sbiddle:zCelicaDude: I would stump the funds required for fibre as yes, it adds value to your home...
I have finished networking my whole house with cat6 to every room... and people go thats a good feature that other homes dont have.. and if they have teenagers they go sweet ps3/xbox/pc/laptop will work faster in this house..
So, having fibre installed in your home, for a selling point of view is awesome!
Also, all new houses being built these days (atleast all the houses from 450-700k) have got these Signet ST2000 box's in the garage, which include telephone, tv, networking, power points... so this is where you would stick the OMT, so the post above about expensive installs, isn't a case for new homes/new subdevelopments.
And what about every other house? Retrofitting cabling isn't cheap. This is the fundamental issue with deploying fibre to an existing dwelling. It's not like ADSL where the customer can do a self install.
Structured cabling should be a part of *every* house that's built now. It should be standard in the building code, just like double glazing and insulation.
There is also a key difference between fibre adding value to a home and structured cabling adding value to a home. The simple reality is there are very few residential fibre developments anywhere in the world delivering more than 50Mbps to the household. Why? Because there is no need. Copper is perfectly capable of delivering this now.
That's not to say we shouldn't deploy fibre but you have to remember that the difference isn't necessarily one of speed.
Bang on. I would also argue that 930k homes in NZ with substandard or no insulation is a much bigger problem than whether they can get fibre and cat6 wiring in the walls.
Mind you if there was a programme to tear open the walls and insulate every house, we could put cat6 in at the same time.
Then add a high-quality ONT and Home Router with high power screaming fan (Cisco I'm looking at you!) to gently warm the house and replace those heat pumps....