It was only a matter of years ago when people were thrilled with their 52K dial-up Modems.

You may be satisfied with wireless now but when the number of users increases exponentially, what sort of speeds will you be left with then?

Back to the World-Wide-Wait I guess.

The number of internet-users is irrelevant to the issue of individual bandwidth: all it means is that the more users there are, the more and stronger exchanges are needed (same for wireless). Those exchanges may well use fibre-optic cable between them.

I was just checking: I'm now getting a bandwidth of 6144 kbps on my ADSL line, and according to my ISP, I could get much more if only I bothered to purchase a newer router. This is more than plenty for X-rays and ultrasounds, but perhaps not enough if you also want to watch 3 porn movies at the same time while your children play 3D games. It is even more than enough for seeing your boss's freckles, unless you must insist on High-Definition.

Or if you are into cloud computing, for "deeper and deeper analysis", then it is simple: you only need to import one screen-image and export your keyboard/mouse movements, as all computations can then be done on the remote cloud server (or cluster). A standard ADSL2 line can easily support that. Sharing a whiteboard is not a problem either with ADSL2.

"The faster the computers get, the more information they'll be asked to process"

- Only if the human behind them will request them to do so.

"and the more information you'll be expected to upload and download to and from work"

Wow, thank you... so you wish me to be owing others more and more expectations, endlessly.

I understand that your current connection is slow. If you live in the country, then indeed you deserve better, but there is no need to drag along the city-dwellers as well. People like you may never be satiated, but it does not mean that the rest of us need to punished for it.

The solution for commuting should rather be in smaller regional communities living a simpler lifestyle, requiring less material goods and depending less on capital cities.

The NBN is not about jobs, but all about ENTERTAINMENT, something we definitely need less of, not more!

Like everything else the Red/green/getup/labour/socialist Alliance does. This is at best a rort, designed to be bloated, so that they can try to buy back some of the votes they keep losing with all their other Un Australian, Anti Social policies. Or is another deliberate, premeditated, plan for failure to bankrupt our treasury, cause GFC2 & bring about a "1984" Big Sista, UN NWO.

' you only need to import one screen-image and export your keyboard/mouse movements, as all computations can then be done on the remote cloud server (or cluster). A standard ADSL2 line can easily support that. Sharing a whiteboard is not a problem either with ADSL2.'

Exactly!

"and the more information you'll be expected to upload and download to and from work"

Like what? See above! Have you ever heard of client-server even? Geez. You can work from home on a 256 connection no probs.

PeterGM really doesn't understand the technology.

Secondly, compression algorithms improve all the time.

I cant believe the pro NBN fans keep acting like the NBN is actually the invention of the internet. We have the internet. People aren't prevented from doing anything that is suggested the NBN will now suddenly allow. Except for HDTV and mass online gaming that is. We have fibre now... Where it's NEEDED! Not to grandpas home where he could read his email once a week.

Bosses will NEVER accept people working from home in large numbers. We have had the bandwidth for this for 20 years and nobody does it because bosses will NEVER trust workers.

The culture of the workplace is being seen in the office until 7PM to prove you're a dedicated soulless drone for the company. Bosses want proof you're not really at the beach. That's just human nature and how the world works. Call it the wage slave principle.

As for roads, think of all the transport for everyone's online shopping. It's increasing every year. I wish I'd bought a courier business when the internet started to take off.

But, having said that, do you think anyone in the IT field would reject a free 48billion toy? Imagine the great games and ENTERTAINMENT (Yes Yuyutsu that's what it's all about).

Gotta love a solution looking for a problem.

Yuyutsu,

When it comes to Wireless, individual bandwidth is variable and depends on demand versus available resources.

It can be likened to available water pressure - the more users at one time, the less pressure available for each.

Our roads were also able to cope with the number of cars many years ago but things have changed.

As the number of users in a cell increases, the speed reduces and so does the cell size, leading to increased bit errors and drop-outs. Due the their frequency range 3G mobile cells need to be about 1 kilometre apart to cope with varying demand and small Internet cells will be similar.

Likewise, the total number of possible users in each cell at any time is dependent on the capacity of the backhaul links/fibres back to the Node. Telephony works on the basis that not everybody will be using their phone at the same time but Internet traffic will always be running at high volumes, regardless of how much data is being transmitted. The current network may be adequate for now but needs to be future-proofed.

Wireless will be the same as the CDMA moble phone debacle. How many years did that network last before it was turned off?

Wobbles,

"Our roads were also able to cope with the number of cars many years ago but things have changed."

Exactly. Cars haven't changed that much; Quality of roads hasn't changed that much, but there are more cars.

Did it occur to you that generations over generations of our ancesstors survived and enjoyed their life without phones at all, and without the internet? they also had no cars, but horses were sufficient. This generation has more, but is not happier.

We cannot turn the clock now, it would be impossible, but did it occur to you why?

Simply, because there are more people. Technology is not for creating a better and happier life: technology is for catching up and coping with increased population. It is not a benefit - it is the price we pay for breeding our species irresponsibly.

While we cannot afford to discard technology, the way to happier life must include the decrease of both human population and their material demands per capita. The least we can do is to be content where we are and not ask for more.

This of course does not mean that disadvantaged sectors should not be helped, so if indeed wireless cannot provide the basics for remote-country people, then a different technical solution should be sought, something that will give them also around 10MB/s as in the cities - but that is no reason to tempt city-dwellers as well (93% according to NBN statistics) with even faster technology that will take people yet further into virtual-entertainment land and away from real life and their physical bodies.

Those few professionals and companies which genuinely require more bandwidth for their work, may already aggregate several copper-ADSL lines to obtain the necessary bandwidth, or they could use customized fibre-optic lines from the exchange, but please don't tempt ordinary families with more destructive distractions.