitload of money to update it to the latest technology. or (2) Spend a shitload of money to update to the latest technology. Would you like to spend a shitload of money once, or twice to achieve the same outcome? poo, the head of Telstra said "Do it once, do it right, Do it with Fiber." And make no mistake, the opportunities given by this are immense. Think of all the different uses of the road system. The NBN is going to be more revolutionary than that. There is no threat from cheaper technologies. There is no threat of obsolescence. Private enterprise cannot and will not do this.

donincognito

So you don't know the difference between a communications backbone and a retail product ?

Quote:

donincognito So you don't know the difference between a communications backbone and a retail product ?

Do you?

The nbn is also investing in a fibre backbone (because private companies didn't want to).

Unlike Telstra, the nbn has no retail presence and will offer a much fairer retail structure by selling access to RSP's.

Thanks to the coalition we currently have a situation where the owner of the network also has a retail arm.

Fit of Absent Mindeness wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 3:04pm:

Quote: donincognito So you don't know the difference between a communications backbone and a retail product ? Do you? The nbn is also investing in a fibre backbone (because private companies didn't want to). Unlike Telstra, the nbn has no retail presence and will offer a much fairer retail structure by selling access to RSP's. Thanks to the coalition we currently have a situation where the owner of the network also has a retail arm.

iceyone

There is actually a fibre backbone in this country, what the NBN is, is fibre to the house, what I prefer is fibre to the node and let the retail market work from there to the house.

Its a good each way bet on the technology.

Fit of Absent Mindeness wrote on May 17^th, 2013 at 8:18am:

These mediums aren't comparable as you need one (fibre) for the other (cellular) to work. 5g is not a standard yet and hasn't been ratified. 1 gigabits a second may sound impressive - until you realise that that is per cell and there may be hundreds or even thousands of users per cell. There are also spectrum and data limitations (fixed connections have 500gb a month versus wireless with 4gb a month). Finally - if you want fast wireless internet, you need a fibre backbone anyway. Anyone who thinks everyone can use cellular without congestion issues, data issues and drop outs needs to do some research - it's against the laws of physics and won't be possible for the foreseeable future.

It's wireless Internet for rich people.

Who the fck has got 5G internet avaialble.

I resently bought a Optus wireless and it more pathetic then Teltra Bigponds adsl or wireless.

warrigal wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 8:16am:

Who the fck has got 5G internet avaialble. I resently bought a Optus wireless and it more pathetic then Teltra Bigponds adsl or wireless.

warrigal

5G is all theory right now.

I use TPG for my mobile phone which is Optus. I get a cheap price and the phone service is fine.

The coverage where I live is very average. BB speeds on the mobile are very ordinary (100 kb/sec or less)

I have a BB Myfi device in the car where I use telstra...... the minimum I get around my area is 2Mb/sec

If your in an Optus 4G area it might be ok but the Optus 4G roll out was limited, I am about 10km's away from an Optus 4G area.

warrigal wrote on May 18^th, 2013 at 8:16am:

Who the fck has got 5G internet avaialble. I resently bought a Optus wireless and it more pathetic then Teltra Bigponds adsl or wireless.

The Samsung development is not 5G and likely never will be. While the test is impressive for wireless it is still ridiculously inferior to the same level of fibre development.

The system being played with by Samsung in development is very high frequency - it is so high that it would not go through paper let alone into buildings or even bus shelters. This technology will fall by the way side. 5G will become a reality but I don't think this one will be available at the projected date of 2020, more like 2030 if ever using this method.

Looking at this type of development testing for fibre and there is an example of a success running at a peta bit. That is a million Gig. Wireless has a valuable place but can not compare to the capability of a fixed service. Not saying that this will go into service any time soon either.

A speed of 1 gigabit per second would require at least 2 GHz of bandwidth, and I'm talking about 2 GHz on the frequency spectrum, modulated to some high carrier frequency above 4 GHz. The higher the speed, the more bandwidth it requires and the more space it takes up on the frequency spectrum. Because a reliable connection always involves transferring more than just the data itself, it's likely that such a connection would require more than just the 2 GHz bandwidth. It would require error correction codes and other stuff. To maintain the required data rate, you might need up to 4 GHz bandwidth, maybe even more.

It's unlikely that they would dedicate such a huge part of the frequency spectrum to the common consumer. This kind of Internet would be too expensive and would likely only be available to people like Rupert Murdoch, Gina Rinehart and Clive Palmer.