• Catch issues early, fix them fast – Free trial


    [ad] With GFI Cloud you can easily manage and secure your remote workforce – wherever they are, from wherever you are! The simple IT management platform includes patch management, antivirus, web protection, monitoring and remote control. Get the benefit of endpoint protection with the ease of central management. Start a free trial now.


  • Great articles on other sites
  • RSS Great articles on other sites

  • Analysis, Telecommunications - Written by on Friday, June 15, 2012 12:08 - 235 Comments

    NBN: Sorry Mr Hockey, you’re still wrong

    analysis Yesterday Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey issued an extensive statement attempting to show that comments he had made about 4G mobile broadband having the potential to be “far superior” to the National Broadband Network’s fibre had been taken out of context. Unfortunately, he only succeeded in digging himself a bigger hole.

    Those who have not been following the debate this week can find Delimiter’s original article quoting Hockey’s comments in Tasmania here, and Hockey’s extensive response in full here. In essence, in a radio interview in Tasmania last week, Hockey had argued that 4G had the potential to be “far superior” to the NBN, along with other claims such as the idea that it could cost Australians up to $1,000 to be connected to the NBN, and that some Tasmanians receiving replacement NBN hardware could be left behind in the rollout.

    At the core of Hockey’s new NBN statement yesterday was the assertion that he had been taken out of context.

    He argued that Delimiter’s original article reporting his comments in Tasmania had made a “deliberate distortion” of the word ‘capacity’, falsely associating it with the technical term of bandwidth rather than with other aspects of a broadband connection, such as value for money, convenience, nearness of availability/deployment and “numerous other attributes”. In this sense, Hockey argued, mobile broadband offered mobility, portability and convenience for end users, facets which would, he implied not be available through fixed-line broadband connections such as fibre. He suggested that it was these aspects of mobile broadband which was behind the current huge take-up figures of this style of broadband, compared with the flat growth in subscriber numbers being experienced by fixed broadband.

    Hockey is correct in that mobile broadband does offer a benefit to Australians that fixed broadband does not; mobility. By its very nature, mobile broadband though 3G/4G networks allows users to leave their premises and go wherever they want. Fixed broadband does not offer this feature; by its very nature, it is fixed. We hold these truths to be self-evident.

    However, with respect to other aspects of his argument, Hockey is unfortunately incorrect.

    Firstly, is a well-known fact that mobile broadband offers much worse value for money than fixed broadband. A simple comparison of Telstra’s mobile broadband plans shows that they top out at 15GB of download quota for $79.95 a month. In comparison, Telstra offers 500GB ADSL/HFC cable plans for $89.95 per month; a download quota 33 times the size, for only a small amount more. And Telstra’s fixed broadband plans are far from the cheapest in the market; Dodo, for example, currently offers an ADSL broadband plan with unlimited downloads, for $39.95 a month; literally half that of Telstra’s top-end mobile broadband plan.

    Hockey is correct that mobile broadband options can be more convenient and available to Australian broadband users in 2012; there are some places you can’t get cheaper and more reliable fixed broadband. We refer to these as ‘blackspots’, and readers regularly complain about the issue.

    However, as the NBN rollout progresses and meets its target of 100 percent penetration of Australian premises across the nation, this will increasingly become less true over the next 7-8 years. With almost ubiquitous fibre to the home broadband around Australia and the gaps plugged by wireless and satellite, it would make very little sense for most users to use mobile broadband when they are close to any residential or business; given that they can achieve faster speeds, with greater quota included, at a lower cost, by connecting to their nearest NBN connection instead. Why reach for a hammer, when there’s a high-powered drill already plugged in everywhere you go?

    This does not diminish the case for Australians to take up mobile broadband further; in fact, Australians are indeed currently taking up mobile broadband in record numbers. But, as Telstra chief executive David Thodey and others have repeatedly stated, most who do so are also already buying a fixed broadband connection, and plan to continue to do so. Fixed to mobile substitution is relatively low in Australia; people want their cake and to eat it too. The big game for telcos like Telstra and Optus is in selling bundles of both. My own household pays for both ADSL2+ fixed broadband at home, as well as 3G connections for two smartphones and an iPad, and I do not expect this pattern of consumption to change.

    As Informa telecoms analyst Tony Brown points out in a detailed analysis of Hockey’s comments this week: “True, there may currently be a very small number of households that might prefer a mobile to a fixed broadband connection, but are these households really going to be willing to pay the kind of prices for LTE mobile data services that operators are going to be charging in the future, with high prices for very small data caps and hefty additional usage charges?” I don’t think so.

    Hockey’s other comments are also still inaccurate.

    Citing “hard data” from the US rollout of fibre by Verizon, Hockey suggested that it could cost up to $1,000 for Australians to wire their houses up for the NBN. “This is verified by industry reports of Telstra’s experience in South Brisbane, which suggest it is taking two technicians half a day to finalise the cutover from copper to fibre,” he said.

    Now, this claim with respect to the NBN is a long-running one. It was first raised by The Australian newspaper during the 2010 Federal Election campaign and hinges on the idea that NBN Co is only providing a connection to buildings, while connections (typically Ethernet cable, but usually also an internal Wi-Fi connection) inside those buildings will need to be rolled out at a cost to the building owner or resident. To be honest, as someone who has had Ethernet cable running down their hall for a decade at a cost of $30, I can’t believe that this is still a debate, but let’s go back over it again anyway.

    The rollout of Ethernet cable inside buildings has absolutely nothing to do with the NBN. In fact, many Australian premises already have internal Ethernet cable wired throughout their premises simply to provide internal exit points for the current generation of ADSL and HFC cable broadband connections — and even 3G/4G mobile broadband connections and fibre where it already exists or even the previous generation of expensive corporate solutions such as Frame Relay.

    When we talk about connecting to the NBN, what this really means for the overwhelming majority of Australians is either connecting their existing router to the internal Ethernet port found on NBN Co’s network termination devices inside a premise, or buying a new router that will be able to connect to it, as many existing consumer routers (particularly ADSL routers) won’t have the correct routing functionality or ports. This will come at a cost of between $100 and $300, depending on how high-end you want to go. For most people, their internal wiring won’t change at all; only their router will change, if that.

    If there is a need or a desire to run new internal Ethernet cables within a premise for the NBN, this can be done by running a few Ethernet cables down the hall to rooms where the cables are needed (as many Australians do right now) at a cost of around $30, or by wiring up rooms by running cables through the walls, typically with the help of an electrical contractor, at a cost of a few hundred dollars.

    If you had a large house, and were determined to get Ethernet cable termination points in every room of the house and run through every wall, this cost could conceivably be more. But in that case, would you really be complaining that this cost should be subsidised by the government? I don’t think so. Like the rollout of electrical cables and home plumbing, the deployment of internal Ethernet is a matter for the building owner, not an external provider like NBN Co.

    It’s also worth pointing out that this cost won’t change if the Coalition comes into power and enacts its rival NBN policy. The deployment of internal Ethernet cables into Australian premises will be needed irrespective of whether home broadband is provided by Fibre to the Home, Fibre to the Node, ADSL, HFC cable or even 4G mobile broadband. In this sense, it makes even less sense for Hockey to be complaining about it. Not only is the Shadow Treasurer wrong on this issue; but even if he’s right, his criticism applies equally to the Coalition’s own policy. Or is the Shadow Treasurer suggesting the Coalition will subsidise my next Cat6 rollout and gigabit Ethernet switch? It is surely welcome to.

    Hockey’s third contention is that Tasmanian towns such as Midway Point, Smithton and Scottsdale will be left behind in terms of the NBN because the early rollout of the NBN fibre in those areas was deployed with different network termination units than on the mainland. These devices will be replaced progressively through the end of 2012; but Telstra has stated that it cannot offer a commercial NBN service to customers in these towns until the equipment is replaced.

    This is an easy one. Firstly, residents in these towns can buy 100Mbps NBN broadband from a range of other ISPs right now. iiNet, Internode, Exetel … the list goes on. It’s no big deal that they can’t get Telstra services just yet. What this means is that they are ahead of the rest of Australia in being able to access high-speed broadband. Vastly ahead. These are areas in rural Tasmania able to get 100Mbps fibre broadband.

    I live in urban Sydney and our area isn’t even on the NBN’s three-year rollout plan, while these bushbashers are able to get the NBN right now. For Hockey to suggest that these areas are somehow behind is nothing short of ridiculous; compared with most of Australia, they are overwhelmingly ahead. The replacement hardware which NBN Co is going to provide these poor hard-done-by souls with will eventually unlock speeds up to 1Gbps. At that point, many Australians, including many of those a stone’s throw from the Sydney CBD, will still not have fibre connections at all. In this sense, I find it hard to feel sorry for those living in rural Tasmania.

    Lastly, Hockey claimed that Delimiter’s article falsely implied to that the Coalition backs a wireless-only model of broadband for Australia. This claim is patently false. Delimiter has extensively covered the Coalition’s evolving NBN policy over time, as detailed in articles here, here, here, here, here and here, to pick a handful out of dozens. To suggest that we are unaware that the Coalition’s rival NBN policy contains a mix of technologies is simply ludicrous. Place a call to your Liberal colleague Malcolm Turnbull, Mr Hockey. We suggest that Mr Turnbull is highly aware of this fact. He can barely breathe without us reporting on it.

    In addition, Hockey claimed that the Coalition will meet the objective of fast broadband to Australians “sooner” and “at a less exorbitant cost to taxpayers”.

    Unfortunately, there is little evidence so far for this claim, as the Coalition’s own NBN policy is so far uncosted. As Delimiter has extensively documented, the NBN is not expected to cost the Federal Government money; it is currently expected (based on financial projections) to make a return on its investment in the long term of between 5.3 percent and 8.8 percent on that investment — from $1.93 billion in the worst case to $3.92 billion in the best case.

    In contrast, the Coalition has not yet detailed the costs involved in its own policy, which features a scaled down approach to the NBN, focusing on the likely separation of Telstra, upgrading current HFC cable infrastructure and targeted fibre to the node rollouts, as well as, potentially, satellite and wireless use in rural areas. However, a recent analysis by Citigroup found that the Coalition’s policy would cost $16.7 billion. The Citigroup report didn’t mention what financial return, if any, the Coalition’s proposal was slated to bring in on its own investment.

    What this means is that under the information currently available, the Coalition’s own NBN policy would cost the Government money, while Labor’s NBN policy is slated to make a return on its investment. The Coalition has not yet presented any evidence for why this would not be the case.

    To sum up, while I myself and the Delimiter community highly respect Joe Hockey for his engagement on this important issue, it is also important to recognise that any discussion of Government policy should be based on facts and evidence and not on misleading information and omission. While Shadow Communications Spokesperson Malcolm Turnbull has shown a strong understanding of the nuances of telco policy in recent times, exceeding the understanding of Stephen Conroy before he became Communications Minister, the rest of the Coalition front bench has not; and its statements with respect to the NBN have been characterised by their misleading nature.

    I have one final message for Mr Hockey: I understand that it is difficult for politicians to be across multiple, highly complex policy areas simultaneously. And we appreciate your efforts to do so. In engaging on this issue, you have gone beyond the call of duty and your portfolio. However, it is inappropriate for a Federal MP who is the nation’s current alternative Treasurer to extrapolate complicated matters of national policy from the fact that they use an iPad. Consumer technology is a wonderful thing, but the development of national infrastructure is a fundamentally different matter; and a senior legislator confuses the two at their peril.

    Furthermore, by continuing to perpetuate misleading information about important policy matters, you are contributing to what has in recent years become a steady decline in the quality of the national debate about such matters, and adding to an ongoing trend of bringing Australia’s political class into ill repute. When even entry-level IT professionals in Australia’s technology sector can prove politicians’ comments about telecommunications technology to be inaccurate (and do so daily in Delimiter’s comments section), our great democracy is in trouble indeed.

    submit to reddit

    235 Comments

    You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

    1. looktall
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:21 pm | Permalink |

      However, it is inappropriate for a Federal MP who is the nation’s current alternative Treasurer to extrapolate complicated matters of national policy from the fact that they use an iPad

      especially when that ipad cannot even make use of the much lauded 4G network.

      • Paul
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:17 pm | Permalink |

        ahahaha, oh man the irony.

        • Mico
          Posted 16/06/2012 at 5:25 pm | Permalink |

          Also ironic, I think, that anybody who owns an Apple wifi router (Extreme, Express, Time Capsule) will not need any additional equipment to connect to the NBN. They may even be able to take advantage of speeds of over 100Gbit/s as well. It might not necessarily be the ideal NBN setup, but the point it is it wouldn’t cost you anything extra. The people that may need to spend additional money on the install would be those that had DSL or cable modems that are not compatible with other types of connections.

          • Moth
            Posted 19/06/2012 at 4:32 pm | Permalink |

            I think you mean 100mbits.

            • djos
              Posted 19/06/2012 at 5:02 pm | Permalink |

              Current Apple Routers support full speed routing @ 1Gbps speeds (confirmed by intern ISP testing when I was working for one), at the time (jan this year) there was only one other router (from Asus) that supporting actual Routing speeds of 1Gbps.

              NOTE: Port speeds and Routing speeds are totally different – eg most current routers with 100mbps ports cant route traffic faster than 70mbps.

            • Posted 19/06/2012 at 5:51 pm | Permalink |

              You mean 100Mbits, 100millibits would be crap speed

      • Stephen
        Posted 18/06/2012 at 11:10 am | Permalink |

        especially when that ipad cannot even make use of the much lauded 4G network.

        An iPad can using a 4G wireless device -which most other devices would also have to use and will become more essential with users having multiple devices.

    2. Jean W
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:21 pm | Permalink |

      Well said.

      • Rhys
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:33 pm | Permalink |

        Here here

    3. Sathias
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:24 pm | Permalink |

      Brilliant response Renai. However I noticed a typo :-)

      “Lastly, Hockey claimed that Delimiter’s article false implied to that the Coalition backs a wireless-only model of broadband for Australia”

      Guessing you meant “falsely”?

    4. Paul Krueger
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:25 pm | Permalink |

      His “out of context” corrections did little more then repeat the same inaccuracies. I realize that the opposition has a hard time without the staff that the Gov has to vet their comments, yet I find it hard to believe that they have no access to anyone who could give them advice…

      Perhaps its less about being true, and more about we expect to win Gov no matter how much we suck?

      • bern
        Posted 19/06/2012 at 11:45 pm | Permalink |

        Paul,

        More like, they feel they can say whatever they like (factual or not) to win political points, because they know that about 95% of the media and 99% of the voters will never bother to check whether it’s true, they’ll just accept it at face value.

    5. Monsta
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:26 pm | Permalink |

      Brilliant Renai. I think you summed it up very nicely.

      Joe – I am Liberal by nature, but I vote Labor because of the NBN. Imagine what would have happened if former Federal Governments did not have the foresight to invest in something like the Snowy Mountains Scheme, another piece of ‘expensive’ national infrastructure which has paid for itself over many times in the benefits. The GDP contribution alone from the expanded agriculture sector in the Murray-Darling basin and the MIA especially would have covered the outlay in just a few years.

      The same is true of the NBN. You are going to see tax revenues from new businesses because the NBN is now in place. Existing businesses are going to see simplified and faster IT services, and finally will be able to back up critical data to external locations…. the ‘cloud’ or possibly to new providers here in Australia that will start up because of the demand for the service.

      If you want to get yourself some correct and factual advice, then ask the people that know. I would be happy to sit down with yourself, Tony or Malcolm at any time and talk about the NBN plan and what it could do for this country versus what the Liberal (as yet vapourware) policy will do.

    6. Troden
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:27 pm | Permalink |

      Now thats what i call a SLAM DUNK!

      • Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:08 pm | Permalink |

        Im going to say it before someone else does:

        BAM and the dirt is gone.

        :D

    7. Tom
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:29 pm | Permalink |

      How about we just call 97% of Australian homes ‘Nodes’ and then the Liberals can have their FTTN and Labour can have their FTTH.

      Problem solved.

      • Simon Reidy
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:51 pm | Permalink |

        LOL. Brilliant.

    8. djos
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:29 pm | Permalink |

      Great article Renai!

      @Mister Hockey, here is some light reading for you from the Business Community the LNP claim to Support ahead of Labor:

      Exhibit A/ HP has just spent 119 Million on a new Data Center to provide business both big and small with cloud services: http://db.tt/VWSAYpIi

      “The new Datacenter represents a great investment in the information economy infrastructure in Australia, which is currently rolling out a $40bn National Broadband Network as part of its 2020 digital economy plan to enable rapid change and infrastructure development”

      Exhibit B/ IBM’s report on the future value of the digital economy to Australia http://www.zdnet.com.au/aussie-broadband-to-make-a-trillion-in-2050-339339712.htm

      “We were, quite frankly, a little frustrated by [the NBN debate] and by the lack of vision,” said Andrew Stevens, IBM’s managing director in Australia and New Zealand. “Being amongst those people who were over the horizon, in terms of confidence in the economic impact of this, we thought we should actually do some quantitative and qualitative research to prove our confidence — or, to disprove it.”

      The report, produced for IBM by international strategic forecasting firm IBISWorld, positions high-speed broadband as “the new utility”, comparing it to the utilities that underpinned previous transformations in society — such as the water- and steam-driven mechanical power utilities of early industrialisation, and the electricity grids and telephony systems of later industrialisation.

      Exhibit B/ Cisco’s Data usage Study http://www.bicsi.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=227:cisco-report-forecasts-explosion-in-australian-internet-traffic&catid=1:enews&Itemid=18

      “The fifth annual Cisco Visual Networking Index Forecast (2010-2015), released recently, predicts that IP traffic will reach 22 gigabytes per capita in Australia in 2015, up from 4 gigabytes in 2010.

      The report also forecasts that over the same period, the number of internet users nationally will increase by 43% (from 14 million in 2010 to 20 million by 2015), and that video downloads and streaming will account for 81% of all consumer internet traffic.”

    9. Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:29 pm | Permalink |

      The Member for North Sydney shall resume his seat…

      • Monsta
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:42 pm | Permalink |

        While I will not link the youtube video, I know it off be heart.

      • Tim
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:42 pm | Permalink |

        I call on the member for Wentworth, and may god have mercy on our souls.

    10. Hubert Cumberdale
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:33 pm | Permalink |

      Posted my response in the forum since it was too complicated for a article comment:

      http://delimiter.com.au/forum/national-broadband-network/86241-hockey-tries-conroys-job-fails.html

      :-)

    11. Belinda
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:36 pm | Permalink |

      Well said :)

      Hockey is clearly trying to misrepresent and mislead the people of Australia about the NBN.

      Its a shame that the rest of the media don’t follow Delimiters example of exposing Hockey’s misleading comments for what they are.

    12. Xasrai
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:38 pm | Permalink |

      A well written response outlining all areas where Mr Joe Hockey is in error. I eagerly await his own response containing a detailed apology to Delimiter.

      • Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:40 pm | Permalink |

        “…a detailed apology to Delimiter…”

        Sorry, I find that funny. Never. Going. To happen.

        • Dan
          Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:57 pm | Permalink |

          Never say never.

          But then again I can’t see the (N)oalition ever giving an inch on the NBN. They know it sunk them last time around and to prevent it doing so again are throwing so many stones it makes a protest in Gaza look like a carnival attraction

          • Rhys
            Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:54 pm | Permalink |

            Haha I like that last bit

      • Mark
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:18 pm | Permalink |

        The trouble with the “rest of the media” is, with a few notable exceptions, they don’t understand the subject, so they just publish as fact anything proffered by those who speak the loudest.

        • Kraut
          Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:37 pm | Permalink |

          Well Mark,

          I think the “rest” of the media understand it (the NBN) very well indeed, and it will turn many a business model upside down. They will do whatever it takes to slow it down.

    13. Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:39 pm | Permalink |

      “Firstly, is a well-known fact that mobile broadband offers much worse value for money than fixed broadband”

      Careful, value is a word that has a different meaning to each person. A 2-seater Porche might be a better car than a family wagon, but it has little ‘value’ to a buyer who needs 6 seats.

      ‘Bang-for-Buck’ is probably a better (?) term. It seems to be the one that motoring magazines have adopted.

      • Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:55 pm | Permalink |

        I’d have to agree here Renai.

        I have to come (slightly) to Mr. Hockey’s defence here in the fact that “value” is perceived, not set.

        For example, our family is currently under 1 (quite small) roof at the moment due to building houses and cost savings. My sister, her partner and their kids use the internet connection that we setup when we moved in. Before that they used their work connections. They have a single Laptop, plus 2 iPhones (once I fix hers….), all of which use our BoB from iinet to wirelessly connect. They probably download, between them, perhaps 5Gb of our monthly 200Gb of quota.

        Now, I am certain, that when my sister moves to her newly built house, she will have no CHOICE but fixed line- where she is moving even Telstra have no reception….However, until now she has survived on less than 5Gb a month. She could get this 5Gb a month (if she understood how, which is part of the problem) on a Telstra hotspot, for say $60 a month. Which is technically less than we spend now for internet (if you include line rental and VOIP). They MAY be happy with that for much of what they do (although I suspect not, seeing as she comes yelling at me on Friday and Saturday evenings when I’m at home during peak-hour to complain how slow the net is….) and if it was 4G, they may be happy for a while.

        Is this better “bang for your buck” as DLB_84 puts it, than a fixed line connection? Not on your life. But seeing as she moved around alot and usually doesn’t even bother connecting a phone (although this will change in her next move) the 5Gb from Telstra 4G (if it was available here) may be “perceived” as better value for their lifestyle.

        I believe this is what Mr. Hockey is trying to say, but he fails miserably in saying it. AND it doesn’t take into account that this is rapidly changing in most cases- my sister may be happy with it now, but my 8 year old niece ALREADY uses Grandpa’s computer to play barbie games and her partner’s son already plays Xbox online….I think she’ll find wireless next to useless soon. She has also freely admitted internet will become, as much as she hates it, much more integral in even their lives.

        • seven_tech
          Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:31 pm | Permalink |

          I’d like to rebutt my on reply actually.

          Much of the perceived value currently of wireless broadband for light users involves 2 things:

          1- It never needs to be connected/disconnected

          2- It, as such, is cheaper overall because of high fees FOR these connections.

          BOTH these issues will be addressed by the NBN as ALL homes will have the NBN and the churn process will therefore take hours, not days and likely cost a fraction of current connection fees.

          • Francis Young
            Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:14 pm | Permalink |

            Precisely, seven_tech!

            NBN detractors often argue that “the elderly”, etc., don’t need the NBN. But what about the next occupants of their house? Most houses change owners every five to seven years.

            By deploying an active box to every premises, even dwellings that don’t buy a service can be delivered a service, as for instance a health insurer paying for a medical device to be supplied for a few weeks of post-operative monitoring, where in the past they would have paid $2000 a day for a hospital bed.

            The possibilities are endless once the infrastructure is in place. The killer app of the NBN is universality.

            • Paul Thompson
              Posted 16/06/2012 at 8:36 pm | Permalink |

              I recently bought a house. One of the main things that I looked for was the internet connectivity. I wiped many suburbs from my list of potential sites to buy from, based solely on the quality of the internet services available.

              In the event that we have the Coalition creating it’s frankenstein version of the NBN, then I know a lot of people simply wont buy in areas that are not services by FTTP.

              • Posted 16/06/2012 at 8:46 pm | Permalink |

                Absolutely Paul.

                I know many of my friends who have moved in recent years and myself included, have gone out of their way to find out what the internet capabilities of their street is, with many refusing locations simply because of no or poor internet access.

    14. TechinBris
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:52 pm | Permalink |

      Mr Rabbit said he is no Bill Gates. Mr Hockey isn’t even Bozo the Clown. Both should shut up and resign themselves to the fact that making a constant fool of yourself, on something you know bugger all about, will only achieve Brownie points from their mate Rupert and no one else of any intelligence. All of this anti NBN rhetoric is all about protection of his and Telstra’s investment in Foxtel.
      Australian’s really do need to see the self-interests involved and promptly ignore these Information technology twits. They are experts in Politics and not much else.
      Now we know the boring Dinner Guest to leave off the invitation list, some interesting one’s…………

    15. Chuq
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:56 pm | Permalink |

      As an atheist, let me say… Renai, you’re doing god’s work son.

    16. DenisPC9
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:57 pm | Permalink |

      @monsta

      “…Imagine what would have happened if former Federal Governments did not have the foresight to invest in something like the Snowy Mountains Scheme…”

      From https://digitalcollections.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/41879/1/dp_60.html
      “…..Antipathy and in some cases hostility had been building up around what was becoming seen as an extremely expensive and controversial scheme….” and “…Prime Minister Menzies, having been critical of the hasty implementation of the Scheme …”

      Same mob, same whinging about major Australian infra-structure building. The more things change the more they stay the same.

      • Monsta
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:45 pm | Permalink |

        I was looking for a slightly ironic twist to make my point, I’m glad at least one person found it.

    17. Posted 15/06/2012 at 12:57 pm | Permalink |

      Woah Renai, I think you’re misunderstanding what Hockey is saying in regards to that $1000, because he is actually right on this one.

      That cost, is not the cost of anything internal to the premises, it is the cost involved in the time, labour and equipment, of having tech(s) physically disconnect the ULL and then connect the fiber and install the cabinet and other equipment at the site. This could easily cost $1000 on average per premises but it is included as part of the rollout costs and not placed on the individual customer at the time of installation, ie. the customer pays nothing.

      What Hockey is trying (badly) to say is that in a 4G based NBN the cost of this would not be required as their would be no changing of the last mile connection, so the cost on the rollout of a 4G based NBN would be far less then a fiber based one.

      • Peter
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:28 pm | Permalink |

        “At the moment to connect from your home to the NBN and wire your home and go through the process can cost a $1,000″

        Hockey is definitely misleading as he is talking from an end user perspective

      • Jean W
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:33 pm | Permalink |

        We should refer to Hockey’s exact words:

        “At the moment to connect from your home to the NBN and wire your home and go through the process can cost a $1,000, can cost a lot more and people haven’t got that discretionary sum available.”

        He is clearly referring to an amount that the customer has to hand over in addition to the free installation of the ONT by NBNCo.

        Considering that many RSPs offer free setup, the actual cost is $0. If you need to replace your existing router, there are basic models available for under $50 – some even with wifi N.

        It is the customer’s choice if they want to invest in a higher end router, or in-home wiring, which they may wish to do regardless of the technology providing the broadband connection.

        • Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:39 pm | Permalink |

          He is clearly referring to an amount that the customer has to hand over in addition to the free installation of the ONT by NBNCo.

          To quote Hockey..

          Hard data from FTTP installations such as Verizon’s rollout to 17 million households in the US suggest that in-the-home costs (that is costs above and beyond the ONT, such as connecting and testing existing CPE and set-top boxes) account for up to 20% of the costs of the rollout (see, for instance, Appendix B of the Analysys Mason Final Report for the Broadband Stakeholder Group: The Costs of Deploying Fibre-based Next-generation Broadband Infrastructure, 8 Sep 2008). This is verified by industry reports of Telstra’s experience in South Brisbane, which suggest it is taking two technicians half a day to finalise the cutover from copper to fibre.
          If these costs are going to be covered by NBN Co, then supporters should point to exactly where they are covered in its $28 billion capex estimate for the FTTP part of the rollout. NBN Co has never clarified whether or not this is the case. If these costs are not in the December 2010 version of the NBN Co business plan, as appears likely, then they will have to be paid for by the Retail Service Providers – and will therefore ultimately be passed on to customers.

          That is $1000 cost of install, ie. a cost which the end customer will not be required to pay at the time of install.

          In my comments I was highlighting the reality that for consumers to make use of the claimed capacity of the network, in many cases they will need to pay for internal wiring inside the home. For example, if the ONT is at the front of the house but the office or lounge room is at the back of the house, then to take advantage of the speeds that fibre offers it will often be necessary to install new internal wiring in the home (depending on how old the home is and what standard of internal wiring it currently has).

          That is the cost “if” the user needs to make any changes inside their house, this is an unspecified cost (both by Hockey and everyone here) as it all comes down individual requirements.

          • seven_tech
            Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:53 pm | Permalink |

            @Tezz

            While I do appreciate what you’re trying to say and be fair to Joe’s rebuttal, the fact is look at his initial response on radio. THAT is the one most people will hear and THAT is the one likely to be the most pervading.

            He has given us, the tech heads a rebuttal with a different point on $1000 per NBN connection as part of the rollout because he KNOWS we are aware that it will not cost a cent for many people to use the NBN over their current connections.

            His initial response, that others have quoted here so I won’t bother, on the radio to the majority of people was simple, pure FUD. Words like ‘in my understanding’ when talking about people having to rewire their entire homes for the NBN are used as Get out of Jail Free cards that allow him, if he were to be questioned in a mainstream interview, to simply say he must’ve been mistaken. But that only helps for those that see the challenge. What about all those who listened to this ABC interview who DON’T understand this is FUD.

            This is the most dangerous thing. On one hand, Labor or NBNCo. themselves lay to rest certain fears with information about the NBN and then all the Coalition do is come along and produce inaccurate, factually incorrect arguments, which aren’t rebutted and it undermines the confidence of those people who were just assured by NBNCo.

            This is the definition of FUD and we need to ensure it is shown to be abhorrent in ALL its forms, not just the ones that are glaringly obvious.

            • Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:10 pm | Permalink |

              Well as per your post above the original statement he made was ..

              “At the moment to connect from your home to the NBN and wire your home and go through the process can cost a $1,000, can cost a lot more and people haven’t got that discretionary sum available.”

              You’re right in that the indication was people would have to pay upfront a sum of $1000 to get the service installed, but that is what his rebuttal clarified.

              I just think nitpicking on this one point is a waste of time since it’s pretty clear what Hockey meant and he later clarified his position, there are plenty of other things he’s said here which are far more worthy of scrutiny.

              • Dean
                Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:47 pm | Permalink |

                I don’t think he clarified his position, he changed his position. His initial comment was clearly talking about cost to the end-user (“people haven’t got that discretionary sum available”). He changed that in the “rebuttal” to some vague thing about reports from the U.S. or whatever.

                If you want to know the cost of installation, why look at reports from the U.S. when we have thousands of people right here in Australia who already have the NBN that you can just ask?

              • Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:47 pm | Permalink |

                @Tezz, might have to agree to disagree on this point Tezz.

                I think it is a VERY important point that he seemed to indicate it would cost you $1000 to connect to the NBN on NATIONAL radio, but clarified on a tech news website. For the average Australian who listens to the radio and believes at least alot of what they hear from supposedly trustworthy officials, $1000 is a large amount and concerning if it was the case.

                You are correct however in that there are numerous other points which result in larger facepalms…

                • maryc
                  Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:23 pm | Permalink |

                  sorry but you have all got it dead wrong.

                  his response does make certain people understand he means in house cost to consumers(beyond the ONT). the problem is Renai actually did cover that in his response. Joe is claiming many people will have to get their houses rewired if they want to use a device in a different room and that it will cost as much as $1000.
                  he is dead wrong. many people may have to buy a new wifi router etc but they certainly dont HAVE TO rewire their whole houses. and even if they did want a cable run to another room then you should look elsewhere if someone quotes you $1000 for it.

                  so you can stop defending Joe on this one. he has tried to FUD that people are going to be paying big bucks and they dont have to at all.

    18. DenisPC9
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:06 pm | Permalink |

      @Tezz. The customer pays for both in their monthly charges. Both Fibre connection and 3/4G Tower builds and Fibre to said Tower costs are amortised in Customer charges. The customer certainly doesn’t “pay nothing”, they continue to pay for it as long as they have an NBN based connection. Not unlike the current Line charges for Telstra Copper, is it?

      Yes, Hockey was right but he was either being dishonest in that he “neglected” to state in his responses that 3/4G has a “connection” cost or he is ignorant of that costing.

      Either way, it certainly isn’t the stance the Community expects from the Shadow Treasurer.

      • Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:31 pm | Permalink |

        You are absolutely right in that the monthly cost of the service will recoup the install cost, but this is applicable no matter what the delivery type so not really relevent.

        The point was that original installation costs will be cheaper using 4G rather than fiber, and unless you can argue that the total rollout cost of a 4G based NBN is more than to install a fiber based NBN than Hockey is right on this point.

        Mind you I’m not agreeing with him that 4G is the best option because it’s cheaper and his “iPad” works on it, I’m saying that he is absolutely correct in that it would be cheaper to install in the short term. A fiber based NBN is the most cost effective way to do it long term and is the way we should, and currently rightfully are, going.

        • Jean W
          Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:35 pm | Permalink |

          Actually, Apple has had to pay a penalty for advertising their latest iPad as “4G”, since it doesn’t actually work on any of the current 4G networks.

        • Noddy
          Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:23 pm | Permalink |

          *dig dig dig* Give it up. He was talking about in home wiring. He was wrong and totally deceptive.

        • Monsta
          Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:01 pm | Permalink |

          And where are all those towers going Tezz? Do all those councils that have rejected the DA’s / Planning Approvals for the towers to service the Fixed Wireless connections all of a sudden roll over to a Liberal-backed ’4G NBN’?

          Somehow I don’t think they would. You are talking about needing so many more towers it is not funny.

          • Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:25 pm | Permalink |

            And where are all those towers going Tezz?

            *yawn*

            • Monsta
              Posted 16/06/2012 at 8:41 pm | Permalink |

              So to me and the rest of a Delimiter, it would appear that you don’t have an answer?

              • Posted 16/06/2012 at 8:59 pm | Permalink |

                To quote myself..

                I’m saying that he is absolutely correct in that it would be cheaper to install in the short term. A fiber based NBN is the most cost effective way to do it long term and is the way we should, and currently rightfully are, going.

                And then you ask..

                And where are all those towers going Tezz?

                I’m sorry, but I’m more than happy to disagree with people and discuss the topic at hand, but to answer the definition of a strawman, no, I’m not wasting my time.

              • Posted 16/06/2012 at 9:05 pm | Permalink |

                http://delimiter.com.au/2012/06/01/warning-telstra-is-killing-off-australias-mobile-competition/#comment-434955

                Read that, if you bothered to spend more time reading this site and less time rubbing your ego you’d realise that I AGREE WITH YOU that putting towers everywhere is not possible.

                And you’d realise the topic at hand was whether a wireless (ie. 4G) or fiber NBN would be cheaper to rollout, there was no discussion on which one would be easier to implement.

                • Posted 16/06/2012 at 9:39 pm | Permalink |

                  I’d say the cost is VERY dependant on what the requirement of service is.

                  It only costs Telstra a small amount (relatively) to provide “minimum 1.5Mbps” broadband access under the broadband guarantee. What if that were to rise to, say, 12Mbps? Everywhere? (likely under the Coalition, although I think this is RIDICULOUSLY low)

                  It’s CERTAINLY not possible on 3G, which would mean 4G basically ubiquitous. And that’s not only ubiquitous in terms of availability, but quality too. Example- I live in a good, solid reception area for Telstra NextG. But I get MAX 3.5Mbps, which is a QUARTER what I’m supposed to get, if, as they say, they’ve rolled out HSPA-DC to the network (which supposedly they have in my area according to the maps). As you know, this is because of contention. Telstra has 2 stores here, Optus one, Vodafone, none. I know of 3 people in my close friends who are on someone other than Telstra, because they’re so shit otherwise.

                  Boosting this to 4G speeds, I see 35Mpbs in the CBD (Sydney) regularly, but often, at lunchtime, as low as 15Mbps AND, in fringe areas, as low as 5Mbps. And this is with only 400 000 devices on the network in total, compared to the 7 MILLION that are on 3G. So, to provide 12Mbps via 4G, they would not ONLY have to roll it out to all areas, but, most likely, DOUBLE the number of towers, even in regional areas, to give people guaranteed access to 12Mbps. That’s not gonna happen for a start, as you’ve already noted, primarily because of opposition to tower placement.

                  So it’s not JUST that it’s not possible, as you’ve already said, but that the price is dependent on a number of factors and the level of service quality wished. Is it cheaper than NBN fibre? Probably. Will it give the speed, reliability and coverage required now AND for even then next 10 years, without quadrupling the number of towers now? No. So price is a very UNimportant factor overall when we look at it objectively. A fact that Hockey wouldn’t understand, seeing as all he does is count the money that could still be in Treasury, rather than going out to all those money-sucking voters.

                  TL;DR. Hockey can’t and WON’T comprehend that COST is a relative term, seeing as it encompasses capital cost AND quality of service cost. Just because something’s cheaper, doesn’t mean it’s better.

                  • Posted 16/06/2012 at 9:46 pm | Permalink |

                    TL;DR. Hockey can’t and WON’T comprehend that COST is a relative term, seeing as it encompasses capital cost AND quality of service cost. Just because something’s cheaper, doesn’t mean it’s better.

                    Exactly, which is why I hope no matter who gets in at the next election the planned NBN rollout is completed.

    19. Bob.H
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:06 pm | Permalink |

      Congratulations Renai a nice rebuttal.

      I think you have hit the nail on the head with “Furthermore, by continuing to perpetuate misleading information about important policy matters, you are contributing to what has in recent years become a steady decline in the quality of the national debate about such matters, and adding to an ongoing trend of bringing Australia’s political class into ill repute.” and despite the current opinion poles I think that they are going to pay at the ballot box for their arrogance.

    20. Neil McAliece
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:09 pm | Permalink |

      Well said Renai. It’s looking like the Coalition is a strong contender for taking government at the next election.

      Having senior coalition members speak with such bravado while talking complete nonsense or lies doesn’t inspire confidence that they’ll do anything better than the current government across any portfolio.

      The really need to do better with communications infrastructure strategy than to just treat it like a political tool to kick the other guys out with. I can’t vote for them unless they can either become properly informed or stop outright lying (or both).

    21. Brendin
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:11 pm | Permalink |

      jeezus…. a hammer is for hammering things, a drill makes holes. could u have maybe picked a better analogy? kerrist.

      • Mike
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:41 pm | Permalink |

        Maybe Renai was refering to a hammer drill ;) ;)

    22. hot air
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:14 pm | Permalink |

      When NBN come into operation in 5 years time, there will be G6 or G7 technology.
      Goodbye NBN or sorry Australians Taxpayers

      • djos
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:16 pm | Permalink |

        @hot air

        Congrats, you are officially even more ignorant than Joe Hockey!!! Well Done!!!

      • TechinBris
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:30 pm | Permalink |

        Guess what will be connecting the mobile towers. Yup. The NBN.
        *SNICKER*

      • Geoff U
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:41 pm | Permalink |

        @hot air

        Let’s just assume by “G6 or G7 technology” you meant “6G or 7G technology”.

        By the time that comes out with speed similar to probably 1Gbps, and there’s no doubt that something along those lines will (and we all hope that it does), the equipment at either end of the fibre-optic cables will have also been been upgraded to allow for 10Gbps or probably higher.

        The world’s-latest fixed-line infrastructure has always been and continues to be far superior to the world’s-latest wireless technology available at the same time.

        • Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:05 pm | Permalink |

          GPON fibre networks are already off-the-shelf ready for 40Gbps. Split the wavelengths of light into more and more colours, and you go faster again.

          Something you can’t do with radio waves, and the limited available spectrum.

          • Geoff U
            Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:37 pm | Permalink |

            “GPON fibre networks are already off-the-shelf ready for 40Gbps.”

            Careful, Michael, you’ll hurt the technologically-ignorant’s brains with facts that they don’t like.

          • Noddy
            Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:39 pm | Permalink |

            Careful, they will start arguing that you have to pay for light spectrum like radio spectrum.

      • Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:57 pm | Permalink |

        “When NBN come into operation in 5 years time, there will be G6 or G7 technology.”

        Your comment is invalid.

        • Tim
          Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:55 pm | Permalink |

          Why can’t I just say that?

          There will be no 5G. We have reached the channel limits: Ericsson CTO

          think we will see the new technologies. If you simplify, for the short range or indoors, we will see the evolution of WiFi. For wide area coverage, we will see the evolution of LTE. It will be a question of finding the shortest way to some antenna and from the antenna to optic fibre to the cloud. A smart card will keep track of what’s happening and charge you per usage and that money can then be reinvested in building an even better network. But I don’t see a 5G technology coming because we have already reached the ‘channel limit’ of what you can do.

          http://www.dnaindia.com/money/interview_there-will-be-no-5g-we-have-reached-the-channel-limits-ericsson-cto_1546408

          “No 5G Radio Technology” – says Ericsson CTO

          In an interview given at the Stanford Faculty club to DNA Ericsson CTO Håkan Eriksson, stated (what has been pretty obvious for some years) that its not likely that there will be a “5th Generation” of mobile wireless systems in the sense that a new radio technology has to be developed. “we have already reached the ‘channel (“Shannon”? ) limit’ of what you can do”.

          http://www.whitec0de.com/5g-what-will-be-the-future-of-mobile-technology/

          So stops the crap about 6G and 7G, I mean you are completely unaware of what you are referring to.

      • seven_tech
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:15 pm | Permalink |

        Actually hotair if you would bother to do any research rather than simply producing vague and incorrect comments, you would find that the next generation of mobile wireless technology, 5G, will likely involve NO speed boost whatsoever over the 1Gbps theoretically offered on full blown 4G (which is NOT what Telstra currently have) and will in fact involve improving throughput and spectral efficiency. These are 2 of the greatest challenges facing current 4G technology and why its’ real world speeds are currently 40Mbps rather than 100 with current 1st version 4G.

        Also, to completely render your argument invalid as Renai has stated, 5G is not currently a standard and is not due for initial rollout until at LEAST 2020.

        I’m sure however you’ve moved on from looking at your trolling comments on this website to others posting similar comments. So this is mainly for those who are curious as to the next step in mobile wireless.

      • Happy Heyoka
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:22 pm | Permalink |

        @hot air
        Nice troll but try googling ‘Nyquist’ and ‘Spectrum Availability’
        Of course we could do x gigabit wireless… but we’d need to dismantle half our other wireless services to do it and you’d still have to share that with everyone else on the tower…

        “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away.”
        Philip Kindred Dick

        • nonny-moose
          Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:42 pm | Permalink |

          the only thing id add here is that even using a minim life of 30Y for the NBN – and quite likely longer – how many generations of wireless will be gone through? id say 5 or 6? and you spend each time you upgrade the towers? putting NBN against one or two future wireless gens as if thats the be all and end all is a bit silly, really. it completely ignores the NBN life further on down the track.

          personally, i really wonder how many more gens can practically be squeezed out of wireless – the low hanging fruit is gone and we now are into using all the tricks to extend its capabilities – beamforming, MIMO and so forth. tack on the spectrum holdings as they are now with long life contracts and the spectrum and technical details become harder and harder to clear to deliver further gains over LTE – LTE/A. those issues dont apply to the FTTH option.

      • Avid Gamer
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 5:27 pm | Permalink |

        “When NBN come into operation in 5 years time, there will be G6 or G7 technology.
        Goodbye NBN or sorry Australians Taxpayers”

        WOW!! is that better/faster then G8?? The G8 is an unofficial annual forum for the leaders of Canada, the European Commission, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States.

        Puts face in palm and then bangs head on keyboard.

    23. frank2005
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:38 pm | Permalink |

      Agree! NBN is like the road. The government must take the initiative, don’t leave it to private companies.

    24. Paul Maynard
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:44 pm | Permalink |

      Well done Renai.

      I like Toms idea
      “How about we just call 97% of Australian homes ‘Nodes’ and then the Liberals can have their FTTN and Labour can have their FTTH.

      Problem solved.”

      • NPSF3000
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:06 pm | Permalink |

        Didn’t Malcolm do this already? IIRC he called ‘FTTB’ FTTN in regards to HK or Singapore connections [which use cat5/6 inside the building].

        Was a while ago, and I can’t be stuffed looking up the specifics.

    25. Simon Reidy
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 1:49 pm | Permalink |

      Easily your most comprehensive, diplomatic fair, and highly accurate arse-kicking yet Renai! Talk about nailing Hockey to the wall with FACTS. A word he should become familiar with if he’s going to comment on technical matters. Let alone pretend that he knows anything whatsoever about broadband and Australia’s future telecommunication needs.

    26. James
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:15 pm | Permalink |

      I wired up my house with Cat6 cabling myself, and it came to $100 including cables, endpoints, and that odd punch-down thing you need (already had a gigabit router). Cheap as for 1Gbps networking between devices and an outlet in most rooms.

      Shop around and do it yourself, and it’s not expensive at all.

      • Neil McAliece
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:42 pm | Permalink |

        In the context of the current debate, you really can’t count self install for home Cat 5e/6 cabling because:

        * While it’s not particularly difficult, most people won’t know where to start and wouldn’t dream of attempting it.

        * You aren’t supposed to do any fixed cabling without appropriate training and certification. Most people don’t have that.

        Hockey is really just trying to scare people with spin. It wasn’t an outright lie, since some people will chose to spend $1000 when they get the NBN connected.

        No one will need to though. They’ll get the chance to connect at least 1 computer to the NTU.

        I’ve already had cabling done because of the performance I want from networked HD media systems (independent of the NBN).

        The other thing that Hockey probably doesn’t want to talk about is free internal cabling which may be done by RSPs as a way to find a competitive edge. There is already a precedent for this for the old HFC networks. Eg sign up for 24 months and have 3 rooms cabled for free.

        • Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:59 pm | Permalink |

          * You aren’t supposed to do any fixed cabling without appropriate training and certification. Most people don’t have that.

          Unless the laws have significally changed since I got my cabling license it’s perfectly legal for someone to cable up their own house with cat5/6, fiber or whatever.

          It is however very illegal to cable up anything that will be touching or is a part of a telecommunications network without the required training, license, and authorisation of the respective carrier.

          • seven_tech
            Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:07 pm | Permalink |

            I’m not 100 percent certain and if somebody knows otherwise please say so, but my colleague who is an electrician and specialises in these, things now believes that it is illegal, if you must pull cables through walls, to do it yourself.

            You’re perfectly at liberty to wire up as many cat 5/6 cables as you like, as I do and run them around you house OUTSIDE the walls. But I believe it is illegal, because of risk of electrical shock and bursting water pipes, to run them yourself through walls if you’re not a licensed electrician.

            This hasn’t necessarily stopped me…..I mean other people however….

            • djos
              Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:21 pm | Permalink |

              @ST Technically they are supposed to be “fitted off” by a licenced data cabler but anyone can drag the cables thru your walls. :-)

              • Paul
                Posted 15/06/2012 at 5:10 pm | Permalink |

                Sorry, all fixed cabling must be installed by a registered cabler. If you “pull the cable” yourself you must be supervised at all times by a registered cabler.

                Paul

              • Paul
                Posted 15/06/2012 at 5:11 pm | Permalink |

                All fixed cabling must be installed by a registered cabler. If you “pull the cable” yourself you must be supervised at all times by a registered cabler.

                Paul

            • Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:23 pm | Permalink |

              But I believe it is illegal, because of risk of electrical shock and bursting water pipes, to run them yourself through walls if you’re not a licensed electrician.

              Fair enough, but I think you mean licensed cabler, since you can beat a licensed cabler and not be an electrician.

              • Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:29 pm | Permalink |

                @Tezz, true. I forgot they have “professional cablers” now, whereas you used to HAVE to be an electrician.

                I should go for this qualification….in an NBN world….LOTS of moolay! :D

                • Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:34 pm | Permalink |

                  I got my cabling license (with cat5/6 & coax endorsements, no fiber) via Tafe Plus about a decade ago :)

                • Tom
                  Posted 17/06/2012 at 1:37 am | Permalink |

                  Especially when you can offer the bargain basement price of around $900 to cable peoples houses.

            • Jeremy
              Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:40 pm | Permalink |

              “You’re perfectly at liberty to wire up as many cat 5/6 cables as you like, as I do and run them around you house OUTSIDE the walls. But I believe it is illegal, because of risk of electrical shock and bursting water pipes, to run them yourself through walls if you’re not a licensed electrician.”

              LOL we’re not that much of a police state, not yet anyway. If it’s your house you’re free to do whatever you like to it, including running whatever cables you see fit. The law can only intervene if your cables directly connect to someone else’s network (eg Telstra or your electricity distributor).

              Of course if you’re a tradesman operating inside other peoples’ homes that’s a different matter and I’m sure there are plenty of laws governing that, but a home owner can do what he likes with his own property.

              • Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:52 pm | Permalink |

                Sorry to be pedantic Jeremy, but I gotta take issue with that.

                We ALL do things illegal now and then; speed a bit, drink in public places, let our kids drink under 18. None of these are akin to say, murder. But the fact is, these ARE all illegal. Same as wiring your OWN home. It makes no difference you own it and can knock a wall out if you want, it is still technically illegal to wire your own home. This is in place so that, if you SELL your house, it is a known quantity in terms of safety and to protect the average user, who wouldn’t have a CLUE about electrical wiring.

                That is not to say that I’d advocate NOT doing it yourself if you have the knowhow. But politicians CAN’T recommend you do it yourself as it is illegal.

              • Chuq
                Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:58 pm | Permalink |

                “but a home owner can do what he likes with his own property.”

                No, not where it involves cabling (especially cable capable of conducting electricity) hidden inside walls.

                http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=1524535

          • Neil McAliece
            Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:11 pm | Permalink |

            I’m very happy if that’s the case. I’m perfectly capable of installing cabling to a professional standard.

            If it’s ok for anyone to do it, I’m a bit concerned about the enthusiastic amateur drilling into power cables, cutting through asbestos etc …. but I guess that’s just like the DIY home renovation craze

          • Neil McAliece
            Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:14 pm | Permalink |

            Bummer, googling brings up a lot of references saying you can’t do your own cat 5 cabling

            eg http://www.homewired.com.au/info

          • Geoff U
            Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:25 pm | Permalink |

            All started in the Telecommunications Act 1989 (Cwlth) and has since been updated a few times.

            – Replaced by Telecommunications Act 1991 and again, Telecommunications Act 1997
            – Updated with Cabling Provider Rules 2000

            More details: http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2009C01013

            • Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:13 pm | Permalink |

              The general gist of that though is don’t do any cabling if it’s going to be at the network boundary point (ie. the socket), and don’t attempt to rewire any power yourself.

              There is nothing in there that says you can’t put cat5 through your walls.

              • Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:15 pm | Permalink |

                “It is also illegal for home owners to install or modify any cabling that can be connected to a telecommunications network. This includes the telephone line and any extensions that have been installed. It also includes any Cat5 cabling, even if you only intend to use it for an internal network….
                …Unfortunately the law still applies even if the Cat5 cabling is nowhere near any telecommunications cabling or even if your home is connected to the network via optic fibre (which doesn’t conduct electricity) or wireless. If you want an extra phone point or Cat5 cabling installed you must use an ACMA registered installer.”

                :D

                • Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:26 pm | Permalink |

                  This may be a bit of a mute point, but why are we even talking about putting fixed sockets in anyway, I’ve got 500Mb EoP adapters at multiple points in the house.

                  Much easier to install than cabling, you can just move it to a new power point if you want to move it, and even though it’s half duplex it still runs fast enough for my 100Mb cabled network not to notice it.

                  ie. Unless you’re running fibre (which your average joe wouldn’t do anyway), you don’t even need to lay cabling through the walls these days.

                  • Noddy
                    Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:36 pm | Permalink |

                    For very short runs, like to adjacent power points they are OK, but between rooms of a house those things don’t get 100Mb let alone their claimed 500Mb. In the same double powerpoint they only get 130Mb. Even more bogus than the advertised peak 4G speeds.

                  • Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:39 pm | Permalink |

                    “Unless you’re running fibre (which your average joe wouldn’t do anyway), you don’t even need to lay cabling through the walls these days.”

                    Exactly the point Tezz. Joe is saying that, apparently, for the NBN, we do and it will cost us $1000. At least that is what he implies in his radio interview.

                    This is false.

                  • djos
                    Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:50 pm | Permalink |

                    @Tezz cause I like having 4 GigE ports in my lounge, Study & Games Room – everything else runs on WiFi-N

            • Paul Krueger
              Posted 15/06/2012 at 6:18 pm | Permalink |

              Isn’t it marvelous to live in the only country in the world where a person can’t terminate a cat 5 cable legally?

              Originally it was done to protect telephony installers from errors that would send mains voltage down telephone wires, perhaps now we have non conductive fiber we can just wipe out outdated laws…

              Or more likely, everyone who has an investment in cable licenses will be quite happy for things to continue as they are, and willing to agitate for the same…

      • Mark
        Posted 17/06/2012 at 10:40 am | Permalink |

        Are you licensed to do that? Otherwise you’ve just broken the law, and can get a $1320 on the spot fine, or up to $13K in severe cases. Why does it matter? The conduits used for data cabling are commonly also the ones used for mains electrical cabling, and if not done correctly, the fixings used for data cables may make them live with mains power.

        • Neil McAliece
          Posted 17/06/2012 at 11:45 am | Permalink |

          I believe the bit about it not being lawful, but would a network with data cable run through the same conduit as power ever pass certification? (I’m curious, eg if there is no other choice like maybe in an old high rise, is it OK?)

        • Posted 17/06/2012 at 11:54 am | Permalink |

          The conduits used for data cabling are commonly also the ones used for mains electrical cabling, and if not done correctly, the fixings used for data cables may make them live with mains power.

          Clearly you’re not licensed, because from a conduit perspective power and data should never travel together, quite simply because they are too close. In conduits power and data should always travel in there own, and the conduits be a minimum distance from each other.

          It’s the same when you see cable trays in the runs of data centres and the like (they are the metal things about a foot or so wide above your head), if data and power are travelling in the same tray they need to be separated by a minimum distance.

          This has nothing to do with making data cables “live” either, it has to do with the EMI generated by the power cables interring with the data cables, but then again you’d know all this if you read the Standards Australia regulations.

          But that is beside the point, in a house you’ll rarely find conduits, rather the cables that go to wall sockets and the like and literally hanging inside the wall.

          • Mark
            Posted 19/06/2012 at 3:19 pm | Permalink |

            I never said I was licensed, and in fact, that’s why I know that I and others shouldn’t do data cabling when we’re not licensed, because we’re not qualified to – and that is why it is illegal. I was using the word “conduit” to refer to a passage -

            “a pipe or passage for water or electrical wires to go through”

            http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/conduit?q=conduit

    27. the lone gunmen
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:35 pm | Permalink |

      They only drink NBN Koolaid on this site. Good for a laugh though.

      • seven_tech
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:39 pm | Permalink |

        Ah, another Koolaid commentor….that takes me back.

        Pray tell lone gunman, do you actually have anything insightful or indeed simply FACTUAL to add, or are you just trolling for laughs as usual?

      • Neil McAliece
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:48 pm | Permalink |

        I look forward to your explanation of the things Hockey got right. It should be a short list, but I’m prepared to be surprised :)

    28. Daniel
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:40 pm | Permalink |

      M = Mobile
      F = Fixed

      Pretty simple facts really.

    29. Daniel
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:48 pm | Permalink |

      So now it’s at $1,000 per connection? I thought it was $3000, $5000 per connection…

      You know what I have lost count on how many changes the Coalition have made in regarding misleading the voters on NBN connection costs.

      • Neil McAliece
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:51 pm | Permalink |

        If I recall correctly the $3000 came from some trickery in a News Ltd publication. Someone on Whirlpool claimed that he was the installer the paper contacted to get an estimate on internal cabling.

        According to that poster, the journalist kept presenting scenarios to try to inflate the number. eg What if it was a double story, double brick building and they wanted outlets in all of the upstairs bedrooms too?

        • djos
          Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:58 pm | Permalink |

          at one point im sure the FUD’sters at the unOz were claiming it would be $6,000 to wire up our homes, made me laugh as I’ve wired up my last 3 homes and each time it cost me about $1,000.

      • Abel Adamski
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 11:05 pm | Permalink |

        When that crud was being bandied about a couple of years ago of I think $5.000, I made an offer to travel to any town or community and do a “special” wire up 4 or more houses for $1,000 each or $1,500 for a single. Not one taker, the trolls left. I then pointed out, just plug in your computer or router or wifi router being currently used.That was on Yahoo, subject did not come up again. I would have to renew my cabling licence but for a profit margin like that well worth it

    30. ND^2
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:54 pm | Permalink |

      Excellent article.

    31. Jason
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 2:57 pm | Permalink |

      Good to see Renai is continuing to apply the pressure on Hockey and the rest of the coalition in his articles

    32. Bruce H.
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:02 pm | Permalink |

      Hi Renai. I disagree with one statement:

      “When even entry-level IT professionals in Australia’s technology sector can prove politicians’ comments about telecommunications technology to be inaccurate (and do so daily in Delimiter’s comments section), our great democracy is in trouble indeed.”

      I would hate for this to be spun to mean the problem is in us knowning and not in them bullshi**ing us, becuase – of course – we haven’t seen the LNP try to spin anything up to now. Having such a large portion of the population being so masterful of the finite details within a social policy is fantastic for a democracy.

      It could read:

      When Politicians continue to try and pass off inaccurate and misleading information to the majority of the public, when even entry-level IT Professionals know your statements to be untrue, demostrates your professions’ continued disrepect for our great democracy.

    33. Kevin
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:05 pm | Permalink |

      Well done Renai, Very well said. Keep the bastards honest!

    34. Jason
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:39 pm | Permalink |

      “By its very nature, mobile broadband though 3G/4G networks allows users to leave their premises and go wherever they want.”

      Not really ;) 4G is limited, very limited, even 3G isn’t that great once you’re out of the metro areas. So to say “wherever they want” isn’t really being truthful, I would give him that point wrong as well!

    35. Ian
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:46 pm | Permalink |

      I just wired up my house with cat 5e for my current crappy adsl2+ that only syncs at 3Mbit, because my wife doesn’t like cables running along the floor….

      It costs $203.

      Hockey is pretty ridiculous, but even more ridiculous are the people that believe the verbal diarrhea that comes from his mouth ,

    36. Posted 15/06/2012 at 3:55 pm | Permalink |

      Not intended as a deliberate link to my own site, but if anyone actually wants to actually learn something about why the fibre beats all other comers:

      http://michaelwyres.com/2011/11/nbn-myths-debunked/

      It’s a long video – (56 minutes or so) – but you won’t see it explained much better.

      • Neil McAliece
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 8:00 pm | Permalink |

        Thanks Michael. I hadn’t seen that before. It should be compulsory viewing for all Aussie politicians.

        • Posted 15/06/2012 at 8:06 pm | Permalink |

          Thanks from me too Michael.

          Neil: I don’t know if we should do that with our politicians….the bit about the GPON Architecture would probably reduce most of them to quivering idiots…..oh wait, never mind

    37. Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:14 pm | Permalink |

      I’m just going to leave this here (although djos mentioned it already):

      http://www.abc.net.au/technology/articles/2012/06/14/3524848.htm
      “NBN stats: Australia’s broadband future and why the Coalition’s alternative ‘won’t work’”

      • Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:16 pm | Permalink |

        It’s an excellent article Andos.

        Already in my NBN bookmarks :D

        • djos
          Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:20 pm | Permalink |

          +1

    38. Jake Cordon
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:28 pm | Permalink |

      If only these sorts of articles were required reading for the wider population we might have less people believing the FUD that the coalition is spreading throughout the media. Once again great work Renai, keep it up.

    39. ole cotton joe
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:56 pm | Permalink |

      A dog barks and the caravan moves on.

      [Old proverb; circa. unknown]

      l wonder how much curtain-makers charge these days… . I guess Mrs Abbott will find out soon enough.

      • Noddy
        Posted 15/06/2012 at 5:21 pm | Permalink |

        Do you really think she will have to go out and work when the Libs drop him? They may not yet, depending on how much he talks. If he shuts up he might not seem as dumb.

        • ole cotton joe
          Posted 15/06/2012 at 5:41 pm | Permalink |

          FYI: She already has an established career as a childcare professional.

          • Noddy
            Posted 15/06/2012 at 7:00 pm | Permalink |

            I guess she will have to sew curtains in her spare time then if they get tight for cash.

            • ole cotton joe
              Posted 15/06/2012 at 7:17 pm | Permalink |

              Tis true an Aussie PM’s salary isn’t that high by world standards, but with grown-up children, I’m sure they can “make do”…

              • Noddy
                Posted 15/06/2012 at 8:02 pm | Permalink |

                His party is 54 to 46 as preferred party. His personal rating is 38 vs Julia’s 42. He’s got to be worried about a leadership challenge.

                • Posted 15/06/2012 at 8:09 pm | Permalink |

                  Not likely Noddy. The Libs don’t do mid-term Leadership changes. They KNOW the damage it does.

                  They’ll go all the way to the Elections with stone-head Tony at the helm, for better or worse.

                  • Noddy
                    Posted 15/06/2012 at 8:11 pm | Permalink |

                    Shame, it’s going to cost them a lot of votes. Will be interesting to see if they have sufficient majority to pass certain policies.

                    • sb
                      Posted 15/06/2012 at 8:35 pm | Permalink |

                      If the libs are serious about winning the election they would dump Abbott., support and complete the NBN in its exiting proposal, and would then basically have government for two terms.

                      But the short term thinking and support of the village idiot, still gives Labor that half chance.

                      • Noddy
                        Posted 15/06/2012 at 8:41 pm | Permalink |

                        Oh, for sure. There are two things stopping me voting Liberal this election.
                        1. I think Abbott is a waste of air.
                        2. The lack of a credible NBN plan, which is probably because of 1.

    40. Posted 15/06/2012 at 5:28 pm | Permalink |

      http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-15/rinehart-ups-push-for-fairfax-board-seats/4071996

      Hmmm, a mining magnate buying up support in a media company…..look out NBN, Fairfax are likely to keep the stings up on it to simply discredit Labor as a result of the mining tax….

    41. ZombieOrchestra
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 5:35 pm | Permalink |

      WHY. NOT. BOTH?

    42. Diachronic
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 5:36 pm | Permalink |

      Nice work Renai.

      Balanced, educated and up to date.

      Keep it up.

    43. Elijah B.
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 7:09 pm | Permalink |

      One thing I wish had been included in the rebuttal is that the taxpayers aren’t paying for the NBN! All the hysteria about the NBN is based upon the assumption that the taxpayers are footing the bill, and losing out on roads and hospitals. If the public were told that they’re not paying for the NBN there wouldn’t be any interest in the notion that the Libs could (supposedly) do a national network more cheaply; who would care? Even if they could build a national network for $100 it would still be $100 more than it’s costing the taxpayer now.

      The NBN funds aren’t coming from taxation but from government bonds, purchased by investors who expect to see a return on their investments. The NBN will be paid by those who use telecommunication services, just like they do now, and at no greater expense than now but for a much better service in speed, universality, phone quality,

      And people think that the Libs are “economic realists”. Economically, I don’t think they should be trusted with a burnt-out match.

    44. Jeffrey ONeill
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 7:09 pm | Permalink |

      I got my house wired up with ethernet to 3 bedrooms. I have a 2.5 floor house so it took a bit of work for the electrician to get all the ports installed.

      Total cost $450

      If I didn’t want to move GB files around then I could have happily stayed with WiFi

      My Dad is lucky enough to have the NBN in Kiama and his cost of instal – $0

      So I say to Mr Hockey, where’s the No News articles of NBN customers lamenting the costs of install for their unneeded fiber connections??

    45. Richard
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 7:22 pm | Permalink |

      Wrong, You cant’ get Telstra wireless Broadband 15 GB package for $79.95,you need a Telstra landliine and mobile to get that price, it’s actually closer to $100

    46. Posted 15/06/2012 at 8:17 pm | Permalink |

      http://www.zdnet.com.au/aussie-broadband-to-make-a-trillion-in-2050-339339712.htm?feed=rss

      Seems, just like HP, these big technology companies are getting further behind the NBN battering ram pointed at the Coalition.

      Shaping up to be an interesting square off if the Coalition don’t change their tune….

      • ole cotton joe
        Posted 16/06/2012 at 12:22 am | Permalink |

        The Deloitte report commissioned by Google a year ago was a complete joke for many reasons l won’t go into (methodological, definitional, etc).

        l was expecting a better job this time round from the IBM-commissioned IBIS report.

        In fact, my expectations were raised by reading this from IBM MD:

        “Being amongst those people who were over the horizon, in terms of confidence in the economic impact of this, we thought we should actually do some quantitative and qualitative research to prove our confidence — or, to disprove it.”

        First of all, IBIS is primarily a business information database service flogging reams of raw historical industry and company data on all kinds of stuff. They also tack on their bald forecasts as a sort of “value-add”. (That’s been my impression.)

        Now, having read the 150 page report. . . . this is a joke. This is not “research”. This is fluff.

        There is no discussion of methodology. Reading the report is like reading Nostradamus’ quatrains — they’re just pulling predictions and numbers out of thin air, coloured with generous sprinklings of wild speculation about the future. There is no way to examine, validate or cross-check the multitude of bald, unsubstantiated conclusions littering the entire report.

        This is not “research”; this is a “marketing brochure” [commissioned by IBM purely to advance corporate interests], much like the IPO prospectus of dotcom-era companies filled with lofty, fantastical crystal ball gazing.

        Like watching a perfume advertisement… full of dazzle and glitz, but of little actual substance.

        This IBIS report is worse than the Deloitte Report — at the least, the latter did disclose a “methodology” of sorts (though seriously flawed).

        This report is a non-event for serious policymakers, but l’m sure IBM will milk it for what it’s worth to push their political agenda (since they paid for it).

        • Posted 16/06/2012 at 2:54 am | Permalink |

          ole cotton joe, your ENTIRE post has no facts.

          It is based on your OPINION that these studies are “marketing brochures” as you put it.

          I have not yet read these studies, although I intend to read both of them AND the Cisco one currently being discussed, in full, when work permits. In the meantime, to give ANY credibility and weight to your arguments, perhaps you would like to pull a few “facts” you disagree with in these studies out, so those of us who’ve not yet has a chance to read them, know what you are suggesting. Then, you will need to provide evidence that these facts are incorrect or misleading, seeing as this is an evidence based forum, otherwise, again, your opinion that they are “fluff” means 100% nothing except that it is your opinion. You’er entitled to your opinion, but don’t expect people to take you seriously in your statements regarding the NBN unless you have facts that back it.

          Finally, I would like to give a simple challenge: You have the opinion that not only is the most recent study from Cisco biased and simply marketing rhetoric, but also that of the IBIS report of IBM AND that of the Deloitte report of Google. Seeing as these are 3 of the largest names in Networking, Technology and Internet commercial organisations respectively, may I ask, if they ALL have this wrong, can you name a study has the “RIGHT” answers??

          “The Deloitte report commissioned by Google a year ago was a complete joke for many reasons l won’t go into (methodological, definitional, etc).”

          No, I’m sorry ole cotton joe, but this is not reasonable. it CANNOT be, factually, a complete joke by simply stating it is. You MUST “go into it”. Otherwise, once again, it is simply opinion, not debate.

          • ole cotton joe
            Posted 16/06/2012 at 9:21 am | Permalink |

            <<<perhaps you would like to pull a few “facts” you disagree with in these studies out

            Well, there's the problem right there — the IBIS report does not contain "facts", but a series of bald, unsubstantiated predictions (or assertions) pulled out of thin air.

            Amazingly, for a report that seeks to be "authoritative", there isn't a single paragraph in the report touching on methodology. Also, there are barely any solid references cited to directly substantiate the myriad wild assertions, apart from a brief section headed "End Notes" with a bunch of links to random news articles and science mags. (I'm sorry, but as history has shown repeatedly, there's a sharp distinction to be made between "technological possibility in a scientific lab" which makes for great reading in Scientific American and "practical adoption and commercialisation in the real world".)

            This is not objective "research" — this is a highly subjective "manifesto" full of random, arbitrary assumptions about how the future will unfold.

            A report of very little value, other than as a political lobbying tool.

            I wonder how much IBM spent on this (probably itemised in their management accounts as a marketing expense).

            • Hubert Cumberdale
              Posted 16/06/2012 at 12:22 pm | Permalink |

              “This is not objective “research” — this is a highly subjective “manifesto” full of random, arbitrary assumptions about how the future will unfold.”

              Oh, you must be referring to the part where Hockey said: “I don’t know about you, but I use an iPad – the iPad I carry around in the car. I don’t have a cable dragging behind the car. I use wireless technology and I think that is the way functionality is going.”

            • Posted 16/06/2012 at 4:36 pm | Permalink |

              “Well, there’s the problem right there — the IBIS report does not contain “facts”, but a series of bald, unsubstantiated predictions (or assertions) pulled out of thin air.”

              So, give me some of these “bald, unsubstantiated predictions (or assertions)” then old cotton joe. You’ve not displayed any of them. Why would I take “you word” for the fact that these assertions or predictions are wrong? Provide them and provide numbers opposing that show they are incorrect.

              Companies such as IBM, Cisco, Alcatel-Lucent and Google do not make up numbers. They make predictions according to HISTORICAL TRENDS. And MOST of the time, they’re found to be conservative. But I will not accept your “opinion” that these assertions, which you’ve only vaguely referred to as “wild assertions,” are incorrect when you have not even SHOWN the assertions OR any “solid references” to dispute them.

              Once again, this is an evidence based forum. As the saying goes “put up, or shutup” without trying to be rude or put to fine a point on it.

              • ole cotton joe
                Posted 16/06/2012 at 5:15 pm | Permalink |

                Sorry, it’s impossible to have a meaningful discussion with someone who is instinctively defensive about a report that he or she refuses to actually read.

                • Posted 16/06/2012 at 5:45 pm | Permalink |

                  Nice deflection.

                  For your information, believe it or not I actually work or am travelling 13 hours a day. I have literally just registered to read the report now.

                  But nicely deflected so as to not actually argue anything, as I said.

                  • Posted 16/06/2012 at 9:07 pm | Permalink |

                    Right, now that I’ve read it (and skimmed the large amount of graphs and tables going into detail about all industries at the bottom of the report) what exactly do you have a problem with?

                    Yes, there are some fairly outlandish claims in some areas:

                    - Government will be personalised, not mainstream
                    - Consumers will rarely visit shops, and even then most of it will be virtual, not physical
                    - Most Australians will drive electric cars (although this is seeming more and more likely over the years)

                    But many of the claims they are making are based on evidence of historical growth and information from the industries themselves:

                    - Mining is becoming MUCH more automated, with Rio Tinto rolling out over 250 completely remotely driven trucks- requires constant reliable wireless connection. Further increases, especially with the NBN in place, can be produced by allowing people to remote in from other CITIES rather than doing FIFO, which costs far more than setting up a secure terminal centre in a remote location

                    - Government communication and productivity is due to get a GREATLY increased boon from teleconferencing services (the recent $24 million setup in 17 locations countrywide has payed for itself in 3 years from saved travel expenses and many involved remember the odd sensation of believing the next time they met those they had teleconferenced with, in person, that they HADN’T actually been at the meeting in person) and from streamlining data aggregation from citizens (ie. Medicare, Centrelink, ATO etc.) as a result of the NBN being ubiquitous (one of the problems now being they CANNOT supply the majority of administration online by default as too many people do not have reliable internet acces.
                    Hell, ABS has already confirmed the next Census will be, by default, delivered online, with those opting out only to be sent the paper form. It’s due to save $100 million of the ~$500 million required for the census every 5 years.

                    - Retailing is increasingly moved online. Will we ever stop going to shops entirely? Unlikely. But will it become less regular? Why not, when most of us buy a large proportion of the same things every time we shop, why couldn’t the process be automated? We’re talking almost 40 YEARS from now. I can see the retail system moving to a VERY much customised system, where a person walks down isles of partly physical and partly virtual products, choosing an avatar of the product as they move along and by the time they get to the “counter” the system, with employees doing the physical labour out of sight, will have their shopping in bags, ready to go, already paid for to collect. The only staff the customer sees will be those for customer service (questions and complaints) and those for bag handling.

                    - Health is ALREADY moving online, via remote monitoring and teleconferencing both domestically and internationally. Remote communities often rely on teleconferencing to make quick decisions about life-threatening cases when no specialist is available at the geographical location. There was the recent story of a child who had a fit in the middle of the night and from the diagnoses given by the specialist over HD video from the local hospital, that child was immediately flown to the nearest treatment hospital as it was believed they might have a life-threatening condition. In other circumstances, with no access to HD video, if they DID have a life-threatening condition, waiting till morning for a specialist to arrive may have proved fatal. The elderly and chronically ill have remote monitoring already, but it could be GREATLY expanded to allow them to live a more normal home life, while keeping them safe and secure and in turn reducing the strain on the health system for another bed.

                    NONE of this is revolutionary- it is EVOLUTIONARY. It is a result of what we already have, being pushed to what it can just handle. Mining companies can afford massive remote and automation projects, because of the revenue. Health can’t, which is why the NBN, with its’ cost savings already being noticed (seeing as a high quality fibre link to a hospital can costs tens of thousands of dollars under Telstra and under the NBN, could drop that to a couple of thousand) can allow Health to expand into these evolutionary areas of remote care and diagnoses.

                    I cannot understand your short-sightedness in this ole cotton joe. Do you have something AGAINST progress? Or is it simply that you believe the current system, of random, unreliable access to broadband is ultimately a better system, wheedling out those who “don’t really need” broadband by the fact of geographical location, contention ratio, or, in many cases, sheer bad luck (cause there are many people living in and around CBD’s who can’t get decent access, simply because of RIM and pair gain) And don’t think an FTTN system will change this. It is an upgrade of the system and an upgrade of a cars engine, when its brakes, tyres, steering and safety are all still old and unreliable, doesn’t mean you can drive it faster.

    47. sb
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 8:32 pm | Permalink |

      Mr Hockey

      Please keep up the absolute tripe both you and the liberal party village idiot leader sprout regarding the NBN.

      The Public are wise to your bulldust,

      The Village idiot still has not learnt he is not currently Prime Minister and is opposition because he did not support the NBN, and come the next election he may very well face the same because although labour is doing an awful job the NBN is something the Australian public understand and want.

      If yourself and the village idiot keep this blatant lies and inaccuracies up, Julia may just scrape in yet again and Australia will have the NBN that it so desperately needs and wants.

      Here’s hoping for a liberal party challenge with some people who support the NBN (in its current proposal). The liberals then really would have a slam dunk election win. However until you and the village idiot keep your current attitude Julia may just scrape in due to the NBN supporter votes.

    48. ole cotton joe
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 10:21 pm | Permalink |

      For various reasons, the Productivity Commission will most likely be commissioned to do an NBN cost benefit sometime after the Liberal Cabinet’s autograph session at Yarralumla.

      (Not to mention, there will no doubt be a comprehensive audit of NBNco’s affairs running in parallel (or before). I’m sure NBNco will come out of that audit smelling like roses ;))

      If you guys are so confident that “everyone else is WRONG, we are RIGHT” and “we have all the answers and facts on our side”, you should start drafting your submissions to the Productivity Commission about how FTTP can be built for free at no (higher) cost to taxpayers and consumers; FTTN is more expensive; uniform wholesale pricing is economically efficient; blah, blah, blah, etc.

      Here’s a tip: l don’t think the Productivity Commission will accept NBNco’s bald financial projections and Alcatel/Cisco crystal ball gazing product marketing charts as “factual evidence” of anything. Also, simply declaring something you don’t like to hear as “tripe” or “invalid” isn’t going to pass muster at the Productivity Commission. Sorry.

      It’s going to be fun. Since you guys think you understand all the issues better than the rest of the public and the “mainstream press”, you should all be attending the various public consultation fora held by the PC during the course of the inquiry and shower everyone with your infinite wisdom.

      Given how staunch Delimiter is at maintaining it’s correct on every single issue under contention, and how fierce it has been in accusing senior politicians of being “liars” and “damaging democracy”, l, along with countless others, fully expect Delimiter to participate actively in the inquiry (including a full and comprehensive submission on the issues).

      Here’s your time to shine and gain a broader public audience. Until then, all these repetitious character attacks and mud-slinging on this blog is about as productive and relevant to the real world as a bunch of lunatics arguing with each other in an asylum.

      Start organising!

      l look forward to reading all your submissions.

      • Posted 15/06/2012 at 10:49 pm | Permalink |

        I’m sorry ole cotton joe, but I don’t see much mud-slinging going on in response to other opinions. Mud-slinging of politicians, yes, but that’s horse-for-courses even in the mainstream media. The mud-slinging I see comes from, mainly (but not always) the anti-NBN protagonists who insist that all of our “facts” are a load of old dogs balls and there is nothing to suggest that this project will even get off the ground….despite the fact that is is already delivering, albeit a small amount, of retail services.

        What, pray tell, has NBNCo. done that would warrant a poor report card from their own running? They are a public company, with open doors to Government and public eyes. Do you have evidence that suggests they are poorly managing resources? Or fraudulently even?

        The PC would use those EXACT predictions from companies such as Alcatel-Lucent in their CBA that seems certain they will do if the Coalition gets in. WHAT other predictions are there to use, than those of the industry themselves? These are the predictions NBNCo. base their plans on, not because it is politically easy and positive to do so, but because these predictions are from the most KNOWLEDGABLE minds and companies in the industry. The Coalition believe “the market” is a better way to achieve their “NBN.” Are you suggesting they WOULDN’T base their cost projections on predictions FROM that market??

        http://www.abc.net.au/technology/articles/2012/06/14/3524848.htm

        Here’s another one from Cisco. And they have NOTHING to gain from the NBN. They have no contracts. Notice the bewilderment of Pepper when the reporter asks what can be done for FTTN using 4G at the node and further generational wireless technologies to truly compete with FTTP….and he says “Look at the numbers…..it simply can’t be done” And then he goes on to state a 8:1 contention ration was required for FTTN to deliver anything above what we receive currently….and our contention ratios are closer to 20:1.

        Your vaunted “mainstream press” continually produces outright LIES on the NBN, whether you believe they do or not. Check back in Delimiter’s archives for NUMEROUS noted infringements from The Daily Telegraph and The Australian, several of which were retracted and the Telegraph actually got reprimanded by the ACMA.

        And in reference to your “start organising”, I believe there are ALREADY consumer groups in Tasmania setup such as Digital Tasmania. I, myself, hope to garner some support to begin one in my area and, with powerful resources like Delimiter, Gizmodo, ABC Technology News and ZDNet to name a few, there is MASSIVE scope for an online community to arrange a group from ALL corners of the country.

        Ironically the very thing that the Coalition is fighting against, decent access to the internet for all, may be the tool that brings them defeat AGAIN in this election.

    49. Mathew
      Posted 16/06/2012 at 12:21 am | Permalink |

      > Firstly, is a well-known fact that mobile broadband offers much worse value for money than fixed broadband.

      It depends on what you define as value for money. If you want a basic internet connection with a mobile phone plan then amaysim offer unlimited calls and 4GB of data for $39.90 a month. Wireless performance will be expected to improve in many black spots as the heavy users move their traffic onto the NBN fibre. Of course we shouldn’t forget that the cause of the black spots is the poor behaviour of Telstra the monopoly that the government is replacing with another monopoly, NBNCo.

      NBNCo acknowledge in the NBNCo Corporate Plan (Dec 2010) that 13% of premises passed by fibre will connect to wireless because it is cheaper (page 116). On page 118 NBNCo predict that 50% will connect at 12/1Mbps. Given the small price difference between 12/1Mbps and 25/5Mbps plans one would assume this was choice was made purely on price. A cheaper, faster 4G plan will be very tempting for these people, especially if the data is already part of the mobile phone plan that they are paying for.

      The fact is that many people only use the internet for basic email and a bit of web browsing. To put rising data usage into context to achieve a 3GB monthly average requires that 500 people download only 1GB for every person downloading 1TB of data.

      • Abel Adamski
        Posted 16/06/2012 at 2:18 am | Permalink |

        The proof of the pudding is in the eating

      • Posted 16/06/2012 at 2:43 am | Permalink |

        “Wireless performance will be expected to improve in many black spots as the heavy users move their traffic onto the NBN fibre. Of course we shouldn’t forget that the cause of the black spots is the poor behaviour of Telstra the monopoly that the government is replacing with another monopoly, NBNCo.”

        2 bets much Matthew? You are saying for wireless improvement to happen, we need fibre, only deliverable by the NBN. And yet you disagree with the NBN because it’s a Government monopoly UNLIKE Telstra which is a PRIVATE monopoly. There is a MASSIVE difference- PROFIT. NBNCo. is not striving for highest profit, they are striving to provide a modest profit while providing the best service to Australians as any good UTILITY should. Telstra are striving for maximum profit as any good BUSINESS should. Only problem is, with Telstra owning 85% of the fixed line infrastructure, maximum profit and consumer welfare are polar opposites, hence our problems.

        “NBNCo acknowledge in the NBNCo Corporate Plan (Dec 2010) that 13% of premises passed by fibre will connect to wireless because it is cheaper (page 116). On page 118 NBNCo predict that 50% will connect at 12/1Mbps. Given the small price difference between 12/1Mbps and 25/5Mbps plans one would assume this was choice was made purely on price. A cheaper, faster 4G plan will be very tempting for these people, especially if the data is already part of the mobile phone plan that they are paying for.”

        Firstly Matthew, the Corporate plan does NOT say 13% of premises will be wireless only because it is CHEAPER. It says pricing competition, that does not mean CHEAPER. As I have already said, perceived value is different from actual value. Don’t spread mistruths. Secondly How will 4G be tempting in the future Matthew? 4G is yet to rollout to the majority of the country. Its’ network MUST be paid for in the short term, by keeping prices at or near their current levels, which means keeping quotas also at or near current levels. Now, 4GB of data for $40 may be attractive to some people now (as NBNCo. states in their plan, 13% will rely on it exclusively by 2021, up from 7% now (The current numbers on wireless only at 13% INCLUDE naked DSL. When separated out, only 7% are actually wireless only) but, in 5 years, when quotas MAY have increased by 50-75% on wireless (as has been the growth path of 3G)? So for $40 we get 6 or 7GB, while on fibre, which over half the country would have in 5 years, even base level 12/1 plans get 50GB, probably 75GB in 5 years time. These base fibre pans, as you have pointed out, are unlikely to go down in price, but neither will they go up- NBNCo. have recently committed to a lock in of wholesale prices for 5 years before increase at half CPI. So we have average quota USAGE increasing from 7GB per person now, to roughly 14GB in 5 years time (if we use Cisco’s predictions, which have been right historically). So now, less than HALF that quota is available on wireless for that same $40, as compared to now where 65% of it is available for $40 on wireless. Value is getting lower and lower Matthew…..

        Also, as has been pointed out before, these predictions of take up tiers are conservative. Your refusal of accepting current data on the NBN that shows the highest take up is on the highest 100Mbps tier notwithstanding, these predictions are likely to be revised upwards, meaning even LESS people will likely be content with 4G only.

        “The fact is that many people only use the internet for basic email and a bit of web browsing. To put rising data usage into context to achieve a 3GB monthly average requires that 500 people download only 1GB for every person downloading 1TB of data.”

        Matthew, once again you ignore trends. The people who only use basic internet are those that used to not use it at all when early adopters had it. The same as those that now use it frequently were those who jumped onboard, many AS early adopters. Why would these trends change? Older people (65+) do not use the internet as much (31%) as younger people (15-17 @ ~95%). Mortality is a harsh mistress. Older people unfortunately die and younger people grow up and have their own younger people. In 25 years time, those in the mid-range 20-55 years) of which currently 65% use the internet, become our old people. So now, we have a MUCH higher penetration of internet usage and, hence a higher quota required on average. THAT doesn’t even take into account that in 25 years time, all our TV is likely to be multicast over IP, as it will be cheaper and ensures quality, unlike now. Simply using current numbers means nothing. The NBN is not being built for today, or even for 5 years from now. It is being built over 10 years for a FIFTY or SIXTY YEAR lifespan MINIMUM.

        You have used these arguments before and they make no more sense now than they did before either.

        • Hubert Cumberdale
          Posted 16/06/2012 at 12:33 pm | Permalink |

          “You have used these arguments before and they make no more sense now than they did before either.”

          You may get a few laughs out of this too: http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2012/06/14/ibisworld_ibm_future_report/

          • Noddy
            Posted 16/06/2012 at 12:50 pm | Permalink |

            You can’t read many articles without running into those posts. I was reading a recipe for lamb shanks and ran into it. ;) OK, an exageration, but it’s post over and over in areas only losely rlated to the post.

        • Mathew
          Posted 16/06/2012 at 6:15 pm | Permalink |

          > And yet you disagree with the NBN because it’s a Government monopoly UNLIKE Telstra which is a PRIVATE monopoly. There is a MASSIVE difference- PROFIT.

          NBNCo will be a private monopoly shortly after the build is complete.

          > Only problem is, with Telstra owning 85% of the fixed line infrastructure, maximum profit and consumer welfare are polar opposites, hence our problems.

          I agree, but to support the current structure you would need to explain how NBNCo owning an even higher percentage of the infrastructure and not permitting potential competitors from using their own hardware is a better scenario?

          > Firstly Matthew, the Corporate plan does NOT say 13% of premises will be wireless only because it is CHEAPER. It says pricing competition, that does not mean CHEAPER.

          I interpret “sensitive to NBN basic service price” (page 116) as choosing wireless because it is cheaper. Pricing competition tends to suggest customers choosing the cheaper service.

          > NBNCo. have recently committed to a lock in of wholesale prices for 5 years before increase at half CPI.

          Do actually realise what this statement means? The NBNCo Corporate Plan is for the price per unit to fall but at a significantly slower rate than the rise in demand (page 101 & 103). Now the only discussion in the Corporate Plan about raising prices is if the ARPU doesn’t grow quickly enough (page 132). If NBNCo find themselves at this point, they will be in serious trouble.

          > Value is getting lower and lower

          But if people are content with product offered by wireless or cannot afford additional spending, then the perceived value of faster speeds and higher quotas is irrelevant.

          > Your refusal of accepting current data on the NBN that shows the highest take up is on the highest 100Mbps tier notwithstanding, these predictions are likely to be revised upwards, meaning even LESS people will likely be content with 4G only.

          Yet again you’ve been taken in by Quigley’s spin in the Senate Estimates Hearing. What Quigley said was “But I also should say, just to put a word of caution in here, when we get into the main migration of the copper onto the fibre network we expected that ratio to start shifting around a bit. What I think it would be fair to say is that we are very comfortable with the assumptions we made in our corporate plan. In other words this data is de-risking the corporate plan.”

          > Matthew, once again you ignore trends. The people who only use basic internet are those that used to not use it at all when early adopters had it. The same as those that now use it frequently were those who jumped onboard, many AS early adopters. Why would these trends change?

          People I know using less than 3GB a month have had ADSL for 10 years, and dialup five years before that. They use it for communication daily but rarely stream video.

          > So now, we have a MUCH higher penetration of internet usage and, hence a higher quota required on average. THAT doesn’t even take into account that in 25 years time, all our TV is likely to be multicast over IP, as it will be cheaper and ensures quality, unlike now. Simply using current numbers means nothing.

          I have some doubts about multicast TV. More and more people are wanting to watch what they want when they want to watch it, not when the TV station has decided to broadcast the show. Currently to do this a show has to be recorded and replayed or online on-demand streaming is used.
          It is this increase in demand that NBNCo are hoping will drive up ARPU so they can meet their financial targets.

          • Posted 16/06/2012 at 6:39 pm | Permalink |

            “NBNCo will be a private monopoly shortly after the build is complete.”

            You are assuming:

            1- Labor are still in in 2021/22 and do not change their mind OR
            2- The Coalition get in and, against advice, sell it whether it is complete or not.

            Both these are assumptions. It is currently a public monopoly. I assume it will remain as such for the near-medium future. There may also be serious discussion about this if the revenue to the government is higher than expected.

            “I agree, but to support the current structure you would need to explain how NBNCo owning an even higher percentage of the infrastructure and not permitting potential competitors from using their own hardware is a better scenario?”

            They are not permitting potential competitors for 10 years, ie for the duration of the build. After that, fair game, as NBNCo. cannot simply undercut these competitors or risk damaging its’ revenue stream, seeing as it isn’t commercial. Also: so you suggest we allow an FTTN built by Telstra? And this would be better than now, how??

            “I interpret “sensitive to NBN basic service price” (page 116) as choosing wireless because it is cheaper. Pricing competition tends to suggest customers choosing the cheaper service.”

            Except that the cheapest wireless only available is around $30 a month, or $5 less than lowest NBN fibre. I appreciate that there will be some people, towards the poverty line, who will find $30 a month for TOTAL broadband, rather than $30 for mobile (including limited data) + $35 a month for home broadband, a more attractive option. The onus is on us as a nation to make sure the number of people who cannot afford basic utility, which is what broadband is becoming, is reduced, not increased, thereby allowing them the choice of decent value fixed-line broadband. This is as much about distribution of wealth as value for money.

            “Do actually realise what this statement means? The NBNCo Corporate Plan is for the price per unit to fall but at a significantly slower rate than the rise in demand (page 101 & 103). Now the only discussion in the Corporate Plan about raising prices is if the ARPU doesn’t grow quickly enough (page 132). If NBNCo find themselves at this point, they will be in serious trouble.”

            And you believe demand will NOT increase? Contrary to 25 years growth in internet data size and speed requirements? AND with the advent of the MASSIVE increase of data flow required for VOD services you’ve later alluded to are coming??

            “But if people are content with product offered by wireless or cannot afford additional spending, then the perceived value of faster speeds and higher quotas is irrelevant.”

            Again, the onus is on us as a country to REDUCE the number of people with no spending choices. Whether we do or not is dependent on many factors, but I would be deeply saddened if we couldn’t reduce the number of people living at or close to the poverty line- it would show we as a country of opportunity are failing in our task.

            “Yet again you’ve been taken in by Quigley’s spin” There is no spin, he admitted it clearly. OF COURSE the ratio will subside to lower levels. It was NEVER assumed 100Mbps would be the highest right now. Not even by pro-NBNers. The current tier uptake, however, suggests that it will NOT be the 12/1 tier that will be the majority (over 50%), but likely the 25/5 (seeing as 87% are 25/5 or above). Even THIS makes the Corporate Plan’s predictions overly conservative.

            “People I know using less than 3GB a month have had ADSL for 10 years, and dialup five years before that. They use it for communication daily but rarely stream video.”

            That’s great for you. People I know use upwards of 100GB now and have been using tens of gigabytes for years. We live in different circles. I don’t know about your circle, but I’m younger, so our circle is mainly like this, using higher speeds and quota (numbers from the ABS back that up). And there’s the catch- mortality. The old grow older and, unfortunately die. The young grow older, with their increased usage and have younger people themselves, FURTHER increasing usage. It is INEVITABLE usage will increase. Not optional. All you’ve done is prove the point that the NBN is built for- future demand.

            “I have some doubts about multicast TV. More and more people are wanting to watch what they want when they want to watch it, not when the TV station has decided to broadcast the show. Currently to do this a show has to be recorded and replayed or online on-demand streaming is used.
            It is this increase in demand that NBNCo are hoping will drive up ARPU so they can meet their financial targets.”

            I’d agree. VOD is becoming more and more common. The broadcasters need to take advantage of this, but currently they aren’t with their old business models- this was why I suggested they will possibly try online broadcast, as it is “online” but old business model. If they instead produced the same shows, for low subscription fees, to larger audiences, they would maintain or increase revenue, while decreasing expenditure by doing away with broadcasting requirements over air. Either way, VOD is increasing and, as you say, it will drive up ARPU, via speed and quota increase, for the NBN, further enhancing its’ business prospects. Multicasting is NOT a large earner for NBN. It is $5 a month per user, compared to $24 a month for basic AVC servicing. (not including CVC, which, yes, needs changing, and NNI)

      • ole cotton joe
        Posted 16/06/2012 at 9:57 am | Permalink |

        Fact: GPON fibre has greater bandwidth capacity than 4G wireless.

        Opinion: % of wireless-only households under the future NBN.

        Our future Treasurer has committed no great error. As long as wireless-only households exist, “wireless” is de facto “superior” to the NBN for a limited segment of the market. And Mr Hockey understands how limited this segment is because he simultaneously advocates upgrades to the fixed-line infrastructure.

        Teacup. Storm. Sensationalism.

        • djos
          Posted 16/06/2012 at 11:10 am | Permalink |

          Fact: OCJ, your posts make zero sense!

          You can bang on about IBM and Ciscos reports being fluff all you like, but HP has put their money where their mouth is and so far have spent $119,000,000 on their new DC in Sydney and plan to add 4 more modules of the same size before the decade is out!

          Folk like you should be ashamed at your lack of vision and foresight! At 36 Billion dollars over 10 years this is a substantial amount but the value to the economy in the long term (as predicted by IBM) is orders of magnitude greater – heck we spend 40Billion Dollars EACH & EVERY YEAR on the Military and it’s not hard to figure out which money spent will have the greatest tangible benefit to all Australians!

        • Posted 16/06/2012 at 4:56 pm | Permalink |

          “Opinion: % of wireless-only households under the future NBN.

          Our future Treasurer has committed no great error. As long as wireless-only households exist, “wireless” is de facto “superior” to the NBN for a limited segment of the market. And Mr Hockey understands how limited this segment is because he simultaneously advocates upgrades to the fixed-line infrastructure.”

          The “opinion” (prediction) of how many wireless-only premises there will be is based on historical data which shows that since viable wireless solutions, such as 3G, have emerged and come down to decent price, only 7% have maintained or become wireless-only. 4G will increase this portion because of its’ inherent ability to be better, with increased speeds and lower latency than 3G. This is predicted to be only almost DOUBLE what it is now (IMO this is conservative- I believe it will be more like 75%, but that is only opinion based on anecdotal evidence, not expert prediction) at around 13% by the end of the NBN rollout.

          Why so low? Because growth in 4G has one HUGE limiting factor- quota. While the price can come down overall and the speed can increase the actual DATA flowing, which will ONLY be required to be higher, will be artificially held low over 4G. Quotas of even 20 or 30GB would be ridiculous over 4G. NO companies in the world have this or are planning it and even the US is DESPERATELY cutting off the “unlimited” plans, which weren’t unlimited anyway- they were throttled after 5GB. So quotas will rise a small amount, while prices drop on 4G. But because quotas on fixed line will steadily increase, people will find, with higher data browsing as the years go on (just like the change from Dial-up to broadband), more and more the fixed line system can provide much better value for everyday broadband (not necessarily on the go requirements which can be complimentary)- both perceived AND actual.

          Mr Hockey stated in his interview “…Telstra was not allowed to sell its new 4G technology as a competitor to the NBN because 4G has the capacity to be far superior to the NBN.” He made no mention of numbers of people who would (after issuing his rebuttal and stating he meant “capacity” as in “ability” not
          “data throughout”) find 4G’s “capacity” as broadband better than the NBN. He stated “it has the capacity to be far superior to the NBN.”

          THIS. IS. FALSE. In THIS context, and that is the ONLY context these listeners had (unless they happened to disagree with Joe AND went looking for someone else who did and found Delimiter) Joe Hockey was stating that “4G has the capacity to be superior to the NBN.”- ie. that 4G can do all the things the NBN can do. Once again THIS. IS. FALSE. It is ALL about the context, which Joe happily admits in his rebuttal. But the context WAS NOT GIVEN in the interview, so it would be taken the way it was spoken, the way I have indicated, as it is the most logical analysis of the sentence.

          It is NOT a “storm in a teacup” because this information, given by a VERY senior member of the country’s Opposition party, lends weight to the idea that 4G is as good as the NBN IN EVERYDAY USE. To those who do not understand about the technology, the fact that a senior politician has said it lends some, if not great weight to the argument, when the argument is INVALID.

          • ole cotton joe
            Posted 16/06/2012 at 5:39 pm | Permalink |

            Why do you persistently take simple truths, distort them to create a strawman and then go off on massive rants with zero relevance to what was originally stated?

            • Posted 16/06/2012 at 5:49 pm | Permalink |

              No strawman ole cotton joe, just your strawman responses. Pray tell WHAT part of the arguments I just made DIDN’T cover your statement about:

              1- It being OPINION, not fact, the % of people who would be on wireless-only
              2- The fact that Mr. Hockey appeared to indicate there was market for both wireless and fixed line, whereas he ACTUALLY stated that wireless had the potential to be “far superior to the NBN.”

              Please I’d like to know how my arguments got off topic on this?

      • Hubert Cumberdale
        Posted 16/06/2012 at 12:15 pm | Permalink |

        “On page 118 NBNCo predict that 50% will connect at 12/1Mbps.”

        The prediction is now irreverent since most (87%) are actually choosing 25/5mbps and higher plans (page 7 of the NBNco product roadmap) in fact the most popular plan is actually the 100/40mbps at 37% (page 7 of the NBNco product roadmap) this has totally exceeded NBNcos expectations in the corporate plan. NBNco have confirmed this at the senate estimates in a conversation with Ludlam. Those are facts not predictions. Sorry, but you lost.

        “Given the small price difference between 12/1Mbps and 25/5Mbps plans one would assume this was choice was made purely on price.”

        Nope. Clearly people are not the dummies you think they are and are in fact seeing the value in getting faster plans since it simply makes no sense to get a 12/1mbps plan when you can get a 25/5mbps plan for just a few dollars more. Only 13% have chosen the 12/1mbps plan so far and looks like it’ll be the least popular plan on fibre for the foreseeable future the rest (87%) have chosen 25/5mbps and higher plans (page 7 of the NBNco product roadmap). Those are facts not predictions. Sorry, but you lost again.

        • Abel Adamski
          Posted 16/06/2012 at 7:59 pm | Permalink |

          Where you are quoting percentages, the deceivers and their acolytes conveniently brush away the fact tat at this time the high proportion of Satellite and Wireless users distort the percentages, they have no other choice than the 12/1 plan AT THIS TIME

    50. Abel Adamski
      Posted 16/06/2012 at 2:06 am | Permalink |

      What they are most frightened of is the truth surfacing to bite them on the bum after many years of whitewash and spin, when they think they have the vacuous voter flummoxed. Like my reference on another thread as to why Howard reversed the actions in hand to separate Telstra when he came to power. The seeds for that ( mentioned in the mini series on Ita Buttrose ), was the Hatred Packer had for Whitlam and the Labor party and how he set out to destroy and destabilise that government, actively working with the Libs at the time. Howard delivered the quid quo pro once in power and the Nation paid the price and it has led to the absolute necessity of the NBN as planned. More will start appearing in comments and blogs as old farts tell their stories of what they knew back then which would otherwise never have the opportunity to be heard.
      Why Murdoch called it a disruptive technology, the truth is his mortal enemy

      • ole cotton joe
        Posted 16/06/2012 at 8:38 am | Permalink |

        Distribution platform. Content enterprise. A distinction exists.

        Funny how the highest traffic websites in Australia are still the online portals of “old media” companies such as smh.com.au (Fairfax), dailytelegraph.com.au (News Corp), ninemsn.com.au (Consolidated Media), etc.

        Not a single new online-based media company has arisen to challenge their mass popularity.

        Go to any torrent portal and look at the most downloaded movies. All l see are content produced by the “old media” conglomerates such as News Corp’s Fox Studios. l don’t see any new online-based film production company having arisen to challenge the big Hollywood studios.

        Distribution platform. Content enterprise. Not the same thing.

        • Abel Adamski
          Posted 16/06/2012 at 1:03 pm | Permalink |

          My home page is Yahoo, just for email notification and news spread for the little lady. The secondary “home Page” which it spends more time on is Google News which is personalised. My links include Huffington Post, the Guardian, and several science and tech sites.
          Yahoo no longer permits comments, 9 doesn’t, the other major old media are also not accepting comments. So many only publish those supportive of their article or ranting against it, NOT those presenting a reasoned fact supported case that disproves their assertions. GIGO

        • Posted 16/06/2012 at 4:31 pm | Permalink |

          “Funny how the highest traffic websites in Australia are still the online portals of “old media” companies such as smh.com.au (Fairfax), dailytelegraph.com.au (News Corp), ninemsn.com.au (Consolidated Media), etc.
          Not a single new online-based media company has arisen to challenge their mass popularity.”

          Oh….I see, you’ve been reading the Australian again haven’t you:

          http://www.theaustralian.com.au/media/print-marks-its-online-turf/story-e6frg996-1226134290916

          So, 40% of the traffic to all newspaper and magazine sites is to “old media” companies…..which means 60% isn’t. And I’m sorry if your daily dose of Australian has skewed your mathematical abilities, but 60% is the majority…..So yes, no individual media website may be beating the “old media”, however, overall, they ARE being beaten. Nice bending of the facts though…

          “Go to any torrent portal and look at the most downloaded movies. All l see are content produced by the “old media” conglomerates such as News Corp’s Fox Studios. l don’t see any new online-based film production company having arisen to challenge the big Hollywood studios.”

          http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2010/12/In_Australia_Men_Watch_Twice_the_Amount_of_Online_Video_as_Women

          Notice how the only “old media” company that shows up in online video watching is ABC. Now why is that I wonder….oh that’s right iView! Australia’s first and STILL best online VOD platform!!

          The fact that you can go to a torrent website and find that mainstream movies are downloaded more than online-only producers means absolute squat. These films have massive budgets, they have massive advertising campaigns and, in general, are decent quality. OF COURSE people want them. Secondly, online-based film production companies DO exist, however you won’t see any on torrent sites. Why? Because online-movie companies PRODUCE DIGITAL MEDIA BY DEFAULT, which means it is downloadable for anyone, often for free, but otherwise for a modest price, meaning people happily pay when they can download it easily, as compared to blockbusters, which we can’t GET in this country on online sources, so they torrent it. The only exception is if you VNP Netflix- and don’t start with Bigpond and iTunes/Quickflix; their quality is appalling and the prices are stupid, except for some TV shows. Not to mention, with Australia’s current state of broadband 50% of Australians DON’T have the speed to download these and watch them in a reasonable time period, hence no growth in the market!. (ie. not having to sit around for an hour while it downloads)

          http://www.thetunnelmovie.net/

          These guys are an Australian mob, have produced the movie “The Tunnel” for FREE online (a genuinely good jump-out-of-your-seat horror set in Sydney train tunnels) and I happily paid $5 for buying a few “frames” to fund the project. It has been screened worldwide and won several awards. And done on a budget of $135 000 dollars. No, they haven’t sold all the frames, but they don’t need to, because of its’ popularity overseas. They have also recently produced an online youTube series called “Event Zero” which has 7 episodes. It is some of the best plain decent acting I’ve seen. Does it have Hollywood production values? No, but there are very few areas where you go “well, that’s just been poorly done”. Is is Australian film making at its’ best- doing a brilliant job with what little you’ve got.

          How about you move out of your comfort zone a bit. LOOK for these sites. LOOK at their popularity overall. The masses may very well be tied to “old media” companies, but their grip has slipped from total dominance 20 years ago to “another large competitor” in an ever expanding market.

          The fact that you believe Australians ALREADY consume all this content online (Print and magazine sources via online portals) AND they’re torrenting popular movies shows EXACTLY the opposite of what you’ve been saying; that Australians won’t use the NBN. Your closed mind excuses are wearing thin.

          • ole cotton joe
            Posted 16/06/2012 at 5:54 pm | Permalink |

            <<<<So, 40% of the traffic to all newspaper and magazine sites is to “old media” companies…..which means 60% isn’t.

            That's not what that article says.

            <<<<Notice how the only “old media” company that shows up in online video watching is ABC.

            Why do internet pirates keep holding up 100% taxpayer funded ABC's iView as some sort of "workable model" for media companies in the commercial sector to follow? Truly bizarre.

            . . .

            Sorry, my bs filter is full.

            • Posted 16/06/2012 at 6:05 pm | Permalink |

              Actually, you’re partially correct. It actually doesn’t really say anything about total visits to all media sites, other than 40% of those visits are to “the top 7 print media websites.” Notice also, it doesn’t actually mention anything that ISN’T “old media.” Al publications listed are old media, even though they don’t ONLY make up the top 100.

              Secondly, thankyou for automatically assuming I’m an internet pirate, even though I’m not. YOU were the one who brought up torrenting, I simply replied. May I assume you are one as well then?

              Secondly, the reason “we” keep holding it up as a model is because it is working. The Government requires ABC to produce content that is high quality and in a form that is popular- hence iView. It shows that with the right attitude and correct implementation, even a comparatively small media organisation like the ABC can produce good quality, easily accessible content that many people watch. They have a modest budget and yet are still able to produce something of such a high calibre.

              THAT is why we keep holding it up, because other media companies could use the model, charging appropriately (not exorbitantly as they are now) and find they can actually make a good business model out of it. The fact that the ABC is taxpayer funded means they SHOULDN’T be able to produce better quality media, as there is no revenue stream to incentivise it. Yet they do.

    51. theslydog
      Posted 16/06/2012 at 10:35 am | Permalink |

      Francis wrote up in amongst the posts:
      ______________________
      Francis Young
      Posted 15/06/2012 at 4:14 pm | Permalink | Reply
      Precisely, seven_tech!

      NBN detractors often argue that “the elderly”, etc., don’t need the NBN.
      ______________________

      However, this is not entirely true and NBN detractors can take a further hit!! :). I have set up a few internet IPTV connections recently for “the elderly” ethnic community.

      With the Death of UBI there are a lot of subscribers no longer getting their satellite Greek, Arabic, Macedonian etc TV channel hit. The best way to get many of these channels is now through the net.

      I told all these folks that they need the NBN to get better picture quality as some of their ADSL was woeful.

    52. Justine Parer (bushbasher)
      Posted 16/06/2012 at 10:46 am | Permalink |

      I’m sorry if Mr Hockey did not adequately explain to you in what ways rural Australia is disadvantaged technologically. Mobile coverage where I live is rubbish and lots of places in the area where I live cannot get ADSL for love or money because its simply not available to them.

      Its frustrating.

      Rural Australia should be the priority with the NBN rollout, the government has that right. The gains for us won’t only be in entertainment – it can potentially also bring about major improvements in health services. For example, here in Albury we recently had a small child with major head injury. LUCKILY Albury has a pediatrician who could operate (there wasn’t time to fly the child to Melbourne or Sydney), but for whatever reason (perhaps because she doesn’t usually do those kinds of surgeries and wanted to ensure a best possible outcome for her patient), the pediatrician got supervised by a brain surgeon in Melbourne. So we are talking about specialist surgery being carried out by a doctor with instructions from a specialist in a capital city. Keep in mind Albury is considered to be a “rural centre”… if this child had have been a little further West in NSW, the outcomes might well not have been so good. Most rural townships do not have even a single pediatrician, let alone a pediatric surgeon. When the NBN rolls out to rural Australia, we will be able to introduce healthcare technologies that allow eg. emergency brain surgery to happen without having a surgeon on site (provided the funding also happens to buy the machines that will accommodate this).

      The NBN can also become the infrastructure for other less dramatic healthcare services as well. For example if we look at rehabilitation, patients can have webinar sessions with physiotherapists; diabetics might get a health check plus some motivational interviewing from their nurse practicioner or psychologist online, etc etc. Why should rural areas get this first? Because rural Australia has the worst health outcomes across the board: most Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people live in rural Australia; rural Australia has lower income on average than the rest of Australia; we have the highest suicide rates; worse unemployment; worse maternal health;… and this is all measurable stuff. Obviously we are culturally disadvantaged as well, unless you count ute musters and country music festivals, etc. :p

      When you live in a rural area you are disadvantaged in many ways. We need the NBN the most, and that’s why we should be the priority. In fact, I think if the government didn’t get the NBN happening in rural Australia first, it would probably never happen. Whereas if you’re in Sydney, all you have to do is wait.

      • Bob.H
        Posted 17/06/2012 at 7:59 am | Permalink |

        We know that the bush needs the NBN but lets be a little realistic. They could run fibre in Berrigan or Jerilderie but what would be the use if there is nothing to connect to. For some strange reason the NBN is being built out from the connection points so it can be lit up as they go. Might have something to do with the logical way to connect as soon as possible and starting to get some money flowing back to the NBN from customers.

        I know that the bush is famous for whinging but really what do they want. The NBN to be built and then everyone lit up at the same time. Get a dose of reality for goodness sake.

    53. Snow Crash
      Posted 16/06/2012 at 11:26 am | Permalink |

      New mobile generations have appeared about every ten years since the first move from 1981 analog (1G) to digital (2G) transmission in 1992. This was followed, in 2001, by 3G and in 2011, by 4G.

      According to some sources the International Telecommunications Union (ITU-R) should have 5G standards available in 2020. What is the cost factor of having to upgrade Joe Hockey’s immature LTE network every ten years?

      “The iPad I carry around in the car, I don’t have a cable dragging behind the car.”

      Great! So despot Joe Hockey is retarded enough to admit he uses an iPad while driving his car. Book him Danno!!!

      “The speed of 4G technology is rapidly advancing, but it is not believed that these 4G speeds will come close in the foreseeable future to the gigabit per second (1000Mbps) speeds”

      Reference to “true” 4G’s 1Gb/s speed is merely referring to the ITU-R specification. Of course in the real world these speeds will never be experienced by the end user as a huge number of users are sharing the same tower as well as the same ISP as it does with 3G networks.

      Another factor is that ISPs utilise bandwidth throttling on mobile Internet networks using Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) technologies to the scorn of the FCC. (eg. See Comcast Corporation vs FCC). There has never been much mention of this issue in Australia and there is still not a peep from anyone in Australia on “Net Neutrality”.

      Telstra advertised their 3G Ultimate NextG (pseudo 3G) speeds up to 20Mb/s with a measly 12GB data cap. However in my experience speeds never got even to a quarter of the “advertised” rate. I rejected this contract and forced Telstra to swap me over to Cable. This changed my Internet world immediately with speed tests fetching average 38Mb/s as little as 4ms latency. However, Telstra’s cable is advertised as 100Mb/s and legally I should be averaging 80Mb/s. Telstra have not upgraded metro Sydney’s exchanges (Surry Hills) to DOCSIS3 yet. ::laughs::

      On the network layer, IPv6 support is essential to support a large number of wireless-enabled devices and where was the abysmal non-participant technology backwater Australian ISPs and hosting solutions on World IPV6 day on 6th June 2012? http://www.worldipv6day.org/participants/

      Joe Hockey, the proof is in the pudding. In the real world, just like 3G, the 4G (LTE) hype is not what it’s cracked up to be as made clear on these seven pages of American speed tests:

      http://www.pcworld.com/article/221931/4g_wireless_speed_tests_which_is_really_the_fastest.html

      Meanwhile Verizon and others are currently rolling out 100Gb/s fibre networks and President Obama has just signed an executive order (US Ignite) to make rollouts faster and cheaper:

      http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/06/13/we-can-t-wait-president-obama-signs-executive-order-make-broadband-const

      Fibre to the node (FTTN) broadband networks are rarely even mentioned anywhere in the world in this day and age as the technology is now redundant surpassed years ago by FTTH technologies.

      http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=103659247569422545492.000444cdef48d72c0b66d

      We are all tired of brain-dead narrow minded backward rhetoric from the conservative media and Liberal despots on home Internet user requirements, quoting narrow low-brow personal experience limited to only email and web without a single discussion on enterprise-level broadband requirements.

      It is time for the conservative Liberal and media despots (colloquial) to catch up with the world of 21st Century mainstream broadband technologies and REALITY. Australians are broadband technology end-users (six years behind) and have played no part in innovation.

      So much for your rhetorical “out of context” line, Joe Hockey and get some real technical and engineering advice from those who are aptly qualified and work at the coalface.

    54. Abel Adamski
      Posted 16/06/2012 at 1:18 pm | Permalink |

      Whilst I wonder more than a little about all pollies, when I read the inanities of the coalition pollies such as Joe, Luke etc . It would appear maybe a partial or full Lobotomy is a prerequisite for preselection and a place in the upper or lower houses

    55. Kee
      Posted 16/06/2012 at 1:42 pm | Permalink |

      Hockey broadband is about Ipad, playing facebook and twitter on the run… this is so wrong. NBN is not about playing your Ipad, it offer hell lot more to improve education, health, security, communication, economy..etc to whole nation and bring Australia to next stage of digital world..

      how many ppls stil only read news from newspaper, internet offered a lot more live news and informations, people start reading digital books, students search information online, doctors using it to do remote operations, conferences between business peoples…so much more

      Really dissapointed with coalition where their internet is all about movies and ipad, their vision bring Australia no where…

    56. fourbypete
      Posted 16/06/2012 at 8:33 pm | Permalink |

      Renai, Congratulations on yet another well informed piece of writing!
      I’d also like to say and I’m trying to not sound sarcastic here, that what we (Australia) need is someone like you to go on TV around the country to cram these sorts of rebuttals down the necks of Australians so they can realize the kind of Bull that the Libs are trying to feed us. It’s everyday Aussies that foolishly vote for these inept techtards and then wonder why the country is in a shambles. Your a great writer you should step up and be an advocate for truth on TV, as should people like Paul Budde and Micheal Wyres.
      There’s far to little truth on tv now days and lately NBNco don’t seem to be doing enough to squash the FUD.

      • ole cotton joe
        Posted 16/06/2012 at 9:53 pm | Permalink |

        +1000

        I WOULD LOVE TO see Renai go on live television and state what he repeatedly claims on this blog:

        1/ FTTP can essentially be built for free with no impact on broadband affordability or burden on taxpayers;

        2/ The forced migration from copper to fibre by itself means Labor’s NBN is virtually guaranteed to make money (concerns over ARPU are a non-issue);

        3/ The financial forecasts in NBNco’s corporate plan are more than just subjective projections — they constitute “factual evidence” of NBN profitability;

        4/ Current NBN retail pricing announced by the various ISPs constitute a high watermark and are set to fall because fibre take-up has exceeded expectations;

        5/ Malcolm Turnbull is either out of his depth in failing to grasp the truth of the above points, or he is deliberately lying to the public.

        That will do.

        Can’t Nick Ross pull some strings and organise an appearance on The Drum? Maybe you should all email The Drum to get the ball rolling.

        • Posted 16/06/2012 at 10:10 pm | Permalink |

          Your sarcasm notwithstanding:

          - Nobody ever said there would be no impact on broadband affordability. You want to stay with status quo and get low price, crappy broadband? Fine. Vote Liberal. When electricity came in there were moans of “disposable income being wasted on frivolous expenses like automatic washing machines.” Look how well THAT turned out for the conservatives

          - Actually, yes, the forced migration from copper to fibre DOES essentially ensure the NBN’s business case. Even at 50% on 12/1 (about what we have now), ARPU is still high enough. Problem?

          - The financial projections are based on the ARPU. Hence, there shouldn’t be a problem. No large corporation has come forward saying it’s unworkable, just that changes could make it better

          - Current retail pricing will not increase in the near term. Why would it? NBNCo. aren’t putting up their wholesale costs for 5 years and more people on fibre, means the current retail pricing can gain viable cost projection, rather than being subsidised by the larger ADSL market as it is now.

          - Actually, I think Malcolm is standing tall in shallow water. But there’s no question he is MISLEADING the public on some issues (there’s a difference to outright lying and even Renai has been hesitant to suggest they are outright lying) because he is set on a party path. I’m sure if her were leader, this would be a TOTALLY different situation. Such is life.

          Nick Ross is a highly respected technology journalist who happens to agree with the NBN. Just because you don’t, doesn’t mean he is any more biased than Renai or anyone else you choose to assume is biased because they broadly agree with the NBN. They present facts and let us decide for ourselves. You happen to believe those facts are rubbish. Bully for you.

          • ole cotton joe
            Posted 16/06/2012 at 10:26 pm | Permalink |

            l wasn’t being sarcastic. I want to see it happen.

            And please don’t take issue with the bullet points; I’m just summarising what I read on this blog. I’m not interested in your views — I’m interested in getting Delimiter’s repeated and strident opposition to Malcolm’s assertions a broad public airing.

            l mention Nick Ross only because he works at the ABC and The Drum is the only program l can think of. Stop being so defensive.

            • seven_tech
              Posted 16/06/2012 at 11:12 pm | Permalink |

              You’re not interested in my views? Considering my views are broadly in line with Delimiter in general, would that indicate why I may have been “getting defensive” over what I believed to be sarcasm?

              Perhaps if you made it clear then what “your views” are then maybe it would be more obvious what you are trying to say?

        • Posted 16/06/2012 at 10:19 pm | Permalink |

          I’ve actually been repeatedly invited onto the ABC and the other channels over the past several years, but I have always declined. By profession I’m a writer, not a TV personality, and I don’t feel comfortable with the format. I try to avoid watching TV if possible, because I feel it’s usually not a good forum for discussing complex intellectual ideas.

          I see writing as an art; and myself as a writer more so than a journalist. In this sense, I primarily write for myself, not for other people; and presenting ideas on TV would hence be a bit of a violation of my core principles. In a sense, it would be propaganda rather than the free expression of ideas.

          • maryc
            Posted 17/06/2012 at 12:10 pm | Permalink |

            the problem is even if you dont believe tv is a good forum it is still the medium a hell of a lot of people will get their information from. you would not have to go in to great depths but could easily outline things that have been presented incorrectly.

            as for writer rather than journalist … sorry but you are writing about current events and actions. thats much closer to a journalist than plain writer.

            as for propaganda … so correcting mistakes and presenting real facts would now be propaganda ? sorry but nobody is asking for you to make things up. just present real data and correct where others have made obvious mistakes. if you are confident enough to do it here you should be confident enough to do that elsewhere too.

            • Posted 17/06/2012 at 6:30 pm | Permalink |

              Sorry — TV is not my medium, and I see no reason to embrace it ;) I am happier doing what I am doing.

              • seven_tech
                Posted 17/06/2012 at 6:32 pm | Permalink |

                Appreciate your writing Renai, regardless of your ‘tv appearances’ :D

              • maryc
                Posted 17/06/2012 at 10:38 pm | Permalink |

                and that of course is your choice. a simply “do not want to” is better than the reasons you gave first though. :)

                however you should understand people will be disappointed that it is an opportunity to dispel some of the FUD that is being missed.

                • Posted 18/06/2012 at 12:07 am | Permalink |

                  … stop hassling me about it; if you want to dispel NBN myths so much, why don’t you get on TV and do so? I don’t belong to the pro-NBN lobby and it’s not my job to push the NBN on national TV. It is my job to write articles about what’s happening in Australia’s technology sector.

                  Get off my back and take some responsibility yourself.

                  • seven_tech
                    Posted 18/06/2012 at 1:36 am | Permalink |

                    Too true Renai. You’ve always stated your role as a journalist, not a lobbyist, even in the many positive arguments you’ve made for the NBN. And negative ones too.

                    If anyone IS interested in getting behind a pro-NBN group, I have a number of ideas that need fleshing out and help implementing. Or if anyone has a group they have, I would be interested in being a part of it. It’s the only way, IMO we can hope to get the majority of the NBN through unscathed. And make any difference on the issues like CVC and privatisation.

                    A call to arms if you like :D

                  • maryc
                    Posted 18/06/2012 at 1:17 pm | Permalink |

                    WOW talk about over-reacting. its now harassing someone to reply to them more than once ?

                    first you dont have to be part of a pro-NBN anything or a lobbyist to dispel untruths. you prove that every time you do an article like this. and for that you are appreciated.

                    to say people will be disappointed that a further opportunity to correct some of these untruths is being missed is in no way having a go at you.

                    finally, i would go on tv myself if i had the chance. however i havent been invited and have no way to force my way on.
                    i acknowledged you did not wish to and that that was your right.

                    • Posted 18/06/2012 at 2:36 pm | Permalink |

                      Look I’ll just cut to the chase.

                      The only reason Renai doesn’t want to go on QandA to challenge anyone is because he’ll do such a good job and make Tony Jones look puny, ultimately resulting in the ABC realising they’ll have to replace Tony with Renai. Further down the line Renai will then move on and take over hosting Lateline, OnePlusOne, The Gruen Transfer, and the pivital childrens roll of Jimmy Giggle, meaning Renai won’t have time to write any more articles.

                      So let’s just leave it all as it is with Renai writing articles.

            • Hubert Cumberdale
              Posted 17/06/2012 at 10:52 pm | Permalink |

              That’s funny, the Internet is often described as the “The Great Equalizer” and yet we have some that want to move the debate back to the old media, the unfortunate thing about television is there are those that get on TV and there simply is no way for everyday people to engage them in the debate and scrutinize those that either deliberately mislead or spout their ill-informed opinions as fact. That’s the great thing about websites like this everyone is basically on equal ground and able to correct the misinformation “live”. On TV or in newspapers the damage is harder to repair and if someone decides that the damage shouldn’t be repaired too bad… guess that’s why some people hate playing on even ground (and hate the NBN). I don’t, bring all the ill-informed comments you like here or on the Delimiter forum and I will happily destroy them. I’m not afraid. I use facts to back up my claims unlike some…

        • Hubert Cumberdale
          Posted 16/06/2012 at 11:28 pm | Permalink |

          “5/ Malcolm Turnbull is either out of his depth in failing to grasp the truth of the above points, or he is deliberately lying to the public.”

          A little from column A, a little from column B…

      • ole cotton joe
        Posted 16/06/2012 at 10:13 pm | Permalink |

        l would also LOVE to see Michael Wyres speak at Commsday in the presence of senior telco industry executives and repeat his claim on ITwire that NBNco’s breakeven on the FTTP portion of the network is less than $12/mth per premise.

        • Posted 17/06/2012 at 12:02 pm | Permalink |

          I’d actually love to see all the trolls in this comment thread – (and others) – stop being chicken sh*t, and stop hiding behind pseudonyms and slagging people’s opinions just because they don’t happen to agree with their own.

          Time will be the judge. If it turns out that I’m wrong – (hey, it happens, I’m human) – I’ll have the courage of my convictions to admit I was wrong.

          Anonymous astroturfing trolls who get proven wrong will just fade away, never to be called out on their inaccuracies.

          Besides, I bet I’ve built more multi-technology networks than you ever have or will.

          • Posted 17/06/2012 at 12:36 pm | Permalink |

            I’d actually love to see all the trolls in this comment thread – (and others) – stop being chicken sh*t, and stop hiding behind pseudonyms and slagging people’s opinions just because they don’t happen to agree with their own.

            This is why comment systems like Disqus are better than the default WP one, it forces people to back their login to a registered account on another system.

            • Posted 17/06/2012 at 12:54 pm | Permalink |

              So you can’t create a Disqus account with a crap name?

              • Posted 17/06/2012 at 1:34 pm | Permalink |

                True, but at least it requires a bit more effort and you don’t end up with spam posts.

              • Dean
                Posted 17/06/2012 at 2:40 pm | Permalink |

                Disqus has better anti-spam and moderation features than the default WP system. But I seem to recall Renai had to disable it because it was more flaky than WP (seems hard to believe ;-P).

                Though Disqus just released a new version, which looks pretty neat. Maybe time to give it another shot?

                • Posted 17/06/2012 at 4:43 pm | Permalink |

                  Disqus kept on flaking out on Delimiter. Given how many comments Delimiter gets — indicating the current system works — I’m happy with the current in-house WordPress commenting system.

        • Dean
          Posted 17/06/2012 at 2:37 pm | Permalink |

          How do you even know who Michael Wyres is, you’ve only been commenting here a few days? Why would someone all of a sudden start commenting under a totally new name?

          • Posted 17/06/2012 at 4:07 pm | Permalink |

            I have a few “followers” who don’t appreciate that I have a different opinion to themselves.

    57. Abel Adamski
      Posted 17/06/2012 at 12:12 pm | Permalink |

      OCJ
      Let us get back on track

      The subject is the NBN and the public/voter perception, as subsets we have

      1) The coalitions version and of what real value that will be to our nation and economy as well what it will cost both to implement and also over the longer term and how that will be paid for, will there be any return to the poor longsuffering taxpayer

      2) What the factors are that have shaped the public/voters perception

      Wireless mobile as a cost effective alternative??????.
      1) Mobile carriers elsewhere in the world are introducing or lowering caps as well as increasing effective charges on data due to the increase in traffic. – and trying to shift data as much as possible onto landline services. One of the values of the National wholesale Network, mobile carriers can offer bundles and shunt data via home and community WiFi networks Nationwide, not just where they have their own landline networks.

      However for convenience and value to the business and personal sector. Invaluable as long as the capacity can be maintained, there are very serious concerns re that factor. It is only 2012, the NBN won’t be finished for many years yet.

      Private Sector solution. ???
      The Greenfields and private sector are fine with the cherries, but past that they want to plug a pernanent tube into the taxpayers arteries, unashamedly stating subsidies and Govt. funding would be required as was stated in that article claiming how hard done by the Greenfield installers have been treated plus so many of the benefits just would not be as effectively realised.

      HFC upgrade and extension.
      Not really cost effective as it is designed SOLEY for cable tv and to fit the bill the work to upgrade, it would be cheaper to re install all but the customer tails, Duplicated infrastructure, splitting the customer base as Telstra and Optus with their HFC have shown is not really cost effective, the ROI is greatly reduced. The ONLY real beneficiary is Murdoch and Foxtel

      FTTN / Top Hat also short run cable (country towns and cities ), Many issues and while a short term solution, the practical factors will provide a limit, so mainly for domestic use compared with the enabling factors of FTTP, That is why rural businesses that do have ADSL with short cable runs are screaming for FTTP. Your bible “The Australian” had an article on that, the inadequacy of the copper in a Rural Centre

      So back to the subject of the article which is in fact the factors influencing Public/Voter Perception and the role of our elected representatives in influencing that. You could add in the resultant consequences for THE NATIONS Future

    58. Abel Adamski
      Posted 17/06/2012 at 12:51 pm | Permalink |

      snowcrash provided a link that Joe and his coalition peers would do well to read. We need a best practice coordinated approach that is not crippled by ridiculous petty ego’s and misplaced ideologies.

      Sorry for the wall of words, but well worth reading.

      For Immediate Release
      June 13, 2012
      We Can’t Wait:
      President Obama Signs Executive Order to Make Broadband Construction Faster and Cheaper
      White House Also Announces 100-Partner “US Ignite” Broadband Initiative

      Tomorrow, the President will sign an Executive Order to make broadband construction along Federal roadways and properties up to 90 percent cheaper and more efficient. Currently, the procedures for approving broadband infrastructure projects on properties controlled or managed by the Federal Government—including large tracts of land, roadways, and more than 10,000 buildings across the Nation—vary depending on which agency manages the property. The new Executive Order will ensure that agencies charged with managing Federal properties and roads take specific steps to adopt a uniform approach for allowing broadband carriers to build networks on and through those assets and speed the delivery of connectivity to communities, businesses, and schools.

      “Building a nationwide broadband network will strengthen our economy and put more Americans back to work,” said President Obama. “By connecting every corner of our country to the digital age, we can help our businesses become more competitive, our students become more informed and our citizens become more engaged.”

      The White House is also announcing that nearly 100 partners—including more than 25 cities as well as corporate and non-profit entities—will join with more than 60 national research universities to form a new public-private partnership called “US Ignite.” The US Ignite Partnership will create a new wave of services that take advantage of state-of-the-art, programmable broadband networks running up to 100 times faster than today’s Internet. By bringing software developers and engineers from government and industry together with representatives from communities, schools, hospitals, and other institutions that will benefit from faster and more agile broadband options, the partnership aims to speed up and increase the development of applications for advanced manufacturing, medical monitoring, emergency preparedness, and a host of other services. These applications will improve services to Americans and drive job creation, promote innovation, and create new markets for American businesses.

      Executive Order

      The Executive Order (EO) will require the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Interior, Transportation, and Veterans Affairs as well as the US Postal Service to offer carriers a single approach to leasing Federal assets for broadband deployment. The EO also requires that available Federal assets and the requirements for leasing be provided on departmental websites, and it will require public tracking of regional broadband deployment projects via the Federal Infrastructure Projects Dashboard (permits.performance.gov). In addition, the Executive Order will direct departments to help carriers time their broadband deployment activities to periods when streets are already under construction—an approach that can reduce network deployment costs along Federal roadways by up to 90 percent.

      US Ignite

      Today, more and more of the Nation’s broadband infrastructure is capable of moving huge amounts of information quickly and in novel, programmable ways, but software developers have been unable to create applications that take full advantage of this new capacity—in part because potential user communities such as factories and hospitals have lacked the means to coordinate their needs with developers capabilities. The new US Ignite Partnership (www.us-ignite.org) will create a national network of communities and campuses with ultra-fast, programmable broadband services, operating at speeds of up to 1 gigabit per second. This network will become a test-bed for designing and deploying next-generation applications to support national priorities areas such as education, healthcare, energy, and advanced manufacturing. US Ignite will challenge students, startups, and industry leaders to create a new generation of applications and services that meet the needs of local communities while creating a broad range of job and investment opportunities. This initiative will open up countless new opportunities for households and small businesses, helping them experience the economic and community benefits of next-gen applications while demonstrating a path for other communities to join.

      Among the commitments being announced today by participants in the new partnership:

      Industry partners offer support to partnership: Global industry leaders including Cisco, Juniper, NEC, and Hewlett-Packard are offering programmatic and in-kind support to communities while carriers, like Verizon and Comcast, are announcing new pilot cities on their network that will participate in US Ignite.
      New tools for communities: Non-profits, like the Mott Foundation, are working with the partnership to deliver new community programs, such as hack days and startup weekends, to accelerate the transition these applications into the marketplace.
      National coalition of universities: The National Science Foundation (NSF) is committing $20 million to prototype and deploy new technologies to advance the development of ultra-high-speed, programmable broadband networks. That is in addition to the ~$40 million that NSF has invested over four years in the Global Environment for Networking Innovations (GENI) project, which currently connects more than a dozen universities with next-generation broadband connections. Built with the technological contributions of more than 300 NSF-funded researchers at more than 60 universities, GENI is already serving as a virtual laboratory and testbed for next-generation applications in healthcare, energy efficiency, education, and other national priority areas.
      Next-gen apps challenge to spur innovation: NSF and Mozilla Foundation, with support from the Department of Energy, are announcing a $500,000 design competition to develop applications for high-speed communities around the country.
      Building on current broadband investments: Departments of Commerce and Agriculture are announcing their support for US Ignite with over six carriers that received funding for expanding their broadband networks while creating new community-based services.
      Supporting military families and communities with new applications: Department of Defense is connecting military families on base with new US Ignite services, while creating new research opportunities to students at West Point. HHS’s Beacon Community Program, starting with the Mayo Clinic, and the Federal Communications Commission’s Rural Healthcare Pilot Program are partnering with US Ignite to provide new healthcare applications, such as remote surgical theatre and patient monitoring.
      Additional details on these public and private commitments, and on the participants in today’s activities, are detailed in a Fact Sheet HERE.

      Building on Success

      These announcements build on past successes and the President’s commitment to deploying high-speed broadband networks as a nationwide foundation for sustained economic growth and prosperity. Broadband deployment programs already underway include:

      NTIA’s Recovery Act projects are increasing broadband access in communities across the country, with more than 56,000 miles of networks providing broadband access to more than 8,000 schools, libraries, hospitals, and public safety entities.
      USDA’s Rural Utilities Service is currently on target to complete over $3 billion in Recovery Act investments ensuring that rural communities and anchor institutions are connected to high-speed broadband networks.
      By taking full advantage of the latest broadband technologies as they evolve, the United States can continue in its role as a global leader while strengthening its economy, building new industries and creating jobs.

      Blog posts on this issue
      June 16, 2012 5:30 AM EDT
      Weekly Address: Ending the Stalemate in Washington
      President Obama tells the American people that the stalemate in Washington is holding our economy back during this make-or-break moment for the middle class.

      http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/06/13/we-can-t-wait-president-obama-signs-executive-order-make-broadband-const

    59. Keith Childs
      Posted 17/06/2012 at 2:18 pm | Permalink |

      To the Hon Mr Joe Hockey of the LNP

      A comment to correct a blatant attempt at glossing over the truth. Mr Hockeys wonderful iPad only appears fast until he takes it into a very busy and contested area, it does only work on speeds (theoretical) up to 35Mbps!

      NBN fibre is 100Mbps (nearly three times faster)

      Mr Thodey Telstra CEO, has noted that the entire country want and need BOTH mobile (3G & 4G) and fixed line services, for you (Mr Hockey) to contend in ABC 936 Hobart radio interview June 2012, that it (national broadband infrastructure) can all go wireless is to patronise the knowledge of the people you are put in Federal Parliament to represent!

      I call on you to formally withdraw these atrociously untruthful comments and representations about National Broadband!

      Further, if your team are to become a credible force in taking this country forward beyond 2013 2014, I urge you and Mr Turnbull to release your intended Telecommunications policy for all to read and understand if you intend to hold back the technological future of our country (like the years Mr Howard was PM) OR will you recognise the need for a fibered future for the collective benefit of ALL Australians

      keith C
      A Marginal Federal Electorate voter

      • Snow Crash
        Posted 20/06/2012 at 6:46 pm | Permalink |

        “NBN fibre is 100Mbps (nearly three times faster)”

        Really? The speed of the NBN fibre will be 1Gigabit per second

    60. Avid Gamer
      Posted 18/06/2012 at 12:21 am | Permalink |

      It really amazes me how some people still believe the misinformation FUD (or just plain stupid) or just down outright lies being spread by various parts of mainstream media and/or some politicians. Read this post from Roger replying to Fred in the Brisbane Times http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/technology/broadband-protection-a-rats-tale-20120615-20etv.html

      This is what Fred said:

      Remember when the opposition was saying that the NBN was the end of the world as we know it? They are silent now. Is that because people are getting plugged in and know what a good thing it is?

      And this is what the “learned” Roger said in response:

      Dear Fred,
      I am not sure where your head is, not in the real world. The take up rate of NBN is very low. No-one seems to have factored in maintenance costs, which will be high, the 4G network which is being rolled out now surpasses the NBN for speed, which will be completed ??when?? and German researchers have come up with a new system which is considerably faster. Rudd was prone to having these thought bubbles which, because his brilliant mind had conceived them, must be correct without research. see carbon capture in today’s news for another of his thought bubbles.

      As the late Julius Sumner Miller would often say “Why Is It So?”

      • Abel Adamski
        Posted 18/06/2012 at 1:58 am | Permalink |

        Avid
        I did post two responses earlier tonight to the learned expert ROGER THE LODGER THE ***, be interesting to see if they appear, just the facts. Incidentally the actual item is not even quite correct, they were NOT NBN cables, and it was not all that was presented. Just another distorted beatup

      • Posted 18/06/2012 at 6:13 am | Permalink |

        Ahhhh, Alan Jones and his “lasers”…there’s another fool who shouldn’t be talking about the technical aspects of a network.

        • GongGav
          Posted 18/06/2012 at 3:36 pm | Permalink |

          Its nice to see Jonesy’s laser thingy (c) get a shoutout…

    61. Nigel Sweets
      Posted 18/06/2012 at 8:29 am | Permalink |

      Like many of your readers, I work in the IT industry and I have to agree with most comments in this article. I was very disappointed to read one of your final closing arguments surrounding the costing of the “rival NBN policy”. Simply put, this devalued your the article and left me with an overall sour taste.

      “the Coalition’s own NBN policy would cost the Government money, while Labor’s NBN policy is slated to make a return on its investment.”

      This is a strong statement that you cannot quantify because under the information currently available, we dont know. The figures have not been calculated.

      I find it more likely that the “rival” NBN policy would be a better ROI due to the reuse and integration of existing infrastructure, but that’s my personal opinion, albeit based on current information available .

      • djos
        Posted 18/06/2012 at 8:36 am | Permalink |

        You Mean ” better ROI” for Telstra!

        I too work in the ICT Industry and have worked as a Customer Delivery and Data Center Manager for an ISP. I’ve seen first hand Coalition style “Incentivisation” at work and all it does is hand companies a bucket of money to build infrastructure that they dont have to share (not open access) and can continue to enjoy large profits from due to not having to acquire the funds themselves to build.

      • Posted 18/06/2012 at 3:42 pm | Permalink |

        I’m sorry Nigel, but while you have every right to believe that the alternative to the NBN (with the little information we have being half the problem) may provide a significantly higher ROI, from the information we DO have, historical data and the attitudes of the Opposition, it is simply not the case.

        The NBN Corporate Plan predicts an ROI, that is, a Return On Investment, on the $27 Billion the government will “invest” and the $9 Billion private investors will provide, of 5.88% at worst case scenario and 8.1% at best case scenario (I think these are the numbers, one will forgive if they’re a few tenths off) and an average ROI of 7%.

        The Coalition have indicated that their plan will involve the construction of an FTTN network, an expansion of the HFC networks and building of wireless networks to increase broadband penetration and speed to Australians. As you say, we have little information, which I think is ridiculous in itself, but the Coalition have indicated a budget of $7 Billion, while the independent firm Citigroup has estimated it closer to $17 Billion, including a CBA and because of changes due to the fact that the NBN is already being rolled out and NBN contract renegotiation. This doesn’t take into account penalties to Telstra and Optus and also doesn’t take into account what area MUST be completed with FTTH or leave half a town with the NBN and half without. Adding these costs on (and being generous) we end up with $20 Billion.

        For the ROI to match the NBN means the money has to be returned to the investor at 7% above what they invested. In this case, the government is the investor and the taxpayer is the financier of that investment. This means the government and subsequently the taxpayer must receive 7% return on $20 billion to get an ROI. So that would be $21.4 Billion returned, giving the original investment, plus 7%.

        Considering that recent a Ericsson study has found that increasing broadband penetration by 10% increases GDP by 1% and that doubling broadband speed increases GDP by 0.3% (http://www.ericsson.com/news/1550083) then, if we assume (by some miracle ignoring technical concerns over the FTTN) that it will return similar benefits of the NBN and increase penetration from 70% (now) to 85% (2020) plus a quadrupling of average speed (from 5Mbps to 20Mbps- which is unlikely, again, because of technical limitations of FTTN in Australia), then we can assume an increase in GDP of 1.5%+0.6% = 2.1%. At a GDP of approx $1 Trillion, that would mean an increase of between $2.1 Billion and $4 Billion (taking into account GDP growth of around 3% a year).

        So, $4 Billion growth of GDP. But that isn’t a direct return to the taxpayer, however, we will take it as such. Plus, we have to take into account growth in ICT taxes, utility taxes, mining taxes and any other industry significantly affected by higher broadband availability and speed. This is a difficult calculation. Nobody has done this sort of calculation. The IBM/IBIS World report (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/australian-it/ict-to-reach-1-trillion-by-2050/story-e6frgakx-1226395739593) suggests that many of these industries will grow explosively as a result of “very fast broadband”, but their definition of the speed of broadband is much higher than the FTTN network can provide.

        In short, you’re are correct in the assertion that we don’t have enough information to discuss the ROI of the alternative policy. However, the NBN WILL return around 7% (that is about $29 Billion- $27 Billion investment, plus $2 Billion return) under their current plan directly to the taxpayer. Even were that plan to blow out nearly 20%, they would still break even over the corporate life of the NBN plan. The alternative plan has no significant monetary return to the taxpayer (by which I mean the NBN returns money to the government as it makes profits as a government enterprise, like Australia Post), other than increase in GDP and increases in taxes from growth in industry. Considering GDP increases are likely to result in a possible increase in taxes of around $4 Billion (which actually ALREADY takes into account much of the increase in company profit and therefore taxes) that leaves growth in company tax to make up the $16 Billion shortfall. Seeing as Australian company taxes were $72 Billion in 2011 (http://www.treasury.gov.au/Policy-Topics/Taxation/Pocket-Guide-to-the-Australian-Tax-System/html/Part-2) that would mean a growth in company tax, purely from the change in broadband landscape via FTTN, HFC expansion and wireless network rollout, of 22%. Australia’s average company tax receipt growth is above that of GDP growth (around 3%), so, if you’ll forgive a little estimation, considering I can’t seem to find any figures immediately, we’ll put it at 5% on average.

        So, if you made it through all that, we can see that the monetary return (or ROI) to the taxpayer of the alternative approach to the NBN, would result in perhaps $4 Billion in direct growth of GDP and would require the average company tax growth to be 2% higher for 10 years to gain the rest of the (current value) investment back as a direct result of broadband increases. Considering that the myriad of technical analyses of FTTN have reported that it would have to be upgraded 10 years after it was completed to keep up with demand, this MIGHT just break even….which the NBN will do anyway, only over a longer period AND it will provide greater growth, availability AND speed of broadband for WELL beyond 10, 20 or even 40 years.

        In short, no matter which way you look at it, Renai’s assumption of the ROI on the NBN, due to the fact that the NBN profits DIRECTLY from broadband use, rather than indirectly as is the case with the Opposition plan, being higher than the alternative plan is a good assumption. It’s even a sensible assumption. And again, until we have more information on the Coalition plan, we have no way to significantly doubt this. This is part of what all of us are saying, WE NEED MORE INFORMATION. But the Coalition seems to be allergic to this giving of information for the time being.

        Apologies for the wall of words, but it is complex.

    62. Snow Crash
      Posted 21/06/2012 at 8:54 am | Permalink |

      Claytons 4G (LTE) is not what its cracked up to be!!!!!

      4G Wireless Speed Tests: Which Is Really the Fastest? AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon: PCWorld’s exclusive performance tests reveal which 4G network delivers the fastest data speeds. (Seven Pages)

      http://www.pcworld.com/article/221931/4g_wireless_speed_tests_which_is_really_the_fastest.html

      • Bob.H
        Posted 21/06/2012 at 10:48 am | Permalink |

        This just shows what we already knew. The 4G speeds are reduced as more and more connections are made to the tower. If you are using mobile phone towers then you have no idea what speed you are going to get at any particular time.

        This is why Mr. Hockey and his compatriots who are claiming 4G is better or equal to FTTN should be called for what they are. Pedlars of misinformation for their own political advantage. Personally I prefer to call them bloody liars.

    63. john
      Posted 03/07/2012 at 4:28 pm | Permalink |

      http://www.itwire.com/your-it-news/home-it/55508-cost-and-confusion-could-compromise-nzs-nbn-update/55508-cost-and-confusion-could-compromise-nzs-nbn-update?start=1

      It adds: “Premises re-wiring may be required to enable users to experience the full benefits of high speed broadband. For both consumers and businesses the cost of premises re-wiring may hinder uptake of high speed broadband services. This was confirmed by the Consumer and SME surveys carried out for the Commission.”

      Possible solutions are broadband over powerline and WiFi. The report notes “HomePlug products are marketed as providing a network connection of up to 500Mbps. However, this is a maximum speed and actual speeds that users experience are likely to be lower.”

      On WiFi the report notes: “The current standard, 802.11n, may not provide sufficient average speeds in ‘real world’ situations to provide reliable services over high speed broadband services. However, the next standard, 802.11ac, which will be finalised next year, delivers a much higher maximum data speed. Equipment using the draft standard has recently become available.”

      However existing CPE will not support these technologies and will either need to be replaced or fitted with adaptors, which the report says “may not work reliably”. It quotes research undertaken by Telecom NZ estimating that about 1.7m customers will incur costs of moving to an IP environment and estimating the costs of replacing impacted CPE at $NZ811m, or about $NZ500 per user.

      The Commission engaged Roy Morgan to survey consumers’ interest in high speed broadband. Amongst other things, the survey measured consumers’ willingness to pay for a high speed broadband service. The survey found that while four percent of consumers said that they were willing to pay more than $20 extra per month, 37 percent said that they were willing to pay between $5 and $10 extra per month. A further 40 percent of consumers (640,000 households) said that they were willing to pay up to $5 extra per month. pityful.

      Looks like Joe Hockey was bang on the money.

      • Bob.H
        Posted 03/07/2012 at 5:08 pm | Permalink |

        What the report also says on page 1

        “As these costs (non standard connections, re-wiring, upgrading equipment and subscribing to the services) appear to be significant, they are likely to reduce the initial uptake of high speed broadband services for both consumers and SMEs.”

        We already know what the RSPs. are going to charge. Rewiring and equipment (modem) are not likely to be a great problem or any more expensive than ADSL 2+ on current indications..

        “In New Zealand the situation is further complicated because different companies are responsible for its version of the NBN, the Ultrafast Broadband Network (UFB) in different areas, and they have different rules”.

        Yes private industry is doing a great job in differentiating their delivery. The NBN is obviously wrong in ensuring that all customers will receive the same service from the RSPs.

        “If the number of non-standard connections is as high as Vodafone suggests, the impact will be substantial. If residential customers with non-standard connections and business customers have to bear the connection cost,”

        What a game breaker. It is all those non-standard connections that are the cause of the problem. If you have non-standard connections you would expect to have to pay a bit more to maintain them but $1,000 is a lot of non-standard equipment I think.

        “..customers will incur costs of moving to an IP environment and estimating the costs of replacing impacted CPE at $NZ811m, or about $NZ500 per user.”

        At current exchange rates that is about $A390 which is a long way short of the $1,000 quoted by Mr Hockey.

        No Joe Hockey wasn’t bang on the money he just ran off at the mouth with a lot of political FUD and that report doesn’t change a thing.

      • Posted 03/07/2012 at 6:42 pm | Permalink |

        @John

        Actually there’s absolutely nothing there at all to suggest what Hockey was saying.

        He said “….people will have to re-wire their house. That can cost $1000, can cost alot more…..”

        NOWHERE in ANY of that article does it mention getting even CLOSE to $1000.

        HFC (up to 100Mbps) cannot be shared reliably over Wi-Fi between multiple users without SIGNIFICANT increases in Wi-Fi throughput from today. Yet people manage… FTTN WILL be the same. THIS WILL HAPPEN REGARDLESS OF THE NETWORK.

        Higher bandwidth internet means higher bandwidth equipment to use it. Unless you are suggesting we all stick with ADSL (in which case I’ll be laughing for a while, so I’ll apologise in advance for not writing back) then this cost WILL be born by consumers no matter WHAT network goes in- usually it will be a $99 setup fee. Or an extra $5 a month over the contract life….oh and look what the bottom paragraph you’ve quoted says….that over 80% of people would be HAPPY to pay that. Increasing technological proficiency in the home costs money. END OF STORY.

        Oh and by the way, this article is 2 weeks old….we’ve moved on….. Did you actually READ any of our comments. We’ve already covered this….

    64. @mkcoates
      Posted 03/07/2012 at 6:59 pm | Permalink |

      High speed broadband to the Mornington Peninsula in less than the 9 years stated would be appreciated. I had hoped it would help revamp regional towns but we still can’t compete as we are always years behind speed upgrades.




    Get our 'Best of the Week' newsletter on Fridays

    Just the most important stories, one email a week.

    Email address:


  • Most Popular Content

  • Enterprise IT stories

    • Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp facepalm2

      If you have even a skin deep awareness of the structure of Australia’s superannuation industry, you’ll be aware that much of the underlying infrastructure used by many of the nation’s major funds — AustralianSuper, CBus, HESTA and more — is provided by a centralised group, Superpartners. One of the group’s main projects in recent years has been to dramatically update and modernise its IT platform — its version of a core banking platform overhaul. Unfortunately, as was revealed in November, the $250 million project has not precisely been going well, and the Financial Review last week reported that Superpartners is actually close to turfing it altogether and going back to the drawing board.

    • Qld’s Grant joins analyst firm IBRS peter-grant

      This week it emerged that Peter Grant, the two-time former Queensland Whole of Government CIO (pictured), has joined well-regarded analyst firm Intelligent Business Research Services (IBRS). We’ve long had a high regard for IBRS, and so it’s fantastic to see such an experienced executive join its ranks.

    • Westpac dumps desk phones for Samsung Android mobiles samsung-galaxy-ace-3

      The era of troublesome desk phones tied to physical locations is gradually coming to an end in many workplaces, with mobile phones becoming increasingly popular as organisations’ main method of voice telecommunications. But some groups are more advanced than others when it comes to adoption of the trend. One of those is Westpac.

    • Ministers’ cloud approval lasted just a year reverse

      Remember how twelve months ago, the Federal Government released a new cloud computing security and privacy directive which required departments and agencies to explicitly acquire the approval of the Attorney-General and the relevant portfolio minister before government data containing private information could be stored in offshore facilities? Remember how the policy was strongly criticised by Microsoft, Government CIOs and Delimiter? Well, it looks like the policy is about to be reversed.

    • WA Govt can’t fund school IT upgrades oops key

      In news from The Department of Disturbing Facts, iTNews revealed late last week that Western Australia’s Department of Education has run out of money halfway through the deployment of new fundamental IT infrastructure to the state’s schools.

    • Turnbull outlines Govt ICT vision turnbull-5

      Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has published an extensive article arguing that the Federal Government needed to do a better job of connecting with Australians via digital channels and that public sector IT projects needn’t cost the huge amounts that some have in the past.

    • NZ Govt pushes hard into cloud zealand

      New Zealand’s national Government announced a whole of government contract this morning for what it terms ‘Office Productivity as a Service’ services. This includes email and calendaring services, as well as file-sharing, mobility, instant messaging and collaboration services. The contract complements two existing contracts — Desktop as a Service and Enterprise Content Management as a Service.

    • CommBank reveals Harte’s replacement whiteing

      The Commonwealth Bank of Australia has promoted an internal executive who joined the bank in September after a lengthy career at petroleum giant VP and IT services group Accenture to replace its outgoing chief information officer Michael Harte, who announced in early May that he would leave the bank.

    • Jeff Smith quits Suncorp for IBM jeffsmith4

      Second-tier Australian bank and financial services group Suncorp today announced that its long-serving top technology executive Jeff Smith would leave to take up a senior role with IBM in the United States, in an announcement which marks the end of an era for the nation’s banking IT sector.

    • Small business missing the mobile, social, cloud revolution iphone-stock

      Most companies that live and breathe the online revolution are not tech startups, but smart smaller firms that use online tools to run their core business better: to cut costs, reach customers and suppliers, innovate and get more control. Many others, however, are falling behind, according to a new Grattan Institute discussion paper.

  • Blog, Enterprise IT - Jul 5, 2014 13:53 - 0 Comments

    Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp

    More In Enterprise IT


    Blog, Telecommunications - Jul 5, 2014 12:12 - 0 Comments

    What should the ACCC’s role be in guiding infrastructure spending?

    More In Telecommunications


    Analysis, Industry, Internet - Jun 23, 2014 10:33 - 0 Comments

    ‘Google Schmoogle’ – how Yellow Pages got it so wrong

    More In Industry


    Blog, Digital Rights - Jun 30, 2014 22:24 - 0 Comments

    Will Netflix launch in Australia, or not?

    More In Digital Rights