The Australian government has decided that the country's best interests are served by a National Broadband Plan. See the news in Telegeography.This shows that at least some people believe that it is a good idea to have a plan before you throw money on the street. It helps to know what the end result should be so that you can properly gauge what the applicants are saying they will do against what really needs to be done. That way you can also tell if they can actually pull it off, or if it is just more of the same that got you in to the current situation in the first place.
Two other interesting points
1. They have a $30+ Billion plan (not $7.2 Billion)
2. They have a 100% coverage goal for the plan with 90% of the homes getting 100Mbps and 12Mbps for the other 10%. (that's broadband speed!)
Australia is 7.6 Million SQ KM and has a population of 21 Million
The US is 9.1 Million SQ KM and has a population of 303 Million
Coverage being what it is the total land mass is only about 1.5 Million SQ KM different. The real issue is in the FTTH cost difference of the 280+ Million people. It should not be in the long haul that wraps the land though.
Bottom line - how does $7.2 Billion cover US?
Two other interesting points
1. They have a $30+ Billion plan (not $7.2 Billion)
2. They have a 100% coverage goal for the plan with 90% of the homes getting 100Mbps and 12Mbps for the other 10%. (that's broadband speed!)
Australia is 7.6 Million SQ KM and has a population of 21 Million
The US is 9.1 Million SQ KM and has a population of 303 Million
Coverage being what it is the total land mass is only about 1.5 Million SQ KM different. The real issue is in the FTTH cost difference of the 280+ Million people. It should not be in the long haul that wraps the land though.
Bottom line - how does $7.2 Billion cover US?
Technorati
Del.icio.us
Slashdot
Digg
twitter
