Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has described comments by parliamentary opponent Malcolm Turnbull on the issue of wireless broadband competing with the NBN as “tedious”, noting “virtually all experts” were in agreement that wireless and fixed broadband were complementary services, and highlighting what he called Turnbull’s “hypocrisy” on the matter.
Turnbull’s comments were sparked this week by a submission made by the National Broadband Network Company to the national competition regulator. In the submission, NBN Co acknowledged wireless broadband could compete with the predominantly fibre-based NBN, and noted limitations on Telstra’s ability to transfer customers onto wireless broadband were “integral to the viability” of NBN Co’s business case.
The Liberal MP reacted by stating that “everyone who has had even a cursory look at the NBN business case” had acknowledged the threat of wireless, and that Conroy himself should do the same. However, in a statement issued this afternoon, Conroy fired back.
“This debate is getting tedious,” he said. “Malcolm Turnbull’s latest comments are yet another backflip and further evidence that he cannot be trusted. Mr Turnbull is talking about a normal commercial transaction between NBN Co and Telstra and yet he continues to misrepresent NBNCo. Mr Turnbull will say anything in an attempt to keep this so-called “debate” alive.”
Conroy pointed out that Telstra chief executive David Thodey had described the limitation on its ability to promote wireless as an NBN alternatiev as “a very, very minor constraint”, adding the Government had “consistently acknowledged” wireless was an important complementary technology to the NBN fibre rollout.
“Virtually all experts are in furious agreement on the complementary nature of fixed and wireless technologies, including Dr Hugh Bradlow, the chief technology officer of Telstra, who was reported this week as saying it would be “a cold day in hell” before wireless networks will eclipse the capability of fixed networks,” said the Minister.
Conroy also highlighted limitation of wireless broadband, noting that its reliability was “greatly reduced” when a large number of subscribers were connected, especially if they were using bandwidth-hungry applications. “While wireless technology will continue to play a complementary role to fixed line services, Australians continue to rely on the lower cost, greater reliability and higher bandwidth offered by fixed line broadband,” he said.
The Labor Senator also accused Turnbull of “complete hypocrisy” on the issue, pointing out that on the 3rd of August this year, the Liberal MP had made the following statement to the Press Club in Canberra:
“[F]or most people wireless and fixed connections will be complementary, as they are now. And in any event, all traffic – wireless or not – will be handed to fibre as soon as possible.”
Conroy added that Turnbull had told ZDNet.com.au on August 11, in response to the question “are you now of the view that fibre and wireless sit side by side”:
“Of course they do, because the wireless base station – whether it’s a base station sitting on top of an office building or a telegraph pole or whether it’s a femtocell, that is going to have to be connected to some fixed-line network, and the fastest fixed-line network for the most capacity is obviously fibre… To what extent people are wireless-only customers is an open question. Some people will be, but for most people … my suspicion or my intuition is that most people will use both.”
opinion/analysis
We’re in murky waters here, and the truth likely lies somewhere in between Conroy and Turnbull’s positions. The power and adoption of wireless broadband is growing remarkably fast, but it also remains true that many people will use both, and that fixed broadband isn’t going away any time soon. It remains to be seen just what the mix between the two technologies will be.
Image credit: Kim Davies, Creative Commons
Of course wireless broadband is growing, there are more people than premises and always will be since people can pop out worm babies much faster than builders build houses and whatnot. The real test is would be comparing X amount of premises with vs X amount of people with wireless, which one do they consume more data on (think $$$) but that is only assuming the wireless plans can match and always match the fixed plans speed mbit for mbit and that is simply not likely to happen, in other words fixed for the real work and wireless when you are out and about sending cat pix. yep complementary, I’m going to have to agree with Conroy on this one… Sorry Turnbull.
I agree Renai. It’s so obviously a case of just playing politics from both sides here.
this is the (only) reality (that matters):
“In the submission, NBN Co acknowledged WIRELESS broadband COULD COMPETE with the predominantly fibre-based NBN, and noted LIMITATIONS ON Telstra’s ability to transfer customers onto WIRELESS broadband were “INTEGRAL TO THE VIABILITY” of NBN Co’s business case.
So in other words the NBN is not quite the monopoly Conroy (or anti-NBN crusaders) were claiming since wireless networks are totally free to compete with the NBN and since they firmly believe that wireless can compete on a performance level with fibre there should be no need for other fixed line networks as these wireless networks will make the copper and HFC networks totally redundant and useless… so you really shouldn’t care or complain about the copper and HFC getting ripped up, wireless will kill them.
Also why would NBNco be paying Telstra billions to transfer customers to its network just to have them transfer them to their wireless network instead, they have to have some kind of arrangement here I imagine since well you know taxpayers who invested in this might be asking why NBNco let Telstra screw them out of $11 billion.
Is this the tactic where you end up making yourself look stupid in an attempt to say “I was never wrong”?
What tactic? I’m simply highlighting the sheer hypocrisy of the anti-NBN crusaders. Thanks for stopping by.
Derryn Hinch at 12.
anti-NBN crusader Derryn Hinch fan. News at 11.
“I’m simply highlighting the sheer hypocrisy of the anti-NBN crusaders.”
Where? – I missed it.
so is the nbn a monopoly or not?
Yes.
“The new chair of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), Rod Sims, has warned that he sees the National Broadband Network (NBN) as a monopoly and as a result will be a priority for him when he assumes his new role…..
He said that because he sees the NBN as a monopoly over broadband access, the government-owned entity will have to be regulated.”
http://technologyspectator.com.au/nbn-buzz/new-accc-chair-scrutinise-nbn-report
I’m not surprised you missed it, here: http://delimiter.com.au/2011/08/26/turnbull-wireless-complaints-getting-tedious-conroy/#comment-295887826
Oh and the NBN Co thinks it’s a monopoly as well.
“How is it that a Government-controlled monopoly can improve competition?”
http://www.nbnco.com.au/faq.html
so its a monopoly with competition, rofl
More a case of 1 connection that you must have to have anything else phone, net, TV. so your limited to what is given, so if Telstra decide to swap your area then you will be stuck with Telstra until someone else decides to come along after telstra, to provide you access, bit like the current NBN setup in South Brisbane I guess.
Scott: the fibre setup in South Brisbane is not the NBN, it is Telstra Velocity. You’re the second person to make that mistake that I’ve seen. Is there something that You’ve read that made you think that?
SPELLING POLICE: “alternatiev”
that’s the Russian spelling.
‘Tedious’ ?? Downright bloody brain numbing. Think, no don’t think, just accept ‘Soma’.
How anyone can seriously consider even the potential of wireless of a viable alternative to fixed line, either now or in the future (take note Renai – considering your opinion/analysis in a previous article) is just beyond reason. And the only reason such a proposition could be put forward with any conviction is if was based on alternative motives.
As for muddying the waters, that is exactly Turnbull’s intention. Murky waters confuse the fish and they don’t know where they are going. All the better to lead them in other directions. And one which Renai appears to support in his ‘opinion/analysis’.
Sigh! Renai, when are you going to start calling a spade a f***ing shovel and stop sitting on the fence. Yes/No. Your ‘opinion/analysis’ continues to give as much latitude to the Libs as possible, always allowing for the chance for just maybe …..
I mean just what the hell is this ….
“The power and adoption of wireless broadband is growing remarkably fast, but it also remains true that many people will use both, and that fixed broadband isn’t going away any time soon. It remains to be seen just what the mix between the two technologies will be.”
I think you need to decide whether you are trying to establish a forum, or playing those interested to generate more hits on your site.
I really wish people would stop criticising Renai on some of these articles, dont you realise he has to throw a bone to the anti-NBN crowd occasionally. They are a very angry lot and if they leave we wont have anyone to laugh at.
yes i think renai is actually a closet nbn lover and pretty clever, as he gives the anti nbn subterfuge club, just enough rope to hang themselves.
he lets then rave on and on, troll in on absolutely everyone’s comment and pedantically argue over the silliest minute detail. just so the general populous can judge them and their cause by their own stubborn stupidity.
who seriously takes the people who comment 4 to everyone else’s 1 seriously. everyone just says, not him again and moves on.
yet, they can’t see it and think they are oh so clever, rofl
I thought you were banned RS?
I have stated my position on the NBN many times. I am in favour of fibre as the technology which Australia needs today and will need increasingly in the future. However, as someone who is broadly against government bureaucracies, and in favour of market competition and capitalism, I do not agree with massive government intervention in any sector, especially one as fast-moving as the telecommunications sector.
However, historically the Coalition has done a poor job of regulating the telecommunications sector, especially with its failure to split up Telstra. Thus I cannot completely back either major party’s policy, as I feel each has some pretty big weaknesses.
Politically, I tend to vote for the Greens (as I believe there needs to be a balance of power, and they have the only refugee policy I agree with), and I used to preference Labor, but now I preference the Liberals, since I became a small business owner. Labor … is no friend to businesses or employers that I can see, with its constant intervention in every sector, big government thinking and so on.
That sort of politics was great when I was an employee — but not so great now that I’m am employer.
I like many of Conroy’s policies (not the filter) but dislike him as a person; I like Turnbull a lot better, and his policies are increasingly getting better. I would vote for either Turnbull or Abbott over Gillard for PM, as I don’t trust Gillard but I do trust Abbott and Turnbull. I don’t agree with all of Abbott’s policies but I do think he is at least genuine and tries his heart out for the people.
I know all of this is complex and not easily digestible. But I assure you I take my role as a journalist holding all sides to account seriously. If you’ve been reading Delimiter for a while, you’ll note that I have doled out praise and censure to all sides equally — when they deserve it. I don’t play favourites, and my views are pretty well known :)
Delimiter’s main focus at the moment is not “hits” (although those are nice, and necessary to keep me employed and the site active). It is the generation of new ideas. To this end I work pretty tirelessly, often 12 hour days. You’ll notice we don’t cover a lot of the stories of lesser importance which a lot of the other sites do. This is because my aim with Delimiter is to get people to open their mind and consider all angles — to move the overall debate forward, rather than rehashing the same old stuff.
This means the site is often controversial, and I assure you the Powers that Be are reading all your comments with interest. I don’t apologise for any of this.
Open enough for you Paul? :) I challenge you to find a site or a journalist who will share with you as much as I just did :)
Renai is probably the most impartial journalist I have seen, at least compared to some others….
It’s very telling that Senator Conroy only had to look at Mr Turnbull’s August 2011 utterances to find these two complete contradictions of his latest claim that wireless-only households undermine the fibre footprints’ viability. Mr Turnbull’s usual gripe about delivering ubiquity at lowest cost was already answered in the May 2010 NBN Implementation Study, which proved that fibre was cheaper to provision than wireless-only for 93% of premises. Building wireless-only within the fibre footprint will increase rather than decrease the cost as well as being inferior.
This is a tedious argument indeed, from a man who knows he is lying and will in future simply laugh off his waste of parliamentary resources throughout the years of debate as just politics.
Yes, Tosh and Pepe, the NBN fibre is deliberately a monopoly, and one which improves the competition outcomes for fibre customers, which is almost everyone (i.e. out of 10.8 million premises in 2020, 10.1 million get FTTP).
The corporate copper monopoly just raised its non-metro wholesale access charges to ISPs, at a stroke rendering regional Australia unprofitable for competing ISPs.
By contrast, a publicly-owned universal fibre network (which should remain public, as recommended by the NBN Senate Committee) has a primary objective to keep the wholesale cost low, and is subject to parliamentary transparency that ensures any future government trying to milk it will have nowhere to hide.
Any provider of a data or voice service can sell services knowing that every competitor has the same cost base for customer access, regardless of geographic location. Price, service features and customer service will determine who gets the business – perfect competition, thanks to the natural monopoly infrastructure.
*It’s very telling that Senator Conroy only had to look at Mr Turnbull’s August 2011 utterances to find these two complete contradictions of his latest claim that wireless-only households undermine the fibre footprints’ viability.*
there is no contradiction. Malcolm said most people will be using fixed and wireless. however, when you push fibre to 93% of premises, you need to maximise market penetration. to the extent that wireless eats into NBN’s light user demographic on the margin, NBNco’s financial viability becomes increasingly untenable even though “most people” are still using fixed-line.
*The corporate copper monopoly just raised its non-metro wholesale access charges to ISPs, at a stroke rendering regional Australia unprofitable for competing ISPs.*
that’s complete rubbish. the ACCC is expanding Band 2 (metro) ESA to cover the additional exchanges in Band 3, resulting in a 50% fall in ULL charges for regional exchanges. this, along with new regional backhaul, will encourage greater competitor DSLAMS roll-outs in regional Australia. as a result, Telstra’s wholesale pricing in Band 3 will be under downwards pressure.
*By contrast, a publicly-owned universal fibre network (which should remain public, as recommended by the NBN Senate Committee) has a primary objective to keep the wholesale cost low.*
NBNco’s SAU (pg 36-37) revealed that they are planning to set prices on the basis of a fully-commercial entity requiring a Telstra-like rate of return, but minus competitive pressures due to legislative safeguards banning all fixed-line competition.
NBNCo is required to project on the basis of current government policy, which is to sell the infrastructure. The Senate Committee thought this was a bad idea, but that the community cannot see this yet. Hence they recommended that any decision on WHETHER to sell the fibre be delayed until after teh build is substantially complete.
Internode’s heavily-discussed letter to out-of-contract Zone 2 regional customers reveals that the wholesale cost to ISPs on Telstra exchanges has risen, and this happens to be just after Telstra has launched new retail broadband plans that are very competitive and available everywhere.
This is the kind of trap for small ISPs that is eliminated when you make the natural infrastructure a wholesale monopoly. A publicly-built and owned universal comms infrastructure is not about socialism, but about national development in our vast but extremely urbanised country.
The reason wireless broadband is OK today is because most people are NOT using it most of the time. Smartphone users and even laptop broadband users only use it in short bursts.
If most people were using it most of the time (e.g. for bittorrent etc — the way wired broadband is used), it would be absolutely unusable.
Wireless internet is shared capacity, and radio spectrum is extremely limited.
Malcolm Turnbull needs to talk to some people who actually know a bit about physics and wireless spectrum, not the fantasy of “lots of people use 3G now, and technology is just going to get better and better…”
The argument is not about wireless BB replacing fixed line BB, it never has been, posters go off onto the tangent that the Coalition policy is all about wireless replacing fixed line, it never has and never will be.
Turnbull doesn’t need to learn about physics and wireless because the argument is not about speed and contention it is about wireless taking revenue away from fixed line now and in the future the NBN FTTH.
Their is a increasing trend to wireless only residences where PSTN disconnections are massive every Telstra reporting period and they are not being totally offset by LSS and ULL reconnection.
Fixed line BB new connections have virtually flat lined, all ISP’s can do now is try and poach customers off each other, with BigPond and Optus holding about 65%-70% of the retail BB market the best ISP’s can try and do is to get the big two customers at end of contract, but the big two are not going to let go as easy as it was in the past, with BigPond especially providing better value and retaining more and more of their customers at end of contract.
I am sure BigPond are drawing customers away from other ISP’s as well, their T-Box T-Hub combined wireless/fixed line packages are going gang busters.
The trend will be wireless only connection residences eating into fixed line BB connection figures, the current upward trend in the USA and the UK is about 26% wireless only, the figure at the moment in Australia in 2010 was 13%, there is no reason why Australia will not easily meet the 26% figure in the next 2 years or go even higher.
Why does that matter? have a look at the NBN Business Plan projection on FTTH connections and revenue and see how it matters one hell of a lot.
“Fixed line BB new connections have virtually flat lined”
But they’re not going down, which completely undermines your “people are disconnecting fixed-line and going wireless” argument.
In fact, fixed line BB connections are not even flat-lined, they’re still increasing!
I didn’t say they were ‘going down’, how do you spin ‘virtually flat lined’ into they are going down?
I also said ‘virtually’ flat lined, and I was referring to the massive rate of increase in wireless connections relative to fixed line as you well know, as indicated by the latest ABS statistics we have for 2010.
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8153.0/
Look at the green bar growth relative to the red and yellow bars, I fully expect the next set of ABS stats published this year will show the green bar even longer and the red and yellow bars virtually the same.
oh dear not these stats AGAIN.
I’m not even going to bother following that link Alain, as every time you’ve attempted to use stats from the ABS, you’ve miss read them.
Read what I said, don’t make up stuff about what you would have liked me to say like Dean did, and point out exactly where I have ‘misread them’?
100% of all statistics can be made to say whatever you want them to say…
So you have discovered errors in the ABS statistics MW, I would be very interested to see what they are.
No.
Clearly you missed my point.
As always.
For starts lets look at that lovely graph at the top of the page you linked to.
It is showing percentages. Now when percentages are used it’s out of 100.
So for something simple. If you have 60 eggs and 40 chickens.
Then 40% of what you have is chickens.
If you add in 10 dogs.
Then you have 60 eggs, 40 chickens and 10 dogs.
I now have 36% chickens. Even though I still have 40
If the next time I count everything I have.
I have 60 eggs, 40 chickens and 40 dogs.
I now have 29% chickens.
If you looked at only a % graph you’d say that the amount of chickens is going down. But this isn’t correct.
Same thing is happening in that percentage graph at the top of the page.
Looking at the actual numbers down the bottom.
DSL ‘000
4 178 – 2009
4 212 – 2010
4 458 – 2011
Mobile wireless ‘000
2 838 – 2009
3 453 – 2010
4 230 – 2011
yes mobile wireless is growing.
So is the number of people using mobile wireless.
Where as the number of fixed connections that use DSL is growing slowly. This is because there is more people than there are places that can use a fixed line.
You have 5 people in a house. You have 1 DSL connection
You have 5 people in a house, with 4 laptops who need access on the go. You have 4 mobile wireless connections.
So of course mobile wireless is going to be growing faster than what DSL does.
Its because mobile wireless is an emerging tech for the masses and it has so many more potential subscribers than DSL does.
@Michael Wyres
“Clearly you missed my point.”
You mean don’t have a point, not one that can be substantiated pertinent to the subject matter which is connection trends.
So I take it you don’t have any issue with the ABS statistics.
@PointZeroOne
“So of course mobile wireless is going to be growing faster than what DSL does.”
Yes that what I said, so we both agree, great.
Nope. There you go, redirecting people’s comments towards your delusional viewpoints.
PointZeroOne ably demonstrated your non-ability to honestly analyse statistics.
Your efforts to “save face” by twisting it the other way completely proves my point that statistics can be interpreted any way the person quoting the statistics wants them to be interpreted.
So you actually proved my point.
Thanks!
How do you spin “# of wired broadband connections are increasing” into “people are disconnecting fixed-line BB and going wireless”?
You’re new around here, aren’t you?
“people are disconnecting fixed-line BB and going wireless”
Where did I say that?
Here:
“The trend will be wireless only connection residences eating into fixed line BB connection figures”
Hre is some more trends for you to digest Dean and PointZeroOne which is worldwide.
http://www.websiteoptimization.com/bw/1102/
Look at the purple line ‘mobile broadband’ relative to the light blue line ‘fixed broadband’, note we are talking broadband here, not mobile telephony which is the dark blue line.
Note the conclusions:
“Overall, the growth of mobile cellular and mobile broadband subscribers is growing faster than fixed telephone lines and fixed broadband subscribers respectively.”
“Similarly, mobile broadband subscribers are growing faster than fixed broadband lines, with mobile passing fixed in mid-2007”
My point that fixed line subscriptions has virtually flat-lined stands.
@MW
“Here:
“The trend will be wireless only connection residences eating into fixed line BB connection figures”
Sorry I missed the word ‘disconnection’ which Dean added and attributed to me, you then copied what I actually said, thanks for that.
“Growing faster than fixed line” is a clear statement that both wireless and fixed line are still growing.
Fixed line is not flat-lining. Given the number of premises in Australia – (most of which are only equipped to have only a single fixed line service commissioned) – it’s actually very impressive that the number is still growing.
You have to understand the market.
Every car maker would love the size of the car market to grow, but there are only a certain number of driving age people around to buy cars.
It’s the same with fixed line. Yet the market still grows.
“Note the conclusions”.
Yes, one persons “interpretation” of the data. Doesn’t mean they are “right”. Or “wrong”.
Yeah Alain, fixed BB has flat lined or at least growing slower. Because there is more people about to connect up to wireless solutions than there is houses to connect up to BB.
Of course it’s going to grow faster. But it too will also flat line once everyone who wants a mobile internet connections has one. We are in a growth period for mobile internet.
This doesn’t mean there isn’t a place for fixed line internet or that people will not connect to fixed line internet.
Lets take a look at some other figures, from the ABS site. This is data usage. Which you could equate to how much each type of connection is used. You’ll note that Fixed Line has many times more data downloaded and growing each year. It is also growing faster than in data downloaded than wireless is.
This would allow me to concluded that people use their fixed line connections more than they use their wireless connections.
Fixed line(d) TB
113 410 – 2009
141 892 – 2010
174 665 – 2011
Wireless(e) TB
14 251 – 2009
13 330 – 2010
16 990 – 2011
Going back to the global ICT graph. Interesting to see that fixed phone connections are going down, yet fixed BB connections are still going up.
Oh, so people are not disconnecting their fixed-line broadband in order to “go wireless”. OK, at least we’re in agreement on that.
Although, I don’t really see how you can claim that wireless broadband is “eating into” fixed-line broadband if nobody is actually disconnecting their fixed-line broadband.
@alain, “people are disconnecting fixed-line BB and going wireless”. Where did I say that?
here is where you said it ;)
http://delimiter.com.au/2011/08/25/nbn-co-acknowledges-wireless-competition-threat/#commenting
and here is what you said ;)
What the NBN rollout is facing and that goes for all existing fixed line infrastructure is the trend of a increasing number of residences deciding to disconnect their landline and go wireless ONLY
strangely, i can feel a bb and fixed argument ensuing.
@RS aka Pepe
“here is where you said it ;)”
Good old RS true to form as the self appointed pro-NBN attack dog always on standby 24/7, I was referring to THIS discussion as to where I said it as you well know, where Dean was misquoting me, along you come drag a comment from a totally different discussion out of context to this one and say ‘here is where you said it’.
Still using the copy & paste BS out of context technique I see RS.
@alain,
you asked and now complain, personnally attack and refuse to acknowledge, when your answer is clearly provided? of course without an answer, you would have complained too.
ergo, i would suggest instead of pointing the finger at others, you are more careful with those rash statements and-or don’t ask where did i say that.
it’s apparent that you make so many comments,which are not constant, that you are unable to recall what you said and when you said it.
Yes, you’ve said in the past that people are disconnecting their fixed-line broadband and going wireless, but at least now we’re in agreement that this is not the case.
However, before the topic gets too derailed, perhaps you can explain how wireless broadband is “eating into” fixed-line broadband if the data doesn’t actually show that people are disconnecting their fixed-line broadband.
LOL it’s all about “context” now, just sounds like more spin spin spin to me…
&Dean Harding
“Yes, you’ve said in the past that people are disconnecting their fixed-line broadband and going wireless, but at least now we’re in agreement that this is not the case.”
WTF!! there you go making up stuff again, I didn’t say we are ‘in agreement that this not the case’.
“However, before the topic gets too derailed, perhaps you can explain how wireless broadband is “eating into” fixed-line broadband if the data doesn’t actually show that people are disconnecting their fixed-line broadband.”
Oh ok so you want to drag a part discussion from another Delimiter article out of context, cut out 90% of what I said that accompanied that statement, insert the bit that is left into this one and it’s ‘I gotcha”.
Ask me in the discussion RS dragged it from and chopped it up out of context.
So what are you saying then?
OK, forget the other discussion. In the context of this discussion, please explain how wireless broadband is “eating into” fixed-line broadband, even though the number of fixed-line connections is still increasing.
err… because fixed-line bb would be growing much faster if it wasn’t for the outright fixed-line disconnections brought on by wireless substitution.
it’s the fixed-line bb growth you don’t see that has been cannibalised by wireless.
to prove that this isn’t the case, you must prove that wireless-only households aren’t accessing mobile bb.
tres simple.
Sure, you could make that assumption, but the data doesn’t say one way or the other.
You could just as easily make the assumption that fixed-line broadband is simply a saturated market and the people buying wireless already have fixed-line connections.
@ dean,
i’ll finish my input here by saying, it is now apparent that some ‘other’ people, consider their own supposedly ‘credible’ comments, to only be credible for a short disposable period of one discussion.
after that all bets are off and what was said, possibly even earlier that very morning in another discussion, was firstly never said and then when shown to have indeed been said, it is then of course, being taken out of context and totally inadmissible in this or any future discussions.
“Look at the green bar growth relative to the red and yellow bars, I fully expect the next set of ABS stats published this year will show the green bar even longer and the red and yellow bars virtually the same.”
Of course the green bar is going to get bigger. There is a finite amount of fixed line connection that can be setup. Where as there is near unlimited mobile internet connections that cab be setup.
As I was explaining about percentages in my other post here. You cannot use percentages to back up your argument. Because the actual amount of DSL connections might be growing, but as soon as a new data is added to the mix it will automatically make the DLS connections percentage drop. Even though the amount of DSL connections are growing.
“Of course the green bar is going to get bigger.”
Yes we agree so far.
“There is a finite amount of fixed line connection that can be setup.”
Yes so far so good, we are in agreement.
” Where as there is near unlimited mobile internet connections that cab(n) be setup.”
Yes that’s correct.
Now it gets muddy.
” Because the actual amount of DSL connections might be growing, but as soon as a new data is added to the mix it will automatically make the DLS connections percentage drop.”
Sorry you have lost me there, the bars are relative, the mobile subscriptions don’t force the trend of DSL to flatten out, the percentage increase year-on-year does that.
” Even though the amount of DSL connections are growing.”
Yes I can see that but as the trend here and worldwide shows the trend is for fixed line BB to flatline, while mobile BB passes it as shown by the graph linked ‘Global ICT Developments’ which showed that it was breakeven way back in 2007.
“Sorry you have lost me there, the bars are relative, the mobile subscriptions don’t force the trend of DSL to flatten out, the percentage increase year-on-year does that.”
But it does force the DSL line to flatten out.
As more data is brought in, specially data that is going to be a lot higher in numbers than other data. It’s going to make variations in the DSL line to be not as noticeable.
If over the years, Apples grows from 10, to 20, to 30, to 40
And that was the only data on the graph, you’d have a nice curve going up.
If you throw in bananas which grow from 100, to 500, to 1000, to 2000
Your Apples line on the graph over the period of time would look almost flat depending on the scale you are working on
And your bananas graph would be showing a nice big curve up.
Of course this is a huge exaggeration of what the data would be in the real world. But it is how these graphs are working, but on % instead.
“Yes I can see that but as the trend here and worldwide shows the trend is for fixed line BB to flatline, while mobile BB passes it as shown by the graph linked ‘Global ICT Developments’ which showed that it was breakeven way back in 2007.”
Sure it was even back in 2007, maybe back in 2007 we didn’t have want to have internet on the go as much as we do now. Or the infrastructure wasn’t in place to use mobile internet on the go.
Mobile Internet has also only become popular in the past few years.
I’m really not sure where we are trying to go with this conversation now.
would you classify Stevie Wonder as pop-funk or soul-funk?
i’m truly vexed.
“would you classify Stevie Wonder as pop-funk or soul-funk?
i’m truly vexed.”
I don’t know what Stevie Wonder’s music is like or what that has to do with what is going on here.
not like i’m derailing a debate that’s going anywhere…
^.-
Comments are closed.