• Enjoy the freedom to innovate and grow your business


    [ad] With Microsoft Azure you have hybrid cloud flexibility, allowing your platform to span your cloud and on premise data centre. Learn more at microsoftcloud.com.

  • IT Admin: No Time to Save Time?


    [ad] Do you spend too much time patching machines or cleaning up after virus attacks? With automation controlled from a central IT management console accessible anytime, anywhere – you can save time for bigger tasks. Try simple IT management from GFI Cloud and start saving time today!

  • Free Forrester analysis of CRM solutions


    [ad] In this 25 page report, independent analyst house Forrester evaluates 18 significant products in the customer relationship management space from a broad range of vendors, detailing its findings on how CRM suites measure up and plotting where they stand in relation to each other. Download it for free now.

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


  • Reader giveaway: Google Nexus 5


    We’re big fans of Google’s Nexus line-up in general at Delimiter towers. Nexus 4, Nexus 7, Nexus 10 … we love pretty much anything Nexus. Because of this we've kicked off a new competition to give away one of Google’s new Nexus 5 smartphones to a lucky reader. Click here to enter.

  • News, Telecommunications - Written by on Thursday, March 28, 2013 11:23 - 345 Comments

    ‘Dumb’ people can’t see wireless is NBN future: Alan Jones

    news Radio shockjock Alan Jones has repeated his comments that wireless broadband represents the future of Internet access, describing those who can’t face this situation as “dumb” and claiming that the Federal Government’s National Broadband Network project will consequently be obsolete before it’s finished.

    Jones’ comments on 2GB on air this morning appeared to stem from a report in The Australian newspaper. Entitled “wireless networks rise as threat to NBN”, the article quotes a letter from NBN Co to the Australian Competition and Consumer Network that acknowledges that the development of mobile broadband networks (such as the 4G networks operated by Telstra and Optus) could see them compete with entry-level NBN services, which are to be predominantly delivered over fibre-optic cable.

    The radio broadcast of Jones’ comments does not appear to be available online, but in a precis seen by Delimiter, the shockjock described the NBN as “an unmitigated disaster”. Jones said the NBN had admitted facing competition from wireless networks, and asked how “dumb” “these people” and the Government were, as “everybody” has known for years that wireless is the way of the future. Jones added that the Government was spending borrowed and taxpayer money to roll out the NBN, which was going to be “obsolete” before it was finished, and said the Government should be sacked on the basis of the NBN project alone.

    Jones added he would discuss the rollout of the NBN with Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull next week. Turnbull has also been in the headlines over the past several days for using a community meeting in Bendigo to describe the NBN as a “horrible hoax”.

    Jones’ comments aren’t the first time he has claimed that wireless broadband represents the future of Internet access in Australia; he initially made the claim in October last year. Unfortunately, Jones’ views on the NBN and wireless appear to contain a number of incorrect statements.

    The idea that Australia’s broadband needs could be served in future by wireless technology — especially 4G mobile broadband is not a new one. It has been raised repeatedly by the Coalition over the past several years as an alternative to the fixed FTTH-style rollout which predominantly features in the NBN. The case for wireless as a future broadband replacement for fixed infrastructure has been strengthened by the huge growth in uptake of 3G and 4G mobile broadband services in Australia, with telcos like Telstra adding on more than a million new customers a year.

    However, the global telecommunications industry is currently almost universally in agreement that in every country, telecommunications needs will continue to be served by a mix of fixed and wireless infrastructure.

    In Australia, for example, commentators such as Telstra CEO David Thodey have consistently stated that they expect Australians to buy both mobile and fixed broadband packages in future, as they serve differing needs; fixed broadband to supply homes with powerful connections to facilitate big downloads such as video, and mobile broadband when outside the home, for access to services which typically require lesser capacity. In addition, mobile towers typically also require their own fibre connections to funnel data back from wireless connections to the major fixed-line telecommunications networks.

    Secondly, Jones’ comment that the NBN will be obsolete before it is built is also incorrect. The fibre technology while will constitute the vast majority of the NBN rollout contains the potential to be upgraded to deliver 1Gbps speeds to premises and potentially higher speeds in future; the deployment of this technology universally around Australia is expected to place Australia amongst the global leading countries when it comes to telecommunications. It is expected that this technology will be in use for multiple decades – at least between 30 to 50 years.

    Jones’ comments this morning reflect only the most recent occasion on which the shockjock – who has strong connections to the Liberal side of politics – has inaccuractely criticised the NBN. In May last year, for example, the radio broadcaster incorrectly stated that German researchers had demonstrated technology which would make the NBN obsolete, delivering speeds 2.6 million times faster than those possible under the Labor project, referring to so-called “lasers” used in the research. In fact, the research breakthrough demonstrated the strength of the NBN’s core fibre technology.

    In addition, Jones’ inaccurate comments come just six months after the broadcaster was ordered to undergo basic journalism training by Australia’s media regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority, after making an incorrect statement regarding carbon dioxide emissions in March 2011. ACMA ruled that Jones’ program would be forced to fact-check certain material before it went to air.

    opinion/analysis
    Alan Jones and Malcolm Turnbull haven’t always had the most harmonious relationship, with Jones’ loyalty towards the Abbott camp in the Liberal Party appearing to cloud the situation at times. I do wonder what an updated chat between Jones and Turnbull would be like. Turnbull appears to be tuning up the rhetoric with respect to the NBN at the moment; scenting blood, no doubt, following NBN Co’s rollout schedule downgrade last week. I wonder whether he would correct Jones on air if Jones truly went off the deep end with respect to his NBN comments (as he tends to do on occasion) of if Turnbull would let such blatant inaccuracies slide by. It’ll be interesting to find out.

    Image credit: Jeremy Buckingham, Creative Commons

    submit to reddit

    345 Comments

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

    1. Kevin Davies
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:30 am | Permalink |

      I’d comment but I don’t think I could make it simple enough for Alan Jones readers to comprehend. Lets try anyway…

      Wireless need big pipe. Big pipe need Fibre. NBN provide Fibre. Alan Jones is wrong. Here, have a cookie.

      • Simon Reidy
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:01 pm | Permalink |

        Me not understand. More space in sky means more space for Kiloblobs. I know because my son has a digital walkmanphone with 2 wirelesses, and it can play video tapes over the air and everything from my cousin’s YooTubes. Compare this to my kettle which has a dirty old cable and takes ages to boil. I laugh at dumb people that don’t understand everything will be wireless and laserbeams in the future – anonymous Jones listener number 247.

        • Derrick
          Posted 29/03/2013 at 2:07 pm | Permalink |

          I don’t usually post , but that comment actually made me LOL

          • Simon Reidy
            Posted 29/03/2013 at 2:53 pm | Permalink |

            :)

        • Simon
          Posted 31/03/2013 at 2:56 pm | Permalink |

          Bahahahaha

      • MikeK
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 5:55 pm | Permalink |

        Shouldn’t it be, Yes Alan, No Alan, here Alan have a banana.

      • Posted 29/03/2013 at 9:57 am | Permalink |

        doesnt FTTN also provide fibre? And alot cheaper as well as it turns out

        • Posted 29/03/2013 at 10:13 am | Permalink |

          Sounds like it was too simple an explanation.

          • Posted 29/03/2013 at 4:16 pm | Permalink |

            its obviously cheaper to go wireless broadband from a FTTN solution vs from a FTTP as all the infrastructure is already in place. All they need to do is to mount a tower ontop on the NODE.. of course it would save alot if the nodes are designed for wireless upgrade in the future without replacement, i suppose a double storyed box would be a good starting point. Nodes 3Km apart can serve most metro areas.

            The wireless upgrade should start in 10-15 years time and should be able to replace the copper part. And there is certainly no rush either.

            • NBNAlex
              Posted 29/03/2013 at 4:55 pm | Permalink |

              Wow 10-15 years… and some whinge because the NBN isn’t coming to them for 5 years or so :/

            • Posted 29/03/2013 at 5:00 pm | Permalink |

              Well obviously…

              Wait what? Oh yeah, that’s (rolling out FTTN purely on the assumption that you want to use the node for a wireless tower) a terrible idea from an network engineering point of view. Where is the magical pixie dusted based wireless technology you’re going to use coming from that’ll render home fixed connections obsolete? How can you be sure the node placement is where you want the towers?

              Also with the high demand for mobile wireless infrastructure if the providers of that technology need power they can pay to have it lain themselves. It’s not that expensive relatively speaking.

              Mobile providers are not going to be any worse off under FTTP compared to FTTN.

            • Tim.H
              Posted 29/03/2013 at 5:56 pm | Permalink |

              Burstyourbubble, please inform yourself before posting. The distances your propose are simply ludicrous, I am sorry.

            • Simon Reidy
              Posted 31/03/2013 at 4:12 pm | Permalink |

              One of the most unintentionally funny comments I’ve read in some time. Did you come up with that stunning wireless plan all by yourself? Or did you get advice directly from Alan? In any case you certainly burst our bubble wide open and made fools of us all. In fact my bubble is so badly damaged after that post, I’m not even sure it can be repaired.

            • SIMON
              Posted 01/04/2013 at 10:23 pm | Permalink |

              You clearly have no idea what you are talking about ‘bursting your bubble’, you are the type of listener Alan Jones would be proud of.
              Anyone who thinks FTTN or Wireless is gonna serve us well into the future has rocks in their head, lol

              • Not the Neanderthal
                Posted 02/07/2013 at 1:29 am | Permalink |

                Anyone who thinks they can categorically say wireless technology can not be developed to cater to data transmission requirements of the future is making a fool of themselves. There are many fronts being explored and carriers expect to be offering 5G networks with download and upload speeds of 1Gbs before 2020.

                Technology advancements will make fools of people who think they know its limits, for example that fibre is the only method capable of handling fast transmission.

                • Posted 02/07/2013 at 5:20 am | Permalink |

                  Technology advancements of underlying principle technology have yet to blindside anyone.

                  It’s only application level technology, like the iPhone, that takes people by surprise.

                  Thus your comment is invalid.

                  • Not the Neanderthal
                    Posted 02/07/2013 at 10:05 am | Permalink |

                    mmm, you say it so it is true and my comment is invalid.

                    There are many people that have been ‘blind-sided’ by advances in ‘principle’ technology. There, I said it so it is true and your comment is invalid.

                    People invent things that haven’t been done before, which by definition means it blind-sides others.

                    I don’t want you doing my strategic management if you only look to the past without contingencies for the future.

                    • Posted 02/07/2013 at 10:56 am | Permalink |

                      There are many people that have been ‘blind-sided’ by advances in ‘principle’ technology. There, I said it so it is true and your comment is invalid.

                      If you truly think such a logical short-coming is how debating works you shouldn’t be commenting on this forum.

                      Maybe you require an analogy by way of explaination, where here it is: If Newton hadn’t discovered gravity the Apple would have still hit him on the head.

                      In other words, the principle technology or theory, that is gravity, remained unchanged, but what changed is our understanding or ability to use it.

                      The laws of physics around transmission of data have remained unchanged, and there is no future technology, despite you unfounded assertions otherwise, that actually topples the requirement for fixed-line fibre technology.

                      In fact, your entire premise here if flawed, which is why I didn’t try and address your points directly and tackled your premise. That premise being that the wireless and fixed-line technologies are a) mutually exclusive and b) the underlying understanding we have of this technology does not align with reality.

                      You are aware that every almost advance to wireless technology is appicable to fixed line technology, and in fact can usually help improve upon fixed line technology?

                      You are aware that every wireless network we have is in fact a hybrid system that relies on fixed line technology to operate? New advances rely even more heavily on those fixed line connections because they have a higher tower density in order to provide the improved bandwidth.

                      I conceed that we might get “blind-sided” but it won’t be by wireless, it will be some as yet undiscovered method of transmission in the realms of science fiction. I would consider this an acceptable risk considering the unlikelihood of it occuring.

                      People invent things that haven’t been done before, which by definition means it blind-sides others.

                      Yes, but they don’t invent things that counter the physical laws of the universe with which we live in, and that is what you’re suggesting here.

                      I don’t want you doing my strategic management if you only look to the past without contingencies for the future.

                      You do understand risk right? Exposure? Return? You do understand that when investing in something you make a risk assesment. You’re suggesting, effectively, if I read between the lines and give you a lot of benefit of the doubt, that we shouldn’t make an investment because of an as-yet undiscovered data tranmission technology that would render our understanding of both wireless and wired networks obsolete and allow us to violate or otherwise circumcent the pre-established and well documented limits of the technologies?

                      If you were in change of my strategic management, I would immediately fire you for suggesting we don’t invest a particular sector of the market, despite that market performing quite well, because of some possible event that in reality has a snowballs chance in hell of actually occuring.

                      Why, also, are you commenting on an article as old as this one? There have been far more recent developments than this. I think maybe you should go back and hide under your bridge.

        • Goresh
          Posted 02/04/2013 at 1:02 am | Permalink |

          I guess it is still too technical.

          FTT”N” means fiber to the Node, so no, it does not provide fiber.
          It will of course provide fiber back-haul for the copper in exactly the same way that is currently being done with DSL. In fact, for those already on DSL, guess what, you are already on the Liberal Party’s vision for “broadband” and you will be glad to know that the NBN is already completed in your area.

      • N. Emo
        Posted 29/03/2013 at 1:24 pm | Permalink |

        Kevin

        I am afraid to say that your in-depth statement may prove to be too complex for Alan to understand but good on you for trying to dumb it down. On the general issue of course David Thodey has got it right – the correct answer is that we need both NBN and wireless – one for heavy lifting and the other for mobility (and both together for redundancy).

        I have written to Malcolm Turnbull about the dangers of attaching his party’s flag to wireless at the same time as he dismisses the NBN – I spoke to someone in the Liberal-National Party coalition just prior to the last Federal election is that this might cause enough discerning voters to go with Labor and the NBN. As they say, the rest is history…

        The unanswered question is why the Coalition is so opposed to the NBN – $43 billion is not a big ask for the skeleton of a future system nor is any extra amount spent developing wireless. Australia has spent much more than this on relatively wasteful expenditure (Defence, Repatriation, Centrelink and Immigration come to mind) with little direct return to this country for much of this. If Turnbull has some insider knowledge of superfast wireless that actually works and is affordable, he should spill the beans early in my view – as things stand, it all starts to look desperate when Allan Jones is let off his leash.

        N. Emo

      • Jessica
        Posted 08/04/2013 at 4:15 pm | Permalink |

        Bahahaha! Brilliant. Conservatives are either rich or stupid…often both.

        • Not the Neanderthal
          Posted 02/07/2013 at 11:34 am | Permalink |

          So when someone from the left accidentally falls into wealth they become a conservative, interesting concept. Does that mean there are no poor conservatives? Or only the stupid ones. Gotta love the caring nature of the so-called lefties. Lets call everyone who doesn’t agree with us stupid and other nasty names. You are no better than radical Islamic groups with that mentality.

          The other ironic and fallacious argument is how catastrophic TA will be for our country. You are no better than the whyalla wipeout proponents when you talk like that.

    2. Rory
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:32 am | Permalink |

      ACMA are useless and it’s almost expected of Jones to hate on anything new or innovative because he’s a conservative

    3. Non Puto
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:35 am | Permalink |

      The less said about this radio dinosaur the better.

      Actually the less said by this radio dinosaur the better it would be for the community in general.

      • LetsBeOpenAboutThis
        Posted 30/03/2013 at 12:34 pm | Permalink |

        That about sums him up! lol

    4. Justin
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:45 am | Permalink |

      more like WIFI is the present and future, rather than wireless broadband.

    5. SMEMatt
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:46 am | Permalink |

      I don’t why Alan Jones keep pushing wireless doesn’t he know the health risks associated with wireless technology.

      • Stephen G
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 3:36 pm | Permalink |

        There is no evidence of health risks from cellular/wireless networking.

        The problem is that to get the capacity of the NBN, we would literally need hundreds of thousands of cell towers. That, plus the fact that those towers would need fibre run to them make the idea of solely using wireless quite ludicrous.

        • Aaron
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 3:42 pm | Permalink |

          I got the sarcasm, you obviously didnt…

          Check here :)

          http://www.abc.net.au/technology/articles/2013/01/23/3674993.htm

          • SMEMatt
            Posted 28/03/2013 at 6:21 pm | Permalink |

            I was implying there is a lot of crossover between Alan Jones audiences and those who believe the illness mentioned in TT show is physiological and not psychological. I call it TT syndrome because I’m pretty every-time Today Tonight run an article on the health risks on technology XYZ using a quack with a “diploma” in holistic medicine as their medical expert new sufferers present themselves. Now to get research funded to show the link between watching Today Tonight or listening to 2GBE and these psychological illness we might be get them removed due to the health risks.

    6. Hubert Cumberdale
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:53 am | Permalink |

      Note to Alan: Please, just keep your bogan listeners entertained with faux outrage and leave the ‘hard’ stuff to the tech websites.

      • NBNAlex
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 5:15 pm | Permalink |

        Hey HC, noticed that even the most ardent naysayers here aren’t silly enough to support Jones?

        Now that is something.

        The only comment that I have seen is from of them one who couldn’t wait to jump in and did so as soon as anything but Jones was mentioned (i.e. ROI)… priceless!

        • Hubert Cumberdale
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 6:17 pm | Permalink |

          “Hey HC, noticed that even the most ardent naysayers here aren’t silly enough to support Jones?”

          yes, but I also noticed they aren’t criticising him either. Any dig against the NBN no matter how erroneous or unethical is ok because stopping the “bad evil NBN” is a good thing and the end justifies the means. Just shows you how much credibility those opposed to the NBN lack.

          • NBNAlex
            Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:12 pm | Permalink |

            +1

          • NBNAlex
            Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:48 pm | Permalink |

            Then along comes Tel :/

    7. Paul
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:56 am | Permalink |

      This discounts both sides of the NBN. Does he think Turnbull should give up on the the FTTN idea and just stick to wireless? Everyone should have a wireless tower in their backyard that connects via wireless to a superwireless tower at the exchange which connects to the clouds using a superultramega wireless backbone.

      • Tom
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 12:02 pm | Permalink |

        Haven’t we seen that already in the past with Vodafone’s network? I heard that it was using wireless as backhaul for the mobile towers, before they started upgrading to fibre. Would have explained a lot about their network at the time.

        • Bruce H
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:28 pm | Permalink |

          They were using 2Mb DSL Copper for a while too! This is why I use the water pipe analogy – no matter how much pressure you have in the mains – a 13mm hose will only give you so much water flow.

    8. Brad
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 12:05 pm | Permalink |

      I guess Eric Schmidt is “dumb” then.

      (Isn’t it politically incorrect to use the word dumb in that sense these days?)

    9. TrevorX
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 12:07 pm | Permalink |

      Australian Competition and Consumer Network?

      • NBNAlex
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 4:50 pm | Permalink |

        That must be the body who overseas the National “Broadcasting” Network, Malcolm use to refer to in the early days…

        It just gets better eh?

        • NBNAlex
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 4:54 pm | Permalink |

          Hmmm… perhaps I just stumbled upon a name for MT’s new network.

          The NBN :/

        • NBNAlex
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 4:57 pm | Permalink |

          whoops oversees :)

    10. Kevin Cobley
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 12:24 pm | Permalink |

      I have a wireless key, only ever use it when ADSL is down when it’s raining, the key is near useless it’s about the equivalent of dialup can receive email but can’t ever upload email.
      If this is the future, I’m not interested in seeing it.

    11. P
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 12:33 pm | Permalink |

      I stopped reading when I got to “Alan Jones”.

      • Steve Dalby - iiNet
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 8:41 pm | Permalink |

        + eleventy one

    12. TechinBris
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 12:48 pm | Permalink |

      Will someone just tell this fool something like “Studies show that Wireless Data transmission turn 95% of those exposed to it’s radiation into Communist!”
      That should turn his blathering around in two seconds flat, as he wouldn’t have a clue that it has as much factual reality as his past “facts”.

      • SMEMatt
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:23 pm | Permalink |

        Wireless is a very communist medium with everyone sharing the same communal spectrum. The only conclusion I can draw from this is that Alan Jone is secretly an evil commie trying to hide behind faux outrage at the “Socialist” NBN. They use the term bogon to disassociate from the term red neck and while they claim the term red neck is related to the sun burnt necks of farmers it is really just a disguise for their red communist nature.

    13. TrevorX
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:05 pm | Permalink |

      Yesterday at lunch with the in-laws they asked some seemingly reasonable questions about the NBN, the underlying technology and comparable networks in the rest of the world. It devolved into statements like ‘you can’t trust politicians’ (said about every statement from Labor or NBN Co but not applied to LNP statements), ‘it is costing us (tax payers) a fortune’ (didn’t matter how many times I explained about debt funding with a guaranteed ROI), ‘the government shouldn’t be getting involved in something that is best left to private companies – this is just another Telstra’, ‘of course Liberal will continue the NBN, why would they stop it?’, and the absolute pearler – ‘you can’t trust anything Labor says, they are running this country into the ground. I have never voted Labor and I never will’. It didn’t matter what facts were presented, the response was like trying to convince a 5yo who stuck their fingers in their ears shouting ‘lalalala’, before going back to repeating the ignorant baseless nonsense they started out with.

      The whole experience was both disheartening and interesting – there are a lot of people like this and they’re not just the over 70 demographic. I find it difficult to get my brain around the idea that anyone could not be open to new information and facts presented to them, but it seems I am the minority. Most people have very strongly entrenched opinions and are only open to new information that supports their already held beliefs. Maybe it seems naive, but while I’ve always understood that a lot of people vote based on lifelong conditioning and prejudice, I still thought they could change their mind when confronted with unavoidably compelling evidence. I now realise just how wrong I was.

      Australia will get a Liberal government at the next election, possibly even such a strong swing that they can form Government without a Coalition. And Australia will get the Government and the crippled telecommunications infrastructure it deserves. Time to ensure my family is protected against the steep decline this country is looking forward to – the intelligent, educated people in this country are smart enough to see the writing on the wall – the rest don’t deserve our help, so our best option is to protect ourselves from being dragged down by their collective stupidity and ignorance.

      • Kevin Davies
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:10 pm | Permalink |

        How did you plan on doing this… leaving the country?

        • Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:29 pm | Permalink |

          Its not a bad plan .. if we all migrate to New Zealands South Island we could probaly out number them and claim it as a new state :)

        • TrevorX
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 2:11 pm | Permalink |

          “How did you plan on doing this… leaving the country?”

          Precisely. The world may be a small place, but (at the risk of challenging the imagination of many) it’s at least somewhat bigger than Australia ;-) The NBN would have helped to make the world ‘smaller’ and more accessible, particularly for our children. The LNP are committed to keeping Australia strongly entrenched as an intellectual and cultural backwater. I don’t want my kids growing up a a country with the collective opportunities of an obsolete mining town.

          • Simon Reidy
            Posted 28/03/2013 at 2:51 pm | Permalink |

            You and me both. After the federal election I’ve started to think of seriously getting out of this place for a while and live somewhere more progressive. It will cost a fortune and be full of uncertainties, but in mind its worth it to not have to watch Abbott and his pals destroy everything I care about in Australia. I watched it happen when Howard seized power and clung onto it for over 10 years, and I’m not sure I can stomach going through it all again with his prodige. Particularly as there is more on the line than ever, with immigration, global warming, education, disability, mental health and newstart reforms, and last but not least the NBN.

            How can people be so blind towards what’s at stake?

            • Posted 28/03/2013 at 4:04 pm | Permalink |

              I’ve long considered myself that I may move to Canada, purely because at least there they have a clue at what innovation and strong ICT investments can bring along.

              Even the US, NZ, UK or South Korea would all be excellent places to go. There may be violence central in the USA, but at least they TRY and improve the country even if it does go backward most of the time.

              • Simon Reidy
                Posted 28/03/2013 at 4:17 pm | Permalink |

                Canada is great. I really enjoyed my trip to Quebec and have a friend from college living there, so its high on my list of possible destinations too.

                • Hubert Cumberdale
                  Posted 28/03/2013 at 5:31 pm | Permalink |

                  You know that old saying “If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem”. Your ideas of moving to another country is loser talk. That’s exactly what they want you do to. Stay and fight. The solution is instead of moving to another country move to a different electorate. Any marginal seat will do.

                  • Simon Reidy
                    Posted 28/03/2013 at 5:52 pm | Permalink |

                    Ten years ago I probably would have said that, but the political prospects are so dire now, that it’ll personally be too heartbreaking and frustrating to deal with the consequences of so many Labor seats lost come September. The way things are going, unless something goes drastically wrong, The Coalition will probably enjoy at least two terms of majority government. As someone who sees need for reform in so many left-wing areas that will never be touched under the Coalition, it feels pointless (at the moment).

                    Plus I have no overwhelming sense of patriotism. I love Australia, but I also love many other countries, and there’s nothing wrong with exploring living in a better place in the world temporarily. Obviously I’d plan to return at a time when I felt it was worth doing so. And maybe I just want to see how effectively another country governs for a while. That hardly makes me a loser.

                    • Harimau
                      Posted 29/03/2013 at 12:26 am | Permalink |

                      I find myself with the same sentiments as others in this thread. The idea of Tony Abbott in power is practically apocalyptic, and the acknowledgement that he was thus the ‘choice’ of the Australian people fills me with a deep sense of hopelessness for this country. The possibility that my opportunities in the future will be determined by the collective vote of “dumb, drunk and racist” bogans leaves me with no faith in this country.

                      Maybe that’s an overreaction, but I am genuinely concerned. Maybe HC is right, and we should stay and fight. But unless there is deep social change, the Tony Abbotts and Alan Joneses of this country will continue to hold influential positions in this country.

                      And the chances of that… Well, I think I’ll have better chances elsewhere. I’ve been considering leaving this country and living in another place in the world, and maybe Abbott as PM is the excuse I’ve been waiting for. I’m single, I’ve finished university, and I’m not tied down in a company or career; I don’t really have anything holding me back, and I won’t face the same challenges that others among you might. Canada does seem like a great place to be, if only to escape summer in Australia :) but it seems even greater, as a way to escape Abbott’s Australia.

                      How did it come to this?

                      • Bob.H
                        Posted 29/03/2013 at 7:16 am | Permalink |

                        Please go overseas and take all those who think that there is a better country to live in with you. Get your experience overseas, increase your skill levels and then come back and share all this with those of us who remain behind.

                        Every country in the world has a down side, including Canada and New Zealand. Often it is a political problem, caused and or maintained by people like Tony Abbott and Julia Gillard. “Zanadu” is a dream regrettably.

                        It doesn’t really matter who gets elected come September. Neither political party will make unalterable changes to Australia simply because neither has anyone with the vision or ability to do anything major.

                        Don’t worry too much about the NBN by the time the Liberals have had three enquiries, two parliamentary committees, and considered a Royal Commission they will be out of power again and it will have been built.

                      • Harimau
                        Posted 29/03/2013 at 10:37 am | Permalink |

                        I’m not so naive as to believe that “anywhere but Australia” is an idyllic place to be, but I’m also not as optimistic as you with respect to Tony Abbott.

                        They’ve promised to pause (further progress of) the NBN (beyond current contracts which they will honour) while they do all these enquiries and committees, so the NBN will not be built by the end, as you say. And of course, the question put to the enquiries are going to be designed to produce a certain answer. For instance, what will be rolled out faster, ignoring contract renegotiation and redirection? For instance, what will be rolled out cheaper, ignoring operating costs over the long-term?

                        But really, the NBN is just one issue that I think the Coalition (well, specifically the Liberal leadership) will completely and utterly botch. Even if the NBN rolls out unhindered, it’ll be sugar taken with poison.

                        The best outcome of the September election has to be another hung parliament. Even if the Coalition gets shuffled into power, maybe they can deal with a minority government, with their new Opposition treating them in kind and opposing them the entire way. Only then will I have hope that the country won’t become a complete backwater. But otherwise, a majority Coalition government will be like giving a gun to a toddler. Though he may be lacking vision for any real change, that doesn’t mean that Abbott can’t do some serious damage.

                        But the idea that this country would vote for a man like Tony Abbott (and I know, I know, we vote for a candidate in our electorate, not our prime minister, but that’s not what the average man on the ground believes) is what really gets me. Not because it’s the right thing to do, but simply as a result of the character assassination of Gillard and her Labor government by the Coalition opposition and the mainstream media.

                        Maybe I’ll leave, come back in a few years and be wiser to the ways of the world (and maybe by then the Coalition will be ousted and the NBN will be built, and it will all have been just a bad dream). Perhaps I’ll even be wise enough to not get involved in politics. :)

                        Now it’s almost a dare, and I can’t back out from this.

                        Wish me luck and good fortune.

                      • Simon Reidy
                        Posted 29/03/2013 at 1:15 pm | Permalink |

                        This is more a reply to your second post which I thought really nailed it, but the post was nestled too deep to reply to. I agree in that just can’t handle the thought of living in a place where the majority of the people are so fickle that they’d let a snake like Abbott slide into power, solely as a message of disapproval for the current government. Like so many other places, right wing media has played a role in brainwashing a large portion of the population into thinking the Libs will somehow make their lives better, or has made them view the current government as ‘financially irresponsible’ (because Hockey knows better than Swan right? /s) , and run by a leader you “can’t trust” (all because of an election promise that Gillard was forced to break as a result of the Labor/Green alliance). Never mind the fact that Abbott backflips and lies his arse off at every turn. Or the fact Labor has done so much good under Julia Gillard with so many important reforms being put in place.

                        I will stay and fight up until the election, but then its quite possibly “retreat time”. As you said I don’t for a second think there’s a perfect country out there that neatly supports all my political views or has all the same luxuries we often take for granted in Australia, but there are countries with more progressive ideas and political agendas, and certainly places far more advanced and interesting to a tech geek like me, with their more advanced technological infrastructure and availability of cheap, awesome gadgets.

                        Plus in your case, if you’re young and straight out of Uni with no family to support, go and see the world while you can! I managed to fit in two trips to the States, one to Japan and one to Europe in my twenties, but it wasn’t enough, and only made me realise that I still have another 99% of the planet to explore. I’ll always call Australia home (just like the tacky Qantas commercial :) ) but first and foremost I’m a citizen of planet Earth, so I intend to see as much of it as possible before my time is up. What better time to do so when your home country temporarily turns to shit?

                        I will officially be in mourning for the NBN for one year anyway (shall have to wear nothing but black) and hanging around for the protracted NBN funeral (and seeing its rebirth as a incomplete, brain-damaged coalition zombie) will be too sad to bear.. ;-(

                      • LetsBeOpenAboutThis
                        Posted 30/03/2013 at 1:09 pm | Permalink |

                        Just thinking outside the square, As far as i know the Greens have always been very supportive of the NBN and also the independents Windsor, Katter and Oakeshott, Not sure about the Nationals? But it would be in their best interest as well.
                        With the general publics displeasure of parliament these days, Maybe the wildcards might play a bigger part next time than what people might think!

                    • Richard Ure
                      Posted 29/03/2013 at 6:54 pm | Permalink |

                      Looked at from one’s own point of view, perhaps buying out the property or tenancy of someone whose premises are passed but not connected might be less drastic than leaving the country. I find it hard to imagine how everyone with the opportunity to be connected to the NBN hasn’t beaten down the doors of the nearest RSP.

                      Perhaps we can take heart from the fact the experts say the NBN was important, if not decisive, in the last election. Remember too the blow torch is yet to be applied to Tony Abbott during the course of the real campaign. Turning up at random workplaces and shopping centres (and today at a religious ceremony!) won’t be enough. Can the Liberal image makers really keep him away from scrutiny indefinitely? At least for the non New Limited rump of the Australian print media should expect more. And News may be dominant in print but how about TV?

                      • Abel Adamski
                        Posted 30/03/2013 at 11:48 am | Permalink |

                        ” Remember too the blow torch is yet to be applied to Tony Abbott during the course of the real campaign.”
                        A nice dream, however as the OP indicated the programming and conditioning is becoming too deeply entrenched and leopards don’t change their spots.
                        “http://delimiter.com.au/2013/03/08/hypocrisy-the-australian-attacks-abcs-nbn-objectivity/”

          • Stephen
            Posted 28/03/2013 at 4:20 pm | Permalink |

            I’m another one for seeing the sights of the world. Australia is in for a dark decade the way things are heading.
            We should be learning the lessons of Denmark and Norway and their investment of the money from natural resources. Instead we’re following the UKs path of squandering it and making the super rich richer.

            • SMEMatt
              Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:02 pm | Permalink |

              Did try going to the way of Norway once a few billionaires with vested interests put a stop to that, a few billionaires with vested interests would like the entire to world to go the way of the US but look how well that is working out for non billionaires.

        • Ben
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 2:20 pm | Permalink |

          married a foreigner.
          kids have two passports, and their grandparents already have a fibre connection !!!

      • alain
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:20 pm | Permalink |

        @TrevorX

        ‘’(didn’t matter how many times I explained about debt funding with a guaranteed ROI),’

        Did you explain that the ROI is NOT guaranteed?

        ‘The competition regulator has warned that the national broadband network may not meet its target 7.1 per cent return if the rollout continues to be delayed.’

        http://www.afr.com/p/technology/accc_chief_warns_on_nbn_rate_of_IXqNgBt0qpJbOZV3PsBYvI

        • GongGav
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:37 pm | Permalink |

          The ROI is guaranteed through the business plans extrapolated figures. If at some point in the future its clear the NBN wont ever provide that return to any reasonable level, I believe the Govt of the day is obligated to provide that return to the investors. At which point (and only at that point) the cost goes on budget (and only that part of the cost), and the costs are laid to rest once and for all.

          As things stand though, with demonstrated numbers you can comfortably predict with a captive market, there should never be a risk that there wont be a return on investment.

          Until something changes that proves 7 million households WONT connect, the predicted numbers are valid, no matter how much you may disagree. And even in that unlikely situation, the amount of people that are still ocnnected will still provide a significant amount of money to reduce the funded liability.

          The money side of this should never be in question. 7 million out of 12 million residences is a very low prediction, and one that really cant be argued against.

        • NBNAlex
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 2:10 pm | Permalink |

          @ alain….

          As TrevorX said…

          “… I find it difficult to get my brain around the idea that anyone could not be open to new information and facts presented to them, but it seems I am the minority. Most people have very strongly entrenched opinions and are only open to new information that supports their already held beliefs. Maybe it seems naive, but while I’ve always understood that a lot of people vote based on lifelong conditioning and prejudice, I still thought they could change their mind when confronted with unavoidably compelling evidence. I now realise just how wrong I was.”

          Sadly, too right Trevor, too right.

        • SMEMatt
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 2:56 pm | Permalink |

          Just because a RoI isn’t guaranteed also doesn’t cause the entire project to cost 100Billion dollars and go on current accounts. At latter date a future government may decide to write down [b]some[/b] the NBN co debt for any number reasons. At this stage all we have is past performance of a similar sized company in this same business. How much did Telecom and then Telstra turn over to the government, what we do know is an assessment post sale had revenue from Telecom/Telstra at a greater value than the interest on the debt the sale repaid. We also do know that without any plans to recover cost the spend on any LNP proposal will need go on current accounts and if the underlying problems that got us in this position aren’t addressed we will be in the same boat again 10-20years from now having to spend more money.

          I don’t really care what technology is used to deliver NBN as long as the primary goal is to fix the fundamental problem that got us to this point in the first place. All MT and “dumb” people like Alan Jones talk out is “faster” “cheaper” or do it wireless or FTTN or HFC without addressing the fundamental issue that got us to this point. It is really no different to the LNP asylum seeker policy of “we will turn back the boats” without addressing the cause, although both parties have very similar issue is this regards. Ultimately it comes down to a more fundamental problem of why should a major political party do anything to provide long term solutions when we only remember the failures and not the successes.

        • Observer
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 9:43 pm | Permalink |

          Alain.

          Cherry picking so we don’t forget you exist. Don’t worry, we know you do.

          Why don’t you tell us your take on Alan Jones’ views of the NBN? At least you have at least two things in common. A first name (albeit, different versions of it) and great dislike of everything Labor.

          Please entertain us with your thoughts on the core of the article.

          • alain
            Posted 29/03/2013 at 12:26 pm | Permalink |

            I’m cherry picking nothing, I know many would prefer it if the ACCC didn’t make known their concerns with the NBN ROI based on missed rollout targets, I have read through the responses, nothing indicates why the ACCC has got their concern wrong.

            As for Jones does anyone really think that his audience which is limited to a small section of the NSW population has any influence whatever as to the outcome of the September election based on what he says?

            • kentlfc
              Posted 29/03/2013 at 5:29 pm | Permalink |

              Actually he is syndicated across the the country.

              His prime audience would be the 60+ age group, who would pretty much have no interest in the NBN.

              • MikeK
                Posted 31/03/2013 at 10:52 pm | Permalink |

                Hey, I’m 61 and my sisters are older than me and we all understand the importance of the NBN and none of us listen to the rubbish that comes out of the mouth of Alan Jones.

            • Abel Adamski
              Posted 30/03/2013 at 11:50 am | Permalink |

              Actually he appears along with Bolt and Co on the list of Australias 50 most influential

      • Non Puto
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:43 pm | Permalink |

        A conversation on politics is comparable to a conversation on religion; faith gets in the way. It is a rare zealot who will listen to logic over faith, as you are fundamentally trying to change that persons belief in themselves, which is why it is so easy to reach a heated stalemate with either of these subjects.

      • andyrob
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 2:20 pm | Permalink |

        I have exactly the same issue. The inlaws have brain washed my wife to be the same. I only have to say “the green cable is starting to get laid down the street” as it is, and she starts going off. Try to talk to them about how well the country is going, ecenomically, ditto. Just can’t win. Between entrenchment and MSM we are seen as the idiots. Geez go figure?

        Everyone just sees it as a waste of our tax money and won’t listen to or read the real facts. It is so frustrating.

        • Posted 28/03/2013 at 5:20 pm | Permalink |

          I worked at the recent state election, and the amount of people who just want to vote against the red head was disturbing; Not only do the populous not understand the difference between state and federal governments, but they are completely brain washed into thinking we are in some kind of dire straits under labor.

          http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/21/australians-julia-gillard

          • Soth
            Posted 28/03/2013 at 6:04 pm | Permalink |

            Well I think voters vote in phases, when a government has been in for a few terms, they want fresh meat in the parliment, not that it does any good, just my thoughts.
            But yes by the looks of it, everyone I’ve asked around work and home will not be voting Labor, so the NBN to my house will probably just be a dream I had once :(

      • Michael
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:46 pm | Permalink |

        “didn’t matter how many times I explained about debt funding with a guaranteed ROI”

        “I find it difficult to get my brain around the idea that anyone could not be open to new information and facts presented to them, but it seems I am the minority. Most people have very strongly entrenched opinions and are only open to new information that supports their already held beliefs. Maybe it seems naive, but while I’ve always understood that a lot of people vote based on lifelong conditioning and prejudice, I still thought they could change their mind when confronted with unavoidably compelling evidence. I now realise just how wrong I was. ”

        I seem to see some contradictions in those two statements.

        The ROI is not gauranteed unless someone has underwritten it financially (not to my knowledge, and even then they can go broke). Already the rollout has slowed and the business plan has been revised, slower rollout but better uptake. Nothing in business is gauranteed in that sense.

        • TrevorX
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 8:22 pm | Permalink |

          The ROI is guaranteed insofar as the framework and assumptions surrounding the NBN and NBN Co – that is, assuming unhindered completion of the NBN under the existing business plan, even if the time frame slips and the costs blow out, NBN Co is still required to deliver that return, even if it takes longer. Yes they can be heavily criticised along the way, yes heads will roll if things go pear shaped. But that is no barrier to the NBN achieving the required turnover and meeting their ROI targets. Indeed, because under the plan the NBN will have a monopoly on fixed telecoms infrastructure in AustraliaAustralia everyone will be using it, it will make money and generate a return, and it is ludicrous given the business plan and costing models to think that loan interest will outpace income. As long as it gets built, the NBN will meet the ROI targets, that is an unavoidable fact. The only thing that can stop this is derailing of the project as it is currently planned.

          So yes, it is guaranteed.

          • Michael
            Posted 28/03/2013 at 8:48 pm | Permalink |

            So let me get it straight,

            If, if costs blow out significantly, then the ACCC will allow the NBN to exploit its monopoloy position to meet its ROI? (e.g. floods delay rollout and damage infastructure in QLD etc etc)

            Given that the ACCC just said that it may not meet its ROI targets?

            • TrevorX
              Posted 28/03/2013 at 9:38 pm | Permalink |

              The NBN as planned will generate a return, and that return will pay for the debt accrued and generate enough profit for approx 7% ROI, thereby costing the Government nothing over the life of the project. I don’t understand why or how this is a difficult concept.

              Quite aside from the technology debate,this isn’t just a superior funding model, it has no equal as a public infrastructure project within a capitalist economic framework. It’s not just that the LNP (lack of an) alternative isn’t as good, they can’t possibly come up with anything superior – they can only equal it by adopting the same model.

              Ok, technically they could improve upon it by reducing the ROI and promising to legislate to keep future profit within a modest annual return figure, but while that means users would pay less, the Govt would have funding to offset against the tax base, so it would be an arguable improvement (and reducing the ROI to creditors would probably mean they couldn’t raise the necessary capital). So maybe improvements to the funding model would be difficult to achieve.

              • Michael
                Posted 28/03/2013 at 10:42 pm | Permalink |

                TrevorX,

                “The NBN as planned will generate a return, and that return will pay for the debt accrued and generate enough profit for approx 7% ROI, thereby costing the Government nothing over the life of the project. I don’t understand why or how this is a difficult concept.”

                I think that you misunderstand the concept of a ROI.

                The ROI is the net discount rate such that future profits over the forward estimating period balance the cost of capital. (Usually derived through iteration in a spread sheet as it is almost impossible to solve exactly).

                The issue I raised what that if you change one side of the equation, i.e costs, through a delay from natural disaters, contractor issues, labour shortages etc, anyone is possible (nothing is “gauranteed”) to offset the lost revenue or delayed revenue, then extra revenue will need to be raised. If costs go up then the ROI will fall, or if revenue is delayed then the ROI will fall as it represents the time value of the investment.

                In either situation if something untoward happens you claim the return is “gauranteed” but to ensure that prices would have to rise as that is the only mechanism that NBN Co can directly affect to increase revenue. Since NBN Co is a monopoly wholesaler this is entirely possible, but this is also what many people complained that Telstra was doing, using is monopoly position to exploit the market.

                • Harimau
                  Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:24 pm | Permalink |

                  In other words, you are nit-picking.

                  He really, really shouldn’t have used the word “guaranteed”. What a tremendous mistake.

                  I wholeheartedly agree with you and, in fact, I’ll expand on your argument, Michael:
                  Nothing in life is guaranteed.

                  Phew. Now that that’s out of the way…

                  • Michael
                    Posted 29/03/2013 at 12:49 am | Permalink |

                    In terms of finance, if a return is “guaranteed” or not is pretty important as well as gauging the level of risk. Ever wonder why there is such a fuss about the credit rating?

                    • Harimau
                      Posted 29/03/2013 at 10:00 am | Permalink |

                      The business case is sound, according to everyone but you and alain. You seem to know something that others don’t. You’ve seen the future, and it is a desolate place.

                      Of course there are some things that can’t be predicted, and maybe, with your famous foresight, you believe you would have been a better project manager? But these are small ripples in a large lake. The 7.1% ROI is all but guaranteed, largely because the NBN will replace the copper and so everyone* will be on fibre, wireless or satellite – they will all be customers of the NBN. As it stands, NBNco doesn’t even need to raise prices because it’s been clearly demonstrated that their predictions of take-up rates are incredibly conservative – most customers have chosen higher speed tiers, and I don’t expect this trend to change much (but of course, you know better). After all, as others (usually against the NBN) have stated, why would someone buy the speed tier (12M) that is slower than (some) ADSL2 services, when they can get a better service at a comparable if not lower price?

                      *whoops, I shouldn’t say everyone, but instead, “a very large proportion of people”

                      There’s a difference between caution and pessimism, and you often seem to find yourself on the side of the latter with respect to the NBN. I wonder why that is.

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 29/03/2013 at 10:07 am | Permalink |

                        +1

                        Nicely stated :)

                      • Michael
                        Posted 29/03/2013 at 10:52 am | Permalink |

                        http://delimiter.com.au/2013/03/28/dumb-people-cant-see-wireless-is-nbn-future-alan-jones/#comment-597155

                        If you believe that increased uptake rates can offset any and all possible cost increases then that is fine. But as others have highlighted there are caps in nominal terms on the % that prices can rise each year so they are limited in how they can offset any cost increases.

                        You might call me pessimistic Harimau, but judging but figures relased on Thursday last week everything is perfectly on track……….

                      • Posted 29/03/2013 at 11:04 am | Permalink |

                        Everything is perfectly on track? So what’s the problem? ;)

                      • Harimau
                        Posted 29/03/2013 at 11:52 am | Permalink |

                        I do not believe* that increased uptake rates can offset** any and all possible*** cost increases.

                        I am confident* that increased uptake rates will likely exceed** any probable and foreseeable*** cost increases.

                        What do you believe? Or what are you confident about?

                      • Michael
                        Posted 29/03/2013 at 12:40 pm | Permalink |

                        “I am confident* that increased uptake rates will likely exceed** any probable and foreseeable*** cost increases.”

                        Just a question about project management –

                        If the cost increases are “probable and foreseeable” the why wouldn’t they be factored into the original proposal? There would need to be a strategy to prevent it or a factor to account for the additional cost at the start, as the client would not appreciate being told that:

                        “Yes we need additional funds for a problem that we knew about from the start but deliberately choose to ignore / under-quote for. “

                      • Harimau
                        Posted 29/03/2013 at 11:33 pm | Permalink |

                        I’m not managing this project, I’m just offering a reasoned view that allows me to be more optimistic about the future than you. In other words, the project outline may need to be reconsidered, but the outcomes remain favourable.

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 30/03/2013 at 7:32 pm | Permalink |

                        Indeed Harimau… you are corresponding with Michael the self confessed NBN supporter who curiously bags everything NBN and anyone who dares support the NBN 24/7 :/

                      • Michael
                        Posted 30/03/2013 at 9:50 pm | Permalink |

                        NBNAlex, judging by your constant attacks on me instead of actual responses,

                        I think your best debating partner would be a mirror.

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 9:35 am | Permalink |

                        Constant attacks…? Another playing the poor me innocent victim card…*sigh*

                        Hypocritically, the same someone who constantly straight up accuses me of trolling (apparently if one disagrees with the far right, one is a troll – go figure) and has told me to go away… but do I cry personal?… No..

                        Michael one’s comments and obvious motives (even admitted to) for those comments, are here for scrutiny and to be critiqued. That’s what these forums are for.

                        I’d suggest, stop the hypocrisy, harden up or if you are still unable to stand the heat.. well :)

            • Posted 28/03/2013 at 10:02 pm | Permalink |

              I think the document you need to read is the SAU for the NBN. This covers this question in verbose detail.

              • Michael
                Posted 28/03/2013 at 10:43 pm | Permalink |

                Yep, it limits prices rises, therefore the ROI is not gauranteed, unless that is a faulty interpretation?

                • Posted 28/03/2013 at 10:59 pm | Permalink |

                  That is correct. However it’s correct in the same way we’re not exactly sure what the weather will be tomorrow. We can, and will, make an educated guess. And the boffins have. They have guessed 7%. Important to note.

                  • Michael
                    Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:27 pm | Permalink |

                    I am not disagree’ing with NBN Co’s forecasts, but with the statement that the ROI is “gauranteed”. In business (not to mention politics) that term is almost certain to preface something that is too good to be true.

                    I don’t see how you can believe the return is gauranteed and yet “be open to new information and facts presented to them”, as events unfold.

                    • TrevorX
                      Posted 29/03/2013 at 11:58 am | Permalink |

                      Michael,

                      I don’t disagree with your technical definition of the term ‘guaranteed’ (although you do keep spelling it incorrectly) – there is nothing that is actually guaranteed, as the future is uncertain. And yes, political and financial guarantees are very specific and limited instruments.

                      But this technical definition introduces unnecessary complexity to the broadly understood definition and the (quite obvious intent) of what I said – your argument is actually misleading, as you’re suggesting that because it can’t be absolutely guaranteed 100% it must be uncertain (you would use it in a technical sense, which is again misleading), but the NBN ROI is far from uncertain (as the term is broadly understood) – the business case for it is extremely strong and it would take a! major change in circumstances for it to miss its targets. As stated, if take up rates continue as initial trends suggest, the ROI targets will be met years in advance because the assumptions made in developing the business plan were extremely conservative.

                      It is precisely because the business plan assumptions were conservative, because actual uptake rates and the speed tiers customers are opting for are both much higher than anticipated, because the technical aspects of the rollout are very solid, because everyone needing fixed line broadband and telephony in Australia will be using it by the time it is complete, because mobile operators will connect much of their infrastructure on top of it (where fibre backhaul hasn’t already been installed) so even a certain amount of mobile broadband users will also be contributing to NBN returns, because the time line to meet ROI deadlines is extremely conservative that I say with a great deal of certainty that NBN ROI is guaranteed, because as long as fundamental assumptions are not dramatically altered (you know, by stopping it) the targets will be met. By pretending that the technical definition of absolute certainty is meaningful or even credible in this circumstance is misleading, obtuse and intellectually dishonest.

                      • Michael
                        Posted 29/03/2013 at 12:34 pm | Permalink |

                        Then why has there been so much furore about misleading advertisements in a similar example say TPG and “unlimited bundles” or Kogan’s recent “unlimited” phone plans?

                        You claim it is “misleading, obtuse and intellectually dishonest” but if a representive of the government or NBN Co’ advertised the returns as guaranteed, then I wonder what the outcome would be?

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 29/03/2013 at 1:31 pm | Permalink |

                        You have IMO, made a rare, interesting point Michael… so kudos.

                        But do the Gov. or NBNCo claim guaranteed?

                        Now, I realise we currently are building an NBN, but I also realise that there may after 14 Sept, be a drastic change to the overall plan… sadly there are little actuals to go by, however…

                        As such, where does the alternative to the NBNs actual slogan being claimed of “cheaper and faster” fit into all of this?

                      • TrevorX
                        Posted 30/03/2013 at 1:19 pm | Permalink |

                        ” but if a representive of the government or NBN Co’ advertised the returns as guaranteed, then I wonder what the outcome would be?”

                        Michael, you do realise the importance of context to an argument, don’t you? I made a statement about what I had said in a discussion with my in-laws (a couple in their 70′s) while trying to explain technical aspects of the NBN and political relevance. As I said, I readily concede that by the technical definition the ROI is not ‘guaranteed’, but the argument for ROI targets being met is extremely strong. Attempting to explain nuances such as this is problematic and likely to only confuse the lay person – I explained the situation to attempt to impart the realities of the situation, as well as fundamental assumptions and most likely outcomes. I also shared some sources and places where they could find more detailed, objective analysis if they wanted to learn more.

                        Had they absorbed what I attempted to impart, they would now be much more knowledgeable on the subject (compared with their previous opinions based on Mr Abbot & Co’s deceptive and misleading misinformation campaign). As it is they didn’t appear to hear a word that was said that didn’t agree with their existing assumptions – apparently the most important consideration in this election is “that woman is a slut!”… You can’t argue with bigotry like that!

                        So I wasn’t stating that the Govt or NBN Co were claiming the ROI as guaranteed – they’ve been perfectly honest about the assumptions, risks and how ROI targets have been set and will be met. But broadly, when attempting to explain something as complex as the NBN with people who don’t know much about it (but need to have some comprehension because of the importance of it and the strong likelihood of the damage that will be done by the LNP) it is necessary to speak in simplified terms and summarise. The ROI being guaranteed under the current plan is broadly accurate and highly unlikely to be incorrect, and even if it proves wrong the net impact will be extremely minimal (as it’s not an ‘either/or’ proposition, it simply means whatever shortfall will have to be recovered and repaid through some other mechanism). Again, not only is summarising the situation like this a perfectly acceptable use of the term guaranteed in a general sense, I contend that pedantically sticking to the technical definition is unnecessarily confusing and misleading and would disingenuously suggest to the layperson that the likely outcome would in fact be the opposite of what the facts suggest at this point.

                      • Michael
                        Posted 30/03/2013 at 2:43 pm | Permalink |

                        1. Why be so condescending to the “lay person”, many will have significantly better knowledge of economics than you if not necessarily telecomunications.

                        2. You say you are using it to simplify, but terms the ROI does not need to be qualified with terms like guaranteed, that alone is adding additional levels of complexity to the argument. It has been included to increase the strength of your argument, which is misleading as the term is incorrect.

                        Simply stating the NBN’s ROI is 7.1% but by including guaranteed that is purely to say that there is no doubt, when even you have admitted there is.

                      • Posted 30/03/2013 at 3:04 pm | Permalink |

                        The latest in a long line of industry experts that believe NBNco’s financial projections are highly unrealistic:

                        See page 46:

                        http://i.haymarket.net.au/Assets/CA1303015_eMail_-_TechBrochure_New_NBN_Report.pdf

                        Regardless of which party wins the next Federal Election, we believe that broadband policy will need to be reset. That is because we remain sceptical of the projections contained in the NBN business plan for two main reasons:

                        1_ There is no fibre premium – The NBN Co plan implies that, over time, as customers use more and more data they will pay more and hence the amount that RSPs will pay NBN Co will also increase. Global benchmarking suggests that this is unlikely. Market demand predictions and economics provide some clues as to why this would be the case.

                        2_ The ROI is not sustainable – The plan implies that NBN Co’s profit margins and return on investment (ROI) will rise over time. These ‘outer-year’ margins and ROI look unsustainable from a regulatory or political perspective.

                        By the way, the Internal Rate of Return is a totally different concept from Return on Investment. As Michael pointed out above, the IRR is a discount rate that equivalates the projected stream of revenue and expenses on a discounted cashflow basis. NBNco’s highly unrealistic business plan projects an IRR of 7% over the lifetime of the project.

                        Return on Investment, on the other hand, is a static measure of profitability:

                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_on_investment

                        As the expert report quoted above points out, NBNco’s business plan actually projects that the ROI will rise steeply over time. This is highly unrealistic and pure spreadsheet modelling fantasy when set against commercial (and political) realities.

                        I’m sure you’re highly qualified and a fount of wisdom on technical matters. However, as evidenced by your misapprehension of the fundamental difference between the simple financial concepts of IRR and ROI, your in-laws are very wise people indeed to recognise your lack of expertise in commercial matters and completely ignore your attempts to brainwash them with ALP propaganda on their NBN.

                        Old people are wise — never forget that ;)

                      • PeterA
                        Posted 30/03/2013 at 6:51 pm | Permalink |

                        The only thing old people are (categorically), is old.

                        Wisdom comes with more than just age in my experience.

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 30/03/2013 at 7:35 pm | Permalink |

                        @ Kookaburra… we’ve heard all your electioneering BS before, when you (prior to the other dozen monikers) previously posted as Tosh P300…

                        So should we take you any more seriously this time?

                        I say no.

                • NBNAlex
                  Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:19 pm | Permalink |

                  Sorry Michael, as you are a self confessed NBN supporter, I ergo can’t understand why it is you always end up arguing against the NBN/pro-NBNers and never against the… well let’s be frank, naysaying FUDsters… curious?

                  • Michael
                    Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:28 pm | Permalink |

                    Well really, there is no one here supporting the NBN.

                    • NBNAlex
                      Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:41 pm | Permalink |

                      Yeeees, ok tell us again (as a self confessed NBN supporter, who isn’t here supporting the NBN after all) about the necessary evil FttN again… *rolls eyes*

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:42 pm | Permalink |

                        BTW – “guaranteed” :)

                      • Michael
                        Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:51 pm | Permalink |

                        Lol, have I ever supported FTTN?

                        But for some who is “on the fence” you sure argue like one…

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:55 pm | Permalink |

                        FFS the strawman comes out straight away, really… again????

                        Show me in my above comments where I said you supported FttN!

                        Seriously do you tell lies for a living…?

                        Next you’ll ask me why I din’t anser the questions you never asked again… *rolls eyes*

                        You said FttN was a necessary evil – DIDN’T YOU???

                        Well???

                      • Michael
                        Posted 29/03/2013 at 12:40 am | Permalink |

                        Go away.

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 29/03/2013 at 10:11 am | Permalink |

                        @ Michael…

                        Seriously, that’s your response?

                        Well I must admit it beats your usual nonsensical strawman arguments (as per above).

                        :)

      • Richard Ure
        Posted 29/03/2013 at 7:57 pm | Permalink |

        @TrevorX Do

        your inlaws internet users now? ADSL or Wireless? Are they moved by the fact wireless is so much more expensive than wired?

        • TrevorX
          Posted 30/03/2013 at 1:35 pm | Permalink |

          @Richard Ure

          They currently have ADSL (at about 14mb/s due to their short distance from the local exchange).

          Don’t get me wrong, they broadly support the technical aspects of the NBN and have said they think it’s vital for the country. The problem is they believe Abbot and the LNP continue it unchanged. Any statements to the contrary they dismissed as Labor Party propaganda. Seriously. When shown direct quotes from Abbot and Turnbull they just believe it to be a pre-election tactic that they would flipflop on once in Govt. Believe me, the mental gymnastics defied comprehension. And yet I have two accept the probability that there are more people like this than there are rational, logical people in this country, as that’s the only way the polls could be accurate.

          • TrevorX
            Posted 30/03/2013 at 1:45 pm | Permalink |

            Corrections:

            … they believe Abbot and the LNP will continue it unchanged.

            And yet I have to accept the probability…

            Stupid autocorrect :-\

            • PeterA
              Posted 30/03/2013 at 6:54 pm | Permalink |

              Get a spade and run it through the sheath of their copper. Ask them how well their internet performs when it rains.

              (jk)

    14. nonny-moose
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:08 pm | Permalink |

      No. Dumb people think you can serve a 150gb, 200, 500, 1tb plan using wireless. Cost per bit is improved with lte by all accounts, but you will run into data carriage limits well before you will on fixed lines – let alone if you try to put the whole nation on it, and bail out of fixed connections altogether.

      He’s been doing this several times since his previous talking – to by acma. I think its high time they pulled him up short and do more than just a truth in media class… He obviously didn’t pay attention. He isn’t a journalist or broadcaster – I’d call him a propagandist. That’s something that doesn’t benefit the listening public, but sadly I don’t see him being dislodged anytime soon.

      • Abel Adamski
        Posted 30/03/2013 at 12:08 am | Permalink |

        Technically I believe he describes himself as does 2GB as “an Entertainer”, that is why Journalistic and Media rules can be “bent”
        However the falthfull followers and the gullible do not understand the distinction and the substantial ramifications.

        Care to have a look at the Australian’s top 50 most Influential Australians, Jones. Bolt , etc all score highly

    15. Simon Reidy
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:10 pm | Permalink |

      Lets not forget this is the same esteemed gentleman who thought it was funny to suggest that the prime minister’s father died from shame (and then waffled on with his so called apology for an hour, which wasn’t even an apology).

      The man will say whatever he knows he can get away with. And in this country that is just about anything that can’t quickly be debunked without an expert on hand (the few times Jones does feature an expert that disagrees within, he’ll talk over them then cut them off).

      Even his most major fuck-ups have cost him a few weeks off the air and a fine, then he’s straight back into it as soon as he hits the mic again. No brain and no shame.

    16. Frank
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:13 pm | Permalink |

      Alan, if wireless is so good then cut 2GB’s broadband connection and use a wireless dongle for a month. Then come back and tell me how good it was.

      • GongGav
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 2:27 pm | Permalink |

        And how expensive.

    17. Soth
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:14 pm | Permalink |

      http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3tk3zy/
      Good old meme generator. What a sad sad man Alan Jones is, fine you don’t like Labor, but to want to destroy the NBN is just reckless.

      • Simon Reidy
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 2:34 pm | Permalink |

        Alan is so meme-worthy, I could sit here all day creating them :)

        http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3tk5n9/

        http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3tk5r9/

        • Soth
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 3:28 pm | Permalink |

          Brilliant! Thanks for sharing :)
          Hopefully Alan is the type of person who Google’s himself.

          • Simon Reidy
            Posted 28/03/2013 at 3:46 pm | Permalink |

            haha. Hope so. Although I imagine Alan prefers Binging himself :).

        • Gamertech
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 6:17 pm | Permalink |

          Make sure to stick those on Whirlpool so they rank right up the top of Google :P

    18. marcus
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:22 pm | Permalink |

      Its simple:
      Nothing travels faster than light. so wireless is out.
      So light is the fastest medium for the NBN.
      Light doesnt travel through solid objects unless travelling along glass.
      Light doesnt turn corners unless being bend through glass.

      Fibre optic is glass.

      NBN should be fibre to the home.

      see that wasnt so hard was it?

      • AJ
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 3:42 pm | Permalink |

        Wireless travels at the speed of light as well just at a longer wavelength to visible-light but the available spectrum for wireless is narrow compared to visible and UV light

      • Posted 28/03/2013 at 5:07 pm | Permalink |

        Someone should send Jones an article about Tachyons and see if he will talk about them next …

        *snorts*

      • PeterA
        Posted 30/03/2013 at 7:14 pm | Permalink |

        Sadly propagation speeds of signals is against Fibre.

        the photons travel through fibre at approximately 66% of the speed of light.
        The radio waves of wireless travel at much closer to the speed of light (99.7% I have heard) and thus “travel” much faster.

        Sadly the real-world benefits of these faster transmission speeds are lost in a large variety of ways. (shared spectrum, encoding/decoding etc.).

        The overall latency of fibre is not worse off as a result. (but in a GPON deployment I suspect the total latency of wireless and fibre probably comes out about equal, but I don’t have any hard facts on this – it is just my own guess).

        Thus; the latency is probably equal (despite the 33% slower fibre), and the total bandwidth available to each end point is much more controlled under a Fibre deployment.

        As the fibre spectrum is shared between a maximum of 32 users; rather than the potentially thousands that would share the available “air” spectrum.

        It is the sharing that dooms wireless. The speed of proagation has very little effect ultimately.

        As an Aside; someone recently invented “core-less” fibre, which has the propagation speed of in-air photons; but the flexibility of a fibre wire. [ie no need to have line of sight].

        If perfected (can’t make very long fibres yet) it could potentially shave some 10′s of milliseconds off a few of the intercontinental fibre connections. Total bandwidth is not really affected.

        • Paul Thompson
          Posted 02/04/2013 at 9:29 am | Permalink |

          I only learned about the 66% speed of light thing a couple of months ago – it is good to share these kinds of facts here.

          I think that there is one more element over and above the ‘sharing’ that you have talked about which is to the further detriment of wireless. That extra element is how quickly the signal strength drops off. With fibre it is really pretty much negligible, and can go for 50km without a worry. But wireless either needs to crank up the output to increase distance, or to crank up the number of towers. Both are serious flaws when compared to fibre.

          • Simon Reidy
            Posted 02/04/2013 at 2:43 pm | Permalink |

            Same here. It was an easy false assumption to make that optical cables deliver signals at light speed, before taking into account that a signal can only move at light speed in a vacuum.

            However I was just reading about a new type of optical fibre at ArsTechnica that eliminates the glass, and therefore can achieve data transfers at 97% the speed of light, allowing transfer speeds up to a staggering 73.7Tbps, and obviously lowering latency considerably. However this cable type is currently only suitable for short runs as the signal to noise ratio is too high for long distance communication (it has a data loss of 3.5 dB per km).

    19. Posted 28/03/2013 at 1:51 pm | Permalink |

      “Lasers”

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfCjrLY2yBU

    20. NBNAlex
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 2:18 pm | Permalink |

      Well it’s a good thing TA is going to “rip out the NBN” then isn’t it Alan ;)

    21. Aaron
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 2:21 pm | Permalink |

      Something really needs to be done about this clowns outright lies…. Maybe Mal could help him out next we…….. oh fuck it.. nevermind

      • jasmcd
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 2:45 pm | Permalink |

        Labor tried recently with media reforms to be able to take some amount of action against outlets which deliberately spread falsehoods repeatedly and intentionally….. that got shot down pretty quick….. fear of freedom of the press and all that. Not that I would call the press all that free when it is owned by a handful of people.

        • Aaron
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 3:08 pm | Permalink |

          Free to think like they do maybe…?

        • Karl
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 3:34 pm | Permalink |

          The media reforms didn’t effect radio, it was trying to apply the same regulation to print that applies to radio (and TV).

        • nonny-moose
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 8:04 pm | Permalink |

          cant remember where i saw it but i think it was from Europe – the comment was made that the problem that is developing is no longer govt control of media, but Media control of govt. the bellowing down (it was more than shouting) of the mere proposal that there be truth in media i think was indicative of that. and the effect an uninformed radio hack like Jones has on people who just take his spiel as gospel rather than check it out and see the holes in it for themselves – well i have to say “media control of…..” rather than “govt control of…..” is rapidly becoming the case.

    22. Karl
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 3:21 pm | Permalink |

      When he says dumb he means in the traditional sense. We are left speechless by this man’s utter stupidity.

    23. Oscar
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 3:22 pm | Permalink |

      Alan, switch off the fibre service 2GB no doubt has, and run the place on wireless broadband. See how that goes for you…

    24. Bob.H
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 3:28 pm | Permalink |

      Yes you can do something about this idiots bald face hypocrisy and constant misrepresentation…..turn him off. There are plenty of other radio stations out there to listen to.

      It would also be nice if the media including Renai just ignored Jones and the other shock jocks when they comes out with unsubstantiated or misleading rubbish. They are no adornment to the journalism profession and should be treated accordingly. I suspect that no publicity would be a killer for these parasites.

      • Aaron
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 3:39 pm | Permalink |

        100 people tuning out, 1000′s more tuning in so they know what opinion they are supposed to have… Seems we are fighting a loosing battle here guys/girls…

    25. Soth
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 3:30 pm | Permalink |

      Someone needs to update the Wiki on Alan Jones about this stuff.

    26. elementalest
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 3:41 pm | Permalink |

      Do the morons really have that much control. Are there that many people that seem to have medieval ways of thinking? Would alan jones have insisted the world was flat back in the day despite proof?

      Seems the answer is yes… This is why Australia cant have nice things.

      • NBNAlex
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 4:40 pm | Permalink |

        I’m sure if the $’s were right Alan would gladly resurrect the flat earth theory and enlighten his worldly audience again *sigh*

        And coincidentally, I know of at least 4 NBN naysaying posters here, who would ergo imo, vehemently agree if he did :/

    27. Posted 28/03/2013 at 5:00 pm | Permalink |

      Hmmm this doesn’t sound right since it goes against the old adage “Old man yells at cloud”

      This is “Old man [Jones] yelling that cloud is all that’s needed”

      Maybe he just thinks that Wireless means radio, radio means listeners, listeners mean more money for his advertorial like cash for his comments.

    28. Anthony Wasiukiewicz
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 6:25 pm | Permalink |

      Good work Renai.
      Appreciated as always
      :-)

    29. John
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 6:27 pm | Permalink |

      Until wireless has the speed and stability of the NBN it is no threat to it.

      • Tel
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:24 pm | Permalink |

        BigAir sell wireless links that are faster than NBN, and their coverage is better too. They offer very attractive SLA’s. Come to think of it, what is the NBN SLA? Has anyone seen any guarantee of uptime?

        Their prices are higher than NBN…

        • Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:55 pm | Permalink |

          The problem is, as I’m sure you’re well aware, BigAir, and similar networks, are simply not as scalable as the chosen NBN topology.

          If you attempted to use only fixed wireless technology, like the type BigAir uses, you will quickly run into these scalability issues. Fortunately no one tries to do this in reality.

          You’ll note BigAir is targeted, specifically for remote business customers outside of the range of traditional fibre broadband Ethernet solutions, either due to large installation costs (not being in a provisioned area therefore needing a custom link) or completely infeasible (remote or temporary locations). They say as much on their homepage.

        • Verbose
          Posted 30/03/2013 at 8:15 pm | Permalink |

          Call Jason Ashton at BigAir, he’ll disagree with you as will their network engineers. The owner/CEO of the company you’re claiming is better than the NBN supports the NBN, it’s essential to their backhaul network when it’s rolled out. Both technologies will co-exist happily, and both are required.

        • Harimau
          Posted 31/03/2013 at 12:37 am | Permalink |

          Interesting. I’m curious if BigAir’s offices are themselves connected by wireless link.

        • Douglas
          Posted 02/04/2013 at 3:06 pm | Permalink |

          As a customer of Bigair, I find their prices insane (you can either by 5GB or 30GB, there’s nothing inbetween, and their value is shocking) and their customer service middling to average at best.

          I would much rather that when the NBN came along, the college put NBN ports in everyone’s rooms and said “find your own provider”.

    30. Gamertech
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 6:30 pm | Permalink |

      When is 2GB going to realise that this senile old coot is “obsolete” and put him out to pasture…?

      His entire reason for existence is to make money by getting people pissed off enough by spouting complete, easily refutable, BS so they tune in and listen to the ads… This includes both the stupid people that believe every word he says and worship the ground he walks on, as well as the people that just tune in for a good laugh while they listen to AJ make a complete fool of himself on air…

      I’d like to think that the ACMA would take fair action against him and shut him down… But as half the ACMA staff probably make up a significant part of his audience I’m not hopeful…

      • LetsBeOpenAboutThis
        Posted 30/03/2013 at 2:10 pm | Permalink |

        This is where the argument for free speech gets a little thin? America is full of Alan Joneses all pushing their own political agendas like the gun lobby for instance and while the west often criticises China about free speech, They must also look at us and shake their heads.

    31. Myke
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 6:51 pm | Permalink |

      I always turn to Alan Jones to what I think about technology – he is a shinning beacon of technological understanding. Let’s look at his background before we make any judgements.

    32. Tel
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:09 pm | Permalink |

      However, the global telecommunications industry is currently almost universally in agreement that in every country, telecommunications needs will continue to be served by a mix of fixed and wireless infrastructure.

      Although some wireless networks are designed to enhance mobility, it might be worth pointing out here that the largest present day uptake of NBN services has been fixed wireless.

      I know, I know, next year will be completely different, I keep hearing that… but as of right now, you guys have been outsmarted by Alan Jones. Something to think about.

      • Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:11 pm | Permalink |

        Epic troll was epic.

        Well played.

        • Tel
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:16 pm | Permalink |

          Good answer for someone who has no material.

          Care to address the topic now?

          • Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:23 pm | Permalink |

            Your presumption ignores the lack of existence of competing options.

            Those with fixed wireless are typically faced between a choice of poorly provisioned ADSL over long line length, Telstra 3G wireless or NBN LTE.

            Given their limited options, they will select NBN LTE because it provides the most reliable and fastest service.

            This fact in no way suggests that, if given the option, these people would nor opt for a short length ADSL or VDSL service or a fibre connection over their fixed wireless connection.

            Therefore the pattern you are seeing is still consistent with the section you quoted.

            • Tel
              Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:26 pm | Permalink |

              NBN LTE is still pretty small (not that I have a problem with LTE in general) but most of their customers are satellite, which happens to be fixed, and also happens to be wireless (you could have figured that out for yourself I’m sure).

              • Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:31 pm | Permalink |

                My argument still applies. Pointless nitpick was pointless.

                • Tel
                  Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:33 pm | Permalink |

                  It may be a pointless nitpick to you, but to the NBN it’s the largest part of their revenue.

                  • Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:43 pm | Permalink |

                    Current revenue. And no way consistent with Alan’s implication, which is, and I quote:

                    Jones said the NBN had admitted facing competition from wireless networks, and asked how “dumb” “these people” and the Government were, as “everybody” has known for years that wireless is the way of the future. Jones added that the Government was spending borrowed and taxpayer money to roll out the NBN, which was going to be “obsolete” before it was finished, and said the Government should be sacked on the basis of the NBN project alone.

                    How can you twist that into, what I can only assume, is an attempt to suggest that because NBN is getting their majority revenue from fixed wireless, the companies existence depends on it. That is a non sequitur if that is what you are implying.

                    • Tel
                      Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:53 pm | Permalink |

                      All I said was that this article and all the comments had completely ignored the very fact that high bandwidth fixed wireless even exists — despite that being the largest base of NBN customers.

                      I don’t really give a rat’s backside what Alan Jones says or thinks, but in the overall wireless vs fiber debate, the NBN as it stands right now is busy proving the case for wireless.

                      To start a completely different discussion… mobile wireless does also compete with NBN but in a different way. Obviously many people want mobility (so they can use it on the train, bus, park, etc), but also for low-volume users mobile wireless is actually cheaper because the monthly plans are lower. If all you want to do is email, twitter, facebook and reading the news, then mobile wireless wins… not on bandwidth but on price. That’s a totally different issue to the question of high-bandwidth fixed wireless, however the fundamental wireless technology covers both use cases.

                      • Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:59 pm | Permalink |

                        All I said was that this article and all the comments had completely ignored the very fact that high bandwidth fixed wireless even exists — despite that being the largest base of NBN customers.

                        No one was ignoring it, in fact the very quote you quoted directly implies it.

                        Just because someone doesn’t mention something explicitly does not mean they consider it not to exist.

                      • Hubert Cumberdale
                        Posted 28/03/2013 at 9:05 pm | Permalink |

                        “but in the overall wireless vs fiber debate, the NBN as it stands right now is busy proving the case for wireless.”

                        False.

                      • Harimau
                        Posted 29/03/2013 at 12:08 am | Permalink |

                        In other words, you are nit-picking.

                        So what if the part of the network that is more complete is generating more revenue than the part of the network that is less complete? That’s a given.

                        I am confused as to why you decided to share this “wisdom”. Please, explain.

                      • PeterA
                        Posted 30/03/2013 at 8:00 pm | Permalink |

                        Oh good;

                        Sign me up to the 100/40 Satellite plan please Tel!

                  • Posted 29/03/2013 at 1:43 am | Permalink |

                    Using your pedantic logic Fibre optics is Wireless too since there is no actual ‘wire’ involved in the glass fibre loop.

                    *facepalm*

            • Tel
              Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:31 pm | Permalink |

              Therefore the pattern you are seeing is still consistent with the section you quoted.

              If you read closely, the section I quoted contains the implication that there are fixed networks, and there are wireless networks, and those are distinct entities. In fact, the entire article above is based on the same belief.

              This is of course complete rubbish. Wireless can be designed around a fixed point-to-point infrastructure (such as the backhaul on half the mobile towers in Australia is currently operating) or it can be designed around a mobile point-to-multipoint structure, or even fixed point-to-multipoint, or a mesh that includes some fixed and some mobile. Anyone who has actually paid attention to what the NBN has been doing would understand this already.

              • Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:47 pm | Permalink |

                So basically you’re responding this quote because you failed to understand, or deliberately misrepresented, where the distinction was being drawn, despite it being obvious in context. The original authour could have been more clear yes, however I thought you, having constantly citied yourself as being a Telecom’s Engineer, would be smarter than that.

                • Tel
                  Posted 28/03/2013 at 8:01 pm | Permalink |

                  I perfectly understand the distinction, but it is just plain wrong.

                  Wireless covers both the fixed and the mobile use cases. As I pointed out above, BigAir are right now offering wireless links faster than NBN fiber… and they are more expensive, which is a legitimate concern, but regardless of price the wireless technology has easily proven itself in high bandwidth applications.

                  The article above pretends that no such thing exists… this is misleading, and spoils the analysis.

                  I doubt anyone would have difficulty understanding what the article has to say, but the major omission of a whole sector of fixed wireless comms makes the whole point moot.

                  • Posted 28/03/2013 at 8:18 pm | Permalink |

                    I perfectly understand the distinction, but it is just plain wrong.

                    It isn’t wrong, it’s imprecise.

                    Wireless covers both the fixed and the mobile use cases. As I pointed out above, BigAir are right now offering wireless links faster than NBN fiber… and they are more expensive, which is a legitimate concern, but regardless of price the wireless technology has easily proven itself in high bandwidth applications.

                    And fixed, in case you missed my original point, covers both fixed line options and fixed wireless options.

                    You’ll further note that fibre connections are available right now with much more bandwidth than 1Gbps. NBN could in fact quite easily switch to 10Gbps XGPONs tomorrow if they wanted to.

                    The article above pretends that no such thing exists… this is misleading, and spoils the analysis.

                    The quote you provided implies that wireless has a future, that includes fixed wireless. Unless you’re now trying to assert that the existence of these technologies precludes the requirement for wired connections on a global scale, then the article is in no way misleading.

                    I doubt anyone would have difficulty understanding what the article has to say, but the major omission of a whole sector of fixed wireless comms makes the whole point moot.

                    No, the point is still very much valid. The context is very important, you will note from their website, and prices, that BigAir is not a residentially targeted network. You will further note that NBN fixed wireless conections are targeting regional areas where fixed line networks become prohibitively expensive. Which, unless their is a huge change in global population distribution dynamics, is a minority.

                    Unless you want Renai to write a 200,000 word essay on the state of Telecoms, which I’m sure he’d be happy to be considering his editor has recently told him to cut back on his sleeping and social life habits, he is going to omit sections which are not relevant to the debate because they deal with what is effectively an edge case.

                    He’s not programming the guidance program for a rocket here, he’s reporting on the rantings of a shock-jock. He doesn’t need to be completely precise.

                  • Daniel
                    Posted 28/03/2013 at 8:20 pm | Permalink |

                    The point of the NBN is not to compete with Wireless, but to upgrade the infrastructure.

                    92% of all downloads come from Fixed Line.

                    Both Wireless and Fixed Line have their place.

                    Don’t be naive to think one is there to be “better” than the one.

      • Hubert Cumberdale
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 9:09 pm | Permalink |

        “largest present day uptake of NBN services has been fixed wireless.”

        Rolling out a fixed line network takes longer than rolling out a fixed wireless network. Imagine that. News at 11.

        “but as of right now, you guys have been outsmarted by Alan Jones.”

        His audience certainly has. They have been fooled because they are easily fooled. Us “guys” are not part of that audience. If the bozo ever wants to drop by and post a few comments on Delimiter regarding telecommunications I’m sure Renai would welcome it and we can see just how “smart” he actually is.

      • Myke
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 9:46 pm | Permalink |

        “Although some wireless networks are designed to enhance mobility, it might be worth pointing out here that the largest present day uptake of NBN services has been fixed wireless.”

        “I know, I know, next year will be completely different, I keep hearing that… but as of right now, you guys have been outsmarted by Alan Jones. Something to think about.”

        Cleverness aside, Tel, can you just state it outright that you think the future of broadband is wireless? Or are you bringing this now because you know it cannot extrapolate into the future.

        A statement, a prediction, I don’t care, just say it outright.

        • Posted 29/03/2013 at 9:07 pm | Permalink |

          Well my predictions for comms in Australia (and similar nations):

          * Fiber will stay dominant for long distance runs (like between capital cities, or international) just like it has been dominant for several decades now. Anything longer that 10km should be fiber.

          * Copper will stay dominant for short in-building wiring just like it always has been (other than small amounts of fiber used in high capacity data centers), but WiFi will start to edge out copper in resedential homes.

          * Mobile wireless growth will continue to be the biggest part of the industry… we have now reached the point where a mobile phone is considered standard, while a fixed line is a luxury extra.

          * People who are constrained by tight budget (the unemployed, the working poor, the students, the backpackers, and probably the elderly) will decide that investing in one good mobile device and a bundled voice+data plan is their best use of limited cash.

          * People in remote areas will always go for satellite (i.e fixed wireless), because the choices are limited and I think the available bandwidth on satellite will improve dramatically, the latency is annoying but not a show stopper.

          * Wireless won’t hit any “laws of physics” limit, regardless of what the armchair physicists might think. When radio holography becomes boring and normal we might be getting near that limit.

          * Mobile apps and casual games will become a big driver, and they generally don’t need much bandwidth because the grunt work is done in the apps.

          * The massive popularity of SMS, Facebook and Twitter demonstrates that a very large part of network usage is people just keeping in touch with each other with very low bandwidth text messages. What they want is something that is always available, and portability is part of that.

          * e-Health is primarily a low bandwidth application (e.g. monitoring blood pressure or what have you) this will go mobile. Indeed, designing personal health records around a personal mobile app would be a hell of a lot smarter than what they are trying to do with doctor’s database stuff. Expect to see health-related bluetooth devices that connect with mobile apps.

          * Application servers will all move into data centers. The price of VM hosting has fallen and will continue to fall, eventually everyone will forget about running servers in the home or in the business (other than just basic file storage).

          * HD video will not be the big driver that the pundits claim. We already have multiple channels of digital TV broadcasting but people are moving away from TV just the same. Those channels are getting filled with reruns of MASH and Mr Ed. Yes there are specialists (e.g. whygo video conferencing) but these applications are not mainstream. We already have the technology, we don’t have the content.

          * Working at home is being held back by cultural factors and business management attitudes, not at all held back by network capacity. I doubt this will change quickly (but it will eventually).

          * The legacy “last mile” copper will hang in there a lot longer than anyone expects, old technology always does. Political backlash will happen the first time anyone attempts to actually shut down a copper network.

          * The growth of fiber will be greenfields not brownfields, and this will happen despite the NBN not because of it. Hopefully the Liberal Party have the brains to hand this area back to the previously burgoning private fiber installers and let them do their good work unhindered.

          * Fixed terrestrial wireless (e.g. BigAir) will grow, and get cheaper, but not as fast as mobile.

          * A lot of voice will move to VoIP, and this will be running over wireless, copper, fiber and everything. Expect a wave of cheap DECT phones with VoIP support to turn up in offices, and middle class households, but also the VoIP clients on mobile devices will eventually get their act together. Pretty much all IP networks even including ADSL-1 are capable of carrying VoIP, so people will leverage that.

          • Posted 29/03/2013 at 9:57 pm | Permalink |

            I broadly agree, but there are a few areas where I feel you have, hopefully not deliberately, misrepresented the situation or possibly weren’t aware of new developments.

            * Fiber will stay dominant for long distance runs (like between capital cities, or international) just like it has been dominant for several decades now. Anything longer that 10km should be fiber.

            Actually long distance runs will probably be, if the technology pans out, air based optical cable (basically a mirrored tube size of a hair). Currently the attenuation is to high to do anything useful with over long distances.

            * Copper will stay dominant for short in-building wiring just like it always has been (other than small amounts of fiber used in high capacity data centers), but WiFi will start to edge out copper in resedential homes.

            True. But that’s not really a problem because WiFi standards are quickly advancing to over 1Gbps levels (802.11ac), and Copper can provide 10Gbps levels. Delivering the bandwidth into the home is actually turning out to be the main problem, not how to distribute it once there.

            * Mobile wireless growth will continue to be the biggest part of the industry… we have now reached the point where a mobile phone is considered standard, while a fixed line is a luxury extra.

            True, however please do not make the mistake of confusing mobile phones with mobile broadband. People who fail to make the distinction really irk me, like alain did above here.

            Further, the growth in the mobile sector has not been coupled with a decline in fixed line residential broadband connections. The problem is fixed-line residential broadband has the problem of being very close to saturation, so the growth you see is very slight (0.6% p.a.) compared to mobile wireless (3% p.a.).

            * People who are constrained by tight budget (the unemployed, the working poor, the students, the backpackers, and probably the elderly) will decide that investing in one good mobile device and a bundled voice+data plan is their best use of limited cash.

            Depends how “tight” the budget is, I know many students who can, despite their limited budget, still afford a fixed line broadband connection as well as their mobile plan, and will forgo other “luxury” items to get one.

            * People in remote areas will always go for satellite (i.e fixed wireless), because the choices are limited and I think the available bandwidth on satellite will improve dramatically, the latency is annoying but not a show stopper.

            Or other technologies like fixed wireless if available. Remote communities will only go for satellite if it is the only option available to them. CSIRO has some interesting ideas they have toyed with to deliver broadband to remote farms that look like it might be cost effective.

            * Wireless won’t hit any “laws of physics” limit, regardless of what the armchair physicists might think. When radio holography becomes boring and normal we might be getting near that limit.

            You’re simplifying the argument. Wireless technology runs into scalability problems that stem from the laws of physics it is constrained by. Improvements to the technology all tend to require more spectra, more complex electronics, more towers or base stations, and more complexity. The feasibility of rolling out a large scale marco wireless network will not be hitting a “law of physics” wall, you are correct, but it will hit a wall that comes about for economic reasons.

            We already know that the mobile wireless networks are under provisioned compared to fixed-line networks, even the new 4G ones, because in order to squeeze better performance out of it, the company will have to outlay more capital that they can actually ill-afford to do. Take Vodafone for example, they could technically fix their networking problems, and are, but not cheaply or quickly.

            * Mobile apps and casual games will become a big driver, and they generally don’t need much bandwidth because the grunt work is done in the apps.

            Agreed.

            * The massive popularity of SMS, Facebook and Twitter demonstrates that a very large part of network usage is people just keeping in touch with each other with very low bandwidth text messages. What they want is something that is always available, and portability is part of that.

            Also agreed.

            * e-Health is primarily a low bandwidth application (e.g. monitoring blood pressure or what have you) this will go mobile. Indeed, designing personal health records around a personal mobile app would be a hell of a lot smarter than what they are trying to do with doctor’s database stuff. Expect to see health-related bluetooth devices that connect with mobile apps.

            Again agreed. NBN supports who use e-Health as an example annoy me a little, only a small sector of e-Health truly benefits from high bandwidth connections, what they really require is reliable connections.

            * Application servers will all move into data centers. The price of VM hosting has fallen and will continue to fall, eventually everyone will forget about running servers in the home or in the business (other than just basic file storage).

            Agreed, but this will not mean that bandwidth requirements will decline, merely plateau.

            * HD video will not be the big driver that the pundits claim. We already have multiple channels of digital TV broadcasting but people are moving away from TV just the same. Those channels are getting filled with reruns of MASH and Mr Ed. Yes there are specialists (e.g. whygo video conferencing) but these applications are not mainstream. We already have the technology, we don’t have the content.

            People are moving away from the broadcast model, that does not mean that interest in HD video has been diminished. We are in fact seeing people move to the on demand model where possible. Often reverting to piracy to do it unfortunately. The on demand model is far better served by broadband connections that TV, which is why broadband is seeing growth.

            * Working at home is being held back by cultural factors and business management attitudes, not at all held back by network capacity. I doubt this will change quickly (but it will eventually).

            Actually I doubt it’ll change at all. What is going to change is that large scale businesses which require lots of staff will become redundant and slowly eradicated by semi-intelligent automated processes. The big city offices will die, not because people telework, but because they themselves will become redundant.

            * The legacy “last mile” copper will hang in there a lot longer than anyone expects, old technology always does. Political backlash will happen the first time anyone attempts to actually shut down a copper network.

            Really? I hadn’t noticed at all… not like we’re seeing any of these problems with a project designed to replace the copper network, a.k.a. the NBN.

            * The growth of fiber will be greenfields not brownfields, and this will happen despite the NBN not because of it. Hopefully the Liberal Party have the brains to hand this area back to the previously burgoning private fiber installers and let them do their good work unhindered.

            The NBN actually doesn’t prevent companies like Opticomm installing fibre in Greenfields. The NBN is supposed to be the last option to provision service.

            And that lack of growth in fibre in brownfields is not for lack of consumer demand. It’s for lack of business interest.

            * Fixed terrestrial wireless (e.g. BigAir) will grow, and get cheaper, but not as fast as mobile.

            And will still be dwarfed by fixed-line solutions because of the previously mentioned scalability issues.

            * A lot of voice will move to VoIP, and this will be running over wireless, copper, fiber and everything. Expect a wave of cheap DECT phones with VoIP support to turn up in offices, and middle class households, but also the VoIP clients on mobile devices will eventually get their act together. Pretty much all IP networks even including ADSL-1 are capable of carrying VoIP, so people will leverage that.

            Agreed.

            • nonny-moose
              Posted 01/04/2013 at 5:18 pm | Permalink |

              The problem is fixed-line residential broadband has the problem of being very close to saturation, so the growth you see is very slight (0.6% p.a.) compared to mobile wireless (3% p.a.)

              Don’t forget it is also less common for folk to have more than one fixed line. Usually, you get one and you are done. There aren’t the same impediments against having multiple mobiles per person – you don’t have to have another line laid in, plugs to the wall, connected by provider etc. Grabbing a second phone and sim is painless by comparison.. So for mobiles, there’s a lot more room for super saturation than fixed (for want of a better word – I mean by that to say more than 100%, or that there are more phones than people).

    33. Michael
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 7:50 pm | Permalink |

      It is Alan Jones; you call him a “shock jock” and what do you expect? He is out there to stir controversy and then people get upset that he has achieved his aim?

      The other question is who are you comparing his reporting skills to? TT / 60 Minutes? or someone serious?

      • NBNAlex
        Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:23 pm | Permalink |

        Personally I don’t believe AJ is a shock jock and I have said this previously…

        Howard Stern is a shock jock…

        Alan Jones is a political pawn.

        • sb
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:43 pm | Permalink |

          Personally I don’t believe AJ is a shock jock and I have said this previously… Agree

          Howard Stern is a shock jock… Agree

          Alan Jones is a political pawn….. disagree.. He’s a politcal pawn and a complete F%$#&ng idiot

          • NBNAlex
            Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:49 pm | Permalink |

            I stand corrected… pertinent point :)

    34. Neil McAliece
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 8:29 pm | Permalink |

      Maybe 2GB can donate the spectrum they currently use for broadcasting towards the wireless data revolution ;)

    35. bammers
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 8:33 pm | Permalink |

      this bald headed monkey prolly thinks a tin can and a piece of string will suffice – he’d is obviously reading what he’s paid to read

    36. Dunx
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 9:05 pm | Permalink |

      People keep spouting this bull***

      I just have images of Joe Australian wandering home after work, plugging his Galaxy XI into the broadband cradle next to the phone socket so he and Jane can download a movie for the evening while the kids surf for their homework assignments….

      …and the ensuing heart attack when the bill arrives.

    37. Syzygy
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 9:34 pm | Permalink |

      I have always found the wireless v broadband to be a rather poorly informed argument with respect to the NBN. It goes without saying that wireless is the major growth area in digital communications. Off loading (mobile backhaul) that mobile growth to broadband has also been a significant factor in the need for additional broadband. Its probably also true that significant GDP growth will come from the huge growth in business use of mobile. Unfortunately, we wont get GDP growth from too many households. Yes, of course there are home-based businesses, but they are insignificant in terms of the potential for GDP growth offered by corporate use, large and small, particularly in terms of mobile service delivery.

      I am also somewhat pissed off by the speed argument. Having an NBN to simply deliver 100Bbps-1Gbps is simply a waste, particularly to households. Yep, I’d love a much faster connection, at home but I don’t NEED one and will not for some years.

      I am also pissed of that the latest NB Corporate Plan 2012-2015 clearly states at pp67:

      8.2.8 Mobile Backhaul
      NBN Co has received requests from the industry to develop products that are suitable for use as
      mobile backhaul. This would allow the utilisation of NBN Co’s Fibre infrastructure for connectivity
      between mobile base stations and an operator’s core network. NBN Co is considering these requests
      and evaluating whether to develop products suitable for use as mobile backhaul. As no decision has
      yet been made, any potential impact from these services has not been included in the 2012-15
      Corporate Plan.

      Dumb, dumb and dummer!

      Am I against the NBN – NO.
      Do I think they are currently strategically placing themselves to poorly service the national economic needs of Australia in 2016 – YOU BET.

      • Posted 28/03/2013 at 9:59 pm | Permalink |

        I have always found the wireless v broadband to be a rather poorly informed argument with respect to the NBN. It goes without saying that wireless is the major growth area in digital communications. Off loading (mobile backhaul) that mobile growth to broadband has also been a significant factor in the need for additional broadband. Its probably also true that significant GDP growth will come from the huge growth in business use of mobile. Unfortunately, we wont get GDP growth from too many households. Yes, of course there are home-based businesses, but they are insignificant in terms of the potential for GDP growth offered by corporate use, large and small, particularly in terms of mobile service delivery.

        All true, but the market tends to already deliver corporate solutions for the very reason that they can provide growth. The fact residential broadband doesn’t provide much growth is exactly the reason the government needs to intervene. Telecom’s have a certain social responsibly to deliver uniform services. But they can only do so much before their profit motive takes over. This is why they will, if left to their own devices, cherry pick the most profitable communities.

        I am also somewhat pissed off by the speed argument. Having an NBN to simply deliver 100Bbps-1Gbps is simply a waste, particularly to households. Yep, I’d love a much faster connection, at home but I don’t NEED one and will not for some years.

        And in those some years, when you will NEED one, infrastructure providers will probably see fit to provide it. As they are right now with ADSL2+ services to regional communities.

        The problem is, as these same regional communities will tell you, is that to do this takes time. A lot of time. The NBN rollout is going to take close to a decade.

        Now, I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to be playing catch-up with our infrastructure. I would rather they pre-empted future use. Hence, the NBN.

        Do I think they are currently strategically placing themselves to poorly service the national economic needs of Australia in 2016 – YOU BET.

        Okay, fair point, but what about 2019? 2022? 2025? I would rather use the good times we are having now with our economy to do one thing that will probably put us in an unfavourable situation (but still manageable) for 6-12 years, to have a considerable economic benefit afterwards. You need to stop thinking in terms of election periods, the world will continue to turn after 2016.

        • BuildFTTP
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 10:26 pm | Permalink |

          +1. Beautifully said.

        • Syzygy
          Posted 28/03/2013 at 10:37 pm | Permalink |

          NightKhaos: Not sure which part of my comment you actually totally disagreed with, but I will cherry pick those that don’t seem to agree simply because its easier.

          “The fact residential broadband doesn’t provide much growth is exactly the reason the government needs to intervene. Telecom’s have a certain social responsibly to deliver uniform services.” These two statements don’t meld. A social responsibility is not about growth, and I talked about GDP growth. A social responsibility is about equity, not economic growth.

          “The problem is, as these same regional communities will tell you, is that to do this takes time. A lot of time. The NBN rollout is going to take close to a decade.” I’m not sure who these ‘same regional communities” are, as I didn’t mention regional communities, tho I take your point. My point was I don’t see a need for 1Gbps bandwidth for anything that I will do in my home for some years. How many, I don’t know simply because I can’t predict the future. But I pretty sure its post 2015 and for a few years post that. I guess my needs may not be those that you have – we are all different!

          “You need to stop thinking in terms of election periods, the world will continue to turn after 2016.” Probably a poor co-incidence, but my reference to 2016 was not the future election, but the fact that the NBN Corporate Plan was 2012-2015, my point was: What are they thinking post 2015, and what will they put in place after their considerations during 2012-2015 for 3rd party mobile backhaul and what will that mean for 2016 and beyond.

          • Posted 28/03/2013 at 10:56 pm | Permalink |

            These two statements don’t meld. A social responsibility is not about growth, and I talked about GDP growth. A social responsibility is about equity, not economic growth.

            That was actually the point Syzygy. Economic growth and social responsibility are independent of one another. Sometimes a company can be socially responsible and it won’t negatively impact growth, but with Telecoms, particularly fixed-line infrastructure, these two things can, and do conflict. And ultimately, being a business, growth wins.

            My point was I don’t see a need for 1Gbps bandwidth for anything that I will do in my home for some years. How many, I don’t know simply because I can’t predict the future. But I pretty sure its post 2015 and for a few years post that. I guess my needs may not be those that you have – we are all different!

            I understand that, unfortunately infrastructure roll-outs don’t. With cars you can get your little around town car (not meaning to imply anything about you personally, just for sake of argument) and I want to get my hypercar, and that’s fine, because if I want to spend a lot of money on a car, I can, and this in no way affects you. Or visa-versa.

            The relationship isn’t so in Telecommications. Because they rely on economies of scale. They can only afford to do it if they give the service to as many people as possible. On demand models don’t work very well, which is what buying a car is. So not only do you have to account for the future, you also have to provide slightly above the middle market.

            Let me explain: using the car example again, if I need a high performance car,and my requirements are for a hyper-car, I can probably make do with a super-car, but ask me to go down to the average family wagon? Nope, that doesn’t meet my needs at all (I realise this is a terrible example because sports cars are luxury items, but if you’ll bare with me). You on the other hand only want your little city car, however, next year you’re getting married, and you’ll want to upgrade to a family wagon. Not only that but with performance increases over the years, what you consider a family wagon is what a used to be called a super-car.

            Building networks are kind of like that. For best results you want to build a network that slightly exceeds (now it’s important to note that in networking a ten-fold increase is actually “slight”, strange as that sounds) what you project will be the average requirements by the time the network is complete.

            By the time the network is complete the projected average is 100Mbps. So aiming for 1Gbps actually doesn’t seem all that unreasonable.

            Probably a poor co-incidence, but my reference to 2016 was not the future election

            Understandable. Apologises then. I’m not sure where I stand then on your point, on the one hand they should predict more about the future of the rollout, on the other, if they do, and they get it wrong, the media will rip into them unfairly (again).

            • Syzygy
              Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:47 pm | Permalink |

              I’m sure we could go on for ages on this to and fro, point by point. Your statements in response, if a little demeaning to an IT consultant of 40 years, are still quite reasonable. But, without my doing it point by point, which to me seems petty and unaccepting of your stance, can I just say this. The NBN, as a concept to roll out FTTP within Australia is a great initiative, probably 3-5 years overdue. Yes that a reference to Rudd, but lets not go there, to me this is not a political aguement.

              My concern is quite simply that a truly 21st century digital network, that will take a decade, seems (on the surface and in the Corporate Plan) to give less that a well reasoned approach to the future growth of mobile technology. Particularly, when one of its greatest objectives must be the economic growth of Australia. To my mind, rightly or wrongly, that economic growth will be delivered by mobile technology and applications. It is after all the real growth area of digital communications. One of the core aspects of supporting that mobile growth will be the provisioning of 3rd party mobile networks. Something the NBN is simply considering – not good enough as far as I am concerned and maybe, just maybe, done as an impediment to Telstra’s possible strategic positioning re mobile – no I dont work for Telstra, but I can’t see why a future thinking digital comms company would still be ‘considering’ 3rd party mobile backhaul support.

              As for household use of bandwidth, I take your point. Its horses for courses, or suzuki’s for Audi’s – I can’t envision a Ferrai! My need for 1Gbps I can’t see simply because I can’t get past how we, in IT, have consistently been able to provide greater functionality with a continuing smaller bandwidth requirement. Application footprints continue to fall even in the face of enhanced broadband capability. Yes, there are multimedia, multiuser opportunities we have not even considered as yet, and which are certainly being built as I write this, but they will not need 10 fold increases in bandwidth to deliver. Why? Simply because my gut feel is that the funding support for those developments is focussed on mobile access, not static household access. The market for app builders is surely a constantly connected, mobile environment.

              Maybe I’m wrong. But then again?

              • NBNAlex
                Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:51 pm | Permalink |

                Well you were wrong when you said the Snowy Mountains Scheme wasn’t on time and on budget, so…

                :)

                • Syzygy
                  Posted 29/03/2013 at 12:16 am | Permalink |

                  I’d love to give you that one just cause I’m a really nice guy. But …… ;-)

                  • NBNAlex
                    Posted 29/03/2013 at 10:21 am | Permalink |

                    Well Syzygy,

                    I’m not going to prolong this, as it is somewhat of topic (and as we have been here before) but you can argue all you like, because all official documentation refutes your claims and clearly states that the Snowy Mountains Scheme was “on time and on budget”…

                    Here’s just one of those docs, a governmental overview.

                    http://australia.gov.au/about-australia/australian-story/snowy-mountains-scheme

              • Posted 29/03/2013 at 12:23 am | Permalink |

                I don’t disagree with anything but I do feel I need to add some caveats.

                We don’t see massive fixed line growth because it’s near saturation for one. Who is there left to sign up? Not many.

                And we may be getting more efficient, but we’re also delivering richer content. Higher quality images, higher quality video.

                It seems the improvements we make in compression and trimming protocols are fighting a losing battle with richer content. This may change, but we have yet to reach that point. It might be the NBN is that point, but I can tell you, it’s definitely more than Turnbull is planning to offer.

                • Syzygy
                  Posted 29/03/2013 at 1:01 am | Permalink |

                  Bugger, here I was thinking I could have a few quite beers! You’ve now force me to go point by point. OK here we go.

                  “We don’t see massive fixed line growth because it’s near saturation for one. Who is there left to sign up? Not many.” Can I just say this, because I believe we have not even scatched the surface on mobile applications which will drive fibre backhaul for mobile. Imagine this, and it’s Scott McNeilly’s (sp?) idea. My car is nearing empty, on board, mobile enabled, computer auctions my need to refuel with petrol stations close to my location. Auction is concluded and my on board computer advises me the fastest route to fill my tank. Simple example and almost a 10 year old idea, was a sales pitch for Java, developed by Sun Microsystems (now owned by Oracle) and Scott was the MD at the time. But it, to me at least, demonstrates how its possible to envision the endless possibilities of a mobile world.

                  Its not the fixed line user that will cause the growth, its how you and I will expect to be serviced as we move about in our world using whatever mobile devices we have available to us. Demanding whatever services mobile providers seek to economically provide.

                  “It might be the NBN is that point, but I can tell you, it’s definitely more than Turnbull is planning to offer.” I totally agree and I vote Liberal! Yeah, OK I’m one of the unhinged. His position, whatever it maybe, will have the same negative response from me if his ‘plan’ is to deliver the same lack of 3rd party mobile service support as the current NBN.

                  Now can I go and get that beer, please!

          • Harimau
            Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:13 pm | Permalink |

            Okay, but the thing is, with the NBN, as the user of the service you can choose which speed you would like to use. Perhaps you personally only need 12Mbps, so you can get a plan with that service. Maybe you start living with your girlfriend, and you need 25Mbps between the two of you. Maybe you start a family, and you might need 100Mbps. Maybe you start a home business, and you’ll need 1Gbps. All the while bandwidth requirements are rising. The NBN is about unlocking doors – whether you choose to walk through them is entirely up to you.

      • TrevorX
        Posted 02/04/2013 at 1:17 pm | Permalink |

        Syzygy: “… an IT consultant of 40 years…”

        Wow. Just… Wow!

        Look, under normal circumstances I would let misguided, uninformed opinions like yours slide, ’cause these can be complex and confusing issues. But you played the “my opinion is worthwhile because I am an expert” card, so I feel it is important to address some of the points you raised.

        As others have stated, growth metrics are misleading because fixed line products have no real scope for growth once as many people who can get fixed-line broadband have already done so. The products have a hard ceiling based on available infrastructure that cannot be readily circumvented. So your analysis here fails because your fundament assumptions are incorrect – that is, mobile and fixed line broadband products have equal scope and opportunity for growth.

        You dismiss GDP growth from ‘consumers’ and ‘home based businesses’ as insignificant compared with corporations, but have you considered the proportion of GDP affected by small businesses in Australia? Right now, small businesses account for half the employment in Australia and 33% of GDP growth. Many of those small businesses need reliable high speed broadband for customer portals, file, db, Exchange and ‘BYOD’ applications and remote desktop servers. They need it to provide simultaneous access to email, websites, business portals and cloud services for their staff, who may be accessing such resources from PCs, Wifi notebooks, tablets and phones all at the same time. Their ADSL may be struggling with this load today. As copper networks are slowly deteriorating while demands for data are increasing, this problem is just getting worse as time wears on. Mobile networks are incapable of providing the necessary reliability and performance for these tasks. Small business owners don’t have the resources to pay the thousands of dollars a month required for dedicated fibre optic lines.

        Regardless of the argument for future utility, there are hundreds of thousands of small businesses around the country who need more reliable, higher bandwidth Internet connectivity today. Even if they had the funds and regulatory approval to (very conservatively) double the number of towers, mobile Telcos lack the backhaul to cope with their current customers all demanding rich Internet content concurrently. Even with adequate backhaul, in order to overcome contention in densely populated areas they’d need ten times the tower density to give users full speed connectivity during peak times. Imagine how much worse this situation would get if everyone who’s currently on fixed-line services was suddenly competing for bandwidth on the mobile network as well! (and yes, this is exactly what you and everyone advocating mobile broadband instead of the NBN is proposing, because the copper network must be replaced or substantially upgraded in the medium term. Not doing so with fixed-line means you’re proposing everyone goes mobile). The copper network is degrading and so FTTN that doesn’t repair or replace last mile copper will provide limited benefit to most. A FTTN network that does proactively replace degraded copper will cost more than the FTTH NBN anyway.

        And then there’s usage models for how people are using the Internet – while most people happily make use of mobile broadband for convenience, the majority of their use usually occurs in the same places (such as home and at work). Such usage lends itself to fixed-line services. Even if their primary devices are tablets and phones, they use more data on Wifi than they do on mobile broadband.

        This all completely ignores the fact that today, mobile broadband is completely incapable of delivering decent performance reliably. Anecdotally, I use my phone for about 80% of my work these days. I use it to connect to portals and websites from locations all over the Perth metro area every day. Most of the time contention is so bad I have to wait until I’m in range of a Wifi network I have access to in order to do what I need to. Most of the time a single Web page takes around two minutes to load when on mobile broadband.

        Now admittedly when on LTE this situation is markedly improved, but again, most of the time I’m not within the fairly limited range of LTE coverage. And within a year or two, once most people have migrated to LTE networks and devices, the same contention problems will drop performance to lower than dialup for many during peak times. To suggest that the future of ‘broadband’ connectivity is mobile fails to appreciate any of the limitations or challenges of the infrastructure.

        What would your alternative mobile broadband network package look like? If the Govt isn’t building the FTTH NBN, what should they be doing? Subsidising towers for private operators at tremdous cost to tax payers with no possibility of seeing a return? Subsiding backhaul? Both? Maybe a wholesale backhaul network? It would have to have ubiquitous coverage and be fibre optic to cope with data requirements. Essentially the NBN without any connections to individuals. Why not just connect end users and provide them with higher speed, more reliable (lower power, cheaper to connect to, greater competition, no contention issues) broadband and let mobile operators connect towers to make use of the fibre network for improved, cheaper backhaul? Oh wait, that’s what’s already being done.

        And yes, right now the business plan has left wholesale backhaul to mobile operators off the table, but there are numerous reasons for this. The network isn’t complete, for a start. They don’t have millions of customers on the network with which to test and evaluate performance, quite aside from the fact that their remit is to provide broadband services, not mobile backhaul – if that is to be accommodated it needs to be managed in a way that doesn’t compromise the stability and performance of the network, so something like that is going to need a lot of additional planning.

        Why do people think their ideas and demands are suddenly more compelling and important than what is already being deployed? Yes, mobile is important, yes it needs to be vastly improved, yes they need a great deal more backhaul and an exponential increase in tower coverage to eliminate black spots and mitigate contention. And maybe the NBN could play a role in this. But it’s not what it was designed for, so any such role will need a lot of planning and negotiation above the fairly complex network that’s already being deployed. Be glad there’s a network being deployed that has any chance of improving this situation – if the LNP get into power and halt the NBN in its tracks mobile network operators will have no backhaul stimulus or support outside of what they can roll out themselves (and they’ve been doing such a stellar job of keeping up with user requirements so far).

        I feel that you fail to appreciate one if the key underpinning drivers of the NBN – minimum service levels. Today, the minimum service level (above ‘not connected’, which is an embarrassingly large number of people) is 56k dialup (ok, 24k on pair-gain). Before you make the argument that people are on mobile broadband instead of dialup these days, there are people in mobile black spots where dialup is the better option. And then there are people who’s mobile broadband is actually slower than dialup.

        The NBN will change this by essentially guaranteeing that the minimum service level avaliable to all Australians will be 12mb/s (and I think it’s likely that that would be increased to 25mb/s by the time the network is finished). That gives developers scope for rich content and services that simply aren’t possible unless you can guarantee every customer will be connecting over a high speed, reliable connection. It’s like applications developed for in-house intranets that aren’t available for the wider Internet because connection bandwidth can’t be guaranteed. Under the NBN this performance can be guaranteed. It will revolutionise the way Australian developers design cloud services and portals in a way that simply won’t exist in a mobile or FTTN world.

        Finally, I feel it’s important to address your claims to your qualified ‘expert’ opinion. You said you’re an “IT Consultant of 40 years”. That could mean either you’re 40 years old and an IT Consultant (but the context of the statement is wrong) or that you have 40 years experience as an IT Consultant (what you actually implied, although your grammar is confusing). So that would make you what, 65? 70?

        The problem with the IT profession in this regard is a lack of standard qualifications (although that is broadly a strength of the industry, too, it becomes problematic when determining the abilities of professionals based on their titles or even work history). You see, IT Consulting is actually one of the most difficult and challenging roles in a very complex and demanding industry, because it requires a wealth of technical knowledge, exemplary communications skills, tremendous analytical and problem solving abilities and the experience to recognise what you’re looking at and devise solutions pretty much instantly. Consultants are among the best paid jobs in IT because it is so rare to find people who can ‘do it all’, who have such a huge range of experience as well as great technical depth while also being good communicators, able to understand IT in the context of overall business strategy and management and yet managing to remain on the bleeding edge of the world’s fastest moving industry.

        But then there are those who call themselves Consultants who are just generalists who know a bit about PCs and help local people with their home computers. Because there’s no regulation of the industry there’s nothing stopping this practice, but it is important for people to understand in the context of your claims.

        Having 40 year’s experience as a Consultant you must have had a tremendous amount of ability to be consulting in ’73 when only large enterprise had computing power of any scale. There would have been very few people able to make a living as a Consultant back then – they would have needed unique skill sets in high demand. To be able to continue in such a role and remain relevant over 40 years is simply astounding. Even more astounding is the ability to do that while having such a poor appreciation for the needs of businesses.

        The poorly informed argument here appears to be yours.

        • Syzygy
          Posted 02/04/2013 at 8:14 pm | Permalink |

          Gee, thanks for the rant TrevorX. Yes, I am over 60 years of age and still gainfully employed as an IT Consultant – thanks for caring about my age. By the way I don’t “know a bit about PCs and help local people with their home computers”, that is of course unless they are good friends. My clients include large Australian corporates, as well as Federal, State and Local Government. You also don’t need to tell me about my job, how ‘expert’ I have to be or whether I am qualified to do the job. To put it mildly you are not qualified to comment.

          If you would like to actually read what I have said, you would noticed that at no stage was I against the NBN. More than happy to have FTTH Australia wide. But, I don’t believe the NBN Co are thinking strategically with respect to wireless. The mere fact they are still considering 3rd party mobile backhaul is inadequate from a long term economic aspect. Sure, home business need and will use the NBN, didn’t deny they wouldn’t. But they will not make the same use of wireless for application delivery that corporates will. Hence in a ‘more’ mobile serviced world a greater GDP growth will be seen with Corporates. If the NBN provided the necessary mobile backhaul infrastructure then they would see more than an adequate return on their investment – Corporates will pay. It will also provide huge opportunities for mobile network providers to develop, build and operate mobile networks that can offload to the ONLY broadband provider that will exist in Australia.

          • TrevorX
            Posted 03/04/2013 at 3:58 am | Permalink |

            @Syzygy

            “I don’t “know a bit about PCs and help local people with their home computers”, that is of course unless they are good friends”

            Good to know, but I didn’t say that’s what you do (I wouldn’t know), merely that there are people out there who’s job description is essentially that and yet they call themselves Consultants.

            “You also don’t need to tell me about my job, how ‘expert’ I have to be or whether I am qualified to do the job.”

            I wasn’t – that comment was meant for anyone reading along. My point, again, was that the term ‘IT Consultant’ can be quite broadly interpreted, but does, in fact, describe quite a specific role. I know nothing about you beyond what you have written above. The only reason we are even discussing your professional credentials is because you brought them up in an attempt to lend weight to your argument, remember?

            “To put it mildly you are not qualified to comment.”

            Ah, and yet again you’re providing supposition with no basis in evidence. The fact is you have no idea what I am qualified to comment on, so your statement is false. I’m also not going to be drawn into the argument because I am confident that the comments I make on this (or any other) forum can be adequately judged on their own merit without the need to confer additional weight through claims to specific expertise or position. That very expertise and experience confers the ability to (hopefully) make informed, insightful comments that add something meaningful to the discussion. That’s all that matters, after all – are my comments useful and are they accurate?

            “But, I don’t believe the NBN Co are thinking strategically with respect to wireless.”

            As I said, that criticism is beyond the scope of the NBN’s remit, but it is something they have indicated they will evaluate. Is wireless broadband important? Of course it is. I would even broadly agree that there is tremendous scope for innovation and opportunities if we had a highly reliable mobile broadband network that could provide high speed connections to all users concurrently.

            But that’s not what the NBN is, and it can’t solve those problems. Yes, it could be part of the solution, but not in the short to medium term. And that’s precisely what NBN Co are saying here – over the next three years the provision of backhaul for mobile operators isn’t an area they are prepared to get into, which is perfectly acceptable – the network won’t be adequate for the task by that stage anyway. If the NBN stays on track then I’m sure NBN Co and mobile operators can start having some of those discussions so that by the time mobile operators are able to lease that backhaul they actually have infrastructure (in the form of towers and planning permission to erect them) ready to go.

            In summary, I don’t thoroughly disagree with your position that the NBN could be utilised to grow mobile, and that there are huge opportunities there. The problem I have is with your impatience, your highly critical attitude towards NBN Co when their position seems more than reasonable, your conclusion that because you see mobile as the large growth area fixed-line performance is overkill and highly unnecessary, and the way in which you tried to prop up your argument with an appeal to expertise, when it was completely unnecessary.

        • Posted 02/04/2013 at 9:12 pm | Permalink |

          Hey everyone,

          just a quick note — no comments directly criticising people for their age will be tolerated. Age is not a factor in competency ;)

          Renai

          • TrevorX
            Posted 03/04/2013 at 3:57 am | Permalink |

            I hope that wasn’t directed at me, Ren? I did not directly criticise anyone’s age, and am in complete agreement that age is no factor in determining competency.

            My questions relating to the age of ‘Syzygy’ were posed to query his statement about being ‘an IT Consultant of 40 years’, as he was using the perception of experience to attempt to bolster the strength of his argument. My point was it is highly unlikely he has been an ‘IT Consultant’ for that whole 40 years – he may have been a Consultant for 20 years, with the other 20 years spent gaining experience in various roles. I have no way of knowing the truth of any claims he makes about his experience, but I do know that instead of relying on the strength of his argument, he felt the need to influence the perception of others by claiming experience and expertise, and I feel that the claims about that experience and expertise are disingenuous – he may have been a genius who was working as a consultant in his early 20′s (it did and does happen) but his predisposition for drawing erroneous conclusions resulting from faulty logic suggest that probably wasn’t the case.

        • Syzygy
          Posted 03/04/2013 at 10:23 pm | Permalink |

          TrevorX: “So your analysis here fails because your fundament assumptions are incorrect – that is, mobile and fixed line broadband products have equal scope and opportunity for growth.”

          Where did I make this fundamental assumption? I said nothing about mobile and broadband products having equal scope and opportunity for growth. Show me my statement where I made that assumption.

          “You dismiss GDP growth from ‘consumers’ and ‘home based businesses’ as insignificant compared with corporations, but have you considered the proportion of GDP affected by small businesses in Australia? Right now, small businesses account for half the employment in Australia and 33% of GDP growth.”

          I didn’t mention small business, which includes companies with up to 200+ staff. I specifically only mentioned home business, which would be included in the 0-19 employee category and contribute substantially less than 10% of GDP. The rest of your comments to do with reliable high speed broadband were wasted as I have never said that the NBN should not be rolled out as a national FTTP network. I said I didn’t need 100Mbps, I also said that I appreciate that may not be the needs of others.

          “(and yes, this is exactly what you and everyone advocating mobile broadband instead of the NBN is proposing, because the copper network must be replaced or substantially upgraded in the medium term.”

          At no stage did I say or advocate mobile broadband INSTEAD of the NBN. My comments were quite specifically on 3rd party mobile backhaul provisioning by NBN Co.

          “Not doing so with fixed-line means you’re proposing everyone goes mobile). The copper network is degrading and so FTTN that doesn’t repair or replace last mile copper will provide limited benefit to most. A FTTN network that does proactively replace degraded copper will cost more than the FTTH NBN anyway.”

          I didn’t mention FTTN as a solution, nor did I say everyone goes mobile.

          “To suggest that the future of ‘broadband’ connectivity is mobile fails to appreciate any of the limitations or challenges of the infrastructure. ”

          I didn’t say the future of broadband connectivity is mobile. I said the growth was in mobile.

          “Finally, I feel it’s important to address your claims to your qualified ‘expert’ opinion.”

          Didn’t say I was an expert.

          “Having 40 year’s experience as a Consultant you must have had a tremendous amount of ability to be consulting in ’73 when only large enterprise had computing power of any scale. There would have been very few people able to make a living as a Consultant back then – they would have needed unique skill sets in high demand.”

          In the 60’s and 70’s there were very few major IT vendors and not a lot of people in the IT industry. Skills and knowledge were at a premium. A year or two of almost any product from any vendor placed you in high demand. Your assumptions are incorrect.

          “To be able to continue in such a role and remain relevant over 40 years is simply astounding. Even more astounding is the ability to do that while having such a poor appreciation for the needs of businesses.”

          This comment is sheer rubbish.

          • Trevor
            Posted 05/04/2013 at 2:03 am | Permalink |

            “Where did I make this fundamental assumption? I said nothing about mobile and broadband products having equal scope and opportunity for growth. Show me my statement where I made that assumption.”

            You suggested that mobile has much greater scope for growth compared with fixed-line: “It goes without saying that wireless is the major growth area in digital communications.” But as NK said, you can’t make such a comparison when there are substantial differences in the circumstances leading to the growth rates of the different technologies you are comparing. The only way you can make such a comparison is if ‘all other things remain equal’, which suggests that in order for you to make the above statement you must assume that the two technologies have ‘equal scope and opportunity for growth’. Because they don’t, because mobile telcos can essentially sign up as many people as they like with no regard for their ability to connect to a reasonable service vs fixed-line connections that are limited by the availability of inflexible infrastructure, it is disingenuous to suggest that growth rates can be compared and hence the fundamental assumptions underpinning your statement that mobile broadband has far greater growth potential are incorrect.

            I also think you’ve somewhat missed the point when you try to equate GDP growth as a consequence of mobile broadband uptake. Because all you’re talking about here is how many people are paying for a particular service. You’re not looking at the applications they’re utilising, which is quite understandable because that can’t be readily measured. But to draw the conclusions you have completely ignores the lion’s share of GDP impact which is what use people are putting their broadband connections to, what services they’re accessing and where they’re spending their time and their money. You can’t determine the broader impact to the economy by working out how many people are connected to which technology – that’s a flawed argument.

            “I didn’t mention small business, which includes companies with up to 200+ staff. I specifically only mentioned home business, which would be included in the 0-19 employee category and contribute substantially less than 10% of GDP.”

            How thoroughly confusing. So your definition of a ‘Home Business’ is based on the number of employees (being less than 20), rather than, you know, the location (being at a home residence)? That seems to contradict the definition of a Home Business as recognised by the Australian Government (and pretty much any source you’d care to look up). Here’s the definition from the ABS:

            “a home-based business is a business where:
            ◾most of the work of the business is carried out at the home(s) of the operators(s), and/or;
            ◾the business has no other premises owned or rented other than the home(s) of the operator(s)”

            Usefully, that same page also defines a small business as:

            “non-employing and employing businesses with less than 20 employees.”

            So your definition of a Home Business is actually the exact definition of a Small Business. Yes, that means that small businesses that employ fewer than 20 people account for around 50% of Australian employment and approximately 33% of GDP growth. Hardly the ‘insignificant’ contribution you dismiss it as.

            Additionally, there’s no reason why small businesses can’t have just as much impact on growth generation from mobile broadband applications as large corporates – indeed, the Internet has broadly been a stimulus and enabler of small businesses who can now market to and have communications with their customers that transcends local physical boundaries and meagre marketing budgets. In a high-speed NBN world with substantial mobile broadband use I can’t see any reason why that trend won’t continue or even accelerate – small businesses are far more agile than corporations after all (and we’ve seen time and time again large corporations copying the grassroots campaigns of small businesses for precisely that reason – they can see what works first before committing themselves, and then just buy the campaign (or the small business itself) out of their marketing budget. It’s cheaper than coming up with your own ideas after all).

            “Didn’t say I was an expert.”

            You said you had 40 years experience as an IT Consultant, which infers that you are an expert in IT and you are providing your opinion on what you think (as an IT Consultant with 40 years experience) is a major downfall of the NBN. Did you explicitly say you were an expert on the NBN? No. Did you suggest you are an expert in the area by providing your ‘credentials’? Without a doubt.

            “This comment is sheer rubbish.”

            Yes well the more you write the more confident I am in my analysis. But you know, knock yourself out ;-)

    38. Roger Mayhew
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 9:34 pm | Permalink |

      I don’t quite know where to start.

      Reading most of the above comments it seems that my years at university studying telecommunications engineering were completely wasted and I have been misguided in considering the economic aspects of networks that I have designed.

      • Posted 28/03/2013 at 9:46 pm | Permalink |

        The thing is Roger that we do consider the economic aspects of the NBN. Well most of us anyway.

        And we still support the NBN.

        Now that mainly comes down to the fact Turnbull isn’t releasing his policy so we can’t actually look at the long term economically viability of his proposals, but there a minor aspects like, since we tend towards full FTTP rollouts being the ultimate endgame, do the short term economic and social benefits of FTTN work out comparing to just doing FTTP in the first place.

        It’s akin to asking a young couple that is planning to have children if they want to buy a big house now or wait until the they actually have kids. In that specific instant the market tends towards up sizing when you need it (because the value of houses appreciates over time and you actually profit from buying smaller), but in networking, where the assets tend to depreciate, can you justify the loses you will incur because it will reduce your initial economic outlay?

        There are further questions like, does the fact we no longer want Telstra to do mean that FTTP is now cheaper because a FTTN network would require you to secure Telstra’s assets in order to complete the build.

        Now, I can’t make the the determination of how you feel for you, but I can tell you, with what information we have, the NBN is a sound choice economically. Now information might chance, like if Turnbull releases a kickass policy.

        That doesn’t mean we aren’t open to negative press of the NBN (again, most of us), take Renai, he wrote a very damning article about the NBN recently because of it failing to meet it’s rollout targets. Strange thing is, he still supports the NBN. Some of us are not only open to it, we can and do actually dish it out.

        So maybe it’s just because this article was a reply to Alan Jones, who has very little idea what he’s talking about, but I think your representative sample doesn’t quite cover the majority of people who support the NBN.

        • alain
          Posted 29/03/2013 at 8:47 am | Permalink |

          Of course it helps when dismissing the viability of a FTTN to ignore lucid evidence overseas especially in the UK how successful it is and why it is still being rolled oiut, as we discussed at length here:

          http://delimiter.com.au/2013/03/25/broken-dreams-the-nbns-bubble-has-burst/#comment-596131

          The head in the sand attitude by pro NBN supporters that Australia is somehow ‘different’ as we are some sort of undeniable oasis of ‘ FTTH only’ in the world has no factual basis whatever.

          • Posted 29/03/2013 at 9:37 am | Permalink |

            I didn’t “ignore” any of your evidence, you completely ignored my points. Your “evidence” in no way contradicted my point.

            As I said, it’s all well and good to say X is cheaper than Y, but to be able to apply it across projects, it’s helps to understand why.

            As I said the reason is access to the previous pits, ducts and copper drops. Something NBNCo has to pay for, which they haven’t completely yet. Without that your Brownfields areas are going to exactly the same cost to you as rolling out in Greenfields.

            And although it’s faster, again, signing these deals adds delays. It took an extra 12 months to sign the deal for the pits and ducts.

            It might still be cheaper for NBNCo after you account for all this, but evidence seems to suggest that even if it is, not by much.

            This added to the fact that the established end game is FTTH in the long term means that it’s actually quite seriously looking like asking NBNCo to switch to a partial FTTN network is asking them to throw away money.

            But this is all things we covered in that conversation we had at length. These are all points you ignored. These are points that have been brought up to you by others as well as me. These are all points that you seem never try and address, to the point where you have just left the conversation completely.

            It’s one thing to concede someone’s points when you get think you’re going around in circles and reached an impasse. I just did with Sy here in which he pointed out he believed future demand was in wireless. I could point out that violates our current understanding of physics, but to use his words, I’d deny him his beer, and we’d already touched on that previously. It’s another to leave serious points unacknowledged, like you do, and go in search of the low hanging fruit to nitpick.

            It’s incredible, excuse the pun, that you think you can just ignore someone points that directly contradict your established point of view and still think your position is being successfully argued.

            I’m going to leave you to your reply now, no doubt you’ll reply this with the same evidence you supplied yesterday to try and undermine my points at the top. No doubt you’ll think that my criticism of your debating style is an attempt to distract away from your points and ignore them.

            How long do you seriously think we can keep playing this game? Renai did warn you about this kind of behaviour, and you are on probation. As before I don’t agree with banning anyone, but I you continue as you are, you’re going to cross that line again, and this time, I won’t defend you.

            • alain
              Posted 29/03/2013 at 1:48 pm | Permalink |

              @NK

              I provide an example of what is happening in the real world from one of the largest European Telco’s that has current experience of rolling out Fibre to the Node AND Fibre to the Home at the SAME TIME and why they prefer Fibre to the Node in brownfields because it is cheaper and faster which is exactly what Turnbull has been saying, but apparently pro Labor NBN armchair theorising from anonymous commentators in Delimiter overrides all of that as the preferred opinion that cannot be argued with.

              BTW NK still classy I see, instead of opening with a personal attack like you have done previously when the kitchen got too hot for you and you are really scrabbling to make a rational response you decided to end off with one.

              • Posted 29/03/2013 at 2:24 pm | Permalink |

                You don’t get it all do you the point I have been making does not at all contradict BTs statements.

                But please, keep digging yourself into a hole. Or alternatively, go back and read my posts on this subject where I have conceded multiple times that rolling out FTTN in Brownfields is cheaper and faster for an incumbent provider.

                Then further read how because NBNCo isn’t an incumbent provider there are extra steps involved in the process like securing the pits, ducts and copper drops which adds time and expenses too the cost of the rollout.

                When you consider that the very things NBNCo needs to secure are what defines Brownfields as Brownfields, as well as the requirement by law for Telstra to be compensated for net present value if NBNCo acquires these assets then it becomes very quick clear that the cost and time savings are reduced significantly by the added complications, possibly even non existent, which brings the viability of NBNCo rolling out FTTN directly into question.

                I don’t know how you can not understand what is such a simple bloody concept and continue to repeat the same lines and evidence that is actually a fundamental part of my logical reasoning, thus indirectly providing evidence for my point.

                —————-

                I wrote the above and realised it’s exactly what I just said that you had replied to, which was repeating what I had already said in the other article.

                So instead of writing a conclusion that asks you to address my points directly if you actually want to talk about this in depth, but I suddenly realised, that after no less than 6 attempts to get this point across its clear to me you don’t have an adequate response, because the law of averages says I can’t seriously be that incompetent at making a point that 6 times in a row I didn’t explain it in enough detail.

                So my only conclusion is you don’t want to accept that FTTN might not make economic sense here anymore, and I can’t actually fathom why that is unless you have a vested interest in one technology over another, or one political party over another. Is this the case or am I missing something here?

                Either way you’re really trying my patience, and this conversation is over unless you are willing to address my point directly. Please don’t bring it up again either.

                Would it help if I said explicitly that I believe BT when they say their FTTN rollout was much cheaper and quicker in Brownfields? That if Telstra did it like BT has they would probably see a similar saving? Because I have implied this multiple times in the course of this conversation and you must have missed it.

              • N. Emo
                Posted 29/03/2013 at 3:12 pm | Permalink |

                Alain

                I am sorry – when I made my comments I relied on the tenet that it cannot be taken for granted that the Coalition will do anything other than pay lip service to slowly improving the existing structure whilst dismantling or failing to maintain any work already undertaken on the FTTH network in place. Why do this – because if favours big money as it stands. As for anonymity, many key contributors would be risking their jobs to comment.

              • Harimau
                Posted 31/03/2013 at 12:16 am | Permalink |

                You begin with the assertion that “cheaper and sooner” is the most important thing for a national infrastructure project.
                The rest of us begin with the underlying argument that the most important thing for a national infrastructure project is that it achieves its aims, it is of high-quality and it lasts.
                Why is cheaper and sooner more important than completely overhauling the nation’s telecommunications infrastructure and regulatory environment? Because some people currently don’t have broadband?
                The fact is, if the LNP had continued to hold government, those same people would still never have broadband rolling out to them.
                The fact is, the only reason the LNP are entertaining the mere idea of a broadband alternative, is because the ALP thought up the NBN, which is now being rolled out.
                The fact is, without the NBN, we wouldn’t even be having this argument, because the idea of getting low-priced, high-quality, future-proof broadband would never have even crossed our minds.
                Now Australia has had a taste, of something wonderful that they never knew existed. And now the diners, they want more, and they want it right now. But you can’t rush the chef, and you certainly can’t change the recipe.

              • Harimau
                Posted 31/03/2013 at 12:20 am | Permalink |

                One more thing, drawing attention to a perceived “personal attack” is itself a “personal attack”, in that it is an ad hominem argument that attempts to distract from the facts and the real argument, and discredit the person that made the perceived “personal attack”, and therefore discredit his argument.

                Don’t be such a (faux) victim. Be the bigger man, if you can, and ignore it.

          • NBNAlex
            Posted 29/03/2013 at 10:05 am | Permalink |

            Speaking of head in the sand, here’s more “lucid evidence” for you…

            http://delimiter.com.au/2012/04/30/fttn-a-huge-mistake-says-ex-bt-cto/

            Hmmm… FTTN a huge “mistake”, says ex-BT CTO

            • alain
              Posted 29/03/2013 at 1:33 pm | Permalink |

              So why are they still rolling it out?

              • NBNAlex
                Posted 29/03/2013 at 4:12 pm | Permalink |

                It being a mistake and them rolling it out regardless…. sound familiar?

              • Harimau
                Posted 29/03/2013 at 11:46 pm | Permalink |

                Because they have already invested in it, and changing tack is a more costly exercise. I would have thought that obvious.

                • alain
                  Posted 30/03/2013 at 9:29 am | Permalink |

                  Nothing to do with changing tack, they are rolling out both FTTN and FTTH, they could substitute one for the other anytime.

                  What is the costly exercise and slower is rolling out FTTH into brownfield areas.

                  • NBNAlex
                    Posted 30/03/2013 at 11:30 am | Permalink |

                    Yes but over the past few years you told us that FttP is a “waste”, because we don’t need such speeds to everyone’s homes and we don’t have apps, etc…

                    Are you now typically contradicting your own entire argument?

                    Funny how all the reasons you pedantically argued over the last few years, typically, don’t apply to the Coalition’s plan.

                    I think I’ll get my dollar back here HC.

                  • Harimau
                    Posted 30/03/2013 at 12:00 pm | Permalink |

                    You genuinely believe that they could substitute FTTN for FTTH at no net monetary or time cost?

                    Well, I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, since you also believe Turnbull’s Broadband Network could substitute FTTH for FTTN at no net monetary or time cost.

                    • alain
                      Posted 31/03/2013 at 9:23 am | Permalink |

                      Yes and to the second one where did I say that? – or have you got it the wrong way around?

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 31/03/2013 at 11:33 am | Permalink |

                        So you don’t believe it then?

                      • Harimau
                        Posted 31/03/2013 at 1:06 pm | Permalink |

                        Well there’s the problem then, I suppose.

    39. Richard
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 10:04 pm | Permalink |

      ‘Dumb’ people can’t see wireless is NBN future: Alan Jones

      His statement doesn’t hold true as he believes that wireless is the NBN future.

      • NBNAlex
        Posted 29/03/2013 at 11:17 am | Permalink |

        + 1 …lol

    40. Vince
      Posted 28/03/2013 at 10:36 pm | Permalink |

      We all know Jones is a fair and unbiased commentator. He has no affiliation with any political party, always presents two sides to every issue and always includes interview guests pushing the alternate views. He then just invites the listeners to make up their own minds and he never pushes his own selfish agenda.

      Of course I’m being sarcastic. The man should move to North Korea where he would fit right in with the manipulative, brainwashing, controlling, authoritarian regime leaders who would welcome him with open arms! The less we hear of this imbecile, the better.

      • LetsBeOpenAboutThis
        Posted 30/03/2013 at 2:55 pm | Permalink |

        +1

    41. Posted 28/03/2013 at 11:37 pm | Permalink |

      Alan Jones is an overpaid idiot! he is the one who is dumb! The only thing that’s shocking about this shock jock is how does someone with an extremely low IQ like him get an overpaid job on Radio?
      If Alan Jones knew anything about Computers and Networks he would not be making stupid comments.
      There is nothing faster than Fiber Optics and Continents are connected by undersea Fiber Optic cabling!
      Fiber is what connects us to the Asia & USA.Wireless will never be as fast or superior as Fiber will be as well as more and more bandwidth gains are constantly being achieved through Fiber as router and compression technologies advance! Wireless bandwidth will always be affected by factors such as traffic load,Interference ,hostile enemy nation or terrorist signal jamming and solar flares! do your homework you D&*K head Alan Jones before you make stupid comments, So put your foot in your mouth Alan Jones!

    42. Elijah B.
      Posted 29/03/2013 at 2:01 am | Permalink |

      Ultimately it isn’t surprising that an empty vessel such as Alan Jones makes so much noise. It’s also not surprising, but it is appalling, that so many people think he knows what he’s talking about. Jones is certainly of the “There’s one born every minute” school of exploitation.

    43. A knowledgeable NETWORK ENGINEER
      Posted 29/03/2013 at 2:12 am | Permalink |

      Alan Jones is a freaking monkey, actually no, scratch that, it’s an insult to monkey’s, sorry monkeys… Perhaps he should stick to talking about things he actually has any knowledge on instead of spreading liberal propaganda and trying to push an entirely inappropriate agenda.

      By saying ‘dumb people’ can’t see wifi as a future of NBN, he’s highlighting how dumb he really really is….
      Wifi has it’s place, it’s used in local networks all the time, but guess what they’re connected to, hard line infrastructure, and that hardline infrastructure is antiquated, decaying, and just plain inappropriate for the tasks we are now attempting to achieve… it was perfectly fine for morse code, and analogue voice, but like Alan himself, it has become outdated, and thus redundant.

      If you’re going to do the whole cop-out of saying fibre will be redundant, that’s utterly horse manure, it’s used in our core networks and has been for years, technologies dealing with transmission and data certainly have changed, but the only way you’re really going to be able to get any faster than fibre’s LIGHT SPEED technology, is to break the speed of light, care to make any suggestions on how we can do that with our limited knowledge and technology, even if we did manage to do it, fibre is a medium in which light passes, not going to change that much.. perhaps you’d like to pass communications through subspace instead?… *yawn*…

      You know the old saying ‘stick to what you know’?… yeah… perhaps you should do that…

      Your’s sincerely,

      A knowledgeable NETWORK ENGINEER

      • Posted 29/03/2013 at 9:05 am | Permalink |

        Although you’re correct in that Alan Jones has no idea what he’s talking about, your explanation as to why fibre optic connections will still be required is not one an actual engineer would use because you’d know the speed of light in fibre optics is about 2/3s that of air.

        Please don’t pretend to be something you’re not. It doesn’t actually help the debate.

        • nonny-moose
          Posted 29/03/2013 at 12:55 pm | Permalink |

          i know i know this is 3T5YA, not the stuff being used here etc etc. but incidentally….

          http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/03/fiber-cables-made-of-air-move-data-at-99-7-percent-the-speed-of-light/

          he could have been talking about that stuff?

          • Posted 29/03/2013 at 1:17 pm | Permalink |

            I doubt it, that stuff isn’t field tested yet and isn’t viable over long line length in current form. It might become a thing in the future if they get it to work over longer line lengths, but likely only for transit fibre links, or people who specifically need low latency links.

            I can see people suggesting this stuff will bring into question the NBN, but unfortunately, by the looks of it this stuff’ll be more expensive to produce per metre because you need a very good internal reflective surface coating the internal of the cable.

          • NBNAlex
            Posted 29/03/2013 at 1:38 pm | Permalink |

            It’s still fixed/cable though?

          • Harimau
            Posted 29/03/2013 at 11:49 pm | Permalink |

            Fascinating. Still decades away from commercial reality, but fascinating.

      • NBNAccuracy
        Posted 29/03/2013 at 10:18 pm | Permalink |

        Stop trying to pretend you are a network engineer. It helps nothing. It just makes pro NBNers look like idiots. Light travels at 2/3rd the speed of light in fibre. Radio and data on copper travel at almost the speed of light. They cannot send as much data due to their limited bandwidth compared to light, but making claims about the speed of light makes you sound dumb.

    44. Gordon Drennan
      Posted 29/03/2013 at 10:36 am | Permalink |

      You fibre fanboys are like the people who when the car came a long and threatened rail said, no, we just need bigger faster trains. Of course you still need trains going to each suburb to carry the big loads. But you don’t need them going down every street to every house.

      And Jones is right in the sense that just as people show they want the convenience of transport anywhere anytime with cars, they show they want the convenience of mobile access to the internet with the massive increase in sales and use of smartphones and pads.

      Every one of the big advances in computers and internet access that are happening and will happen in the reasonably near future involve mobile access. All the health related stuff. All the education stuff. All the smart equipment that works better by being internet connected.

      Bigger fatter pipes to every house are the past. They are pretending that the future looks like the past, just bigger and faster. Mobile access is the future.

      Its you lot that are stuck in the past, not Alan Jones.

      The NBN that is being built ignores the real world numbers that show the demand for fixed connections plateaued years ago, while the demand for mobile is increasing rapidly, and would be even faster if it wasn’t that it was being choked by lack of infrastructure. That is where at least some of the taxpayers money going into the NBN should be going: to giving taxpayers what they clearly want. More mobile.

      • Posted 29/03/2013 at 11:01 am | Permalink |

        Demand has plateaued, but it isn’t declining. In fact there is still minor growth, about 0.6% compared to 3% p.a. according to the ABS.

        Your analogy is therefore flawed, your reasoning as well. As is your understanding of technology. Wireless technology has serious physical limitations that makes large scale macro networks feasible, which is why technology like WiFi exists, and will continue to exist, to provide micro networks. These micro networks are best served by fibre.

        The future is wireless, but that means we need the NBN. It’s a difficult concept for some to grasp I realise because they believe the technology mutually exclusive.

      • Harimau
        Posted 29/03/2013 at 11:42 am | Permalink |

        People only travel for a small portion of the day. Most people do not use the internet only while they are the move.

        Also, WiFi, look it up.

        And it isn’t tax dollars, I thought we established this long ago. *sigh*

        • Harimau
          Posted 29/03/2013 at 11:45 am | Permalink |

          But to be fair, if the NBN did *expand* its scope to provide a wholesale open access mobile wireless network, I’d be very happy with that suggestion, Gordon.

          • alain
            Posted 30/03/2013 at 9:50 am | Permalink |

            So you figure even more Government debt which is already at record levels should be used to try and eliminate Telstra, SingTel and Vodafone out of the wireless data and mobile business?

            • NBNAlex
              Posted 30/03/2013 at 11:44 am | Permalink |

              http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2012/10/30/interest-rates/great-debt-furphy

              “Government debt is not an issue in the minds of anyone with a serious interest in the functioning of the Australian economy and its bond market. Australia has a triple-A credit rating from all three major credit rating agencies and government bond yields are near all time lows. The strength of the Australian dollar owes much to international investor confidence in public policy”.

              And…

              “…. Net government debt has never been above 18.1 per cent in modern history and with it topping out at 10 per cent of GDP in the current cycle, any concerns about government debt are hopelessly misguided.

              In 46 budgets between 1970-71 and 2015-16, there are 23 surpluses. Exactly half of the time, as a Keynesian would wish, there has been a deficit, half the time a surplus. Which just reinforces the point that there is no debt problem in Australia, no debt servicing issues, no interest rate burden on the government sector.

              The debt level is chicken feed, it’s peanuts and it’s starting to fall from an already low level as the budget moves back to surplus.”

              Wow this expert suggest your concerns are “hopelessly misguided”… it’s as if he reads Delimiter eh ;)

              • Michael
                Posted 31/03/2013 at 1:24 am | Permalink |

                “The lesson of the past decade is that when an economy is growing, it is best to pare back government debt levels. In a boom, pay back debt quickly. With softer growth do it slowly. This was the error of most governments made in the decade up to about 2007. There were good economic times yet rarely did we see budget surpluses.”

                Read more: http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2012/10/30/interest-rates/great-debt-furphy#ixzz2P26N4MYG

                Given that revenue has been growing at 2x the rate of inflation ever since the GFC, why have we only had deficits? Isn’t this the problem the author alludes to and the true “debt issue”

                • NBNAlex
                  Posted 31/03/2013 at 11:40 am | Permalink |

                  Err nice try, but what about the rest you conveniently omitted? i.e. immediately following the paragraph you alluded to he says…

                  “FOR AUSTRALIA IT”S DiFFERENT. Net government debt has never been above 18.1 per cent in modern history and with it topping out at 10 per cent of GDP in the current cycle, any concerns about government debt are hopelessly misguided.”

                  “Hopelessly misguided eh” :)

                  • Michael
                    Posted 31/03/2013 at 12:53 pm | Permalink |

                    So it is OK to follow the mistakes of Europe then?

                    But just in conclusion, I would hate to be standing on false premises.

                    “The debt level is chicken feed, it’s peanuts and it’s starting to fall from an already low level as the budget moves back to surplus.”

                    …………….

                    Read more: http://www.businessspectator.com.au/article/2012/10/30/interest-rates/great-debt-furphy#ixzz2P4uW3CLW

                    • NBNAlex
                      Posted 31/03/2013 at 5:37 pm | Permalink |

                      Which part of “for Australia is different” do you not understand Michael?????

                      • Michael
                        Posted 31/03/2013 at 6:52 pm | Permalink |

                        Which part of faulty assumptions lead to faulty conclusions did u miss?

                        Net debt is not falling.
                        There is no surplus yet.

                        The economy has recovered yet we are falling deeper into debt, exactly what he warned the EU about, but we are not doing what he suggests to follow the keynesian model.

                        Just to highlight how his conclusion for Aust. is based upon faulty logic: “Net government debt has never been above 18.1 per cent in modern history and with it topping out at 10 per cent of GDP in the current cycle,”

                        Net debt has not topped out so one of his key reasons behind why we do not need to worry is not applicable. By his logic, we do not need to worry if we stop the growth of debt, and it tops out at the current level, I think most people would agree and that is why we need to get back to suplus.

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 9:26 am | Permalink |

                        True to the cause as usual Michael well done…

                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Australia

                        Regardless of who was/is in power, the Oz economy was and still is, one of the strongest anywhere… and anyone who says otherwise is a fool or on a clear agenda, IMO.

                      • Michael
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 12:08 pm | Permalink |

                        So, they why is the government running a deficit to shore up a weak economy?

                        If the economy is strong, why is it not in a surplus to build up cash reserves for the next stimulus?

                      • Michael
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 2:13 pm | Permalink |

                        But just to add one more question;

                        From your response is it right to imply that your logic is that it does not matter how our economy is being run as long as we are in good economic times?

                      • NBNAccuracy
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 3:11 pm | Permalink |

                        Paying the piper for years of Liberal infrastructure neglect and decay.

                      • Michael
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 3:30 pm | Permalink |

                        Its good to see your true colours come out.

                        Instead of any economic debate, you just resort to partisan point scoring.

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 4:05 pm | Permalink |

                        Err no Michael…I simply supplied an article refuting alain’s claim about debt. You should read it instead of scouring for the cherry-pick.

                        Anyway, your mate typically ignored my info… you strangely, totally dismissed the crux and ignored the subsequent paragraph to your cherry-picked one, which said Australia is different.

                        No where have I seen this before :/

                        So I won’t ask you to again answer my FttN concerns (because in all likelihood post Sept14 that will be the plan) because you bluntly refuse to add to the debate.

                        Seriously, until such times as you look through the eyes of something rather than a self confessed lifelong conservative (which admittedly may be difficult/or impossible for one so entrenched) I’m afraid the rest of your comments are, IMO, ergo equally unfairly tainted :(

                      • NBNAccuracy
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 4:14 pm | Permalink |

                        Actually I have never voted Labor in my life, usually Liberal. But a dose of Labor now and then gets stuff built.
                        How is what I said partisan point scoring? The Liberals freely admit they believe in small government and that market forces should provide where possible. In many cases they haven’t and where they haven’t Labor has had to fill the gaps. For example, the many years of nothing done to improve our communications infrastructure.

                      • NBNAccuracy
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 4:18 pm | Permalink |

                        I think he was responding to me. Maybe he thinks we are the same person.
                        I thought it was quite obvious why there is a deficit. They could have had a surplus. Abbott wants a surplus, and he is going to cut and cut and lay people off in the public service until it fits his small government ideal. The smaller the government the bigger the corperate “incentives”. I am sure some will accidentally trickle down to th employees if they aren’t careful.

                      • Michael
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 4:20 pm | Permalink |

                        The NBN is off budget so it cannot be contributing to their debt problems…..

                      • Michael
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 4:25 pm | Permalink |

                        **debt should be deficit**

                        You posted an article to refute Alain, but then get upset when someone shows you a mistake in the article.

                        He contention that we are different is based upon the fact that the budget was going to return to surplus. It is not.

                        If the arguements he uses to backup his main contention are no longer valid then that throws doubt over it all, and it is too simplistic to hang onto the “Australia is different” phrase like a drowning man on a piece of wood.

                        But as to the other question, If our economic credentials are so good, then why do we still have a massive deficit at 4% of GDP last year?

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 4:57 pm | Permalink |

                        Michael, the underlying fact is our economy is strong. Whether you can stomach that fact or not, it is fact.

                        I’m not sure now whether you are arguing that our economy isn’t strong or whether you have typically morphed that to… it would be stronger under Abbott/Hockey? I’d suggest it will remain strong regardless…

                        But there are hurdles as there always are and will always be, with every nations economies, but again the gist of this new round and round in circles with Michael (as usual) arguments is…”talks of debt problems and linking them to comms is nothing but FUD/scaremongering…”

                        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoS-MCnTPtQ

                      • Michael
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 5:08 pm | Permalink |

                        Sorry NBNAccuracy I did get confused.

                        NBNAlex,

                        Ok, I get the gist of your argument;, Since we have a strong economy, we do not need to worry about whether we have good economic management or not. As long as it is all good relative to the rest of the world it does not matter if it could be better.

                        If that is your argument, then fine, I don’t agree with it, but I can understand it. Just to keep repeating our economy is good is not a response to any of the other questions.

                        Just to repeat,
                        But as to the other question, If our economic credentials are so good, then why do we still have a massive deficit at 4% of GDP last year?

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 5:27 pm | Permalink |

                        ONCE AGAIN, the Michael strawman always rears it’s ugly head… doesn’t it?

                        Read my lips… alain made a smart arsed comment, linking “debt to comms.”

                        I refuted this… that’s it, (I’ll give you the bare bones basic so as to limit the next strawman). Got it now?

                        Stop reading what is not there and then arguing on your own warped strawman interpretation, FFS.

                      • Michael
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 5:32 pm | Permalink |

                        Oh well,

                        The standard non-response. I wish you better luck with your economics next time.

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 5:59 pm | Permalink |

                        LOL… cherry-pick one aspect, I said economy.

                        So… compared to our trading partners and other western nations, is our economy strong – yes/or no (no BS no cherry-picking and no strawman).

                        Hmmm, yes or no… what now?

                      • Michael
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 6:13 pm | Permalink |

                        Given that we have a strong mining sector but poor retail growth on the East Coast and low business confidence across the board it is hard to say whether we are strong or not. Compared to major trading partners, the US, / Japan, our economy is strong, to China, our growth rate is tiny.

                        So yes we are strong relative to most of our Western trading partners, but that only reinforces the point that we should not have a deficit. It would blow out of all proportions if unemployment were to rise and revenue were to stop growing at double the rate of inflation. It is currently 4% now, if things went pear shaped, it would be enourmous.

                        In general terms (not comparatively) our economy is in a fragile position. There has been no recession for 20 years, and confidence is low. Demand is slowing in non-mining sectors and parts of the economy are struggling to make structural changes in order to stay competitve. This is evidenced by lower than average GDP growth, low interest rates and strongly expansionary fiscal settings.

                        But would you care to tie that into one of your arguments and answer my questions as I have been kind enough to answer yours?

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 6:19 pm | Permalink |

                        My, that was a long winded yes…

                        [quote] “So yes we are strong relative to most of our Western trading partners…”

                        Exactly my point… many, many (unnecessary) comments back!

                        Thank you.

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 6:22 pm | Permalink |

                        Ooh, now how about my FttN questions you avoided a week ago? Before again having the audacity to expect me to involve myself in your questions, while you continue to ignore mine :/

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 01/04/2013 at 7:32 pm | Permalink |

                        Michael… truce.

                        Although not what I was genuinely referring to, to show I am trying to be fair and not argumentative…

                        Yes agreed… we need to remain vigilant to avoid recession and not apathetic simply because we currently have a relatively healthy economy.

                        :)

                    • Michael
                      Posted 01/04/2013 at 8:36 pm | Permalink |

                      NBNAccuracy,

                      Sorry about before.

                      But to respond to your post, cutting funding is not the only way to achieve a surplus, taxes can also be raised to pay for additional programs. Australia has one of the lowest taxation levels (and size of public sector) in OECD.

                      In either case, the underlying economic theory of “stimulus packages” or “stimulus spending” is Keynesian. He advocated a balanced budget over the medium term (~1 economic cycle) so, if not return to surplus now, when?

                      In returning to surplus there is another debate (although politicians do not want to go there), of raising taxes for new initiatives, or cutting back on existing intiatives.

            • Harimau
              Posted 30/03/2013 at 12:25 pm | Permalink |

              Awfully defensive there, alain…

              As NBNAlex has demonstrated, the premise of your argument is false. Your peddling of falsehoods as if they were facts almost makes you sound like a Liberal voter.

              But ignoring that faulty premise, I think that is a fantastic suggestion, alain.

            • Observer
              Posted 30/03/2013 at 1:06 pm | Permalink |

              Alain

              “even more Government debt which is already at record levels”

              Careful. Your devotion to anything coalition, true or false, is showing.

              Since, you give so much credence to what happens in the UK in relation to FTTN, why don’t you check their debt levels and while you are at it, also check most of the rest of the world.

              And guess why debt levels are so high. It might be news to you but there has been a global financial crisis. Considering that, Australia’s debt is remarkably low.

              • alain
                Posted 30/03/2013 at 1:57 pm | Permalink |

                All the responses totally ignored the fact it seen as a good thing that the NBN Co rolls out or buys out wireless infrastructure so that we have a ‘open network’.

                Why stop there? Why not let the NBN Co become a ISP so residents can buy their BB plans without going through BigPond, Optus, iiNet etc?, cuts out the middleman and reduces plan costs.

                • NBNAlex
                  Posted 30/03/2013 at 7:25 pm | Permalink |

                  Buy out all wireless = ridiculous typical strawman.

                  *rolls eyes*

                • Harimau
                  Posted 31/03/2013 at 12:04 am | Permalink |

                  Why, do *you* see that as a bad idea? And why is that?

                  I’ve noticed, alain, that you never actually state your own positions on things, you either provide support to whatever the latest Coalition (or in this case, Alan Jones) line is, or only try to pick at others’ arguments (or even phrasing, in some instances). So far, all I’ve seen you do is criticise, not necessarily critically analyse, others, never stating your own opinions on matters. Are you afraid that if your opinions were known, it would display a clear bias? Do you even have an opinion?

                  • alain
                    Posted 31/03/2013 at 9:32 am | Permalink |

                    Except I don’t always support the Coalition line they have a hell of lot of negotiation obstacles to overcome, especially with Telstra and the ACCC.

                    But even so I agree a mix of technologies is feasible, for all the reasons a mix of technologies works overseas.

                    The present NBN is being bulldozed through mainly on the back of spin, I cannot wait for a proper CBA to be done, which is a major benefit coming out of a Coalition win.

                    • Harimau
                      Posted 01/04/2013 at 5:48 pm | Permalink |

                      What exactly is the point of a CBA?
                      To decide whether or not the NBN is a good idea?
                      The whole nation supports the NBN. It is a good idea. Even you profess to support the NBN. Even you believe it is a good idea.
                      So what would the CBA tell you?

                    • Harimau
                      Posted 01/04/2013 at 5:56 pm | Permalink |

                      A CBA is done on projects that don’t provide a return on investment, and they are done before the project commences (to see if it is feasible or justifiable to proceed with it).
                      The NBN project provides a return on investment.
                      The NBN project has already commenced.
                      So what exactly is the purpose of a CBA on the NBN?

                      All you have done with your latest comment is give credence to a long-held suspicion that all you do is parrot the Coalition line. That, surely, is the exact opposite of what you would want to do.

                  • NBNAlex
                    Posted 31/03/2013 at 11:42 am | Permalink |

                    +1

                    This has been noticed and mentioned before, but nothing ever seems to change :(

      • Simon Reidy
        Posted 29/03/2013 at 12:38 pm | Permalink |

        “you fibre fanboys..”

        Nearly stopped reading after this stupid comment.

        “Alan Jones is right”

        And… I’ve stopped reading.

      • Hubert Cumberdale
        Posted 29/03/2013 at 1:02 pm | Permalink |

        “blah blah blah… stuff about cars and trains… Bigger fatter pipes to every house are the past.”

        But you expect a road to be laid to your front door so you can drive your car?

        “Mobile access is the future.”

        You should tell this to Turnbull just in case the coalition win and decide to roll out FttN.

        “demand for fixed connections plateaued years ago”

        You seem to be conflating issues here, demand for fixed (actual or imagined) does not dictate demand for speed which is something fixed has not been able to keep up with. The NBN FttP rollout solves that problem. Hope that helps.

        btw you really should do some research before embarrassing yourself again Gorden, it is clear you are way out of your depth commenting on this website.

      • Observer
        Posted 30/03/2013 at 1:08 pm | Permalink |

        Gordon

        “Jones is right”

        And the pope isn’t catholic.

    45. Bob
      Posted 29/03/2013 at 11:54 am | Permalink |

      Gordon,

      Lets think about it for a second hey, because I don’t think you’d accepted the limitations of a wireless network. Your view and Alan Jones view is that you don’t need FTTH, which is naive to say the least.. If he has some knowledge about networks and how they worked, it would be good for a start.

      So I’m going to assume that you want 93% coverage via wireless right?

      #1 – How many towers do you think you’re going to need to install to achieve this? Answer: A ridiculous amount.

      #2 – How and where are you going to install these without the community crying foul over health concerns?

      #3 – Why would the government build a wireless network when there is no monopoly, there are already three wireless networks, being Telstra, Optus and Vodafone.

      #4 – Wireless is a shared medium, the more users, the slower the speeds. Do you really think that if the entire population would get good speeds if 93% of the population is connected to it? What about black spots?

      #5 – Cost per GB for wireless vs fiber. You’d be lucky to get 10GB for $60 a month on a wireless plan. Do you think this can then be shared in a home, say between 4 people?

      #6 – Upgrading wireless costs. So 4G is out, if a 5G were to be created, you’re going to have to pay/replace the equipment. This is costly. FTTH, the cable does not change, only the end hardware, far easier and cheaper to do. I might add FTTH will deliver 1000 Mbps once fully completed.

      #7 – You’re comment about wireless growth verse’s fixed line growth is pointless. The reason being is everyone has or owns a mobile phone these days. They come with voice and data. However, not everyone has a house for themselves. So you might have 5 people living in the one house. The fixed line connection serves 5 people, the mobile data serves 1 person. The need for higher data limits and speed are therefore required to service a house and the 5 people in it. You’re metric of comparing growth is pointless. Wireless data is there to compliment a fixed line connection. It gives you a little freedom when out and about to check an email and some sites. Its not going to give you high speeds and high data limits.

      #8 – Data is rising rapidly. Once we had 20GB HDDs and you think its enough. We’re now up to 4000GB HDDs. The point is, the greater our data storage grows, the greater the need for faster speeds. Unfortunately, wireless networks cannot do an entire nation at high speeds and high data limits.

      #9 – If wireless is as good as you make it out to be, there would be a lot of people that do not have fixed line communications. I just don’t see it.

    46. alain
      Posted 29/03/2013 at 2:24 pm | Permalink |

      ‘#9 – If wireless is as good as you make it out to be, there would be a lot of people that do not have fixed line communications. I just don’t see it.’

      You need to look at trends outside Australia where that statistic is tracked more diligently, wireless ONLY households in the USA is at 26% and rising.

      • Posted 29/03/2013 at 2:36 pm | Permalink |

        I think you’ll find it’s actually 36% and that figure is for telephone services. Mobile broadband and smartphones only households is actually only estimated at 7%.

        • alain
          Posted 29/03/2013 at 7:34 pm | Permalink |

          Oh it’s actually higher at 36%! – thanks for that,, so is that 36% + 7%?

          The point is of course is that wireless only households DO NOT have a fixed line connection, it’s irrelevant what they use the wireless connection for.

          No wonder the NBN Co have identified wireless only residences as a key risk in their identified risk list in the latest 2012-2015 Corporate plan.

          • Posted 29/03/2013 at 8:04 pm | Permalink |

            I know what your point was. But you need to learn to read exactly what the statistics are reporting.

            So let’s explain again 36% of American households do not have a landline telephone service (through they might have a cable broadband service).

            7% of Americans only use their smartphone or a mobile broadband plan to connect to the Internet.

            So the figure you were reporting, the 36% one, which I can only assume was a typo has no relevance to the debate. The one that does is the 7%, which makes the 13% figure NBNCo predicts reasonable.

            • alain
              Posted 30/03/2013 at 10:53 am | Permalink |

              First of all you ignored the identified risk of wireless listed in the NBN Co Plans which would impact ROI, you do know what risk means?

              Secondly you ignored the fact that the NBN Co don’t just provide a BB data service they also provide a voice service off the UNi-V port, the increasing trend of residences disconnecting from a Telstra, Verizon, AT&T landline service and are just using their mobiles for voice are not going to want a NBN Co provided landline (voice) service.

              Your assertion that we should ONLY be looking at the figures for residences that ONLY have wireless internet is incorrect.

              • Posted 30/03/2013 at 11:26 am | Permalink |

                First of all you ignored the identified risk of wireless listed in the NBN Co Plans which would impact ROI, you do know what risk means?

                No I didn’t. You see that bit where I suggested that the 13% wireless only figure is reasonable? That means I believe the risk calculated by NBNCo is accurate.

                Secondly you ignored the fact that the NBN Co don’t just provide a BB data service they also provide a voice service off the UNi-V port, the increasing trend of residences disconnecting from a Telstra, Verizon, AT&T landline service and are just using their mobiles for voice are not going to want a NBN Co provided landline (voice) service.

                No I didn’t, because as I’m sure you’re aware…

                Your assertion that we should ONLY be looking at the figures for residences that ONLY have wireless internet is incorrect.

                … NBNCo gets most of its revenue from Internet connections, not telephony. In fact all plans include telephony bandwidth for free in the AVC cost.

                Not only that but if 36% of people only use their mobiles for telephony access and 7% of people only use their smartphone or mobile wireless for Internet access then the difference, logically, must consist of two groups:

                - Those who have a fixed line Internet but no landline telephone (quite common in America cause the most common access is Cable, which doesn’t require a phone).

                - Those who have no access to the Internet at all.

                But unfortunately we can’t know exactly the split, but we do know that in Australia something like 90% of the population use the Internet, whereas in America it’s like 78% (where ahead of America in terms of Internet users). However there is a positive coloration between non-internet users and non-mobile users (most people who don’t use the Internet are not interested in advances of technology at all).

                With this in mind it is safe to assume that the majority of the people in the difference are in the also have cable Internet group.

                So of the two statistics we have, the 7% is far more relevant to calculating the risk to NBNCo from wireless only customers than than the number of people without a phone line.

                It’s called the National Broadband Network for a reason Alain. The telephony aspect is very much a secondary service.

                • alain
                  Posted 30/03/2013 at 12:07 pm | Permalink |

                  Sorry NK your NBN Co doesn’t agree with you.

                  ‘THE company building the National Broadband Network, already under fire for running late, has admitted it faces rising competition from wireless networks offering improved services and prices.’

                  ‘Now a senior NBN Co executive has said: “NBN Co faces competition from wireless networks that are increasing in capability over time, subject to significant economies of scale and scope (and therefore, decreasing cost per gigabyte delivered), and are expected to offer a potential substitute for NBN Co’s voice-only and entry-level voice and broadband services.” ‘

                  http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/wireless-networks-rise-as-threat-to-nbn/story-fn59niix-1226608057785

                  As you can see they mention their voice only service is at risk of substitution, not just the broadband service.

                  My comment stands.

                  • Posted 30/03/2013 at 12:09 pm | Permalink |

                    Which is funny, because your comment in no way contradicts mine.

                    Again.

                    How do you keep doing this? Seriously? I don’t understand it.

                  • Posted 30/03/2013 at 12:20 pm | Permalink |

                    Let’s be clear Alain, I never said voice only services aren’t in risk of being substituted, in fact, in my comment I assumed there wouldn’t be any voice only services on the NBN.

                    • alain
                      Posted 30/03/2013 at 12:28 pm | Permalink |

                      Well it’s a incorrect assumption, the NBN Co state they have a voice only service which is at risk of wireless substitution, I assume they know what wholesale services they are offering.

                      • Posted 30/03/2013 at 12:32 pm | Permalink |

                        *facepalm*

                        You do realise the assumption I made here is the worst case scenario right? I’m assuming no one will want a landlines service from NBNCo and despite this I still think their 13% figure is accurate based upon current statistics and trends of wireless broadband take-up.

                        Assumptions can be sometimes helpful like that you know.

                  • NBNAccuracy
                    Posted 30/03/2013 at 12:45 pm | Permalink |

                    Yes, he also said that in 2011 and it is mentioned and taken account of in the plan. This isn’t something new.
                    Look mate stop being a tool. You are just trolling NK.

                    • alain
                      Posted 30/03/2013 at 2:00 pm | Permalink |

                      Who is ‘he’ that you are referring to and he said what in 2011?

                      • NBNAccuracy
                        Posted 30/03/2013 at 2:39 pm | Permalink |

                        End of conversation alain, you are not trolling me too.

                  • Abel Adamski
                    Posted 31/03/2013 at 12:19 am | Permalink |

                    alain
                    Interesting article.
                    The headline and first paragraph creates a very clear impression which then biases the comprehension of the rest of the article which includes.

                    “Last night, NBN Co spokesman Andrew Sholl said the scenario was an “entirely theoretical construct anyway” and the maximum agreement to set price caps and other key terms for NBN Co. “It is neither planned nor intended that we would price in this manner,” he said.
                    The NBN Co has modelled several scenarios regarding its price, and the corporate plan is based on a different scenario in which prices fall across time in both real and nominal terms, which would make the NBN Co’s services of a similar value to wireless.”

                    Like to re evaluate your understanding of the article

                    • alain
                      Posted 31/03/2013 at 9:08 am | Permalink |

                      No not at all, wireless substitution is a substantial risk to the predicted ROI of the NBN, it has been identified as such in the latest Corporate Plan 2012-2015, and enforced in the latest SAU submission under discussion currently at the ACCC.

                      • NBNAlex
                        Posted 31/03/2013 at 5:43 pm | Permalink |

                        It was highlighted as one small factor alain…

                        And if your more precious than life itself Coalition, are elected and roll out FttN… the same factor will again be prevalent…

                        But of course even though you chuck a tantrum about it now, I’m sure you will discount it as non consequential if the Coalition win…

                        Seriously with your extreme hatred of everything Labor and welcoming of everything Coalition, do you believe anyone takes your NBN comments seriously any more … *sigh*

    47. Jim M.
      Posted 29/03/2013 at 5:02 pm | Permalink |

      I’m not aware who Alan Jones is, but he clearly has an engineering background to be making comments like these.

      Did he provide a detailed enough proposal to deal with the contention issues in wireless? Which multiplexing scheme did he propose using?

      I’d be very interested to see the technical detail of his approach. I work in wireless systems design, and so far, nobody has designed a workable approach to allowing high throughput for a large number of users over a shared spectrum.

      • NBNAccuracy
        Posted 29/03/2013 at 5:41 pm | Permalink |

        ROFL, you are so far wrong. He was am english and sports teacher back in the 60s and 70s. He then tried to run for the Liberal party, lost what was considered a safe liberal seat then went into rugby coaching and then radio. As for engineer, he may just be able to program a VCR, but that’s a long shot.
        As for technical details, he doesn’t know or care, he is just anti Labor, pro liberal and will spout any old crap to push his agenda.

        • Harimau
          Posted 29/03/2013 at 11:54 pm | Permalink |

          I’m certain that it was sarcasm, and of quite the clever, subtle kind that I so approve of.

    48. Bob.H
      Posted 29/03/2013 at 5:30 pm | Permalink |

      Alan Jones is an ex Rugby Football coach and knows SFA about engineering or most other things as far as I can tell.

    49. jason
      Posted 29/03/2013 at 5:44 pm | Permalink |

      typical Alan is likely paid to discredit it like he does normally regardless of facts or figures nothing but BS hype, to be honest Turnbull of the Wally isn’t much better, Alan likes a good yarn spinner…

    50. Jim
      Posted 29/03/2013 at 6:32 pm | Permalink |

      Where are all these radio towers going for that wireless option?

      I’m pretty sure Today Tonight trotts out a family traumatised by a Mobile Phone tower installation….. or wind farms for that matter….. every 6 months.

      Just fight stupidity with stupidity and tell the Jones crowd that filling up the air with BROADBAND WIRELESS will fry their brains due to the sheer amount of information contained in the signal.

      Better the bury the signals into the ground so you don’t DIE!!!!!!!

    51. AnticPed
      Posted 29/03/2013 at 9:42 pm | Permalink |

      It’s about time somebody threw a real spanner in the works of ALL the Wuncher Bankers who think that cell phone data connections are the bees knees.

      Truth is that if as many people as some of the Bankers suggest will use mobile data access then all the mobile telcos would need waaaaaay more spectrum, Spectrum costs heaps and the supply is not infinite.

      One of the best indications that the cellcos are doing everything they can to off load traffic whenever they can is the introduction of microcells.

      http://www.att.com/standalone/3gmicrocell/?fbid=Y_jWPZlmTad

      which explains at the bottom of that page how it works: “Connects to your broadband Internet service to create a strong, secure, sharable 3G signal in your home. Up to four AT&T 3G or 4G phones can be used at the same time.”

      It saves the cellco having to provide bandwidth for your phone because your traffic is using your internet service.

      Oh yes. Nearly forgot. Every microcell deal I have looked at still charges YOU for the traffic as though you were getting it from your cellco, and you pay for your landline charges as well.

      How do I know all this? Back in the nineties IBM and Cisco formed a “strategic alliance”. IBM got out of routers etc and got access to some new Cisco kit. At the time I was one of two representatives of IBM Learning Services at the technology announcement and we got the full info on lots of new toys. Telephony products included VoIP and a cell device which was running successfullly on trial in Spain.

      That was the device now called a microcell.

      I did hear (quite some time ago) that Optus was pushing a similar device but I wasn’t interested.

    52. Mike K
      Posted 30/03/2013 at 6:48 am | Permalink |

      Alan it’s time for you to book a room in a retirement home, you are no longer relevant.
      Wireless can only ever be an adjunct to a wired connection for 2 reasons
      1 wireless is a lot less secure then a wired connection.
      2 Wireless itself has limited space, and once that space is congested then everything slows right down.
      It is ID 10 T’s like Alan Jones and Tony Abbott who have no idea about just how desperate the need is to replace the current copper infrastructure with the next generation of wired connections that is FTTP.
      Data increases alone demand that Fibre is used right to the premises.

      If these ID 10 T’s had been around when the copper was first talked about and installed we would still be going to the post office and sending morse code messages all over the place.

    53. wanglese
      Posted 30/03/2013 at 10:32 am | Permalink |

      In one respect, he’s right, you know. The kit that NBNCo provide you inside your house is appalling, and you absolutely MUST have it.

      Once upon a time, when the PMG (I think) was responsible for your phones, you absolutely HAD TO HAVE one of their phones. It didn’t matter how good an alternative handset was, you absoultely had only one place to go.

      Nowadays, you can plug anything you want to the socket, as long as it is within australian approved specs.

      Yes, you can plug any router into the NBNCo device, as long as it’s within spec.

      But it’s UGLY in the extreme, and already outdated technology. Within 10 years, it will be a dinosaur.

      • Posted 30/03/2013 at 10:55 am | Permalink |

        In one respect, he’s right, you know. The kit that NBNCo provide you inside your house is appalling, and you absolutely MUST have it.

        Just like you must have an electricity metre, and you must have a gas metre, etc. What’s the problem?

        Once upon a time, when the PMG (I think) was responsible for your phones, you absolutely HAD TO HAVE one of their phones. It didn’t matter how good an alternative handset was, you absoultely had only one place to go.

        Not equivalent at all, that’s an end user device, the NTU is more akin to a meter for electricity and gas.

        Nowadays, you can plug anything you want to the socket, as long as it is within australian approved specs.
        Yes, you can plug any router into the NBNCo device, as long as it’s within spec.

        Within spec is basically every non specialised ADSL or cable router in existence.

        But it’s UGLY in the extreme, and already outdated technology.

        Outdated compared to what? And if it’s ugly get it installed in a cupboard or externally. You don’t need to have the bloody thing visible. The point of the device is to be robust as it isn’t designed to be end user replaceable because you need to directly splice fibre into it.

        Within 10 years, it will be a dinosaur.
        The NTU might, but that’s easy for NBNCo to replace if you have a fault or you need a new one. In fact I recommend to everyone they get an external one so that NBNCo can come do such replacements without requiring access to inside your home.

        • alain
          Posted 30/03/2013 at 11:21 am | Permalink |

          I think you will find that poster wanglese comments are satire NK.

          :)

          • Posted 30/03/2013 at 11:30 am | Permalink |

            It’s not at all obvious that that was satire. So I assumed it wasn’t.

            • alain
              Posted 30/03/2013 at 11:58 am | Permalink |

              I think a few posters in here are warming up comment for Monday April 1st – lookout!

              :)

              • NBNAlex
                Posted 30/03/2013 at 7:21 pm | Permalink |

                I thought all of your comments were 1st April comments for their obvious comical content…

    54. SuperiorIQ
      Posted 30/03/2013 at 11:31 am | Permalink |

      Sure, sure I get it…. this is another excuse, test bed for grounds to tear up the NBN when the Libs get into government. After all it’s a great white elephant right and must die at all costs.

    55. Andre
      Posted 30/03/2013 at 3:41 pm | Permalink |

      Why is it that people will take what some unqualified and inexperienced nobodys word about a technical matter where in the real world, if you applied for a job with no qualifications or experience, you would not even get a callback let alone an interview. This applies to Jones and some of these NBN naysayers within the comment stream. I would also apply this to the job of minister within any govt dept where any CEO of most companies would have experience in the field they are managing. We are run and opined by people without the qualifications or experience to have the influence that they do. It’s a disgrace.

      • baud
        Posted 30/03/2013 at 7:56 pm | Permalink |

        Shockjocks are jack of all trades.. they would say things that their ‘listeners” want to hear. Things they would say is marked for the “segment” malleable, ignorant people, does not have to be factual.

    56. tom r
      Posted 30/03/2013 at 4:20 pm | Permalink |

      Has this guy ever found a blackspot let alone lived in one?
      Come to my house where optus doesn’t work at all even for calls. vodafone unavailable to test (im not wasting money on them after they stole $100′s from me in the past) and telstra is 1mbit at 3am. Tell me how its the future hmm? How are they going to get NBN type speeds into my house if even telstra blows at 3am even after the upgrade they did to the 21Mbit 3.5g service? Also that I can’t even pick up some tv stations or are pixely at best.

      Also not that they care but wireless doesn’t work at a family members house. Drops out every few seconds. Then goes back to edge. How on earth would they get NBN speeds? There are 2 optus towers that you can see from there house less then 500m away yet drops out. Telstra the tower is further away and drops out too.

      Unless you give everyone there own tower to make sure there is coverage for everyone a wireless NBN wont work. I’m not a dumb person I just live in the real world. That is even before you get on price differences.

    57. jhmos
      Posted 30/03/2013 at 11:39 pm | Permalink |

      So now Alan Jones is the tailor of the Emperor’s new internet and only stupid people can’t see that wireless is the best thing for the NBN.

    58. Haderak
      Posted 01/04/2013 at 11:05 am | Permalink |

      OO MY GOD, ALAN!

      Don’t you know that those wireless towers give you CANCER?!

      To wireless the whole country would mean towers everywhere! Even near schools!

      Do you want to give our children CANCER, Alan?

      Why do you want to give our children CANCER?

      You’re a bad man, and you want to kill our children, just so you can have faster Internet Porn.

    59. ewan
      Posted 01/04/2013 at 12:38 pm | Permalink |

      With out NBN wireless speed will be at dial up speeds, wireless is a complimentary broadband solution it can’t copy on its own. Alan Jones is no expert On ICT solutions.

    60. Alan lost son
      Posted 01/04/2013 at 9:30 pm | Permalink |

      I don’t know why Alan is for wireless? As this mean he and his suckers sorry listeners BS based on emotions not facts, well be broadcast slower across The Internet.

    61. Alan lost son
      Posted 01/04/2013 at 9:34 pm | Permalink |

      PS You like Alan don’t like faster Internet with The NBN, then duh don’t use it.

      Yes how dumb are some?

    62. Jonathan Wilson
      Posted 02/04/2013 at 1:32 am | Permalink |

      As someone who has has experience in the wireless industry (6 month student internship writing software for Motorola phones) and who understands the physics of wireless and the workings of mobile phone data protocols, let me say that no matter how good wireless technology is, it will never be better than fast wired internet for applications like gaming, VoIP and video chat due to latency and congestion.

    63. KingForce
      Posted 02/04/2013 at 3:47 pm | Permalink |

      Quite sad really. Most of the comments I mean. While the Titanic has just hit an iceberg people are starting to worry about the colour of the deck chairs. Focus people. Focus. I fear that people will move on to plan B which involves rearranging. Time to objectively examine the NBN before it really starts to sink. Seriously, Alan Jones is the least of the NBN’s worries.

      http://www.afr.com/p/technology/nbn_at_war_with_contractors_UY69p5MzeTv96l8E0MoVpL

      • Posted 02/04/2013 at 3:51 pm | Permalink |

        I think you are the one who has a perspective problem. The NBN has hardly hit an iceberg.

    64. KingForce
      Posted 02/04/2013 at 4:45 pm | Permalink |

      I’m not saying that the ship is sinking, I’m saying the ship has just bumped into a big problem and the captain and crew are playing cards instead of concentrating on the welfare of the passengers. No need to start lowering the lifeboats but everyone should at least start inspecting damage on the hull.

      • Abel Adamski
        Posted 03/04/2013 at 12:52 am | Permalink |

        http://www.businessspectator.com.au/comment/reply/435481/251281

        On the same subject.
        Mark Gregory raised this issue on the ABC. In his opininion and I agree for quite a number of reasons NBNCo would have done better building a construction arm and recruited and trained their own installers. I know several ex Telecom Linesmen and field and install techs that are so pro NBN and woild love to work for the NBN, but not interested in working for the contractors, some of those guys that did the early fibre splicing and the HFC install. Aplogies Renai, but in their 50′s to 60′s, still fit healthy and keen, they have pride in building the origanal Telecom Network and have old school pride in doing it right and efficiently. Just the mentors , installers and team leaders needed.
        Plus without the middleman pay rates much better.
        Plus the opportunity to recruit local fibre techs who are usually also qualified sparkies in the current install area and usually have a fair idea of the condition of the local cables/pits ducts etc.
        Maybe the NT may be the trigger, still time to start

    65. Stephen H
      Posted 02/04/2013 at 7:29 pm | Permalink |

      It is such a shame that some politicians feel appearing on the shows of these idiots is a valuable way to spend their time. It is even more of a shame that so many people believe what these morons (Jones et al) say.

    66. Geof
      Posted 03/04/2013 at 1:42 pm | Permalink |

      Wireless is the answer. All the spectrum would be needed for the NBN including all the AM and FM radio and TV broadcasting spectrum. Then there would be none of this stuff being broadcast anymore over the radio waves. -except on the web and it would be so congested we wouldn’t all be able to hear it, assuming we actually wanted to.

    67. Phil
      Posted 09/04/2013 at 4:46 pm | Permalink |

      Poor Alan. Still thinks wireless means the old Kreisler radio his listeners tune in to his show with. How quaint.

    68. artemistic
      Posted 12/04/2013 at 12:22 am | Permalink |

      “‘Dumb’ people can’t see wireless’ Clever people see those who can use wireless to hook into other people’s internet connections to get free service. Well done Alan Jones. People can cheat to save money.

    69. iHope
      Posted 16/04/2013 at 3:15 am | Permalink |

      Several years from now all Australians will have a clearer perspective on what actually constitutes an essential internet service and what by then has actually been proven the best technology to implement for such a service.

      ADSL is analog technology that uses copper to provide fast downloads and slow uploads. It requires 1 twisted pair connection and 1 line rental fee, either wholesale or retail. A compromise due to adaptation of Analog phone lines.

      DSL is the same base technology, and additionally attempts to provide fast downloads and equally fast uploads, it costs more as a service and also works reliably only over short distances from an exchange. It requires 2 twisted pair connections, one for downloads & one for uploads. So 2 line rental considerations either wholesale or retail. And higher data charges per installation. A more reasonable compromised adaptation of Analog phone lines.

      All wireless technology based data services mimic ADSL behaviour insofar as they provide downloads at a higher rate than uploads. Sadly this also applies to NBNCo FIXED wireless infrastructure.
      To have very fast upload speeds, fixed wireless in any form will not be able to supply fast enough upload speeds, unless it is re-imagined as a dual channel technology were each enduser has a powerful transmission capacity back to the wireless tower so that fast uploads can be permitted, from a doubling of infrastructure, at synchronous speeds, i.e. the same as download speeds. This solution would be more costly than FTTP and perhaps risky to consumer health if they had such higher power residential transmitters on every house. Any wireless service is also a compromise of wireless technology developed during WWII, it cannot support future broadband requirements in any of the current implementations because of the upload speed restrictions inherent in the technology. To overcome those restrictions would at least double the installation costs and the subscriber cost to levels way beyond implementing FTTP.

      Mobile wireless data services do have value, however that is a different market for people in transit or away from fixed sites, and the data needs are immediate yet not so large.

      FTTN is a wider implementation of the Telstra RIM concept, urban and regional fibre optical backhaul is all good until you reach the copper distribution part of the network. Again downloads are available at a higher speeds than uploads. FTTN cannot provide upload speeds beyond a couple of Megabits per second and it is this truth that is the Achilles heel of FTTN.

      FTTP is all Optical Fibre all the way, no limits and always the potential to have full duplex data with both fast downloads and uploads. This includes the ability to have the exact same speed for uploads and downloads. FTTP can provide very fast upload speeds, including the ability to match the available very fast download speeds and it is this truth that is the under appreciated strength of FTTP.
      FTTP is the only technology that will continue to give very fast UPLOAD speeds economically and reliably to everyone.

      Most people, regardless of their attitude to the NBN have failed to grasp the importance of upload speeds and the fact that we WILL ALL need them far sooner than anticipated.

      It will soon not matter how fast anyone can download data if they cannot upload data at far more than a couple of Megabits per second.

      The [near] future is about content creation as well as consumption, cloud services will be ubiquitous and transparent but they will fail utterly for users on networks with slow upload speeds. How do you backup many gigabytes of cloud destined data with a slow connection? You can’t and the background attempts will fail part way through over and over again, needlessly creating extra useless data transfer burdens on the internet. Useless and also billable / metered data transfers for most users.

      As you read this, even if you think you don’t need faster upload speeds, the truth is that you do and you will do more and more as time goes by. Many people will eventually be called on to telecommute and high upload speeds from home or office will directly contribute to success in seeking future employment or winning a business contract, as much as having a valid driver’s licence was and is important for tradesmen and sales reps now and in the past.

      Therefore FTTN & Fixed wireless broadband only options will be a handicap of increasing impact as we move forward.

      All other arguments, technical dialog and political positions will fade away if the truth about which network connection technology will allow all of our data to go from us as fast, or near as fast, as it can come to us, is comprehended and understood by ALL Australians.

      France gets it, much of Asia now gets it and many other countries are having a technically valid revelation and appreciation that FTTP is the most beneficial and fully functional, socially equitable solution for their citizens and residents, now and into the future.

      As infrastructures, Fixed Wireless internet is an energy hog, FTTN uses more electricity than FTTP.

      Finally a political observation, The Labor Government took advice from the industry specialists and technology advisors globally when deciding how to implement the NBN, they knew public servants and MPs are not experts and technically capable for such decisions. The Liberal party instead, shared a few beef sausages with the National party and decided that Malcolm Turnbull knows his megabytes from his mosquito bites because he used to own (the appalling ISP) Ozemail, so what was good enough for a dialup ISP service is good enough for all of us.

      And the mainstream media still thinks that ubiquitous fast upload capacity for all will kill their business models, it won’t it will actually grow them in time, just as iTunes made Apple richer, but if they believe it will, then the task for them is to demonise the concept in every way.

      I appreciate that Alan can’t comprehend any of this, nor most of his ‘Audio Radiance’ yet I posted this here to add a very valuable considered context to the debate for those of you here that have a fair capacity for critical thinking. For Alan and his ilk, my question is this, when the Feck are you all going to wake up and realise how screwed up your years of incessant Irish logic has made Australia, and for that matter the World?

      • Not the Neanderthal
        Posted 02/07/2013 at 10:21 am | Permalink |

        Ihope,

        it is people like you that do not comprehend that the market will dictate what is essential internet. I do not want my devices to be plugged in to anything, nor does the broader market. Your description creates images of people walking around their house or office with fibre leads attached like drips. We want everything to be wireless and so it will be. This fact creates problems for your FTTP solution.

        Everything in the home or office needs to be transmitted wirelessly to be effective in the marketplace.

        We will end up with wireless technologies that enables fast upload and download because that is what the market wants. Simple really. Now that may mean towers connected by fibre, it may not. But having to plug our devices in to enjoy “essential” internet is not an option.

        • Posted 02/07/2013 at 11:01 am | Permalink |

          You do understand what WiFi is right?

          It’s a short-range (within home), high bandwidth transismision technology currently capable of around 1.5Gbps.

          As a general rule of thumb with wireless the bigger the network you try and make, the less bandwidth you can deliever. We already have a solution to the problem you have so equiately indicated, and it’s called WiFi.

          Macro scale networks, like 4G, deliever slower speeds at higher contention, so to overcome this limitation we use even shorter range technologies. This is the way it will be for a while, until our bandwidth usage requirements plateau, which hasn’t happened yet, at which point the macro scale networks will become increasingly effective.

    70. Gigidaman
      Posted 17/04/2013 at 12:41 am | Permalink |

      Folks, the implementation or not of NBN will show how progressive the Aussies are. If Libs decide to run down what the Labs intent to do about NBN , then we will go to sit next to North Korea … But, if Labs stays in power and we are going to have a nice, 100 Mb/s system then at last, we can go head to head with South Korea. Sure , that oooold stink mouth alan jones (sic) will move the air around yapping and growling, but who’s going to listen to him ,if we will be to busy watching Jon Stewart’s show live (even with time dif.)? Hello ? Nobody? Ok… no one… Bye bye allan (sic, for he deserves it)…




    Get our 'Best of the Week' newsletter on Fridays

    Just the most important stories, one email a week.

    Email address:


  • Most Popular Content


  • Six smart secrets for nurturing customer relationships
    [ad] Today, we are experiencing a world where behind every app, every device, and every connection, is a customer. Your customers will demand you to be where they and managing customer relationship is the key to your business’s growth. The question is where do you start? Click here to download six free whitepapers to help you connect with your customers in a whole new way.
  • Enterprise IT stories

    • NetSuite in whole of business TurboSmart deal turbosmart

      Business-focused software as a service giant NetSuite has unveiled yet another win with a mid-sized Australian company, revealing a deal with automotive performance products manufacturer Turbosmart that has seen the company deploy a comprehensive suite of NetSuite products across its business.

    • WA Health told: Hire a goddamn CIO already doctor

      A state parliamentary committee has told Western Australia’s Department of Health to end four years of acting appointments and hire a permanent CIO, in the wake of news that the lack of such an executive role in the department contributed directly to the fiasco at the state’s new Fiona Stanley Hospital, much of which has revolved around poorly delivered IT systems.

    • Former whole of Qld Govt CIO Grant resigns petergrant

      High-flying IT executive Peter Grant has left his senior position in the Queensland State Government, a year after the state demoted him from the whole of government chief information officer role he had held for the second time.

    • Hills dumped $18m ERP/CRM rollout for Salesforce.com hills

      According to a blog post published by Salesforce.com today, one of Ted Pretty’s first moves upon taking up managing director role at iconic Australian brand Hills in 2012 was to halt an expensive traditional business software project and call Salesforce.com instead.

    • Dropbox opens Sydney office koalabox

      Cloud computing storage player Dropbox has announced it is opening an office in Sydney, as competition in the local enterprise cloud storage market accelerates.

    • Heartbleed, internal outages: CBA’s horror 24 hours commbankatm

      The Commonwealth Bank’s IT division has suffered something of a nightmare 24 hours, with a catastrophic internal IT outage taking down multiple systems and resulting in physical branches being offline, and the bank separately suffering public opprobrium stemming from contradictory statements it made with respect to potential vulnerabilities stemming from the Heartbleed OpenSSL bug.

    • Android in the enterprise: Three Aussie examples from Samsung androidapple

      Forget iOS and Windows. Today we present three decently sized deployments of Android in the Australian market on Samsung’s hardware, which the Korean vendor has dug up from its archives over the past several years for us after a little prompting :)

    • Businesslink cancelled Office 365 rollout cancelled

      Microsoft has been on a bit of a tear recently in Australia with its cloud-based Office 365 platform, signing up major customers such as the Queensland Government, Qantas, V8 Supercars and rental chain Mr Rental. And it’s not hard to see why, with the platform’s hybrid cloud/traditional deployment model giving customers substantial options. However, as iTNews reported last week, it hasn’t been all plain sailing for Redmond in this arena.

    • Qld Govt inks $26.5m deal for Office 365 walker

      The Queensland State Government yesterday announced it had signed a $26.5 million deal with Microsoft which will gain the state access to Microsoft’s Office 365 software and services platform. However, with the deal not covering operating system licences and not being mandatory for departments and agencies, it remains unclear what its impact will be.

    • Hospital IT booking system ‘putting lives at risk’ doctor

      A new IT booking platform at the Austin Hospital and Olivia Newton-John Cancer and Wellness Centre in Melbourne is reportedly placing the welfare of patients with serious conditions at risk.

  • Enterprise IT, News - Apr 17, 2014 16:39 - 0 Comments

    NetSuite in whole of business TurboSmart deal

    More In Enterprise IT


    News, Telecommunications - Apr 17, 2014 11:01 - 141 Comments

    Turnbull lies on NBN to Triple J listeners

    More In Telecommunications


    Featured, Industry, News - Apr 17, 2014 9:28 - 1 Comment

    Campaign Monitor takes US$250m from US VC

    More In Industry


    Digital Rights, News - Apr 17, 2014 12:41 - 15 Comments

    Anti-piracy lobbyist enjoys cozy email chats with AGD Secretary

    More In Digital Rights