Fibre optic broadband to last 50 years, says Budde

94

news While one might expect some new wonder technology to be on the horizon, fibre optic broadband has nothing that is likely to replace it for as much as 50 years, telecoms expert Paul Budde has said.

Writing on his blog, buddeblog.com, the industry researcher and consultant pointed out that fibre-to-the-home (FTTH) networks were already being discussed back in the ’70s and ’80s, when the tech was seen as the next level of telecoms infrastructure needed for services like interactive and pay TV.

While a few early residential fibre pilot networks were built in that era, the timing was wrong, he said. And while the FTTH vision of that period was “valid”, it wasn’t until more recently that the vision finally started to be realised.

Now, some 40 years on, Budde has taken a look at what could lie in store in another 40 years’ time.

“And, no, there is nothing revolutionary on the horizon in relation to fixed telecoms infrastructure – nothing similar to, for example, the total replacement of copper and HFC by fibre networks,” said Budde.

While wireless will see more developments, he said, there will always be “the capacity problem” regarding spectrum, meaning it is “not suitable for mass-market high-quality video”.

Instead, it will be improvements in fibre technology, rather than a totally new technology, that is likely to drive change, Budde predicted.

“Change will be driven by developments in new types of fibre that are more cost-effective, he suggested.

This trend can already be seen in fibre optic networks that were installed 20 years ago, and are no longer economical to maintain.

Some submarine cables are now having to deal with the same issue, he points out. Yet 20-plus-year-old 2.5Gbit/s networks can these days be upgraded to 40Gbit/s or even as much 100+Gbit/s.

So what might lie ahead?

Budde quoted from Wikipedia on one new fibre technology with potential called photonic-crystal fibre:

“Photonic-crystal fibre (PCF) is a new class of optical fibre based on the properties of photonic crystals. Because of its ability to confine light in hollow cores or with confinement characteristics not possible in conventional optical fibre, PCF is now finding applications in fibre-optic communications, fibre lasers, nonlinear devices, high-power transmission, highly sensitive gas sensors, and other areas.”

PCF also exists in other specific types of categories allowing for different applications.

These new fibre optic cable technologies will remain viable “for at least the next 50 years”, Budde predicted, “bringing us to a timeframe equal to the one when we first started to talk about a commercial FTTH vision”.

On the other hand, while it is hard to make predictions about technologies that have not yet been imagined, “the next level could quite possibly be based on neurological-based communication based on our brainwaves”, he said.

“Who knows?” Budde concluded.

Image credit: Paul Budde

94 COMMENTS

    • Why do you need a boat? The canoes we’ve used for the past 50 years are enough, we dont need to change them.

      • Because they keep putting the cabinets in area’s they’ll be submerged ;)

        Those things are too big for canoe’s! (Canoe’s will probably work for the lil extenders … I mean we have to think of the huntsman’s after all)!

  1. Meanwhile their revamped ADSL and HFC network will last less than a Liberal term. Yet they blew all the money. People will be stuck on their faulty crap for decades. Sabotage.

  2. I am still waiting for the Royal Commission into the NBN and Bank Sector….
    We all know it will never happen…
    Rich and Powerful protecting each other, as the poor fight amongst themselves for scraps.
    Hello is this 1700 England again?

    • To quote another splendid raconteur, Gore Vidal,

      “All along, I think the most useful and creative people in the United States, from the very beginning, have been the ones that say, ‘No!’ And many have begun to say, ‘No!’ again. And, when the chorus gets loud enough, the people will march.”

      You can swap the US for Australia, but give it time, that’s what it’s coming to.

    • If there was to be a Royal Commission – what should the terms of reference be?

      Am curious – I see a lot of people on forums calling for one but not much definition of what it should look like.

      • Indeed a federal anti corruption agency would likely be a better option.

        The only way I see a RC working is after the fact when its all gone to pot to try and catch the buggers that played with monopoly money. (otherwise like you say the ‘terms’ are a little hard to nail down to anything substantial).

  3. I congratulate Australia on having politicians who argue that 5 + 7 = 567 at immense expense to taxpayers.

    I am sad that Delimiter is ending. Because I would have offered to write an article on the future of music production and how it needs fibre internet. For instance over the next 3 to 5 years you will have virtual reality musical instruments. Think Guitar Hero but without the physical guitar and 100 times better. You will be able to play a virtual instrument with anyone through the internet. This will have immense benefits. One is that the days of dropping a 3000 dollar brass flute will be over. Instead everyone at a high school will have ANY instrument at their fingertips in a visualised form. If I can think of that then somebody is already working on it.

    Meanwhile we are a tech backwater like this:
    https://www.geeks2u.com.au/geekspeak/could-downloading-videos-solve-netflixs-speed-problems/?utm_source=geekspeak&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=article

    • There is no doubt that FIBRE is needed. I already use Steinbergs Cubase Connect Pro – which uses the internet to allow a studio to connect with other studios / performers anywhere in the world. At the moment this is extremely limiting for multi-track recording and node-lottery on FTTN will be a huge hindrance to the adoption of this type of technology.

  4. With a little bit of luck, NBNCo might have just about completed the FTTN rollout in Tasmania by then

  5. So whilst older generation fibre is discarded under 20 years (non commercial); Budde claims next generation fibre will have a 50 year lifetime. Strangely we were told the same in the 90s;-)

    Let look at another 90s tech, that unlike retired fibre remains commerical:
    “Operators are discovering that in situations where companies and homes already installed cable, it is more economical to upgrade cable services than make the switch to fibre, which gives DOCSIS 3.1 a definite advantage in the market.”
    http://www.cso.com.au/media-releases/27756/aus-and-nz-unite-on-docsis-for-fast-iptv/

    Technology continues its advance. Fibre has many advantages; cost and speed to deploy aren’t two of them. Infrastructure reuse saving billions, speeds matching customer demand and capturing majority of revenue.

    NBNCo’s 1.05mbps / customer provisioned TC-4 CVC exposing Conroy’s policy folly and the waste extending fibre all the way to homes.

    Further Ovum reports “By leveraging the existing DOCSIS 3.0 HFC infrastructure, NBN will facilitate the acceleration of its rollout, minimise capital works, minimise truck rolls, appointments, and need for entry into premises, and so deliver world-leading broadband services while managing cost of deployment. With the development road map for HFC, NBN and Australia’s broadband uses can have great confidence that as broadband requirements continue to grow, the HFC network will be more than capable of meeting expectations.”
    http://www.zdnet.com/article/nbn-launching-docsis-3-1-for-hfc-network-in-second-half-of-2017/

    Another 3+m NBN premises would be passed today for 1/3rd the cost (less if private sector driven). Fixed line build completed if included FTTB/N. Cheers Rudd/Conroy (“greatest Comms minister”;-)

    • I am a music professional and I could not do what I do with HFC and its congestion. I need low latency and FTTP alone reduces latency to almost zero.

      You have no idea what you are talking about.

      • GPON is more congested than DOCSIS3.1. Both pale into insignificance when transit / CVC / backhaul congestion taken into account.

        You have no idea what you are talking about.

        • “GPON is more congested than DOCSIS3.1”

          Say what??? Please provide some documentation on that as all the tech I have seen say exactly the opposite.

          • And all that article says is that it is cheaper to upgrade HFC to Docsis 3.1 than roll out FTTP…that has nothing to do with the overall TCO (total cost of ownership) and is a spurious argument.

            It is also `12 times more expensive to run than FTTP, won’t last as long, has FAR less upgradability, and dozens of other problems…
            http://tinyurl.com/zx3mnb6

          • BTW, my link was written by one of the largest HFC operators in the US, so it probably isn’t biased against HFC…

          • Dick is just demonstrating his ignorance as usual. Amazing that he claims to be a senior nut counter yet he can’t calculate simple contention ratios!

          • It’s quite simple Chas, the HFC in Australia is already installed, the NBN Co obtained ownership of the infrastructure for the same price Labor had negotiated to have it shut down for BB use.

            Any cost of upgrading the infrastructure for NBN use or later for DOCSIS 3.1 and in fill with FTTN where required is always going to be more cost effective than rolling out brand new FTTP to 4 million residences in brownfield HFC areas.

          • @Reality,

            Chas in this instance, was referring to the article Richard supplied & Richards’ post implying, for others to infer, that upgrading HFC is always a better choice economically than installing multi-gigabit capable FTTP.

            An easy way to destroy this argument, is via a simple example scenario; What if there was no Telstra HFC available to nbn in Australia.

            Would Optus HFC be more economically viable to upgrade & expand, as opposed to installing new multi-gigabit capable FTTP?

            Here are some juicy links:
            [The Australian included for LNP lovers]

            http://www.itnews.com.au/news/nbn-considering-overbuilding-dodgy-800m-optus-cable-412280

            http://www.zdnet.com/article/leaked-nbn-documents-show-optus-hfc-not-fit-for-purpose/

            http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/technology/optus-cable-blow-to-nbn-rollout/news-story/82b8e7efd4324bdd3ef739892281d710?nk=b5bbcce4740737b86eb4edbe4dae5a6b-1469246819

            The links are a simple example of upgrading HFC is not always a better & more economical way to go, than installing new multi-gigabit capable FTTP.

            And as Chas mentioned, don’t forget to include the running & future maintenance costs of these networks.

            Later, RIPP :)

          • Both the Coalition and Labor had no intention of replacing HFC with FTTP, the next upgrade beyond making it suitable for NBN resale is DOCSIS 3.1.

            Replacing DOCSIS 3.1 HFC with FTTP is a maybe in the way distant future and certainly not in this term of Government, let’s revisit the possibility in 2019-2022.

          • @Reality,

            Your replies are not related to what people are writing about;

            Are you trying to distract the conversation to save Richard from further embarressment maybe?

            Later, RIPP.

          • ” the HFC in Australia is already installed”

            Correction, SOME of the HFC is already installed. But it is quite common that it only covers every other block, or does not connect to any businesses on a block that has it in a residence.
            This requires a whole new rollout…and the last estimate I saw was that they needed an additional 30% to cover the holes.
            The alternative would be to put FTTN in between HFC connections, which would create a huge amount of wasted overlap.

            “the NBN Co obtained ownership of the infrastructure for the same price Labor had negotiated to have it shut down for BB use”

            PLUS the additional cost of operations, maintenance, repair, upgrade, and eventual decommissioning…which more than doubles the cost in the long run.

            “Both the Coalition and Labor had no intention of replacing HFC with FTTP”

            Labor never wanted it but got stuck with it after the LNP stuck us with those contracts. That said, they promised to immediately fund a commission to find a way to replace it with FTTP in their first year.

          • ” the HFC in Australia is already installed”

            Only in select city metro suburbs for PayTV in the mid 1990’s. No delivery to public housing buildings. Cherry picked by Telstra and Optus

            I have friends living in Sydney who are still stuck with ADSL because the ADSL2+ deployment was botched and cherry picked. HFC is not available either.

          • @ Reality…

            But “HFC is failed and only good for the possums to run up and birds to perch upon” isn’t it?

            Well that was your argument and your words, a few years ago when trying to deride the need for FTTP, wasn’t it?

            Unbelievable perpetual hypocrisy and/or idiocy.

            You’re welcome

    • @Richard,

      I love the disclaimer at the top of the CSO website page you linked:

      “Media releases are provided as is by companies and have not been edited or checked for accuracy. Any queries should be directed to the company itself.”

      1. Released by companies,(ie. vested interests).
      Looks like CombiTel wrote this piece, see bottom of article in question.

      “CombiTel:
      Specialist IPTV systems integrator focusing on service providers and enterprises.”

      2. Not edited, nor checked for accuracy.

      In the following quote from the article you posted above:

      “Operators are discovering that in situations where companies and homes already installed cable, it is more economical to upgrade cable services than make the switch to fibre, which gives DOCSIS 3.1 a definite advantage in the market.”

      I note you bypassed the facts, as per usual.

      1. Your company must already own & operate the cable.
      2. The cables must already be installed,(active network).
      3. Cables must already be installed from the cable network and INTO PEOPLES HOMES.

      So, once you actually own the network;

      * Additional costs are required to expand the cable network.

      * Additional costs are required to connect the cable network to the premises,(even if premises were/are in the current,(original, unexpanded) cable footprint).

      Such additional costs can make FTTP a better choice.

      But hey, keep spinning & deceiving… It’s what you do.

      Ps. Your current link 404’s on the CSO site… you need to remove the hyphen:

      http://www.cso.com.au/mediareleases/27756/aus-and-nz-unite-on-docsis-for-fast-iptv/

      Later, RIPP.

      • Take the article on its merits; you can discredit it if you like (Rofl). You imagine “bypassed facts” then present conjecture:
        1. NBNCo owns the network
        2. Millions of premises passed, network actively used
        3. Millions connected; local drop in cheaper (less skilled; techs available, less equipment) than fibre

        “Such additional costs can make FTTP a better choice.”

        But don’t. CPP numbers available.

        But hey, keep spinning & deceiving… It’s what you do.

        • @Richard,

          Aren’t you dizzy yet? So much spinning.

          You were implying above, for others to infer, that reuse of HFC would always be the better option than FTTP;

          Along the way you neglected to add, for this to be possibly true, you needed to own the network, not be looking to expand its’ current deployment footprint & additional costs would still be incurred by people that the current cable may have passed, but never connected too before,(but now needs to connect too).

          BTW., Along with spinning your points against mine above, where is the nbn HFC expansion cost to fit in,(since you changed goal posts to be nbn related);

          Stangely you didn’t mention it.

          Ps. CPP too funny…

          PPs. I don’t need to discredit your article link, I do that to you instead ;)

          Later, RIPP.

          • I didn’t imply, nor expect others to infer; stated clearly in paragraph 3 of my original post.

            HFC expansion costs included in CPP, NBNCo has confirmed within budget. NBNCo also in th original post; goal posts not moved.

            Another poseur’s shallow understanding exposed.

          • @Richard,

            Which budget are the figures within.. nbn are currently allowing themselves upto 56 Billion.

            Originally the budget was 29 Billion all up.

            You & your flexible LNP/nbnco figures.. LOL XD

            Ps. Speaking of nbn, they still on track & budget for all Australians to get access to 25Mb/s or higher at their premises before 2017 begins,(ie. 2016 ends)?

            IN MY VOICE,(doubt I’ll get a direct honest reply from Richard, but I’ll reply to their imaginary honest one anyhow):

            “Oh, they’re not? So LNP/nbn, budgets & forecasts are bogus. The reviews also just shams… Thanks for the information” :)

            Later, RIPP.

          • Rizz,

            Which budget are the figures within.. nbn are currently allowing themselves upto 56 Billion.

            Glad you noted that is the ‘up to’ figure, the Labor funding figure was $57B, that’s not the ‘up to’ figure that was the actual figure, the most cost effective responsible funding figure range was chosen by the electorate for the rollout through to 2020.

          • @Deluded-Reality,

            RIPP is not Rizz, as much as you’d like to think there is 1 less person that thinks you’re a trolling dumbass.

            Why was Labors figure 57 Billion? Likely because they sought to be honest & have a proper budget figure, instead of a bogus range;

            If Labor finishing the nbn ultimately came in less expensive than 57 Billion, no-one would complain… except a nupty like you.

            So 56 Billion might just cover the Coalition contracts for FTTN, HFC, Fixed Wireless & Satellite etc. & then a spare billion for the premises that would be changed from FTTN to FTTP.

            Besides, soon enough the Coalition & nbn with their mis-management will be past 56 Billion anyway……….. Or not.

            Who the fuck would invest in nbn with less than a 3% return… Bwahahaha XD

            My bank will give me over 3% easy,(personally).

            So companies with millions to invest will see 3% and less, as a total joke,(like the mtm itself actually is).

            Only way investment money gets to nbn for them to get past the government locked down 29 Billion,(not a penny more) is if there are big kickbacks, side-deals, money under the table & or tax breaks,(pretty much each of these options is government funding nbn but trying to pretend they aren’t).

            Put simply, if Coalition accounting were honest, mtm would be put on budget, meaning the Coalitions nbn WILL BE Taxpayer funded,(unlike a proper Labor alternative nbn).

            Coalition being the best economic managers is like you, Reality, actually having a clue…. It hilarious! XD

            Ps. Reality QUOTE:
            “…the most cost effective responsible funding figure range was chosen by the electorate…”

            The electorate did the Coalitions’ accounting? So did the costings come via a Reachtel survey maybe… LOLOLOLOL :D

            Later, RIPP.

          • @RIPP Devoid is so dumb he cant tell the difference between us all despite the very different posting styles.

          • Hi Derek O :)

            BTW., “…you are not that smart.” quoted from Reality, above, implies he’s still seeing you as Rizz too… lol :D

            @Reality:

            F.T.R.,(For the record) I use heaps of semi-colons.

            I don’t yet use Bold, or Italics,(not looked into the code for them yet) & I often add in a “Ps.”.

            Ps. Buy a vowel dude, get a clue ;)

            Later, RIPP.

          • @RIPP I dont comment as much as I used to (got a much busier Job), but Devoid used to accuse quite a few of us of being Rizz or HotCakes … for a while there we were all mashing our names together to take the pi$$.

          • @Derek O

            LOL – Nice :D

            When I actually started posting here a little while back, from before, just reading posts, I knew who the trolls were;

            So I dropped in a few end post:
            “You’re Welcomes” ..LOL XD

            However I did say I was borrowing the line from Rizz for the lulz, not that I was him.

            Some people aren’t too bright.

            Later, RIPP :)

          • @Derek O & old Snow Crash collated links

            LOL XD

            It’s all fun & games until someone loses an eye… I mean; .. loses Science funding.

            CSIRO & your science bretheren ..hold on a little longer, hoping we’ll get a Liberal party implosion before the Coalition term finishes.

            Then you’ll get some well deserved funding back.

            Later, RIPP :)

          • “So companies with millions to invest will see 3% and less, as a total joke,(like the mtm itself actually is).”

            Correct

            Private investors don’t even want to look at less than 17% ROI

        • 1. “NBNCo owns the network” – but will have to pay exorbitant fees to maintain it, operate it, and eventually dispose of it, not to mention be forced to roll out FTTP anyway as it becomes unusably slow.

          2. “Millions of premises passed, network actively used” – however millions more will need to be rolled out to fill in areas and let businesses have access…all at extremely high cost.

          “local drop in cheaper (less skilled; techs available, less equipment) than fibre” – but this does not account for the new skinny fibre with universal connectors. The cost for those drops are cheaper than HFC and they require no external nodes or power amplifiers like HFC does.
          Also, HFC lines require power which is a different and more complex scenario for rollout than FTTP. In the end, FTTP is going to be cheaper to rollout on a drop by drop comparison…

    • @Richard,

      RICHARD QUOTE:
      “So whilst older generation fibre is discarded under 20 years (non commercial);”

      Way to spin it Richard.

      BUDDE,(actual) QUOTE:

      http://www.buddeblog.com.au/frompaulsdesk/fibre-optic-technologies-for-the-next-50-years/

      “Change will be driven by developments in new types of fibre that are more cost-effective, as we can already see with fibre optic networks that were installed 20 years ago. It is no longer economical to maintain these networks.

      Several submarine cables are having to deal with this. Here we have seen that 20+ year old 2.5Gbit/s networks can now be upgraded to 40Gbit/s and even 100+Gbit/s networks.”

      No longer economical to maintain does not mean broken & unusable, it means it’s more cost effective to upgrade them with new fiber than to keep maintaining/patching,(when/if required).

      Fiber isn’t as good at working with Telstra plastic bag style fixes;

      Hence, replace the fiber when it’s old & in need of maintenance, when said maintence would cost more than a fresh fiber install, or just be uneconomical, in comparison to a fresh fiber install.

      Later, RIPP :)

      • Non-commerical does not mean broken & unusable.

        You also appear unaware that many earlier versions of “fibre” (as will be case in the future) are today obsolete. Market has moved on, money wasted.

        • @Richard,

          I own an obsolete PIII 600Mhz computer that I still use regularly.

          Do you understand what obsolete actually means?

          It generally means cheaper to replace than make many upgrade/fixes too.

          In this, my PIII is obsolete; But since it doesn’t require any upgrades/fixes currently & runs all it needs too, I therefore don’t need to throw it away & buy new equipment.

          Hence, fiber that has been laid many years ago may now be technically obsolete & no longer sold, but provided it doesn’t require any expensive upgrades/fixes, it can still be utilised for many years to come.

          Obsolete fiber in the above instance, is therefore still commercially viable & functional, until such time costs,(running, maintenance, upgrades) vs benefits, tilts in the “time to upgrade”,(more cost effective to install new fiber) direction.

          Later, RIPP.

        • “You also appear unaware that many earlier versions of “fibre” (as will be case in the future) are today obsolete”

          Really? And yet the 40 year old fibre cables continue to be upgraded and not replaced, increasing capacity 100 fold. I call BS Richard…

          • BTW, I find it amusing that Richard considers fibre optic cable that is capable of over a Petabit (1,000 Terabits) in broadband speeds to be obsolete…
            And that was several years ago…that same cable is probably capable of more today with the proper transmission.

          • Yet Chas, our friend Richard will argue (and has done so with me many times, in his usual pompous, egotistical, narcissistic way) that copper is NOT obsolete…

            Even when coming from a right wing, former Republican US Presidential candidate, who is close to being a billionaire and is a fellow cultist… L(l)ibertarian… who even mentions the “O” word and is everything our dear friend aspires to, he just can’t accept anything outside of his set in stone blinkers, even when refuted by everyone even his own.

            http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/04/11/copper-wire-technology-whose-time-has-passed.html

          • The US Conservatives (GOP, Republicans & Tea Party) don’t have much in common with Australian conservatives when it comes to the Internet and broadband technologies and it’s applications.

            Take note that Chattanooga in the State of Tennessee are governed by Republicans and the State is regarded as the Home of the Tea Party, and yet they are one of the most advanced smart cities in United States and built by a public energy utility.

            You will find similar politics in several other States (Kansas, Texas) where FTTH fiber is being deployed.

            Go figure. 😎

            It can only happen in Australia

          • That’s true Snowy, our’s are particularly stupid as even the Kiwi Conservatives support FTTP.

    • Sorry Richard your comment is invalid as you linked an article that shows speed you your self has claimed we don’t need

      • Where? When? As usual you’ve failed to comprehend what was written (universal 12mbps with low contention; options for higher demand users) and the technologies themselves (speeds, contention and node splitting).

        Alex and JK; the kings of shallow understanding. 8th year and still not even the basics (more joining above).

        • @ Richard

          Just like the lap dog alain has done here at this article too… poor burnt, sorry Richard (and the world’s largest, now damaged, E G O of his…lol) on the back of his completely failed MTM and failed cult “Greenspan-esque” theories… is compelled to mention me, even when I’m not involved in any of the fucking correspondences…

          Deliciously, PRICELESS, to know my “factual expose`s” of your partial, cherry-picked, mixed with lies and blinded cult idiocy, is hitting the right nerve ;)

          Anyway Dick… how about (without having to mention RFP, FTTP, Quigley or Conroy)… explain how “YOUR” MTM plan, has managed (or rather mismanaged ;) to blow out from fully costed to all by 2016, to as much as $70B (according to our former Treasurer) and won’t be available to all Aussies until 2020 (if this can even be believed after YOUR plan has been so completely fucked, so far)…

          GO

          You’re welcome.

      • What shallow understanding Richard like your claim Conroy threat was due the Telstra upgrading the HFC when you have failed to supply anything claiming it lol.

        Failed to supply any reason why HFC is going to be upgraded to 3.1 when it only needs to supply up to 25Mbps which it already does in its current condition.

  6. In 2013 there was an experiment by a research team at the University of Southampton in England. They achieved 73.7 terabits per second over a hollow fiber that contained air to reduce refraction that is the cause of latency delays.

    http://phys.org/news/2013-03-fiber-cable-capable-light-in-vacuum-throughput.html

    However, there is an enormous difference between theory and practice, particularly in regard to public telecommunications networks. We live in a practical world.

    Submarine Cables:
    https://www.telegeography.com/telecom-maps/submarine-cable-map.1.html

    Southern Cross Cable (submarine cable Australia – U.S.A.) is currently augmented with 40Gbps and 100Gbps technology for a lit capacity is 3.6 Tbps with a futire potential of more than 12Tbps
    http://www.southerncrosscables.com/home/network/overviewandmap

    The Square Kilometer Array Telescope (SKA Telescope) signal transport and network backbone has a data transmission rate of approximately 160Gbps from each radio dish to a central processor
    https://www.skatelescope.org/signal-processing/

    Wireless & satellite will never be a standalone data communications technology as it relies on backhaul and fronthaul generally provided by optical fiber backbone. Ever heard of a wireless based communications backbone in a data-center?

    On May 12th 2016 the IEEE P802.3cd Task Force started working to define next generation two-lane 100 Gbps PHY.

    There are plenty of 100GbE network interface cards, routers and switches available (e.g. Juniper, Alcatel-Lucent, Cisco). There are also several optical fiber network interface cards and optical fiber cables available to connect your computer directly onto the fiber.

    Unlike the race to 10Gbps, which was driven to address the Internet growing pains of the 1990’s, interest in 100Gbps technology was driven by economic factors. i.e. to reduce the number of optical wavelengths to lit new fiber; to utilize bandwidth more effectively than 10Gbps technology; to provide a cheaper wholesale, Internet peering and data center interconnect; to skip the expensive 40Gbps technology and move directly from 10Gbps to 100Gbps.

    The physical optical fiber cable that is deployed for FTTH networks is capable of carrying data at multiple Terabits Per Second bit rate and has a life of more than 100 years.

  7. “The physical optical fiber cable that is deployed for FTTH networks…has a life of more than 100 years.”

    Classic;-)

    • “The physical optical fiber cable that is deployed for FTTH networks is capable of carrying data at multiple Terabits Per Second bit rate and has a life of more than 100 years.”

      Probably true…the manufacturer is claiming 60 years, but copper only had a claimed lifespan of 20 years and it has lasted 60 years.

      • To claim the 60 year half life, the optical fiber was subjected to extreme tests that it probably would never experience while in commercial use…… unless there was some sort of “apocalypse”!

      • China hasn’t even started getting rich yet and already this country is weeping for its children… wait: no it’s not! The Boomers are still congratulating themselves for every con-job they pulled on their kids kids kids kids kids!

        * Who was Johnny Howard again? Imagine Helen Coonan didn’t get shown the door? Remember that line about opening the vein? Classic Right Wing con-artists not even blinking in the face of pure greed inspired shenannigans for the foreign investor! (Let us just mine rocks forever: go the clever country!)

  8. Alternate Title:
    Fibre Optic Broadband might arrive in 50 years, says Turnbull
    .. after all 25mbps and a fraction as upload is all Australia needs, and perhaps not even then … all technological innovative startups will have moved across to New Zealand. Perhaps the rest of us too…
    Can the last person to leave, turn off the lights and shut down the 486 in Turnbull’s office. Does anyone really need more than Windows 3.11 on a computer?

    • “all technological innovative startups will have moved across to New Zealand.”

      I moved to the U.S. in 2005 and did a startup. Here in San Francisco East Bay Area alone there are about 12,000 ex-Australian ICT workers and about 60 companies started by Australians.

      We are not coming home!

      • 12,000 ex-Australian ICT workers and about 60 companies started by Australians.

        Which 60 companies?

          • @Reality,

            Stop playing games.. he never said 60 Australian companies.

            SNOW CRASH QUOTE:

            “Here in San Francisco East Bay Area alone there are about 12,000 ex-Australian ICT workers and about 60 companies started by Australians.”

            He said, as quoted; About 60 companies, STARTED by Australians.

            If you leave Australia & look for it to be perminent, why in hell would you make the company Australian, so tax goes to the Australian government & funding to start the company in a foreign land,(not Australia) becomes much more difficult to source.

            But I’m sure you understood this, you’re just being your usual obtuse trolling self.

            Later, RIPP.

          • RIPP

            I made it perfectly clear U.S. venture capitalists rarely provide finance to Australian registered startups. They are very specific about registering a startup in the U.S!

            There are various immigration laws and citizenship requirements.

            Everyone I know bring their families to join them once business has been established. That includes sending their kids to school etc etc.

          • Hi Snow Crash,

            You either accidentally replied to Reality with my nickname;

            Or you mis-read my post where I was in effect backing you up.

            ie. Australians going to live in the U.S.A. for example, get funding more readily & easily if the companies they startup are U.S.A. listed,(non-Aussie).

            Which is in-effect, what you wrote in regards to your initial venture capitalists post, but which Reality didn’t comprehend, or sought to ignore, with their reply to your post with: “Oh are they.”

            If you could correct your above post, with a reply below, I would be most appreciative :)

            Later, RIPP.

          • “You either accidentally replied to Reality with my nickname;”

            No accident because I was addressing you

            “Or you mis-read my post where I was in effect backing you up.”

            Didn’t misread. Yes. You were backing me up

            “Oh are they.”

            A solipsistic introjection

            The Reality (Richard) types usually have a high expectation of what it means to be successful, which is higher than they are able to obtain. They resort to psychopathy, machiavellianism and narcissism.

            “If you could correct your above post, with a reply below, I would be most appreciative :)”

            Done :-)

            Back to The Witcher 3 game
            CU

            SC

          • Don’t worry snow and ripp you really need to supply pictures for the troll to understand

        • “Don’t worry snow and ripp you really need to supply pictures for the troll to understand”

          A Rorschach Test would be interesting LoL

          • Love the dedication “”” snow crash “”” , it was 4:38 AM in San Francisco when you posted that.

            lol

          • Hey Reality. I am often awake at ridiculous times of the morning here in Aus. Does that mean I am Rizz as well?

          • I just love the way alain can’t accept FTTP, err because… but can readily accept and claim, that primarily every one posting here is one person…

            Yes, that makes much more sense *sigh*

            Obviously tells more about his devious thought processes and shenanigans than everyone else’s. Whoops I mean mine ;)

            But hey when one needs to completely contradict previous positions, because he really doesn’t have a leg to stand on…

            Like claiming FTTP must succeed because it’s a monopoly, to FTTP will fail, like HFC failed, because such speeds aren’t wanted.

            Then go onto say ADSL speeds are and will be fine for everyone..

            Then only a few years (and change of government… ahem, cough) later claim HFC is now great – not failed.

            Then laud DOCSIS3.1 because of it’s speeds (even though we won’t need any better than ADSL)

            Sob that he doesn’t want to be forced against his will on to the monopoly (socialist) FTTP NBN… but has never complained about being forced onto MTM.

            Is a stickler and will jump as soon as anyone say MTM will be $56B (sans the UP TO).. but doesn’t have the same obsession to MTM speeds being UP TO…

            …. well it’s understandable that he really only has straw clutching, obsequiousness and stupidity, at his disposal…

          • “But hey when one needs to completely contradict previous positions, because he really doesn’t have a leg to stand on…”

            You’re not kiddin’ Rizz

            LMAO!

          • RIPP

            “That gigabit plan unlimited data for just US $40/month?”

            Yeah… plus S.F. taxes

          • @Snow Crash,

            M0ther-fEcker… You get a nice price like that.. Dang!

            Our prices will probably go up soon enough,.. to cover more copper maintenace, since it’s an nbn cost responsibility now,(nice negotiating Turnbull; Ya mug!) and all them new node boxes to be flooded out this year & the followings.

            Node cabinets,(non-raised up) on riverbanks & low-lying land prone to flooding; Bloody genius.

            Later, RIPP :)

          • RIPP

            Historically, the price of high speed FTTH broadband subscriptions have been dropping the last few years as footprints increase. The telco’s customer base increases as a result. They only have to maintain and run one network topography so the costs are reduced which they pass on to their customers.

            There are several other economic factors which also includes social economic benefits.

  9. 2007: Alcatel-Lucent today announced that scientists in Bell Labs, the company’s research arm, have set a new optical transmission record of more than 100 Petabits per second.kilometer (equivalent to 100 million Gigabits per second.kilometer).

    http://phys.org/news/2009-09-bell-labs-optical-transmission-petabit.html#jCp

    Here are some other speed records achieved over optical fiber and wave division multiplexing (WDM)

    2009: Alcatel-Lucent Effective speed: 15Tbps WDM channels: 155 Per channel speed: 100Gbps Distance: 90 km
    2010: NTT Effective speed: 69.1Tbps WDM channels: 432 Per channel speed: 171Gbps Distance: 240 km
    2011: KIT Effective speed: 26Tbps WDM channels: 1 Per channel speed: 26Tbps Distance: 50 km
    2011: NEC Effective speed: 101Tbps WDM channels: 370 Per channel speed: 273Gbps Distance: 165 km
    2012: NEC, Corning Effective speed: 1.05 Petabit/s WDM channels: 12 core fiber Distance: 52.4 km

Comments are closed.