Dave Plowman wrote:

Hello Dave

Which is the big single drawback on wired networks -
replacing of damaged wiring. Whether it's buried in
plaster or hanging from poles, it's expensive and time
consuming to fix.
DP| Properly installed domestic wiring is very unlikely to
DP| suffer damage. I *know* some have suffered rodent damage,
DP| but it's pretty rare. Overhead wiring is something else -
DP| but then it's done like that for cheapness, not reliability.

I think there's also an element of "It's always been done that way".
RF is still in its infancy as a high bandwidth solution, imo. What
we've got now /works/, but not as well as it'll work in ten years
time.

DP| Also, wonder why the mobile phone companies link to their
DP| base stations with cables if RF has such advantages?

They do? I understood that they also used microwave links in LOS
situations. I don't recall any major cabling works going on when they
erected one nearby, other than putting in power - though I suppose
they could've run in comms at the same time. It certainly has two
microwave dishes on it, but that might be rented out to someone else.

Here's a question; Why do mobile phone charges cost more
than landline? Surely landlines require much larger
initial investment, but running costs must be fairly
similar?
DP| Supply and demand. The average punter expects to pay more
DP| for mobile running costs. That and the huge sums paid out
DP| for licences, and the ever hopeful introduction of new
DP| 'improved' technology that they pray we'll pay
DP| for.

I think the 3G fiasco isn't going to be repeated, caused serious
financial problems within the sector. The new stuff, well, doesn't
really appeal to me - unless I can use it as alternative high
bandwidth internet access when my main link goes down.
Like the majority, I want my phone to be a phone, not a camera or PDA.
That's useful for some folks, but not for me.

--
Simon Avery, Dartmoor, UK
uk.d-i-y FAQ: http://www.diyfaq.org.uk/