The (maybe) good news here is that the local drab olive box is only about 80 metres down the road.
Mine's across the road and one house down. Still drops 4Mb on that epic journey. ;p
Doesn't mean the copper runs direct to you. Could run up one side of the street then back down your side before going to your premises. This is one of the many problems with FTTN, the copper paths where laid out for ease of installation and to meet voice only requirements, not to bee useful for a data system that suffers major speed reductions with increased length.
In worst cases some people can see a node over the road or just around the corner, but their premises connects to a different node a km away. They lost the node lotto, big time.
We now have the lowest level of welfare dependency of working age Australians in almost 25 years.”
Well derr, if you make it more difficult for people to get welfare then of course welfare dependency drops. Given what the charities are seeing in the increase in demand for their services all the aresholes have done is move the problem, not fix it.
"Would FTTP have been a better product?", I would honestly say I dont know.
It would have to be. Not only is it more reliable and cheaper to run, but allows for far more products to be delivered over it.
The only negatives to FTTP as implemented by NBN that I can think of are the CVC costs (which also affects MTM of course) and the stupid decision of the ACCC to enforce 121 POIs which of course made it harder for smaller RSPs to go national.
Would NBN v1 have run into the same problems as NBN v2? I dont know
Would have had the same issues RE: skilled technicians, primary contractors hogging the profits etc, but definitely wouldn't have had all the issues dealing with node cut over and poor Telstra documentation, degraded copper, copper paths being designed for voice transmission not broadband delivery, access to power for the nodes, the complete mess of trying to integrate so many different technologies in to their systems, etc etc.