Excuse my ignorance but why do we still focus on fibre optics ? Wouldn't existing satellites provide a far better coverage at a lot less cost ?

Apparently not Individual- according to some complaints to the newspapers (though admittedly it's not something to rely on alone).

Logically, it is a less efficient and reliable form of transmission than a fibreoptic cable (as one is an insulated light-speed transmission along a shorter distance with no chance of interference in situations beyond exceptional damage inflicted to the cabling- while the other uses a slower energy medium that is easier to disrupt in ways not unlike the problems experienced by mobile phones.

Not to mention satellite dishes require a bit of investment and technical skills (nothing big in either case, for someone with a fair grasp of how to work it right, although it could be a fair factor to consider- not to mention local stock).

But what you say is a good point to consider. Because it WOULD stand to save a lot of money.

The problems with satellites is latency and you can't push up to satellites from your home in any meaningful way. Think of the old days when OS calls were on satellite before laying fiber on the ocean floor. You could have up to 10 seconds of lag in your conversation, light solves all those problems.

That's not to say that some smart Sci-Fi nut won't come up with some "way out there" Tacheon beam tech that beats fiber in the near future. But if we were to always wait for emerging or future technologies, then we would still be beating hollow logs :)

Hello,
Many people now days think about luxury when they fulfill all the things for necessity. but the people who don't have enough money they first try to fulfill there necessity.today for rich people luxury become there necessity.

thanks!!
________________
http://www.expedia.com.au/Ho-Chi-Minh-City-Hotels.d178262.Travel-Guide-Hotels

Dan you really are so typical of a city dweller who has never had anything to do with the country, Or you are really yanking my chain.
Small farming as seen on the east coast is an expanding and growing market, i won't argue that it is done with out much help from government but it is strong and growing. As for major broad acre production, this is massively profitable and a hugh industry in this country, why do you think the government put so much money into supporting drought stricken farming areas, because the payback on years like this one are enormous. Our fisheries are successful despite the governments trying to stop them fishing.
Our biggest problem is we are ignored by government and under serviced. You learn to take what you can get in the country and at the moment it looks ok for a change. The independents stand to do what the lib's lapdogs the Nat were too gutless to do and get some of our wealth coming back to us. So save your suburban conservative ignorance and get with the program, something is happening for this countries wealth machine for a change, not the ever greedy and selfish.

Diver Dan,
Just to help you understand, wheat as a crop is expected this year to harvest around 25 million ton. At the current price this will produce around 7.5 billion for the Australian economy and mostly in foreign currency.
This is one crop, a big one yes but then there's barley, oats, canola, the wool clip the live meat trade and on and on. So much of it foreign currency and thats only western and southern grazing lands. Then consider mining and its wealth generation.
So how do the suburbs do for real wealth generation, service industries, shopping and unsustainable building industry, banks. None of this really creates wealth it just redistributes it to the rich. The cities are a massive financial and political drain on this country, poorly organised and run with massive festering social problems rooted in ignorance and bigotry. I visit the western suburbs of Sydney regularly to see family and have nothing good to say about the place, it's a disaster waiting to happen, a massive slum if anything really ever goes array in this world.