579,

Before you open you mouth to change feet, the existing NBN plan is not going to deliver FO to most of the rural communities, planning to use wireless or satellite to 7% of households. I suppose you think it is peoples' right to be close to a fully equipped hospital, supermarket and bank too? Feel like a hypocrite?

The UK is in the process of upgrading its networks using the same fibre to the node system proposed by the coalition. It has provided households with 80Mb/s speed at a tiny fraction of the cost per connection of the NBN. It has also managed this without creating a state owned monopoly, and banning competition such as Labor is planning.

Without actually knowing I presume that NBN will take fibre to the
basement of unit blocks and then run cat6 or such to individual flats.
Thats what they do in Korea.
It makes sense but then sense does not always come into it.

579, fi you can't say something sensible, spare the rest of us.

I am not in favour of using radio for any application that can be
served by land line, co-ax, fibre or equivalent.
So radio systems should be last resort stuff.

In the country a protocol like Wimax should be used to serve an area,
say from the edge of town to the area around the next town.
They seem to be relying on a phone type system which may not be the
best solution.

It is like delivering bread and milk, if you live in more remote areas
no one seems to be complaining about that.
For the life of me I just cannot see what applications would need such
high speeds in the reomote locations.

No one has answered my challenge, what medical services would require
100 mbit delivery ?

Too late by miles, The vote was in favor of a national fiber optic system. No idea what Bazz is on about.

579, since when does a vote count in labor land, or have you already forgotten the carbon tax lie.

As for living in the bush, but wanting the mod cons, PAY FOR IT, but nobody in the bush should expect others to foot the bill. That's why one pays peanuts for land, rates etc, because they go without many of the mod cons.

My rates in western downs are less than $500 per year, while in the city I pay $2500 odd, maybe more.

The whole point is this NBN is yet another untested gamble by this government, one we simply can't afford in my view, especially when nobody, even the government knows or can explain IN FULL the details.

You see businesses dont invest in something like this without the detail, and this is why labor are so bad and have wasted so much in such a short time, they simply don't know.

Now while not knowing is not a crime, going ahead without knowing is a crime on tax payers rights and money.

I say again, if business, or any sector for that matter wants super fast Internet, then pay for it.

579,

Butcher is right, 38% voted for the party with the NBN, and 95% voted for the parties with no carbon tax.

No one voted for a government legislated monopoly.

579 said;
No idea what Bazz is on about.

When the discussion gets a bit technical, just sit back and learn as
making facetious comments is pointless and makes you look silly.

Fibre Optic cable is the Rolls Royce solution that is the ultimate if
it can be afforded. The problem is that to feed it everywhere is very
expensive. The alternatve fibre to the street node is a lot cheaper
requires no changes in the premises, gives fast enough service, better
than what we have now with adsl2. It will mean that more people will
retain their landline and with less dependance on wireless.