Shadow,
I clearly know a lot more about networks than you. Copper is a bit cheaper to install, but a lot more expensive to maintain. The main problem isn't getting hit by spades, it's corrosion.

Copper does have the advantage that the battery backup can be at the other end, but it's still needed.

I have already acknowledged that FTTB is an adequate solution. Once you're in the building you can use proper digital cables (as many as you need for the capacity) rather than having to rely on modulation to get the digital signals through the phone cables.

What plan are you on that switching to NBN would double your costs?

FTTN may reduce maintenance costs compared with FTTE, but they're still significantly higher than FTTH. FTTN has the extra step (and the significant extra power consumption) of modulating the signals.

My battery 'back up' failed and had to be replaced the other day. No problem with the internet itself, no power outages - just the back up. Seems we need backups for the backups!

Paul, Aidan,

The maintenance of new Fiber networks is less expensive than the maintenance of existing old copper networks but more expensive than new copper networks. You only have to look at buildings and businesses where 99% of new networks within the businesses are copper.

Copper wires in cables are covered by a sheath of PVC which is extremely corrosion resistant happily lasting 50yrs or so with the main problems coming from the connection boxes corroding, which can happen just as easily with FO.

As far as battery back up is concerned, one battery backup in the node that feeds 100 houses is far cheaper than 100 smaller battery units in each of the houses. Also modulation went out with the last of the 56k modems, it's all digital and far faster now, with the digital signal occurring at a higher frequency which can be filtered out for audio.

In short copper and fibre both are modern systems of communication with advantages and disadvantages over the other. The choice depends entirely on the application.

I have 2 copper phone lines, one 45 years old, & the other 26 years old. Both are about 150 metres long. Neither have given a moments trouble in their life, & both are totally adequate for the speeds available, or likely to be available from the NBN in my lifetime.

My previous property had a 600 metre long copper phone line underground, now 60 years old, & still working perfectly.

As with much the idiot did, we will be paying for this K Rudd stuff up, long after he is dead & buried. When you get fools involved with technology you get disasters. Hell he still probably thinks CO2 causes global warming.

Dear Ttbn,

«How do you feel about having to pay $2,000 for something that you already have and have paid for?»

To tell the truth, I feel relieved that I can keep my phone at all.

The other day, when I made enquiries about it, the call-centre representative was actually located in South Africa, so when I explained my problem she said: "come to live here, in South Africa we still have copper phones and will continue to have them for at least 10 more years".

So I feel lucky that I don't need to move to South Africa and can get away with keeping my phone for only $2,000. Other people have bigger problems, like health problems that cannot be fixed even for $1,000,000.

Shadow,
Modulation certainly didn't "go out with the last of the 56k modems". Broadband modems are still modems. Modulation on multiple ultrasonic frequency bands is still modulation. And though the digital signal can be filtered out for audio on ADSL, that's not suitable for VDSL - hence the loss of the old phone service even where they're using FTTN.

The reason 99% of new networks within businesses are copper has nothing to do with the maintenance costs. It's mainly convenience. Plus most computers don't have optical ports, so there would be the extra expense of converters each end and it would still be limited by the speed of the metal ports on the computers.

And I ask again: What plan are you on that switching to NBN would double your costs?