Come on, Malcolm has promised you 1Gbps by 2030, what more could you want?
(Meanwhile, my bro' should be enjoying his 1Gbps early next year, unless
they decide to crush that delivery for political reasons.)

 

From: GregAtGregLowDotCom [mailto:g...@greglow.com] 
Sent: Thursday, 12 December 2013 5:14 PM
To: 'Tony Wright'; 'ozDotNet'
Subject: RE: NBN Petition

 

I love the idea of the country building infrastructure. It's the speed of
public projects here that concerns me. 

 

For example, we've been talking about high-speed rail for how long? China
started planning in the early 1990's and by 2015 looks like they will have
completed 18,000 km of high-speed rail. We're talking about a project
(Brisbane to Melbourne via Sydney and Canberra) of what? About 1700km ? And
first train to run in the 2060's? Clearly we have a different situation to
them but is that really the best we can do? Have it finished in time to
probably made obsolete by some other technology?

 

I've travelled on quite a few high-speed rail systems but it's hard to
imagine that many of them were planned 60 or so years ago.

 

Mind you, it would still beat the Redcliffe rail link in Brisbane. At least
the current QLD govt has let a project that should see it being complete in
2016. Given it was first gazetted in QLD parliament in 1895 (no typo there),
that's been quite a project.

 

Regards,

 

Greg

 

Dr Greg Low

 

1300SQLSQL (1300 775 775) office | +61 419201410 mobile│ +61 3 8676 4913 fax


SQL Down Under | Web:  <http://www.sqldownunder.com/> www.sqldownunder.com

 

From: Tony Wright [mailto:tonyw...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, 12 December 2013 5:01 PM
To: 'ozDotNet'; GregAtGregLowDotCom
Subject: RE: NBN Petition

 

Of course, I'm interested in why they are so interested in building
non-productive infrastructure, such as roads, that we spend, maybe 1 hour a
day on,

 

yet we often spend 8+ hours of our time, many of them productive (for some
of us, anyway), on computers, yet they won't invest in a productive venture.

 

One makes a profit for the country and is in need of an upgrade
(NBN/Internet).

 

The other is generally good enough and throwing more money at it isn't going
to give us much of a return and certainly not foreign money (Roads).

 

From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com <mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com>
[mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Ken Schaefer
Sent: Thursday, 12 December 2013 4:51 PM
To: g...@greglow.com <mailto:g...@greglow.com> ; ozDotNet
Subject: RE: NBN Petition

 

 

 

From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com <mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com>
[mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of GregAtGregLowDotCom
Sent: Thursday, 12 December 2013 4:38 PM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: RE: NBN Petition

 

If you were trying to run a commercial business based on rolling out an NBN,
where would you start? Would it really be the back of Ballarat and Tamworth
or would you roll it out in high-density areas in Sydney/Melbourne that are
already screaming for it? A political or public service might do the former
when they are spending other peoples' money. A business would do the latter.

 

I guess it would depend on a lot of things. I'm not an expert on rolling out
telecoms infrastructure, but I guess I'd need to ensure that I had good
information and processes first, so starting in less complex areas might
make sense. 

 

Secondly, I guess it isn't cheap cabling older apartment blocks in
inner-city Sydney - they were built in the 1920s through 1970s, and probably
have no Ethernet cabling in the building. The cost of retrofitting these
buildings even just for HFC has meant that the majority aren't connected. 

 

If I was also mandated to cover everyone in the country, then I'd be
covering all the new greenfields sites, so that they aren't reworked.

 

>From what I understand, it isn't just sites in Tamworth that are being
covered, but some in metropolitan areas as well. 

 

I guess, if this was a commercial operation, it would be done differently.
But I don't know the whole picture (and I doubt you do either). And as I
said before, we may have to accept some compromises. If each one of us had
our own caveats on providing our support for this project based  on
implementation details, nothing would be done. You're insisting on more
commercial savvy, and the next person will insist that the priority should
be those people who don't have access to any comparable technology (i.e. all
those on RIMs and pair-gain and whatnot that can't get ADSL2/ADSL today)

 

Cheers

Ken

 

 

Reply via email to