thekiwikeith:sbiddle:Sideface:
UFB costs more to install than POTS.
Guess which option the developer will prefer?
Why do you think UFB costs more?
Running copper inside a building carries significant cost. Getting Chorus or the LFC onboard in the early stages insures the building is ducted with contributions from both parties. Depending on the size of the building this cost for fibre could be well less than what it will cost to reticulate copper around the building, and will typically be significantly less work.
Now we're getting somewhere. Thanks, sbiddle. You've confirmed my thoughts. So if no copper in the building, which I've been led to believe, why is developer so soy about announcing type of service?
And still, my original question. If UFB not initially in the street then what's involved in hooking interior fibre to POTS in the street?
You can't hook interior copper to fibre. If the building is being pre-fibered it'll be in conjunction with Chorus and UFB will be available in that area. Just because a UFB coverage map doesn't show UFB at street level doesn't mean UFB isn't available there - when a MDU is deployed it contains equipment and splitters in it and (depending on the size) can be hooked up very differently than a SDU.