Admittedly if you don't understand the physical limitations of wireless, it's the obvious conclusion one makes (everything seems to be going wireless, and LTE is FAST!). There is a chance we innovate in this area and work out how to make infinitely scalable wireless... But maybe I'm just being overly optimistic.
Good call. This is one of the reasons why I currently prefer the government in Australia over the opposition. They are rolling out a national FTTH network [0], rather than the opposition which seems to think that wireless broadband is the way to get fast internet into homes.
As an example of the attitude of the opposition (from 2009, but their views are the same as far as I'm aware) [1]:
"What they are proposing is the effective re-nationalisation of the fixed line network in this country ... But it certainly should not please the rest of Australia to have the re-nationalisation of a fixed line network in this way, particularly when there will be some $20 billion at least of taxpayers’ money put at risk in an investment in a particular fixed line technology which many have noted will take another 10 years to roll out. And by then we have no idea what the capacity and possibilities will be with alternative communications technologies—most particularly, of course, mobile and wireless. There is a massive flight from fixed line to mobile and wireless broadband going on right now. What will it be like in 10 years time when this thing is finally built? I suspect this will be one of the all-time great white elephants this country has seen."
It's already replaced the "last few feet" of most Internet connections already, though!
Fiber solves "the last mile", but wireless is handy that last little bit of the way. I think that today's "wired to the home, wireless devices" will remain the most common option.
Yes but replacing the last dozen feet at a customer's discretion is a lot different than having the majority of internet users connecting via something like 4G/WiMax
The main problem with this being the limited bandwidth of the "air", correct? In other words, wireless works fine and dandy right now precisely because everybody isn't using it as a cable replacement.
Comments
The "author" lost credibility when he suggested that wireless can replace wired connections as the norm.
Agree!
Admittedly if you don't understand the physical limitations of wireless, it's the obvious conclusion one makes (everything seems to be going wireless, and LTE is FAST!). There is a chance we innovate in this area and work out how to make infinitely scalable wireless... But maybe I'm just being overly optimistic.
Good call. This is one of the reasons why I currently prefer the government in Australia over the opposition. They are rolling out a national FTTH network [0], rather than the opposition which seems to think that wireless broadband is the way to get fast internet into homes.
As an example of the attitude of the opposition (from 2009, but their views are the same as far as I'm aware) [1]:
"What they are proposing is the effective re-nationalisation of the fixed line network in this country ... But it certainly should not please the rest of Australia to have the re-nationalisation of a fixed line network in this way, particularly when there will be some $20 billion at least of taxpayers’ money put at risk in an investment in a particular fixed line technology which many have noted will take another 10 years to roll out. And by then we have no idea what the capacity and possibilities will be with alternative communications technologies—most particularly, of course, mobile and wireless. There is a massive flight from fixed line to mobile and wireless broadband going on right now. What will it be like in 10 years time when this thing is finally built? I suspect this will be one of the all-time great white elephants this country has seen."
[0] - http://nbnco.com.au/
[1] - http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?id=2009-05-12.77.1&...
Yes - I was until 5 weeks ago living in Melbourne, I'm aware of the NBN and Tony Abbott's delusions about technology ;-)
Exactly. Especially the assumption that wireless can fully replace optical fiber shows how little understanding of the physical limits he has.
It's already replaced the "last few feet" of most Internet connections already, though!
Fiber solves "the last mile", but wireless is handy that last little bit of the way. I think that today's "wired to the home, wireless devices" will remain the most common option.
Yes but replacing the last dozen feet at a customer's discretion is a lot different than having the majority of internet users connecting via something like 4G/WiMax
Keep reading. There's yet fun to be had.
Few paragraphs down, he mentions how tape units use magnetic platter technology same as hard drives.
The main problem with this being the limited bandwidth of the "air", correct? In other words, wireless works fine and dandy right now precisely because everybody isn't using it as a cable replacement.
pretty much yes. it's a magnified version of the problem cable (DOCSIS) internet has - the more active peers in your area, the slower it gets.