Jasper Bryant-Greene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think the NZ ISPs don't percieve a great demand for fibre to the home
just yet, so pricing-wise it's still directed strictly at businesses.
They may be right, but I suspect they will become less so over time.
Steve Holdoway wrote:
Why should they? The ADSL infrastucture that's already in place is capable of
delivering in excess of 10mbit in at least one direction, can't remember
off-hand what the adsl2 specs are, but no way can the installation of fibre to
the door be cost-effective in that environment.
ADSL2+ (which is the technology that Telecom has been pushing into
exchanges) will do 24mbit on a short run. In AU the piratical speed is
proving to be no more than 20mbit on a short run and more like 12mbit.
If you're going to make a case for fibre, then you need to be promoting Gbit bandwidths to make any sensible difference.
Agreed. You also talk about latency.
>And with the current international bandwidth availability, that's
pointless without using it for every service you possibly can. OK,
you're future-proofing, but are you 20 years ahead of your time?
Hog wash.
Industry experience in New Zealand (and overseas) shows that high
capacity BB tips the traffic triangle up side down.
80% of your traffic becomes local, 15% national and 5% international.
And I must be honest, I don't perceive a great demand for fibre to the home either.
I agree. Fibre is only needed to local nodes, say within 90 meters of
your home. From there you can use DSL/ethernet technology to get
500mbit into the home.
DRM is slowing that down ):
DRM is going to have less and less to do with anything. EMI are already
pulling out. Artists are using the net to distribute their own media.
People will eventually choose content based on it not being DRM controlled.
Cheers Don
