Lightning Broadband - A Competitor to the NBN

[SammoFS]

Lightning Broadband is a small company in Victoria servicing a small cafe already with ultra fast speeds, For residential you can get 100/100 Where the NBN is only 100/40 so They give you an extra 60mbps on upload. + Unlimited data https://www.lightningbroadband.com.au/residential/

 

For "Developer + Body Corporate" You can get 200/200, You will have to Enquire for this. + Unlimited Data https://www.lightningbroadband.com.au/developer-body-corporate/

 

And last of all, For "Commercial" you can get 1000/100 Which comes with Unlimited Data, But you will have to Enquire https://www.lightningbroadband.com.au/commercial/

 

In my opinion I think this is good but it may end up costing you a bit, the 100/100 plan is about $120 per month. Whenever I get the NBN I will probably just go with 100/40 with MyRepublic :/.

 

There have been some happiness but some disappointment as well. here are some results

 

Good: (100/100 Plan)

 

Bad: (50/50, 50/25 plan)

 

[Mikpwn]

Aussie here also, i think at the moment for the best consistent speeds you want to go with TPG FTTB. Its 100/40 and there is barely any congestion at all and everything is owned by them rather than people using dark fibre or leasing out lines from other companies. Not to mention its dirt cheap at $60 a month!

[SammoFS]

Just now, Mikpwn said:

Aussie here also, i think at the moment for the best consistent speeds you want to go with TPG FTTB. Its 100/40 and there is barely any congestion at all and everything is owned by them rather than people using dark fibre or leasing out lines from other companies. Not to mention its dirt cheap at $60 a month!

Fibre to the BUILDING. it's not for homes

[TrigrH]

Quote

Easy installation

Installation is a quick and easy process.

– Our team will install a small microwave receiver on your home’s antenna mast or on a small mast we can supply* if required.

– A cable will then be run from the receiver to a wall plate installed in a convenient location in your home for connection to your WLAN compatible router (we can provide one *) or direct to your PC.

– That’s it – then you’ll be ready to hit the web at breakneck speeds!

I'd rather use FTTN than microwave.

[snortings]

That lightning broadband, I would assume that it's only if you have FTTP? Which is only a small majority, we're supposed to be getting FTTN on 5th of May, being 727m from the node.. not gonna get the best of speeds.

[SammoFS]

1 minute ago, snortings said:

That lightning broadband, I would assume that it's only if you have FTTP? Which is only a small majority, we're supposed to be getting FTTN on 5th of May, being 727m from the node.. not gonna get the best of speeds.

all hfc users are apparently getting FTTC. So i guess that includes me. I know there is a telstra thing in the ground outside my house

[snortings]

7 minutes ago, Rika Shiguma said:

all hfc users are apparently getting FTTC. So i guess that includes me. I know there is a telstra thing in the ground outside my house

Yeah they are, but I doubt that they will come back and fix up the people on FTTN. Even if so, it's just another waste of money to fix up their mistakes cause they'll be ripping out the pre-existing technology. Liberal have really stuffed everything up, should've just stayed with Labor's plan of FTTP.

[SammoFS]

1 minute ago, snortings said:

Yeah they are, but I doubt that they will come back and fix up the people on FTTN. Even if so, it's just another waste of money to fix up their mistakes cause they'll be ripping out the pre-existing technology. Liberal have really stuffed everything up, should've just stayed with Labor's plan of FTTP.

While I do agree with you, Apparently FTTC can be upgraded with G.fast/XG.FAST

[TrigrH]

18 minutes ago, snortings said:

That lightning broadband, I would assume that it's only if you have FTTP? Which is only a small majority, we're supposed to be getting FTTN on 5th of May, being 727m from the node.. not gonna get the best of speeds.

its microwave

[SammoFS]

Just now, TrigrH said:

its microwave

ITS WIIIIIIILD

[TechGod]

I feel so glad that NZ handled this right. We have 5 cities with gigabit and more and more homes continue to get connected 

[snortings]

3 hours ago, TechGod said:

I feel so glad that NZ handled this right. We have 5 cities with gigabit and more and more homes continue to get connected 

editting hold on

[snortings]

3 hours ago, TechGod said:

I feel so glad that NZ handled this right. We have 5 cities with gigabit and more and more homes continue to get connected 

While that's good and all, when you look at the stats it's a bit of a different story.

 

New Zealand has a population density of around 15 people per square kilometer whilst Australia has 2.91 people per square kilometer. New Zealand has made the right choice, but with Australia serving so many people that are vastly spread out.. it's a bit hard to achieve.

 

Though I still think they should've stuck with Labor's plan of FTTP.

[Droidbot]

4 hours ago, TrigrH said:

its microwave

like Apple Wave? heh, that was good. (if you don't know, the 'IOS 9 gives your phone the ability to charge in the microwave' thing)

 

but seriously, I just want fast internet

I don't give a F L Y I N G 

F U C K 

how I get it, I just want it. And not Cable. Cable only allows me to put my router downstairs when everything's upstairs and the line is dreadful

[JAKEBAB]

7 hours ago, snortings said:

That lightning broadband, I would assume that it's only if you have FTTP? Which is only a small majority, we're supposed to be getting FTTN on 5th of May, being 727m from the node.. not gonna get the best of speeds.

Nope nothing to do with NBN or FTTP it's using "wireless".

[mynameisjuan]

13 minutes ago, JAKEBAB said:

Nope nothing to do with NBN or FTTP it's using "wireless".

Its fixed wireless which is actually very stable.

 

We use them in some locations. Take everything bad about consumer grade wireless and throw it out the window and then you have fixed wireless. <3ms response times with bandwidth up to 1.6gbps on some platforms and can reach ~10 miles reliably depending on terrain. Big emphasis on depending on terrain. 

[JAKEBAB]

3 hours ago, mynameisjuan said:

Its fixed wireless which is actually very stable.

 

We use them in some locations. Take everything bad about consumer grade wireless and throw it out the window and then you have fixed wireless. <3ms response times with bandwidth up to 1.6gbps on some platforms and can reach ~10 miles reliably depending on terrain. Big emphasis on depending on terrain. 

Yea i know some guys who have line of site to family/friends who have FTTP and use some ubiquiti? (Cant remember brand) antennas to essentially have the same service, obviously yours is on a much bigger commercial scale though. Id take this over FTTN.

[Belgarathian]

On 3/23/2017 at 1:00 AM, snortings said:

While that's good and all, when you look at the stats it's a bit of a different story.

 

New Zealand has a population density of around 15 people per square kilometer whilst Australia has 2.91 people per square kilometer. New Zealand has made the right choice, but with Australia serving so many people that are vastly spread out.. it's a bit hard to achieve.

 

Though I still think they should've stuck with Labor's plan of FTTP.

Yeah, but buddy... You can't just apply it like a blanket over the country because NZ isn't delivering FTTP to John Doe the farmer on Mt Cook Station (massive sheep farm in the middle of nowhere). They're only delivering FTTP to customers in residential areas, all schools, and all hospitals (I think there is some other stuff too). For everything else, FTTN + VDSL, & wireless 4G solutions. My brother, who's on a dairy farm out of Oamaru (which has FTTP and a population of 3000) gets 50mbps down and 30mbps up on 4G.

 

FTTP is only going to about 85% of the population. http://ufb.org.nz/

 

Australia's population density in residential & metro areas is the same, if not greater than NZ. Auckland (NZ most dense city) has a population density per kilometer of 1,210 people. Sydney on the other hand, has 2,548.

 

Your argument is invalid. http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/graph/15879/city-populations

 

Edit: I mistook FTTC as FTTP, which NZ is running. 

 

 

[SammoFS]

FTTP/FTTC would've been nice.

[snortings]

5 hours ago, Belgarathian said:

Yeah, but buddy... You can't just apply it like a blanket over the country because NZ isn't delivering FTTP to John Doe the farmer on Mt Cook Station (massive sheep farm in the middle of nowhere). They're only delivering FTTP to customers in residential areas, all schools, and all hospitals (I think there is some other stuff too). For everything else, FTTN + VDSL, & wireless 4G solutions. My brother, who's on a dairy farm out of Oamaru (which has FTTP and a population of 3000) gets 50mbps down and 30mbps up on 4G.

 

FTTC is only going to about 85% of the population. http://ufb.org.nz/

 

Australia's population density in residential & metro areas is the same, if not greater than NZ. Auckland (NZ most dense city) has a population density per kilometer of 1,210 people. Sydney on the other hand, has 2,548.

 

Your argument is invalid. http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/graph/15879/city-populations

 

Edit: I mistook FTTC as FTTP, which NZ is running. 

 

 

That's from 2006.. regardless not going to get into an argument here. FTTP is achievable in NZ due to of it being smaller than Australia. Sure it is still achievable in Australia, but it will cost more.

 

 

[mynameisjuan]

17 hours ago, JAKEBAB said:

Yea i know some guys who have line of site to family/friends who have FTTP and use some ubiquiti? (Cant remember brand) antennas to essentially have the same service, obviously yours is on a much bigger commercial scale though. Id take this over FTTN.

Yep we use Ubiquiti points as well. Its is light years better and more stable than FTTN. I just cant stand copper.

[Grinners]

On 22/03/2017 at 11:00 PM, snortings said:

 

New Zealand has a population density of around 15 people per square kilometer whilst Australia has 2.91 people per square kilometer. New Zealand has made the right choice, but with Australia serving so many people that are vastly spread out.. it's a bit hard to achieve.

 

 

I actually think this is an argument for why it should be FTTP in Australia. The vast majority of distance will be covered by fibre under the NBN. It is only the distances (RELATIVELY small) between the node and the premises that will be copper.

 

Where Australia is different (the gap between nodes), we're having fibre anyway. 

[SammoFS]

1 minute ago, Grinners said:

I actually think this is an argument for why it should be FTTP in Australia. The vast majority of distance will be covered by fibre under the NBN. It is only the distances (RELATIVELY small) between the node and the premises that will be copper.

 

Where Australia is different (the gap between nodes), we're having fibre anyway. 

Are you talking about FTTN?, If so. Your describing 1km of copper as "Small" (they set the max to about 1km)

[Grinners]

10 minutes ago, Rika Shiguma said:

Are you talking about FTTN?, If so. Your describing 1km of copper as "Small" (they set the max to about 1km)

I'd say 1km compared to our width of 4,000km is relatively small,  yes. 

 

My post is in support of FTTP. NZ is not that different to our situation as what makes Aus so big is the vast spans of emptiness which will already be fibre under both NBN types. 

[SammoFS]

1 minute ago, Grinners said:

I'd say 1km compared to our width of 4,000km is relatively small,  yes. 

i didn't know the distance between you and your node was over the f*cking ocean lol