4 ms·

I am barely able to get a 20mb ADSL2 connection here in Australia, let alone 100mb. I know I won't live to see even a 1gb connection speed becoming available in

I am barely able to get a 20mb ADSL2 connection here in Australia, let alone 100mb. I know I won't live to see even a 1gb connection speed becoming available in Australia in my lifetime. Lab conditions and real world conditions are two different things. You can have a fast connection, but if the bandwidth isn't there to meet the demand, then you just end up with a fast link to the exchange and then from there, it's plain old slow internet.

colechristensen 10y ago
This is all about core networks, the comparison to residential surface is just bad journalism. It seems, reading between the lines, that they were able to make 10x bandwidth improvements over existing fiber with fancy new physical layer encoding (QAM with some statistical magic) And it's not in a lab, they're experiments between major German cities.
- visarga 10y ago
  If it means replacing much of the current fiber optic equipment it's not going to be popular soon.
  - amazon_not 10y ago
    Equipment gets replaced all the time. Obviously there is a diffusion curve. It's not only absolute costs that matter, costs per bit or bit mile matter too. Demand, and it's economics, determine how popular it will become and how soon. One thing is undeniable tho. Bandwidth demand is steadily growing and there isn't a clear end in sight. And where there is demand there is progress.
  - snarfy 10y ago
    If it's between upgrading equipment and adding more lines I think it will be a very popular option.
  - colechristensen 10y ago
    This is ridiculous. Last-mile operators don't care very much about speed, but core network operators definitely do because performance is money. Replacing fiber optic equipment is damn near a trivial technical operation and business decision.
    - rasz_pl 10y ago
      Not if you bought enough politicians and can simply tell them to mandate data rate limits on core network they will pay you to build(op country).
  - kuschku 10y ago
    Why not? Replacing cables is cheap if you built the infrastructure properly. Switching my entire district from ADSL to fiber-to-the-building took a team of a dozen workers only 2 weeks, because all cabling between buildings and all street cabling is in cable tunnels where the cabling can be easily replaced with RC vehicles. That means replacing those cables again in a few decades will be basically free, too. For backbones, the same applies, except there the reward is even higher: They’re all in cable tunnels, where they can easily be replaced.
    - kalleboo 10y ago
      Around here they're on telephone poles - we moved into an apartment in a building that wasn't wired for anything but POTS, so they just sent someone up the phone pole to pull a fiber cable straight into our 3rd-floor apartment.
    - amazon_not 10y ago
      > That means replacing those cables again in a few decades will be basically free, too. I think you and me have a different definition of free. There are still substantial costs in both labor and materials to replace the outside plant, even if there is existing ducting in place with free space.
      - kuschku 10y ago
        Almost all of the costs of replacing the cabling in the US today is digging a trench, or getting access to privately owned telephone poles. As evidenced by Google Fiber’s struggles. If that cost is eliminated, replacing fiber outside is as cheap as replacing it inside a datacenter.
        amazon_not 10y ago
        > Almost all of the costs of replacing the cabling in the US today is digging a trench, or getting access to privately owned telephone poles. Firstly, if you have existing ducts there is no need for trenching. Secondly, a lot of trencing is replaced by directional boring and, where possible, by microtrenching or plowing. Thirdly, gaining access to poles isn't usually the problem. What takes time and money is to get them into such a state that new cable can be installed. Fourthly, your largest cost is always going to be labor, regardless of what you do. Lastly, even ignoring all the other costs there is still equipment and materials, which will account for at least a fifth of the project costs. So in summary, no almost all the cost is not in the line items you specify. A lot of money is going to get spent no matter what when you replace your outside plant. > As evidenced by Google Fiber’s struggles. Google is also being actively hampered by competitors that own the poles they need access to. > If that cost is eliminated, replacing fiber outside is as cheap as replacing it inside a datacenter. That's a bit optimistic, as the outside plant is far larger than any datacenter, not administered by a signle party nor a controlled environment.
boyter 10y ago
If you voted liberal in the last election then sorry you made your bed, otherwise I sympathise. This if for backbone infrastructure though and I think it's likely you will see gigabit connections in the next 10 years just at an enormous cost to the taxpayer or through 5G or some such.
scurvy 10y ago
Well, you do live in probably the most Internet-hostile part of the world.
- amazon_not 10y ago
  I can think of a few more hostile places. Cuba is doing well to qualify, but North Korea is still king of the hill.
z3t4 10y ago
its a community management problem. If only you connect it will be costly, but if a few hundred people come together it will be cheap.
Keyframe 10y ago
Have you lived through 9600bps or 14.4k to 20Mbps?
rasz_pl 10y ago
problems in Australia are entirely of political nature (corruption/collusion). There is absolutely ZERO reason for national fiber backbone to enforce data cap limits and encourage metered plans, but there it is, in Australia. Countries considered an ass of Europe like Romania roll on the floor laughing at you ($15 unmetered 1Gbit home connections).
- amazon_not 10y ago
  I agree with you that the nature of the problem in Australia is political, but not that the main root cause is corruption/collusion. The main problem is that the politicians made promises they cannot keep: cheap fiber to everyone at the same price, at no cost to the state since it will pay back itself. Well, turns out it's not cheap to build out fiber to everyone, costs differ enormously between the city and the bush and there isn't enough revenue coming in to pay for it. Since no politician will ever admit they were wrong, consumer prices can't be raised and the buildout cannot be stopped. Desperate to save money and face, the politicians opted to switch to DSL from fiber, bought up all cable tv companies to substitute CATV for fiber, forbid any competition with the national fiber company and proceeded to squeeze every last penny out of the Internet service providers, since they couldn't touch the consumer prices. While there are zero reasons for data caps and metered plans, the national fiber network is so expensive to use, ISPs have no other option but to use data caps and metering so as not to go out of business immediately. The end result is very poor and very slow service on the national fiber network with customers complaining and wanting to stay on old ADSL connections, which is ironic. Unfortunately they can't since the copper network is being decommissioned, so as not to compete with the national fiber network and to bring in more money to the government owned company.

colechristensen 10y ago

This is all about core networks, the comparison to residential surface is just bad journalism. It seems, reading between the lines, that they were able to make 10x bandwidth improvements over existing fiber with fancy new physical layer encoding (QAM with some statistical magic) And it's not in a lab, they're experiments between major German cities.

visarga 10y ago
If it means replacing much of the current fiber optic equipment it's not going to be popular soon.
- amazon_not 10y ago
  Equipment gets replaced all the time. Obviously there is a diffusion curve. It's not only absolute costs that matter, costs per bit or bit mile matter too. Demand, and it's economics, determine how popular it will become and how soon. One thing is undeniable tho. Bandwidth demand is steadily growing and there isn't a clear end in sight. And where there is demand there is progress.
- snarfy 10y ago
  If it's between upgrading equipment and adding more lines I think it will be a very popular option.
- colechristensen 10y ago
  This is ridiculous. Last-mile operators don't care very much about speed, but core network operators definitely do because performance is money. Replacing fiber optic equipment is damn near a trivial technical operation and business decision.
  - rasz_pl 10y ago
    Not if you bought enough politicians and can simply tell them to mandate data rate limits on core network they will pay you to build(op country).
- kuschku 10y ago
  Why not? Replacing cables is cheap if you built the infrastructure properly. Switching my entire district from ADSL to fiber-to-the-building took a team of a dozen workers only 2 weeks, because all cabling between buildings and all street cabling is in cable tunnels where the cabling can be easily replaced with RC vehicles. That means replacing those cables again in a few decades will be basically free, too. For backbones, the same applies, except there the reward is even higher: They’re all in cable tunnels, where they can easily be replaced.
  - kalleboo 10y ago
    Around here they're on telephone poles - we moved into an apartment in a building that wasn't wired for anything but POTS, so they just sent someone up the phone pole to pull a fiber cable straight into our 3rd-floor apartment.
  - amazon_not 10y ago
    > That means replacing those cables again in a few decades will be basically free, too. I think you and me have a different definition of free. There are still substantial costs in both labor and materials to replace the outside plant, even if there is existing ducting in place with free space.
    - kuschku 10y ago
      Almost all of the costs of replacing the cabling in the US today is digging a trench, or getting access to privately owned telephone poles. As evidenced by Google Fiber’s struggles. If that cost is eliminated, replacing fiber outside is as cheap as replacing it inside a datacenter.
      - amazon_not 10y ago
        > Almost all of the costs of replacing the cabling in the US today is digging a trench, or getting access to privately owned telephone poles. Firstly, if you have existing ducts there is no need for trenching. Secondly, a lot of trencing is replaced by directional boring and, where possible, by microtrenching or plowing. Thirdly, gaining access to poles isn't usually the problem. What takes time and money is to get them into such a state that new cable can be installed. Fourthly, your largest cost is always going to be labor, regardless of what you do. Lastly, even ignoring all the other costs there is still equipment and materials, which will account for at least a fifth of the project costs. So in summary, no almost all the cost is not in the line items you specify. A lot of money is going to get spent no matter what when you replace your outside plant. > As evidenced by Google Fiber’s struggles. Google is also being actively hampered by competitors that own the poles they need access to. > If that cost is eliminated, replacing fiber outside is as cheap as replacing it inside a datacenter. That's a bit optimistic, as the outside plant is far larger than any datacenter, not administered by a signle party nor a controlled environment.

boyter 10y ago

If you voted liberal in the last election then sorry you made your bed, otherwise I sympathise. This if for backbone infrastructure though and I think it's likely you will see gigabit connections in the next 10 years just at an enormous cost to the taxpayer or through 5G or some such.

scurvy 10y ago

Well, you do live in probably the most Internet-hostile part of the world.

amazon_not 10y ago
I can think of a few more hostile places. Cuba is doing well to qualify, but North Korea is still king of the hill.

z3t4 10y ago

its a community management problem. If only you connect it will be costly, but if a few hundred people come together it will be cheap.

Keyframe 10y ago

Have you lived through 9600bps or 14.4k to 20Mbps?

rasz_pl 10y ago

problems in Australia are entirely of political nature (corruption/collusion). There is absolutely ZERO reason for national fiber backbone to enforce data cap limits and encourage metered plans, but there it is, in Australia. Countries considered an ass of Europe like Romania roll on the floor laughing at you ($15 unmetered 1Gbit home connections).

amazon_not 10y ago
I agree with you that the nature of the problem in Australia is political, but not that the main root cause is corruption/collusion. The main problem is that the politicians made promises they cannot keep: cheap fiber to everyone at the same price, at no cost to the state since it will pay back itself. Well, turns out it's not cheap to build out fiber to everyone, costs differ enormously between the city and the bush and there isn't enough revenue coming in to pay for it. Since no politician will ever admit they were wrong, consumer prices can't be raised and the buildout cannot be stopped. Desperate to save money and face, the politicians opted to switch to DSL from fiber, bought up all cable tv companies to substitute CATV for fiber, forbid any competition with the national fiber company and proceeded to squeeze every last penny out of the Internet service providers, since they couldn't touch the consumer prices. While there are zero reasons for data caps and metered plans, the national fiber network is so expensive to use, ISPs have no other option but to use data caps and metering so as not to go out of business immediately. The end result is very poor and very slow service on the national fiber network with customers complaining and wanting to stay on old ADSL connections, which is ironic. Unfortunately they can't since the copper network is being decommissioned, so as not to compete with the national fiber network and to bring in more money to the government owned company.