opinion Now that Labor’s ambitious National Broadband Network project has finally cleared all of the regulatory, commercial and political hurdles that have stood in the way of its path to universal bandwidth nirvana, it’s time to ask the most important question of all about the project.
Who will be connected last?
We know, of course, and have known for some time, which Australians will get access to the predominantly fibre NBN infrastructure first.
Some lucky souls in Tasmania already have their houses wired up, and NBN Co has started rolling out fibre to five additional ‘first release’ sites on mainland Australia. The five sites run the full gamut of available geographies; suburban Brunswick in Melbourne, parts of Townsville, Minnamurra and Kiama Downs south of Wollongong, West Armidale and even Willunga in South Australia.
NBN Co has also announced 14 ‘second release’ locations which will be the next cabs off the rank. And again the areas are quite geographically diverse, ranging from metropolitan areas to the bush. After these will come a mass-scale rollout, commencing simultaneously in 16 large rollout regions around the nation in every area.
But what we don’t know yet is who will be the last premises in Australia to receive the NBN.
NBN Co’s rollout schedule published in its corporate plan (PDF) makes it clear that it will take many years for the fibre infrastructure to make its way around our wide brown land. In 2011, NBN Co’s fibre deployment schedule will crawl at a snail’s pace, hitting only 58,000 premises by the end of the year. And it won’t ramp up fully until 2014, at which point the company will kick into gear, rolling out fibre to some 1.5 million odd premises each year for the next seven years, before it slows down a little and the rollout is largely finished in 2021.
What this means in practice will be the creation of a vast digital divide in Australia that will last more than half a decade for many Australians.
Let’s take the residents of Kiama Downs and Minnamurra, for example, who will receive NBN fibre in 2012, as part of NBN Co’s first release sites on the mainland. Both of these small coastal towns are only a short drive from the major metropolitan centre of Wollongong; in fact, many people living in NSW’s Illawarra region consider them to be a part of Wollongong.
However, it is likely that there are areas of Wollongong proper that will not receive NBN fibre until the latter stages of the rollout — 2017, say, or even closer to the end of the main NBN rollout if they’re not lucky, in 2021. Nine years after Kiama Downs and Minnamurra.
The situation gets even worse when you realise that NBN Co has been asked by the Federal Government to prioritise regional areas in its rollout over the big metropolitan centres, as part of a commitment given to the Independents by the reigning Australia Labor Party during the recent Federal Election.
This “roll-in” deployment turns the normal metro outwards schedule which Australian telcos have typically followed on its head, and could potentially mean that it might not just be small communities like Kiama Downs and Minnamurra which receive the NBN first; it could be a whole slew of such tiny rural centres which get priority over substantial chunks of the major metropolitan areas.
The impact of this diverse rollout schedule on business and residential micro-patterns in the Australian economy could be extreme.
Take, for example, the case where white collar workers living in the outlying suburbs of major cities like Wollongong are suddenly faced with a situation where they will be stuck on ADSL2+ broadband or — God forbid — LTE or even just bog-standard 3G mobile broadband — for half a decade or more, while the sleepy seaside villages full of retirees just a few kilometres down the road are enjoying 1Gbps fibre. Half a decade — or even, in extreme cases, nine years — is plenty long enough for many residents and businesses to decide they’ve had enough of waiting and pack up and move down the road to a better fibre future.
This scenario becomes even more likely when you realise how important the internet will be to a life in modern Australia in 2015 — given how much it already dominates our existence at the moment.
I’d like to make a number of predictions about what impact this awkward, jumpy style of NBN rollout will have on the Australian population over the next decade.
The obvious impact will be on the price of housing throughout Australia — the NBN rollout will, no doubt, play havoc with the value of entire suburbs over the next decade. It will force real estate agents and home owners to carefully scrutinise NBN Co’s rollout plans before any transaction, and I anticipate property descriptions will shortly start to include predicted NBN connection dates alongside the number of bedrooms in a residence.
Secondly, in 2-3 years time as its full rollout kicks off, NBN Co will come under increasing pressure from many different areas of the community — political leaders, commercial interests and even residential lobby groups — to roll out fibre to their geography first.
NBN Co chief executive Mike Quigley acknowledged that this was already a factor at his last press conference several weeks ago. “We’re lobbied very heavily by different shires all over the place, who want us to come there first,” he said. “That’s the biggest issue we’ve got at the moment — people want us to get there sooner.”
Secondly, after 2013, when 1.6 million of so premises will have received the fibre, a constant debate will start about who should receive the infrastructure next; a debate that will rage in public, through politicians, big and small business and the media, until the end of 2021, when the rollout will have largely finished.
The high points of the debate will logically fall around the times of Federal Elections.
As we’ve mentioned previously, with 1.6 million premises already having received NBN fibre, it will not be reasonable for the Coalition to take a policy to the next Federal Election of cancelling the NBN. Instead, it is likely that they will take a policy of changing the rollout’s geographic schedule, and limiting its breadth to cut out the most expensive areas.
The first will give the Coalition to play to the needs of one of its strongest constituencies — business — while the second factor will allow it to maintain its mantra of fiscal responsibility.
The underpinnings of this debate will be incredibly strong, because if there is one thing that is ingrained in the Australian psyche, it is outrage whenever someone is seen to get an unfair advantage over someone else. We hate it when Americans get the new iPhone before us; we hate that we pay more for our technology, and we want to be known as the equal of anyone.
With this in mind, to keep the peace during the NBN rollout over the next nine years, let me suggest a new commandment to replace what is commonly cited as Christianity’s number nine tenet, and as we pray that our own individual houses and places of businesses not be the last premises in Australia to receive the NBN fibre in 2021 … years and years after everyone else.
“Our Father Quigley who art in NBN Co, hallowed be thy name
Thy fibre kingdom come, thy rollout schedule proceed on Earth as it is in the business case
Give us this day our daily bandwidth,
And forgive us our fibre jealousy, as we forgive those who lust after ping times
And lead us not into the temptation of Wi-Fi theft, but deliver us from internet congestion
For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever.
Amen.”
Image credit: Michal Zacharzewski, royalty free
I still reckon the NBN should be rolled out to areas without any DSL at all first (pick me).
Have to agree with you regarding house purchasing, I personally know two people who have not bought a house purely because it could not get DSL. This situation will surely get worse once some houses are on NBN and others aren’t.
I wonder if I can get some sort of refund from NBNCo if I have to sell my house for less than it’s worth because it doesn’t have NBN?
I’m not sure what the answer is, myself, but I think it should at least concentrate first on rollouts in the rings around CBDs where there is no fibre, but plenty of white collar small business. An example suburb in Sydney would be Surry Hills — where digital media and much of the IT startup community is concentrated. These people are still on ADSL and could use fibre productively.
As for the bush … for any town smaller than 15K or so … why would you expect to have great broadband in those locations?
I am going to have to disagree with you on all of your points. The cities have enjoyed the best of everything for so long, whilst the bush is continually forgotten.
In fact I have seen absolute contempt for the bush by not only business, but also people living in the city. People who live in the bush are just as entitled to get ultra fast broadband as anyone else, and who are you and the rest of the “city slickers” to tell us that we are any less entitled to get it before the cities do.
Why should NBNCo. roll out their fibre network from the cities to the bush? In the cities there is plenty of competition and it is sold at a far cheaper price then we pay in the bush. We are the last ones to get anything, especially under a commercial business model, which is why the Federal Government has made the right choice about rolling in from the bush. I thank God for Tony Windsor and Rob Oakshot standing up for the bush and holding the government to account for their lack of investment in regional Australia.
The idea of the bush getting the NBN before the cities is great for regional Australia. It may in fact encourage people to move from the city to the bush, thus freeing up property in the city and reducing vacant properties in the bush. It is simply insane to expect everyone to move from the bush to the city in order for them to get decent broadband speeds and prices. In fact to do so would see a huge hole in Australia’s production of exports as well as local goods. After all, if everyone from the bush moves to the city to get decent broadband who will produce all of our food and livestock, who will mine our resources, who will look after and maintain our national roads.
It is about time the bush was looked after as a matter of priority in one area at least. The bush produces the goods that this country exports and without our exports where would we get our revenue.
If you want city infrastructure, move into the city and pay for it like us city folk do.
We do pay city infrastructure prices, but get second hand services.
This phenomenon is also prevalent in commercial property. I’ve seen countless examples of commercial properties having to have their rental rates reduced, simply because they are in a non-SHDSL area, and further again when no DSL of any flavour is available.
@MW
The phenomenon of business premises and rental values as you describe it doesn’t translate into the residential BB market in any meaningful statistical way, unless you can provide evidence that:
1. Houses that have HFC cable running past them are of higher value than those that don’t – putting aside that other ‘strange phenomenon’ that most residences that HFC running past them don’t connect to it.
2. The first rollout area in Tasmania, that is houses in Smithton, Scottsdale and Midway Point that have a NBN connection are valued higher than those that don’t – putting aside that other ‘strange phenomenon’ that most houses that could connect have not and those that took the freebie connect most did not go on and sign up with a active ISP NBN Plan.
3. House that are closer to a active Telstra ADSL1/ADSL2+ exchange are worth more than houses that are further away, where the value progressively falls in line with the speed/distance factor from the exchange.
No I didn’t think you did.
@alain/advocate…
Again I ask you (as you have been hiding…LOL) please present your proof to prove MW wrong? You ask but can never deliver can your self, can you?
Because anyone with common sense would rightfully see having the NBN connected as a selling point.
Just like it would have been a selling point in years gone by, to buy a house with the telephone or sewerage connected.
My parents/grandparents, tell me they had two phones in their neighbourhood many years ago, both pay phones at the end of the block (east and west) and the old thunder-box in the backyard.
Tell me with a straight face having the PSTN connected OR an indoor WC weren’t selling points too…
NBN likewise, imo!
So that’s a resounding NO then, you don’t have any evidence either.
@alain. I am neither advocating (there’s a word you know) here and now, one way or the other. It was you made the sarcastic claim about the Tassie suburbs, “not me”, so I simply asked…where is your evidence?
So I again ask, where is your evidence? Please put up or shut up!
Regardless… as usual, you simply have everything a**e about. You see although the NBN may entice people from the rat race to the less stressed rural and regional areas, I think the benefits are more so the flip-side of this.
A quick example for you (to again bag for no rational reason) having people who live, say 1.5 hours drive from Melbourne or Sydney, who therefore travel 3 hours each day (with all the associated traffic problems, safety concerns etc) only to sit in front of a PC when they get to work. With upgraded comms, especially speed certainty, they will be more able to work from home.
But you will say, they can do that now… (go on, yawn) – well tell that to this person – ZDNet 10:30 this morning – “A user from Sydney measured 57kbps @ Broadband Speedtest”.
So that’s STILL a NO then.
From you the one making the stupid statements..YES!
Real estate agents in Armidale have for the past year included NBN fibre as part of property listings in the Armidale first release zone. There’s your evidence.
Evidence of what? – that those houses are selling for more than those than don’t have NBN, is that what you are saying IS happening?
@alain, you would fail at schoolboy debating. Perhaps you are still at school, so let me go easy on you.
The following is called a syllogism, whereby a truism is stated, a specific case is desciribed, and a conclusion about that case is thereby proven to be true.
1. Otherwise equivalent homes with better services available at lower cost attract a higher selling price.
2. The NBN fibre and wireless offering is a much better service than dialup, ADSL or wireleess-without-fibre and will cost less than a phone and internet service on those technologies.
3. Therefore, Armidale homes with fibre will sell for equivalent Armidale homes without fibre.
The fact that agents include the NBN as a selling point means that is a what is known in the vernacular as a selling point.
Now pay attention at school and you will grow up into a smarter boy.
I am curious now. Does anyone have proof – hard evidence – that homes with capability for faster broadband sell for more than those which don’t?
I believe it’s up to the person who made such a claim to prove it.
The phrase “selling point” in real estate listings is meaningless marketer-speak. It is not evidence or proof.
Cheers.
@Francis
Thanks for the personal attacks, and you have the gall to accuse me of ‘school boy debating’, hypocrisy at its best Francis!
So in in conclusion that’s a NO then, you don’t have any statistical evidence at all from someone who represents the real estate industry like the RESI about increased house values in the categories I described in my post, only the ‘Francis gut-feel theory armchair opinion’?
Great opinion piece, Renai, we have to let the pollies and NBN Co know that we are all watching.
As CEO of a company that is awaiting the NBN rollout with bated breath, I hope that more people have it sooner rather that later. But generally, I think the economic and social benefits of a fast, but considered rollout have to taken into account.
In the first few years, I can’t see consumers generally really caring about whether a house has NBN or not, and as such, I can’t see house prices being dictated by the rollout schedules. However, business premises will certainly see this trend first.
I think you dead-on with the election debates around which areas are first: that’s going to be interesting for at least the next election, and possibly the one after!
Trevor Glen, CEO
Memory Box Backup
Cheers! I think they definitely know that we’re watching at this point — Quigley is certainly aware of the intensity surrounding every word he utters :)
The punter taxpayers that are paying for it are watching too, well some of them are, unfortunately apathy is the Governments best friend, and they are watching not necessarily for the vested interest reason of ‘ How can I make a buck out of this”.
Ok please tell us “your” alternative to the current NBN?
Not everyone believes that Australia needs a taxpayer-funded government-monopoly nationalised broadband scheme rolled out to every home in the country.
And no, those of us who think that way are not pig-ignorant tech-troglodytes, although that seems to be the “narrative” you all like to run – we may just have a different opinion as to what are and are not legitimate functions of government and what is and isn’t a good use of taxpayer funds. Cheers.
I was thinking the other day when seeing the rollout areas for Vic that it wouldn’t be to bad moving to where its getting rolled out so I can get the NBN. I believe one of the places listed is on a train line to melbourne as well.
True, dat. I reckon it would be worth it to get in early. Would be sooo many things you could do with that amount of bandwidth and latency … host your own datacentre in your basement and sell backup storage to your neighbours ;)
There’s a NBN construction update briefing I’m attending in early February – hopefully that’ll shed some light on the timetable.
Looking forward to it.
Just makes me want BNE’s poop pipe even more.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
BNE’s “poop pipe”?
To what are you referring, sir?
The connection that may or may not be happening depending on what page of the internet you land on.
“Following the recent successful trial of the technology in Brisbane’s sewerage system by i3 Asia Pacific, Newman said the company would begin rolling out the fibre network early in 2011.”
that one from: http://www.zdnet.com.au/brisbane-commits-to-fibre-to-the-sewer-339306601.htm (oct ’10)
Ah right, that. Yes, I highly doubt that network will ever get off the ground.
Yes, it will !! Don’t shit on my dreams, man.
If the project looks to fail, I’ll do a Shawshank on the pipes by myself.
The “cherry-picking” legislation will make such networks generally unviable. The existing legislation already dictates that any such network be open-access wholesale only.
~fingers in ears
lalalalalalalalalalalalala
You have to remember Brain that for the NBN to at least ‘look successful’ it needs to eliminate fixed line competitors by legislation, it will make the current Telstra monopoly look like a charity.
lol, it was not deliberate, I meant Brian.
PS. How Renai, how about a edit facility, the concept has been around a while!
Bullshit. If this was the case NBN Co would be the only company capable of tendering for a Greenfields Estate. i3 are welcome to run there network so long as it is open access. It will also save NBN Co from rolling out where i3 does.
Heh.
You mean, reduce the “cost” to taxpayers?
That would destroy the argument, no?
Who says the taxpayer bankrolled NBN Co will not roll out into areas that i3 does?
I dunno, the same reason that NBN Co won’t come and “redo” the fibre that has been laid in Greenfields Estates?
If i3 does build their network (which I will be very surprised if they do) I will be very (so doubly) surprised if NBN Co comes along and rebuilds the i3 network rather than just saying to i3 “Thanks, now we’ll intergrate your work into our network.” Which by the sounds of the press around the issue is EXACTLY what i3 wants.
I am not referring to ‘special case’ Greenfield estates which is a cosy closed shop contractual arrangement between the developer and the Telco.
So if a fibre rollout company looks at the NBN Co proposed rollout list and rolls out in the suburbs/regions before the NBN does then the NBN will cancel it’s rollout plans in those areas?
Will the NBN promise not to rollout in areas where there is HFC cable? – oh that’s right that’s a ‘special case’ that requires Conroy to gift billions to ensure SingTel and Telstra pull it down and handover the customer base.
That’s how a Government funded ‘open access’ monopoly works.
Actually alain:
http://www.zdnet.com.au/nbn-may-skip-private-fibre-areas-339306654.htm
That is the legislation I was referring to.
Oh alain/advocate… you are up to your own “dirty contradictory” tricks again…like you did at ZD…, before you ran, changed names and stopped here…
You have been telling us that the HFC network “bled millions” and is/was a waste and then compared HFC to the NBN and claimed the NBN would also be a waste. In fact you told us the HFC hanging in your street is only used by pigeons to sit upon… didn’t you?
But again the contradiction…
You sob because that big bad monopolist [sic] is going to close the very same ” bled millions pigeon nest HFC network”…???
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dear oh dear your unending desperation, to save your own wallet, at Australia’s expense is repugnant!
@NightKhaos
Yes I have read that link before, it doesn’t address anything I said, but thanks anyway.
@RS
The most intelligent bit of your repetitive no fact rant was this:
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It went rapidly downhill from there.
@alian
Wait, wait, wait… you have just been going on about how how the NBN could rebuild over the i3 network and other networks, and how there is nothing stopping them from doing that, and you asked who said the NBN Co won’t roll over existing networks?
Tell me again… how does that link NOT address that particular circumstance?
Oh wait… the HFC networks… how could I forget, you one sized fits all solution to complaining about the NBN. NBN Co is going to build over the HFC networks… oh my god, what waste! I mean they are paying Telstra MONEY to migrate their customers over. Why would they do that? (Seriously, give it a rest already)
We have been over this. And then over it again. And then, just for kicks and giggles, I think we decided to go over it again. But since you’re like so interested in it:
The reason that they are paying Telstra to migrate customers is so that they can use their ducts. Now, because the ducts are currently full of HFC cable and twisted pairs for for phone and Foxtel, there isn’t much room for NBN Co’s Fibre as well. So NBN Co wants to migrate customers off the HFC cable and copper networks, so that it can full those wonderful ducts with Optical Fibre cable.
This also has another advantage, as well as the obvious saving in civic works, it means they get a sudden influx of customers to start paying back that huge bill that this project will cost. And all this is so that they can increase competition at the retail level, but leave the wholesale level, where it is ineffectient to run a cable for every service provider (think back to the HFC wars) because it requires to much capital to do.
The deal is not about killing competiton, the deal is not about making the project look successful, it’s about space in the ducts, and a greedy company that didn’t do anything. Did you know that durring the original NBN tenders Telstra started asking for assurances that they could keep control of their own assets since any tender would obviously need to utlise Telstra’s assets? I really have no sympathy for them.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/telstra-pushed-from-broadband-tender-20090303-8nas.html
So in part the deal is to get rid of Telstra. And for the record, because you are obivously going to point this out in “defense”, NBN Co are not entering a similar deal with Optus. That plan was shelfed and there has been no activity on that since October, and I don’t think there will be a deal at all. So you’ll still get your “infrastruture competition” you so darely want, between NBN FTTH and Optus HFC cable.
As I said, due to your disproven FUD and ridiculous contradictions (which has meant you were compelled to change your name and hide…!) I have now reduced you to nothing more than a meaningless troll… AGAIN proven beyond doubt…!
However, I can see why you relate to LOL, because it describes your comments perfectly…
Again I say debate me – so put up or shut up…!
Above was of course meant for alain/advocate…
What can be done, really? You can’t do the whole country in one year, or even three years. Someone has to be first. It may as well be the people who can’t get ADSL first – followed by the ones who can’t get ADSL2+ via a non-Telstra DSLAM.
Of course, it would suck to be connected to an exchange with 6 competitors DSLAMs but to be 5km away from it … but thems the breaks!
+1
It’s a fair call that those that are connected first are those that cannot get ADSL now, the problem with that is those areas a low population areas, where other than Telstra competitors fear to tread.
Now providing these areas with a email and browsing facility with a fibre pipe to the farm veranda is overkill, especially when the so called justification for the NBN is based around multiple PC’s in a residence sucking down simultaneous IPTV channels and HD movies.
The payback on the NBN is mainly based around people wanted to download more gigs than they do today (keeping in mind residences only use 15% of their current quotas – but I digress), and don’t use it just for browsing, emails and telephoning a pizza order or Telstra faults.
The higher population higher income areas of the capital cities is where the NBN has a higher possibility of a better ROI, because of the higher possibility these residences are prepared to front up with extra monthly fees for multiple IPTV and movie downloads.
But I use the word possibility advisedly.
These high income areas in the high density suburbs of our main capitals are the same areas that have high speed HFC running past them, and the majority decided they don’t need it.
A fibre pipe to the farm verandah?
If you recall (or actually knew) the plan, according to the NBN announcement in April 2009 – “Use next generation wireless and satellite technologies… to people living in more remote parts of rural Australia”
So no fibre pipe per se`, to every verandah in the bush, thats just more of your FUD…
Also, as pointed out, but you “always” conveniently overlook, the cost of HFC has been inhibitive for consumers unless pro’s or fanatics, which is simply why people haven’t signed up… No matter how fast or how large the quota etc, if the bottom line price is too much, people won’t pay.
This is why the NBN will work as the prices both projected and current are as they have said, equal to or less than current non-NBN plans, but with speed certainty…!You FUDsters keep screaming about NBN affordability, but then use the expensive and not readily available HFC and it’s lack of up-take, as a comparison to bag the NBN?
BTW, do you have HFC alain? Be honest now, remember we have corresponded (me under the same name and you, very dishonestly, under “one of your other names”, LOL..!) before!
As an atheist, I’m quite happy for Quigley to be the only God I pray to! Given I live in Tasmania I imagine my prayers will be soon be answered.. :)
Your revised prayer makes a lot more sense than the original. Thought about starting your own cult Renai? ;)
Thought about it? What the heck do you think Delimiter is??? ;)
LOL. Touché!
That’s right. The ceremonial de-clothing will be taking place at dusk. After that we will be shooting guns and drinking whiskey before the cleansing ritual starts. Don’t be late!
Yes master. Anything for our enlightened leader..
Where does the bacon fit in?
Somewhere between ‘turn your head’ and ‘cough’.
Clearly Warringah (Sydney) should be last on the list!
Quigley should write to all the federal MPs and ascertain their attitude to the NBN and split the installation plan into 3 parts. Those who want the NBN, those who are ambivalent and those who do not want the NBN.
Then within each group do a draw as to the installation order.
*tongue in cheek*
All those who are anti-NBN should be put on a register of “never to be connected”…let them suffer from a future “vodafail” with their wireless…
@SLDR
Those areas that don’t want it are not taxed for it also, sound fair enough eh?
I don’t want to pay to educate other peoples children, or build roads to their new suburbs or fund the health costs of an ageing population…..can I have an opt-out on those too?
I wasn’t making the point about having non-NBN rollout electorate areas, but never mind.
You have touched on a issue here which i think is linked to population growth of the major cities. If you upgrade the “regions” first then you would tend to think that they will attract more people to them rather than to the major cities which are already choking. I like SLDR’s idea of asking each federal MP what their preference is. Funny stuff!
@Bob Smith
Yes the population movements to the Tasmanian areas of Midway Point, Scottsdale and Smithton the first NBN rollout areas in Australia are mind boggling, the Tasmanian ferry is chock full of mainland ‘immigrants’ uprooting from their crappy ADSL areas and getting some of that needed NBN goodness.
@alain, please supply evidence to prove people are not relocating to areas such as Midway Point?
Where’s you evidence alain/advocate?
Once again making up lies to support your wallet… disgraceful!
The biggest issue being highlighted here is the insane timeline that the NBN, and with Telstra being delayed (again) in its dealings with shareholders, its getting more likely that even the schedule that was released for the next 3 years will be delayed even further (the entire length of the NBN rollout has already been delayed by 3 years)
This is the crux of the problem with the NBN, its so massive and its shakes up so much shit, that people are obviously going to have a massive resistance to it. There has to be a Telstra split, it needs political support for 3 terms, its going under heavy scrutiny and delays in parliament, plus many and many and many more ramifications which are even outlined in the business case
Even though I don’t really need fast internet, I am myself on 5mbit, and since I live in metropolitan sydney I will probably receive the NBN last, and because of the NBN Telstra has basically halted improvements in their current CAN network due to uncertainty
If this was a FTTN, and Labor actually did the plan properly, 80%+ of Australia could have been FTTN’ed in the space of a few years, with everyone getting a baseline of 12mbits + access to VDSL2.
What I see realistically happening is that the NBN is going to be continously delayed, which will actually push Australia further and further and further backward
Silly topic, it should not be about who is connected first/last.
and people like deteego has notion (almost like dreamland) that FTTN would be quicker, easier and cheaper.
When the fact is that there are more unknowns (especially if Telstra at the helm).
If you think that FTTN has ‘unkowns’, then the NBN must be stabbing in the dark while wearing a blindfold.
FTTN has already been proven to work around the world, New Zealand (who has their own vertically integrated monopoly version of Telstra) did a FTTN and its results are fantastic to say the least. Cost $1.5 billion and they connected around 80% of their country in just one and a half years. They are already releasing plans for VDSL2/Fiber
And with such a small capital cost, there is not going to be any of this CVC shit that NBN is proposing, which will put Australia backwards in terms of quotas and market disparity
@deteego “NZ’s results are fantastic”, you say…
Well our’s is better.. according to these two highly credentialed gentlemen-
http://www.zdnet.com.au/oz-nbn-plans-beat-nz-s-microsoft-execs-339308540.htm
But then they are biased [sic] and can’t be trusted, unlike you, eh (ahem)?
I dont give a crap what Microsoft says, they are a IT company with a vested interest. They wouldn’t care if the NBN ended up costing double of what its supposed to
LOL deteego, as I clearly preempted and prophesied in relation to your inevitably ridiculous reply- “But then they are biased [sic] and can’t be trusted, unlike you, eh (ahem)”?
And just as predicted, your fact-less, obvious response, right on cue/didn’t let me down – “I dont give a crap what Microsoft says, they are a IT company with a vested interest”…
At least put up minimal fight…!
But FUDster, me and probably many others don’t give a crap about you and your dopey FUDulent, anti-NBN lies, either…! Personally I have no reason to doubt these gentlemen, whereas I know you clearly lie (for no rational reason) just to bag the NBN – so what is the reason?
Simply, you’ve A G A I N been caught lying, just as you did at ZD claiming incorrect figures, stacked against the NBN as factual. You even had the hide to argue with multiple posters, that the Senate forms government not the HoR. You have still not been man enough to retract either of them…OMG the ego eh, LOL!
My friend [sic] you clearly have NFI about anything (so you need to lie) and I enjoy coming here to tell you so and demonstrating this, to everyone else…!
Have a lovely day…
Im not actually going to stand to profit from not supporting the NBN, where as Microsoft will due to government tenders with Microsoft and whatnot, so no its completely different.
Same reason why IBM/Google supporting NBN should be taken with a grain of salt
But, but, but… you prove my prophecy once again, claiming “they” can’t be trusted and inferring you can, LOL!
You won’t profit from it, but it would appear that the NBN IS detrimental to either – your wallet, business, employer, shares, political alliances or whatever, so you have the same reason if not more, for opposing.
Hence the lies, BS and FUD…
Speaking of which, please post those figures of yours and tell us all about parliament again, they are FUDgold)..!
And how do you know I won’t profit from it?
Do you even know who I am?
The matter of fact is that anything that Microsoft/IBM/Google says regarding the NBN should be taken as a grain of salt, just like everything that Conroy or the Labor government says
How do I know you won’t profit by it (NBN), I don’t?
I can only look at it from my perspective. That of a current Labor voter (mostly because of the NBN – I voted for Howard previously) a comms hobbyist not in the IT sector professionally, with no associations to any comms Co or ISP (apart from being a Telstra and Optus customer and one who occasionally buys/sells TLS shares for fun) who already has ADSL2+ which is fine for now, BUT who vehemently believes and supports the NBN as “essential” for our nation.
Essential not just for me, but YOU, my and your (future?) kids/grandkids etc and for those who currently do not have. I also believe it essential for us to remain or become even more globally competitive and that the benefits clearly outweigh the costs. Yes I am aware of the risks, but they are minimal compared to the benefits, imo!
The fact that the copper is on its last legs, Telstra will at last be separated – relieving us of the wholesaler selling to itself/own retailing dept and importantly, “unlike the majority of other governmental expenditure, this will…PAY FOR ITSELF…!
Seriously, it’s a no brainer”!
So to you, the fact that you come here to criticise every little thing and refuse to accept any positives McKinsey report, OECD report 1, the overwhelming positives in OECD report 2 (but honed in like Turnbull on one negative paragraph in a 400 odd page doc), bag NBNCo for not having a business plan – then when tabled, you call the business plan toilet paper (remember that one?).
Then you FUDge figures and tell porkies about cost, which even Turnbull wouldn’t…etc, etc, etc
No, I don’t think you will profit from it, in fact as I said before…”it would appear that the NBN IS detrimental to either – your wallet, business, employer, shares, political alliances or whatever, which is why you oppose”.
Just to clarify, my and your future kids wasn’t a marriage proposal…LOL!
What this article neglects to do is to go one step further and make the insight that people aren’t just going to whinge about the pace of the roll-out, or change suburb. They’re going to question the need for the roll-out to take so long and demand it be hastened.
Quigley, I suspect, is being deliberately over cautious in a number of ways. Perhaps its a case of under-promise and over deliver, but there really aren’t any practical or physical limits on the speed of the roll-out once NBNco has bedded down and established its costings and procedures.
As you say, there is already considerable pressure on NBNco to “do my town first”.
What we really need is some down to earth, nuts and bolts articles on what the practical limitations are. What the “work practices” of NBNco are likely to be. How many people doing which jobs? How many person-hours is involved in passing a house with aerial cable. How many to do the drop cable and installation.
And I’d suggest that the elephant in the room is the one single thing that affects everything about the NBN. And that’s the simple question, what does it cost, or rather, what should it cost to connect a home with fiber. NBNco’s figures suggest that it’s thinking in terms of $2200 to $2600 per house. Overseas estimates, and other reasonableness checks (it helps to talk to real contractors) suggest the cost could be considerably lower. Perhaps under $1500.
Even a few hundred dollars cheaper per house adds up to billions over the whole network. Equals increased cash-flow. Equals the ability to expand operations much faster.
A skilled workforce is not an issue. Training takes weeks to months at most. Nor is wage competition an issue. As with the mining industry, good rates of pay are quite possible provided the productivity is there.
What I want to see is more reporting, and more good journalism on the actual construction of the NBN. And from there we can talk about speeding it up. Personally, I think the politics of the situation will demand that it be finished before the 2017 election. And I can’t see why that can’t be achieved.
You are over simplifying all of the glaring issues of the NBN. You cannot just ‘create’ a workforce out of thin air by throwing money at it, or saying that NBN can ‘create’ a workforce
We have record unemployment from the howard era, most of the people that are unemployed Australia either can’t work (disabilities, age etc etc) or already have highly paid work in the area of Labor thats being looked at (competing with mining industry in this case with people that have incredibly inflated wages)
And such projects like these are never under-promised, they are always ‘optimistic’ for political reasons
Although I’m totally in favour of NBN, 2021 seems as a ridiculously unnecessary stretch. This has to be done within 4-5 years at most, otherwise this project would sink in political disputes. If Labour reckon they can secure their majority purely due to NBN for the next ten years, I think they are deeply mistaken.
Besides, by 2021 most of the previously rolled out infrastructure is guaranteed to require upgrading.
Its not possible to do the NBN faster, if you wanted something fast (that also had a FTTH path) then FTTN would have been the only option. With the NBN FTTH, they have to go installing last mile in (almost) every premise of Australia, plus there is all the regulatory stuff and splitting labor and inevitable delays, like what happens with EVERY ‘political’ project
Be careful what you wish for
Quote “Take, for example, the case where white collar workers living in the outlying suburbs of major cities like Wollongong are suddenly faced with a situation where they will be stuck on ADSL2+ broadband or — God forbid — LTE or even just bog-standard 3G mobile broadband — for half a decade or more, while the sleepy seaside villages full of retirees just a few kilometres down the road are enjoying 1Gbps fibre. Half a decade”
As someone who lives in one of these “sleepy villlages outlying a major town” near Newcastle I fully agree with this aproach. It is in such towns that the average distance from the exchange is far greater with most of the residents living over 3km from the exchange – where ADSL2+ means absolutely nothing – ADSL is faster in these situations and people are not getting anywhere near the speeds.
I for one have the unfortunate circumstances of living 6km from the exchange. What does that mean for me? Well due to bad lines and equipment on hot days I don’t get a stable connection above 700kb/s, and later into the night I connect at a wopping 1900kb/s this is on a 8000/384 plan. And to top it off – if I lodge a speed fault on my connection, without a valid line fault my ISP has informed me that Telstra will simply put in a “Dirty Ticket” and tell me I am no longer able to have ASDL.
What it means is the people in the cities – with access to decent ADSL2+ connections (I consider this above 2500kbs), possible cable access and lastly are more likely to get working and useful wireless services might wait longer than others? but are they really getting a bad deal? I say HELL NO, geeze If i could get my connection to last 24hrs without 20+ dropouts I would be happy.
A number of points;
– I think you are over estimating the importance of broadband in the eyes of the average australian. For the tech heads like you and I, it is certainly has an impact on choosing where to live, but i highly doubt that is common. I dont think it will change house prices by all that much. Further, the average australian, particularly in metro/urban areas that are serviced by 5mbit+ connection speeds is probably fairly happy with the status quo at the moment, and wouldnt feel the need to move to improve their connection speeds. It should be noted that the NBN is more about ubiquitous access at the moment, the advantage of increased speeds wont be noticed by the average australian for a few years yet.
– It is fairly typical that as soon as a project comes along that doesnt advantage the metro areas first, comes a scream of “Woe to me! I want a marginal increase in speed right now! Stuff the regions!” A roll in philosophy makes sense. Serve the underserved first, and there is no disputing that the regions are underserved in comparison to metro/urban areas.
– As an engineer and project manager, the calls for a faster than 8 year roll out seems to be completely insane. This is a massive project, and projects of all sizes take time to develop and implement, particularly if you want it done well. I thought the original 8 year timeframe was far too quick, and i suspect the current timeframe is optimistic. It is simply very difficult to spend that amount of money quickly and well. The saying comes to mind, “The three variables in a project are schedule, cost and quality. Pick the two you want”. It is obvious that the cost and quality are the two important factors here.
Hey Chris, just want to address one element of your argument here.
“the advantage of increased speeds wont be noticed by the average australian for a few years yet.”
OK, sure, but what about latency? Got kids with an Xbox? They’re going to notice improved latency at their friend’s house when playing Call of Duty online through the NBN. And it’s not just kids that play video games these days ;)
Assuming that the average Australian in on DSL, im not sure that the latency difference will be that pronounced.
I admit im not up with gaming these days, but I used to be, I was an avid Halflife DM player (Damn I miss that game and the community!). I remember moving to DSL from dialup and finding the latency allowed play almost equivalent to that of a LAN.
Assuming pings on DSL of 70-80ms and my guestimate of 30-40ms on fibre, id be surprised if there was much difference. I could be wrong though :)
Spending $43 billion to get the latency down on Call of Duty sounds fair enough to me, these NBN naysayers!
:)
$43B????
Yeah its closer to $49.5 billion
Care to pluck another figure from your FUD hat…?
Why do you bag the NBN for no apparent or rational reason? Why don’t you tell us (not that you will and you’ll typically lie if you do) but I’d like to know…
Rhetorical as you will never say, so rather than hold my breath and decipher the minimal truth from the extensive BS you may supply anyway…
Here’s my take on you FUDsters, as I posted to one of your FUD clones, at ZD a few days back…
“It has become apparent, after corresponding for many months here, that there are 2 types of NBN FUDsters, only…
1. The stakeholder FUDster – broken into 3 different stakeholder categories. One who is either…
a) The political fool stakeholder – A member and/or blind supporter of the Coalition, who is unable to think for him/her self and simply lets their precious party think for them.
b) The selfish stakeholder – an employee/owner of a company who will be affected by the NBN build.
c) The greedy shareholder stakeholder – normally Telstra, still believing the NWAT BS, even Telstra now shies away from.
Or we have…
2. The brainless/visionless FUDster – who for no apparent reason (as he/she is not from #1) refuses to concede the NBN will be beneficial and without reason, bags the NBN incessantly, will challenge without foundation NBNCo projections and will daily twist words, lie, spread BS and even deny facts when categorically proven to them. The sort of visionless fools, that gladly weren’t around in the day, otherwise we still wouldn’t even have a PSTN…
deteego, … are you a “stakeholder FUDster or “a brainless/visionless FUDster”… perhaps you are the cream of FUDdom and both…wow!
So whilst you enjoy your “glass half empty future”, please feel free at anytime, to join us here in reality and enjoy the NBN!
Thank you…!
Or how about a different type of person:
Likes the idea of an NBN but dont think the Government can deliver on time or budget.
I think the NBN will ultimately be a good thing but hate the way everything is shrouded in secrecy under the guise of commercial-in-confidence. If the project was solid then the Government should just lay it all down and take the opposition head-on. Instead we have this system where most information is slowly having to be dragged out by a variety of sources through the media.
Hi Jackey J… good point – seems we need another category then (although still somewhat in the “glass half empty camp”) – LOL!
I think what we need to do is be patient (within reason) and realistic. After all, this is the biggest project in our history and there’s really no template (apart from the PSTN how many moons ago) to work from… And let’s face it, what exactly did Howard do from 1996-2007 comms wise? SFA (and I voted for him…d’oh)! So…
Add to to that a difficult opposition (acting in their own interests, against the nation, imo) and Telstra wanting the biggest slice they can get, holding things up too and there inevitably, will be delays.
As for the secrecy, yeah not good, I’d prefer more transparency too. But the nay-sayers want the NBN to be treated like a business and businesses have strict confidentiality clauses, so they can’t really have it both ways, imo.
I dont believe the glass is 1/2 empty, I believe the glass is too big.
The scale of this enterprise is massive and the Government is making it up as they go. I admire the vision but fear the implementation. Having been involved in Government procurement on smaller scale projects I have seen departments exposed to industry by a lack of procurement, contract and technical expertise. Hopefully NBNCo gets it right.
Time will tell I guess, at worst we will have over priced shiny new infrastructure or the same infrastructure 5-10 years older.
“The government are making it up as they go”… I don’t think so, totally, as there are reports such as McKinsey, business case, Senate hearings etc, to keep the bast**ds honest…
But granted, there is a degree of suck it and see, simply because there has to be, imo.
Let’s face it, this is only the second time in our history such a network is being constructed, so apart from the PSTN roll out many moons ago, there isn’t a sound template to use, as there is for say building hospitals, schools etc, for a roll out of such magnitude…!
That’s where NBNCo/Quigley etc, with their years of experience and comms knowledge (as well as a deal with Telstra – who know the PSTN better than any, since it’s their’s) come into the equation, because Conroy and the government (even if they had complete bi-partisan support) couldn’t handle it!
Yes all assumptions aside… only time will tell.
But sadly, if we get a change in government, although built and operational in many places already and many more to come prior to the next election, it may never be completed.
Which imo, is sad for the nation!
Thats what the business case said
Capex + Telstra business deal ~= 49.5 billion.
Thats how much its costing them
I would explain Capex and Opex to you, but even in the unlikely event you could comprehend, I’m sure you still wouldn’t want to, so…
But at least you FUDsters could get your numbers the same –
FUDster #1 says – $43B
You FUDster #2 (feel free to argue over the FUD rankings, too, LOL) – $49.5B
And the exalted FUDster says $27.5B, iTNews 20/12/10 –
“Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull said the $27.5 billion the Federal Government announced it would contribute in taxpayer funding to the NBN (cont)….”{END}
Still not willing to own up to your embarrassing faux pas’, elsewhere, too I see, LOL…!
Could all of you agree, at least, that a glass line system will reduce the rubbish people go though to get hooked up and whatnot ? Which would have to reduce customer service costs.
You know, in theory.
“I would explain Capex and Opex to you, but even in the unlikely event you could comprehend, I’m sure you still wouldn’t want to, so…”
That’s one of the funniest things you have ever written, the old throw in a few accounting terms, makes it look as if I know what I am talking about, then not explain it anyway under the escape clause ” you could not comprehend” – nice one RS, really good.
Oh alain I couldn’t reply to you personaly, so…
I see I have reduced you to the staus of mindless troll now, LOL…
Well to be exact, troll anyway, I think you were born with the rest…!
How’s that Bachelor of Commerce degree majoring in CAPEX and OPEX coming along? – us peons are struggling with the sheer academic weigh behind your arguments.
*weight
Refer to previous comments alain… yawn!
@RS
this from Conroy’s own Departmental website:
“The Australian Government announced on 7 April 2009 it would establish a new company to build and operate a new high speed National Broadband Network. The $43 billion National Broadband Network will become the single largest infrastructure investment made by an Australian Government, accompanied by historic reforms to Australia’s telecommunications sector.”
http://www.dbcde.gov.au/all_funding_programs_and_support/national_broadband_network
$43b it is.
In any case, I think a marginal decrease in latency is even less likely to influence housing prices and trends, dont you?
Given the amount of people I know who already think of their ADSL as instantaneous I’d had to agree. Gamers are the only ones who care about ping, and the percentage of gaming adults who would buy a house to shave 20ms of their ping in Black Ops, would be rather small :)
This is coming from someone who fully supports the NBN. I just don’t think better latency will be a driving force for adoption in any way.
I think latency will become increasingly important over the mid-term (5-10) years, but I agree in the short-term its impact will be negligible.
Have you some inside info on the software development plans for Call of Duty 10 have you and will it run on 4G on the iPhone 10 Ver 2.1?
:)
At the same time as we are being hit with a new “levy” to cover 1.8 billion dollars to fix up vital infrastructure in Queensland, because the government is apparently broke, we are seeing arguments in favour of a 48 billion dollar nationalised broadband scheme, and most of the arguments seem to be based around “better for gamers” and “faster movie downloads.” Surely even you tech-heads can see that that’s a little off?
@Gordon, the silly levy is pure politics, though it seems counter-productive to Julia’s prospects. $5.6 billion over three years for rebuilding is 0.1% of government expenditure and doesn’t require a new levy. Long after the work is done, everyone will remember Julia’s one-off levy, which will look very odd when a dozen disasters of the next decade don’t also get one.
The arguments around “gamers” and “movie downloads” are from opponents of the NBN, which will cost $35 billion (according to Malcolm Turnbull’s live blog on the Australian website just before Christmas).
It was not Labor but the Howard government which first proposed a universal broadband network and even let some contracts to Optus and Elders. So both sides of politics recognise the need to deliver broadband to the 40% of Australians who do not have access to it after fifteen years of competition, and both sides have talked about 12 Mbps as a benchmark speed. Neither OPEL nor NBN Mark I could work out how to practically deliver universal service for the price, and were abandoned.
It turned out that the very cheapest way to deliver 12 Mbps broadband to ALL Australians (as opposed to just the usual suspects), is to lay fibre to premises (not to stop at exchanges) in large towns and cities. Fixed fibre liberates the airwaves from most of the data volume, so 12 Mbps wireless without congestion can be delivered as well with fewer towers needed.
Gordon, I am a vocal lobbyist for much railway, dam and river diversion infrastructure, and am scathing of Federal and State governments of the 1990s and 2000s who have failed to deliver them. But the NBN is going to give regional Australia opportunities and population it currently lacks. Last December the opposition were a bit shaken at how conservative the Business Plan actually was. In fact it will pay for itself during the construction phase, in my view. Most people will pay $50 a month instead of the $70-100 for phone and internet today, but the difference is that fibre is capable of delivering higher speeds to those who want to pay for this themselves. And with every private dollar spent on a faster service, the NBN gets more wholesale revenue and pays its way sooner. Video is not the reason for the NBN, but its takeup by individuals will accelerate the return on investmentto the taxpayer.
We’ll have to agree to disagree on this, Francis, as I mentioned gaming because that’s what people on this thread were discussing, and that really does not seem like a good reason to send our grandchildren into even more debt. Besides, I am very skeptical about the government (Labor or Liberal) being able to either “pick winners” when it comes to the marketplace, or to deliver anything on time and within budget. I work in America & Australia, and America’s internet access is much cheaper, faster and more flexible than Australia’s – and they did it without resorting to a government monopoly or a nationalised taxpayer-funded government-selected-and-built megaproject. When governments pick winners, we end up with hideously expensive under-performing Trabants and mercury-laden ‘splodey light globes. I am not optimistic.
As a note Renei, according to the OECD countries, Australia is in the #10 (iirc) in regards to latency. We actually have the lowest average latencies out of most of the planet currently on the ADSL
The latency difference between FTTH and DSL is almost negligable. What makes the biggest difference on latency is the number of ‘hops’
“The latency difference between FTTH and DSL is almost negligable. What makes the biggest difference on latency is the number of ‘hops’.”
Yeah? You ever lived on a fibre network? I did — for several years I lived at the University of NSW, on the Ethernet end of AARNet. And let me tell you, I used to get 16ms to the Quake server at the University of Canberra. Try that with ADSL.
I am currently at UNSW, so yes I do, and I am saying its the network architecture and not the medium that makes a significant impact on latency. AARnet has great pings because it has dedicated links to locations (including canberra), it has little to do with last mile DSL
There is a technical difference between the latency speed of fiber vs dsl, but it is negligible in the real world.
I currently have a ping of 16ms to Sydney, and around 20ms to Canberra, and I am ADSL2. ZOMG!!!! (and I am also ~4.5km from exchange as well!!!)
So guess what you proved, nothing
Fiber cannot transmit data faster then the speed of light, and because the photons are not travelling through a vacuum (but glass) the data travels at a theoretical maximum cap of 0.8c (in best case scenario). You can do the math yourself
If you are going to continue to claim that fibre has no better latency than DSL then I will leave you to your delusion :)
Maybe if you read what I was saying, I said that the difference is negligible, not that there is no difference
The only thing delusional here is your reading ability
The NBN should really be rolled out in the cities first. There will be more demand, they can roll it out easier and quicker, they will make more money from it, and it will gain more support from a greater % of the people.
Just like when you want to create any sort of network, whether it be a rail network or whatever, you start off in the CBD where its most populated and expand from there.
“. In 2011, NBN Co’s fibre deployment schedule will crawl at a snail’s pace, hitting only 58,000 premises by the end of the year. ”
Hopefully the active connection to a ISP NBN plan is not at a snails pace, what will be interesting at the end of 2011 is how many of the 58,000 premises are actually using it.
What will also be very interesting is will the two biggest ISP’s in Australia, BigPond and Optus be actually selling NBN by the end of 2011?
well i have 100mb speeds with optus cable, true my uploads are not as fast as NBN but my downloads are as good as the best the NBN will offer at first.
Make optus/ Telstra HFC cable suburbs last to be connected IMO
the HFC network covers aobut 20% of the population, if any HFC suburbs get NBN before a suburb that is curantly below 5mbps over copper its jsut WRONG theres no other way of putting it.
on a personal note
i would ONLY consider NBN if the speeds were over 200mbps and a usage limit of around 500-1000gig usage each month, or 100mb speeds with totaly unlimited usage. btw im not paying more than $80per month.
The HFC is a special case, Conroy is negotiating with Telstra and Optus taxpayer billions for their HFC customer base, well he has to get punters to use the NBN somehow!
The timing of the forced mass migration will be the curly one, it will have to be progressive suburb by suburb, hope that all goes smoothly!
Your assertion that the HFC suburbs should be last in any NBN rollout timetable is based on the assumption that residences that have HFC in the street actually use it, the opposite is true.
Do you use it (HFC)?
No.
Really… hmmm, that’s not what your alter-ego advocate was inferring over at ZD… curious!
What are you on? – what’s curious? – what relevance does your mindless ramblings about posters have to do with the subject matter? – ‘NBN: Who will be connected last?’
I’m on anti-idiot pills to help ward of those like you…!
[Editor’s note: Come on RS, you can do better than this. Clean up your conversation or I will moderate further. Cheers, Renai]
He asked a smart ***e question and got the deserved reply…Renai!
*with Telstra, not Optus.
So Ron, you want 200Mbps, no less than 500GB each month (or 100Mbps/unlimited) and to pay less than $80.
I guess you also want the NBN built by Easter and have paid itself off by Xmas, too?
And of course a free set of steak knives?
Yes….!
RS
thats exactly what i expect right now im with optus and i have the cable speed pack.
the plan is 100/2mbps (nbn download speeds) and im getting 120gb for 80per month
in 4-10 years time when this NBN is finaly finished and im forced to connect to it or go off line…..
of corse i expect something far better than i have now or its been a waste or tax payers money.
why would anyone change from HFC to fiber if the speeds are the same, with usage and cost simila. therefor i do expect what i posted above, honestly i expect gigabit for $43B.
if optus and telstra take the limits off the HFC network the DOCSIS 3.0 speeds are listed below.
Source: cable labs / wiki RE: docis 3.0
4ch down 171.52 (152MBpb) /122.88 (108) Mbit/s
8ch down 343.04 (304MBps) / 122.88 (108) Mbit/s
docis 2.0 is 38/27MBps
P.S ill take knife set but only is its Platinum :)
Ron that’s lovely, but the NBN is NATIONAL broadband network, it isn’t RBN Ron’s Broadband network…
You are in the lucky minority with cable (cable which alain here tells us almost no ones is connected to anyway – so who do we believe) but because you have cable, you believe providing for your fellow Aussies who DO NOT have and preparing the rest of Australia for the future, is a waste of taxpayers money?
That’s the spirit, ***k the rest, I’m ok…
Nuff said…
That’s not the point ron was making, but you know that twist the inference (again) and then rave on with your normal agenda and respond to something else that was not said anyway.
The point was why go off HFC if it is equal to or worse than a NBN connection, and he is quite correct it would be a waste of money.
Unfortunately for ron he won’t have a choice, because the NBN is all about having NO choice, Conroy is gifting billions to Telstra and Optus for their HFC customer base, the NBN has to at least ‘look successful’ even if you have to buy in customers.
“the plan is 100/2mbps (nbn download speeds) and im getting 120gb for 80per month”
2Mbps Upload? Are you sure? If so that is some of the worst up/down ratios I have ever seen. 50/1? Frak me.
Remember the NBN will be of equivelent pricing, however, you with get 40Mbps upload, that is 20x the upload, you do currently. Well worth the upgrade if you ask me. So, I think you’ll find that once this penetrates the skulls of ignorant Australians like yourself (I can upload my photos to facebook up to 20x faster than I do currently? Wow, that’ll save me so much time…)
And I’m sorry Alian, but I have to agree with RS here. This is a case of “I’m fine, why should we do anything about it?” Not everyone can get HFC, and those that do might not want to be locked into a 2 year contract (as you can’t get HFC on a month to month basis) or don’t want to sign up to Telstra, or many number of other reasons.
“Unfortunately for ron he won’t have a choice, because the NBN is all about having NO choice, Conroy is gifting billions to Telstra and Optus for their HFC customer base, the NBN has to at least ‘look successful’ even if you have to buy in customers.”
Once again, it is only TESLTRA who are being given money to migrate their customers, and once again, it is important because the fixed line telecommications market is a NATURAL MONOPLOY. And once again, the NBN will encourage retail commitition, not hinder it. Do I have to explain it again? Because I am seriously sick of repeating myself on points like this.
Oh and another thing:
Source: cable labs / wiki RE: docis 3.0
4ch down 171.52 (152MBpb) /122.88 (108) Mbit/s
8ch down 343.04 (304MBps) / 122.88 (108) Mbit/s
This quoted bandwidth is shared between all users in a given area. It does not mean, and it’s like wireless in this regard, that you personally can get a connection of 304/108. It means that bandwidth is shared between everyone. In practice they will only give you connections of a maximum of about 200/20 (with 8ch) because any higher and they risk the contention ratio being too high and thus users will not be able to attain the burst speeds of 200Mbps as advertised.
Kudos NightKhaos.
Sadly, regardless of how overwhelmingly compelling your facts are, you will grow sick of explaining it to those who are either incapable or unwilling to comprehend.
There are some who are so biased (due to either/and/or their wallets, employment or political stakes) who will baselessly refute the facts and continue on their own little FUD journey (as clearly witnessed with the incessant lies by alain/advocate of gifting $Bs to Optus).
I had a similar experience at ZDNet where I claimed Graeme Samuel said that he believed an NBN CBA isn’t possible. To prove my point I linked to a webcast where you could both see and hear Graeme Samuel actually saying these words, more than once, but old advocate/alain (he uses his alter-ego advocate over there, yawn) still claims he never said it!
Each time I again mention it, he again disputes, so I again post the URL and even provide the exact time where Mr Samuel says it. Of course a few days later, ditto,…unbelievable!
yes upload speeds in australia suck but its for all isps not just optus and not just HFC, in melb bigpond cable has hit 100mb its only 2.5mb up. but most adsl2 is only 1mbps up
they say its uploads that congest the network, i recon its so people with patches over their eyes cant share to much and also expect their uplaods to be free so they can use P2P and torrentz ect….
basicly if theres a demand theres a supply. for anything and everything.
clearly some people want faster uploads but i urge you all to look at your usage history and check your uploads vs downloads. and uploaded content is so minimal 2mbps uploads is fine atm. true its a big diffrence. but again if deman was there im sure for fairly small amount of upgrades at the exchange HFC would deliver over 20mbps uploads even up to the 40nbn will offer.
curantly optus use 4ch down for me network speed 150MBps (provisioned at 107) if was also made 2-4 upload ch i dont see anyreason why HFC couldnt sustain 20-40mbps up. as 4ch has a network max speed of 108mbps
at the end of the day its to expensive for that speed vs usage, this is the reason all previous atempts at symetrical sppeds have failed. on a consumer level. telstra bigpond cable for a short time years ago had 10/10mbps on unlimited usage for around $250 per month wile at the time 10mbps/128k was just $60 failed tho with in about 6months. just was never heard of again. then SDSL came along again the home user never took it up or it would be inforce today. again that to was quite expensive at about aprox dubble the price for the faster upload speed, nothing ells. same usage same download speed that applies to both the telstra cable and other isps SDSL plans.
also then we open a hole new can of worms, will uploads be counted or not if they are its ok, if uploads are made free again, imagine how much stuff will be getitng shared over P2P and torrents thats not legal content. it just gives the redhead goverment another reason to go ahead with their shifty internet filter.
not to mention spam virus stupid emails with monkeys taking a leak all the crap we hate will be up to 40x faster.
honestly i dun like this NBN deal at all, i think the previous idear would have been better where the big 9 were going to build the network privetly at 0cost to the taxpayer but telstra had a cry and said if you do we dont wanna play anymore (like little kids) and the goverment backed em up.
but hey again lets not worry about or health system or anything ells. one example is my grandmother, just coz she paid her verry modest home off over 35years ago centerlink/the goverment who ever is involved says she is well off enough to pay for her own reading glass, her walking frame and all the other things she needs as an 80+yo she cant aford it. if was not for my self and my sister she would have to go with out thease things and be bed riden or forced to give up her home for a nursing home. so please dont tell me we need the NBN funded by taxpayers, this country has gone to the dogs! its getting to that stage people i know are becoming ashamed to say they went to war for for this country in the past to have labour sell us out.
“yes upload speeds in australia suck but its for all isps not just optus and not just HFC, in melb bigpond cable has hit 100mb its only 2.5mb up. but most adsl2 is only 1mbps up”
*2Mbps with Annex M, currently provided by Internode DSLAMs for SOHO customers, but yes, they do suck.
“they say its uploads that congest the network, i recon its so people with patches over their eyes cant share to much and also expect their uplaods to be free so they can use P2P and torrentz ect….”
The uploads “debate” has many sides too it. In all honesty I loath pay-per-gigabyte plans in any form. This isn’t to say I want “unlimited internetz”, but just I don’t understand how quotas relate back to how ISPs pay for their internet (i.e. 95/90/80 peak bandwidth usage)
“basicly if theres a demand theres a supply. for anything and everything.”
I DEMAND A TRANSPORTATION DEVICE. Ergo, you must supply it. Just because their is demand for a particular thing doesn’t mean it can actually be SUPPLIED sometimes. As well as economic limitations (limited demand) there are other limitations that can often make it impossible to supply a particular service. The assertion that “if there is a demand for something, the market will supply it” is so simplistic it makes me laugh sometimes. However that is pricey what conservatives would have us believe when it comes to Broadband, that if people really wanted better broadband we would have it.
“clearly some people want faster uploads but i urge you all to look at your usage history and check your uploads vs downloads. and uploaded content is so minimal 2mbps uploads is fine atm. true its a big diffrence. but again if deman was there im sure for fairly small amount of upgrades at the exchange HFC would deliver over 20mbps uploads even up to the 40nbn will offer.”
See above and allow me to point out that my “uploads is so small” because my upload bandwidth is so small. I want to be able to send large files to friends, but I can’t because to do so would take longer than physically delivering it to them. I want to be able to use off-site backup, but I can’t because to do so would take about a week.
Yes, HFC is certainly capable of delivering faster uploads on DOCSIS 3.0. However, that still doesn’t address the majority of people on ADSL.
“at the end of the day its to expensive for that speed vs usage, this is the reason all previous atempts at symetrical sppeds have failed. on a consumer level. telstra bigpond cable for a short time years ago had 10/10mbps on unlimited usage for around $250 per month wile at the time 10mbps/128k was just $60 failed tho with in about 6months. just was never heard of again. then SDSL came along again the home user never took it up or it would be inforce today. again that to was quite expensive at about aprox dubble the price for the faster upload speed, nothing ells. same usage same download speed that applies to both the telstra cable and other isps SDSL plans.”
Because at the time there was very little upload happening from users. This trend is changing, quite rapidly in fact. Uploading hundreds of photos to Facebook, flickr, etc, uploading home videos to YouTube, P2P sharing of files (which is a reason why their is resistant to increasing uploads because it is often used for illegal sharing)… but users do upload way more than they used to. And what about businesses? They often need to upload more than they download, but they can’t get this opportunity unless they pay huge amounts for SHDSL or OF connections.
“also then we open a hole new can of worms, will uploads be counted or not if they are its ok, if uploads are made free again, imagine how much stuff will be getitng shared over P2P and torrents thats not legal content. it just gives the redhead goverment another reason to go ahead with their shifty internet filter.”
Ha, I doubt that more people “uploading stuff” via P2P will be easy to link back to “saving the children” but prove me wrong.
#See above and allow me to point out that my “uploads is so small” because my upload bandwidth is so small. I want to be able to send large files to friends, but I can’t because to do so would take longer than physically delivering it to them. I want to be able to use off-site backup, but I can’t because to do so would take about a week.#
ok sending files to friends but are you prepared to pay 140 bucks to your friend can watch your kids birthday party video clip faster. and if your talking the lower level plans if you were uploading backups time saved uploading would be lost in recovery. and a external HDD could do same thing, and dose not take a week and can be kept at family or a friends place. but if you would rather pay permonth for backup than a once off fee thats your choice.
#Because at the time there was very little upload happening from users. This trend is changing, quite rapidly in fact. Uploading hundreds of photos to Facebook, flickr, etc, uploading home videos to YouTube, P2P sharing of files (which is a reason why their is resistant to increasing uploads because it is often used for illegal sharing)… but users do upload way more than they used to. And what about businesses? They often need to upload more than they download, but they can’t get this opportunity unless they pay huge amounts for SHDSL or OF connections.#
some of that maybe valid , but pics are normaly quite small even hundreds of them (not that any sober people would uploads “hundreds” in one hit drunk and stoned after a party maybe lol), but dont they get rescalled for sites like face book before they get uploaded., youtube has its own limits to file size used to be 100mb or 10min, its 15 and 20min now not sure what file size limit is tho. and P2P is questionable at best. of corse we upload more now our usage has gone up in some cases by 100x over the past 5 years give or take…
and if businesses are uploading that amount of data they can probably aford fiber, they shouldnt be congesting a consumer network, and most would only be text docs anyhow therefor anyspeed over 1mbps isnt rely much use. but to the ones needing 40mbps get a business plan so you also get SLA if your a business uploading so much data you cant aford to be offline for 10min. so home level plans just wont do. coz they do go offline here and there and you just have to deal with it when it happens.
“ok sending files to friends but are you prepared to pay 140 bucks to your friend can watch your kids birthday party video clip faster. and if your talking the lower level plans if you were uploading backups time saved uploading would be lost in recovery. and a external HDD could do same thing, and dose not take a week and can be kept at family or a friends place. but if you would rather pay permonth for backup than a once off fee thats your choice.”
Actually I would pay the “premuim” for remote backup services for two reasons:
1) the amount of content I gather is increasing at a rate such that the cost of online storage is cheaper than the cost of buying physical double the physical media (i.e. a disk to store it, a disk to back it up) and storing it offsite
2) the policies of the services I use have very strong data retention and multiple site redundancy policies. I could pay to store a hard drive in a warehouse somewhere, but those hard drives only have a certain shelf life before the data on them begins to degrade, and also their is limited redundancy for that. So if I need to find a file from say 5 years ago (not uncommon if I’m dealing with a legal preceding of sometime) and find I no longer have a local copy, and then go to find out to my friends place where I have stored it in has recently been… to use a recent example, flooded out and the disk is damaged beyond repair, as well as any physical copies I may well have made and stored, I’m well… screwed.
But hey, I could always just buy a terabyte disk and whack it all onto there, it’ll be much cheaper, right? You obviously don’t have any data which you consider that essential now do you? I will gladly pay the premium for the high speed bandwidth service, and the backup service… and you know what, so will my friends, the ones you just mentioned that would have to pay that extra to watch the silly video.
“some of that maybe valid , but pics are normaly quite small even hundreds of them (not that any sober people would uploads “hundreds” in one hit drunk and stoned after a party maybe lol), but dont they get rescalled for sites like face book before they get uploaded., youtube has its own limits to file size used to be 100mb or 10min, its 15 and 20min now not sure what file size limit is tho. and P2P is questionable at best. of corse we upload more now our usage has gone up in some cases by 100x over the past 5 years give or take…”
On Facebook, yes, they prescale your photos before uploading, but I don’t subscribe to that kinda shit, I, and my friends upload our photos in their full 12Megapixel glory to places like Flickr and Picasa, because we are avid photographers. Maybe I’m biased in that regard, but at around 4 Megabytes per photo that is a considerable amount of data to upload.
I’ll admit our download has gone up too, but my point was is that what we do online, the ratio is changing, we still download fair more than we upload, but we are uploading far more relative to what we download than compared to say 5 years ago. And as such, shouldn’t our upload speeds go up to compensate? I mean hell, I’d be plenty happy with a 10:1 ratio (what I had in the UK under Annex M)… but 50:1? Not good enough. And 5:2 (what the NBN offers), would just be like awesome, although probably overkill. However, if the trend continues, in a few years time maybe we’ll need that much.
“and if businesses are uploading that amount of data they can probably aford fiber, they shouldnt be congesting a consumer network, and most would only be text docs anyhow therefor anyspeed over 1mbps isnt rely much use. but to the ones needing 40mbps get a business plan so you also get SLA if your a business uploading so much data you cant aford to be offline for 10min. so home level plans just wont do. coz they do go offline here and there and you just have to deal with it when it happens”
Of course, this is true, however you’ll note it’s true even under the NBN. Under the technical document explaining how the network pricing will work they have different tiers of data, and explained how you would pay for more CVC data in order to ensure CDRs for your customers. So those businesses that need committed rates of 40Mbps upload will pay for it. It will have two advantages of the current system through.
1) You won’t have to pay $10K to get a line installed, making it more accessible, and hence cheaper for small businesses to setup lines to satellite offices.
2) Start ups who can’t afford to pay $4k a month for a decent, committed service, will be able to get a consumer service until they tide over into some form of profitability.
I do admit that there will be an disadvantage in that some businesses will never upgrade to a committed service because they don’t know any better, but that is true even now. I wonder how many businesses who can well afford a dedicated 5Mbps/5Mbps FTTP link but still stay on ADSL2+ or HFC because their IT manager/CIO doesn’t know any better?
@Ron, a 50/20 connection with 200 GB of data is expected to cost about $80, not $140. The nearest you can get (if under 2km from your exchange) today is SDSL at 10/10 for around $2400 per month.
At 50/20 you can backup your hard drive offsite and an incremental online backup service only uploads changed files so 200 GB is probably adequate.for a business with one or two computers.
Both parties insist they will deliver ubiquitous broadband. The cheapest way to provide wireless everywhere is to take the heavy data loads off the airwaves, because wireless spectrum is physically incapable of handling the massive data volumes, which is why it is rationed with exorbitant data charges.
By laying fibre to large towns and cities, uncongested 12 Mbps wireless can be supplied to 97% of premises as well, and with far fewer towers. 93% will have a choice of fibre, wireless or both, and two satellites will provide 12/1, 12/2 and 12/4 options to 100% of Australia, albeit with half-second latency.
Just because most premises will only need a basic 12/1 service at first doesn’t mean it is the only speed we should build, surely? Fibre has no theoretical speed limit, only today’s switches slow it down. (The record is 69.1 Tbps sustained over a single fibre 240 km long on 25 March 2010.)
Fibre-supported wireless is the right solution.
LOL the phantom alain is here…
Not interested in discussing the issues one on one when I offer, but will troll in, blurt out baseless FUD, then go back into hiding agian.
When you grow up come back and debate, as i offered… otherwise, just go and grow up…!
@RS
You debate the issues?? – you must be joking, all you do is go for the personal attack, make up rubbish about posters motivations such as Telstra shareholders (not that you know), Liberal supporters (not that you know) twist the content of posts to suit how you want to answer which is the usual base set agenda based on plenty of words like FUD, Naysayer, !!!!!, LOL LOL !!!!! – and that’s about as intelligent as it gets.
I hit a nerve there eh…alain, LOL!!! Nice dodge from further debate though… it’s my fault…LOL!
Well at least I DO NOT disgracefully post under numerous different names to hide, weasel and BS 24/7, like some do alain, advocate or whoever else you are today. Despicable…!
Plus when I say something I do not then contardict myself, because I think it will suit the latest comment…
So…Why don’t you tell us why you bag the NBN and be done with it? Otherwise I will continue to surmise – the wallet, political party, employer, TLS shares… Probably ALL, LOL!!!!!!
Well go on…spit it out, you don’t want to hold Australia back for nothing!!
RS i think you dont understand my point.
if you look at curant NBN prices from internode or iinet and then compare to my curant plan im getting a better deal.
going from optus to NBN with prices atm would suck, id only get half the download speed and 20gb less with internode for same as im paying now. ($80pm)
http://www.internode.on.net/residential/broadband/fibre_to_the_home/nbn_plans/
with iinet again isnt as good as cable pricing, to get 200+200 is $80pm with the phone, and after trial period speeds are basicly same as standard cable. so in this case optus naked 500gb plan for 80pm gives you basicly same thing but atm nothing on the iinet site about what speeds and prices after june this year. so in juse maybe ill have to eat my words. but untill then i cant see why the HFC cant work side by side with the NBN,
resell cable untill the NBN is finished, give people the choice NOW howmany people here would go to HFC if they could keep their ISP?
Oh I think I do Ron…I have been corresponding with selfish people who only think about themselves for sometime…!
“if you look at curant NBN prices from internode or iinet and then compare to my curant plan im getting a better deal. ”
Let the one go through to the keeper eh RS? – you don’t like facts getting in the way of good old rant and answered to something that Ron never asserted in the first place, standard strategy when it all gets too hard eh RS?
No alain/advocate/whoever else, because NightKhaos answered him totally above, no need to do it again,…
AGAIN, you didn’t answer why you wish to hold Australia back… spit it out!
No NightKhaos provided an opinion, which is not the same thing as he ‘totally answered him’ at all.
LOL…
Nuff said
geez RS are you 6 or something or do you jsut suffer homer simpson syndrome. your the one wanting to take us backwards i think your just jelous HFC is upto 100mb wile your probably stuck on 2mb,, puting people that are prepared to pay for premium HFC back to somethign slower more expensive ect.. is holding us back. thos that dont wanna go to telstra optus for what ever reason is their choice to be held back. hence why i moved form TPG to optus about 6 months ago.
how is putting people from adsl2 over to HFC insted of building nbn (for a few years untill the NBN is more compleet and making its own profit) gunner hold us back. LOL slow much. your honestly telling me that if you had HFC outside and your a crappy copper line is onyl 2mb. are you saying your not wanting to have faster sppeds ect… then why do you want the NBN, and if you dont have HFC as an option well you dont have a choice on this topic. and what im refering to dont involve you. but why should many thousands of HFC users be sent backwards. my point only is for 20% of homes with the HFC option.
RS what isp you with now, what plan how much, what speed you get? be honest now. do you have hfc as an option? if so who with bigpond, optus and whats your key reason for not taking it up when you got adsl2 tho im sure your not with optus coz they didnt give me a choice. when i called up they put me on cable, bigpond give you a choice.
optus in the past did credit checks to get conected again i can see this being an isue for somepeople but if they are black listed for something maybe they shouldnt have the internet, they should be paying off their bills.
Yes whatever Ron…
You came here and said **** everyone, I have cable, so NBN is a waste and now portray me as the bad guy.. LOL!
Nice try, no miserable try…!
Actually it worked quite well, nice sensible post Ron.
Gee Ron I’d be worried if I were you! If your post is being heralded by one who lies and blatantly contradicts himself, as alain/advocate does, to suit his own wallet…!
“how is putting people from adsl2 over to HFC insted of building nbn (for a few years untill the NBN is more compleet and making its own profit) gunner hold us back.”
It isn’t, it s perfectly sensible interim solution, however it has one fundamental flaw: current the HFC networks are run by two competing providers, Optus and Telstra, whom only provide contracts for their HFC services.
If, and I stress the IF, the government could convince Optus and Telstra to open their HFC networks to other providers and provide wholesale access, then NBN Co might be able to get away with not upgrading the people who have HFC connections, or as will likely be the case, not upgrading them until LAST.
However, I serious doubt that Telstra or Optus will agree to giving up their assets like that, allowing anyone to run services on them, as in order for the HFC networks to be integrated properly into the NBN wholesale structure the HFC networks will need to be sold, in full, to NBN Co, in order to prevent the same COI that has plagued the ADSL market, i.e. vertical integration.
RS BTW…..
source: ABC australia
According to a report in the Australian Financial Review, the deal would resemble the $11 billion non-binding agreement established between NBN and Telstra earlier this year.
The deal would see Optus’s 425,000 broadband cable customers shift to the NBN.
im sooooo selfish when im talking about whats happening to almost half a million people on optus cable not to mention bigpond cable. as you put it
NUFF SAID!! *rolls eyes walks away
With respect here ron, the Optus deal talks have not resurfaced since October, the water cooler talk around those following the situation is that the Optus/NBN talks broke down and that Optus will compete directly with NBN Co via their DOCSIS 3.0 HFC cable offerings.
Until I see some more evidence, like for example a deal being taken to Optus shareholders like with the Telstra/NBN deal, then I take anything mentioning the Optus/NBN deal with a gain of salt.
This is why I correct alian everytime he says that Optus and Telstra are being paid by NBN Co to migrate their customers, because as it stands, it is just Telstra.
Oh Ron are you still trying to justify that first selfish comment of yours?
The …I have, I want and if I don’t get, what’s the point of the NBN (or words similar, can’t even be bothered to scroll back up, as I thoughtyou’d see the selfishness and just let it go).
Yes walk away (let’s see if you can now, at least keep your word, LOL)… tail between legs!
In any endeavour, there will be a beginning, middle and end. Mostly. It’s not really that simple, though.
Someone will always be first. Someone will always be middle. The difference with deployments of this type, is that there is no such thing, as “last”. Because this deployment will grow, over time.
ADSL(2+) deployments have not stopped. They continue.
I would like to hope that deployments will hit arreas with least connectivity options first. That’s the ideal world. The “outside-in” approach. It’s a world, however, we don’t actually live in.
Ironically, it will be areas where best inroads can be made, where efficiences exist and where capital expenditure is balanced against outcomes. It will be based on a balance between cost and return.
In short, the NBN Co should be spending their funding wisely. So they can indeed hit the stauration levels planned.
As a side note, it is not just regional areas that are afflicted with substandard connectivity, outlying metro areas of non-trivial sizes are often carpeted in RIMs and other such sillyness. Never mind the hundreds of new housing estates that have had the same, or “mini exchanges” (a myth, we’re told.. they exist none the less) ploughed in to save Telstra having to install an actual exchange.
We all want to see this new thing, soon. As much as it may seem best to cover areas that have the least choice, the choice isn’t that simple to make. I expect the NBN to deliver on it’s promises. It can’t do that if it becomes a wasteful enterprise.
The answer is simple…
Build the areas with the least average supply first and work your way back to exchanges that have multiple competitive dslam’s installed and/or HFC…
This is a government instituted welfare program of sorts when you cut right back to the bone. Those most in need should get first stab. Then those with only access to 1.5. Then those with only access ‘up to 8 Mbit’. Then 24 Mbit. Then cable.
As for the timeline, let’s not forget that it has been 4+ years since the promise was made in the 2007 election. Lest we forget that the clock has already been ticking that long and while people in cities and major regional centers enjoy more competition and more options, those stuck further out are still dealing with the connection that started with 4 years ago…
And lastly, I still can’t believe there are morons out there puerile enough to use the ‘you want city services, move to the city’ excuse. The same morons who would starve to death in short order if no one were farming, and wonder why their shiny new fibre stopped working because no coal was mined for the power stations…
I say this as a person living near to a major regional center with ADSL1+. I can wait for those without to get service. If we’re pushing this as a big government infrastructure reform and NBNco is not capable of rolling out more sites simultaneously, the worst served covered by the NBN footprint should be the first helped…
50% of users will connect at 12/1Mbps according to the NBNCo Corporate Plan (speed tiers chart on page 118). Unless the retirees live until 2026, it is extremely unlikely that they will connect at 1Gbps, as that is the first date that 1Gbps appears on the speed chart.
On page 116 it states that the wireless only premises are very sensitive to price. I wonder how many of that 50% will choose wireless because it is cheaper and almost as fast.
You don’t get to choose which technology you get.
If you’re in a designated fibre area, you get fibre. If you’re in a designated wireless area, you get wireless. Everywhere else, you get satellite.
He is talking about wireless competition from Telstra/Optus, not wireless from NBNCo
He doesn’t actually mention that at all.
Its however obvious thats what hes talking about
It it were “obvious” I doubt he would have made that mistake, and nor would I have.
It does seem weird to talk about NBN wireless vs fibre, so you can infer that is what he talking about, but you can’t be sure can you?
I was definitely referring to wireless competition from Optus, Telstra, etc. I can well imaging wireless providers pitching $20 or $30 a month offers with peak speeds that are close to the NBNCo 12/1Mbps. Now if you don’t really care about your internet connection (heresy I know, but…) a wireless service which mostly works (adequate for email and facebook) and is half the cost will be very tempting.
My concern is that if wireless operators can poach another 10% of the market then it damages the profitability of NBNCo. The big advantage of fibre is speed, yet it seems that NBNCo have given up this advantage. Have a look at the speed chart on page 118 of the NBNCo Corporate Plan. The speeds are depressingly slow.
@MichealWyres
“You don’t get to choose which technology you get.”
Well you do actually, customers today have HFC , ADSL2+ and wireless available to them and a increasing number choose wireless over fixed line.
When the NBN is rolled out it won’t make any difference to the customers who have chosen and will still choose wireless, because the choice of wireless as a data solution has more to it that just raw speed, quota and latency.
It’s all about Iphone, HTC Desire, Ipad, IPod, eBooks etc – the future? my money is on wireless, unfortunately when it comes to choice unless I buy Telstra shares my tax money is going to the loser technology – fixed line.
“You don’t get to choose which technology you get.”
He didn’t mention retail competition at all as Micheal rightly pointed out, we can therefore assume he was thinking you could opt for NBN wireless over NBN fibre, which isn’t the case.
As for your thinly vailed “agruement to this.”
“Well you do actually, customers today have HFC , ADSL2+ and wireless available to them and a increasing number choose wireless over fixed line.”
LUCKY customers today have HFC, ADSL2+ and wireless avaiable to them. MOST customers have ADSL2+ or wireless as their only options, and a select few only have wireless available to them, and even selecter few have the option of getting an FTTH connection because they are in an NBN testbed, or their Greenfields Developer was smart enough to opt for FTTH.
You have a distorted view of the relality of Broadband here Alian, and it’s begining to piss me off a little bit.
“It’s all about Iphone, HTC Desire, Ipad, IPod, eBooks etc – the future? my money is on wireless, unfortunately when it comes to choice unless I buy Telstra shares my tax money is going to the loser technology – fixed line.”
And here, you are just plain wrong, like Mr Turnbull. Yes, the future will be always on, always connected devices out and about, however the problem is that any STATIC media, such as high definition media, telecomminitying, etc, all future technologies which are becoming increasing popular, and even already popular technologies such as gaming require HIGH BANDWIDTH, LOW LATANCY connections, that cannot be delievered on Wireless, and further more, need to be taken away from Wireless SO THAT THE DEVICES YOU JUST MENTIONED AREN’T HINDERED BY HIGH BANDWIDTH DEVICES TRYING TO UTLISE THE NETWORK.
It’s simple, you have a flexiable hose able to take a small amount of water, you want to make the most use of this flexiable hose, so you did this by using a fixed pipes to take water away from the flexiable hose to go to locations like the bathtub or shower, so that you can use your flexiable hose to do the garden why someone else is in the shower. Mobile Wireless is often said to be a supplimental technology, however I’m starting believe this isn’t the case, FIXED is actually the supplimental technology. It suppliments mobile wireless solutions in order to maximise the effectiveness of mobile wireless by taking any and all traffic that can be taken away from mobile wireless, away from mobile wireless.
“You have a distorted view of the relality of Broadband here”
Really? the point I was making is that many customers have a choice of fixed line high speed broadband today and elect to choose despite all the marketing hype about IPTV and movie downloads to have wireless ONLY, they will still choose to have WIRELESS ONLY when the the NBN is running up their street.
If you care to read the Telstra and SingTel financial reports have look at the revenue trend especially the ARPU’s, Telstra especially the revenue is moving away from fixed line products both wholesale and retail toward wireless in both its forms, telephony and data, this has been happening progressively but accelerating more recently for at least the last 10 years.
If I was a private investor looking at the garage sale of the NBN when it moves from Government ownership at some time in the future ( perhaps the next election!), I would be having a long hard look at where the communications trend is at and its effect upon FTTH ROI.
How many customers will opt for this option? Not as many as you seem to think Alian. If you want stats to backup notice the number of fixed line subscribers and the amount of data consumed on fixed line connects are BOTH INCREASING. Conversely, the amount of mobile subscriptions (at a faster rate than fixed line yes) are increasing but the amount of data being consumed is DECREASING.
It doesn’t take a genius to take a genius to look at these figures and go “Okay, looks like the majority of people are getting both and then using their fixed line connection for their bulk data needs and mobile so that they can be connected wherever they are.”
There are going always be a few people on the fringes who opt for wireless only, just like people who never use an oven, or those that decide to use a sink than a dishwasher, for economic or other reasons, and I have nothing against these people, but government policies must be looked at from the point of view of what ALL of Australian’s are doing. And if we look at it like this, there is a demand for fixed line services, and this demand is not being adeuqtely addressed by the telecoms.
Why is this? Well you just hit the nail on the head. THERE IS MORE MONEY IN WIRELESS. This is a well known fact across the world. You can make more money for wireless services because people are prepared to pay more for the convience. So what do ISPs do? Well, let’s look at O2 in the UK. They have a very profitable wireless network, they then decided that on the back of these profits they could offer cheap (GBP10 a month for ADSL2+ unlimited) broadband to their existing customers. Doing this served two purposes for them, one it got a lot of traffic off their mobile network that shouldn’t be there, since when browsing at home on their iPhone the customers will end up using WiFi, and two, it gave them a greater selling point which in turn gave them more satifised customers who would continue to purchase their services.
These trends have been well documented and it comes down to two, very important things:
– THERE IS LITTLE TO NO PROFIT IN FIXED LINE SERVICES
– CUSTOMERS AND PROVIDERS NEED FIXED LINE SERVICES
So when you look at that, you get a situation where providers will only upgrade their fixed line services begrudingly, not proactively, because althrough they aknowledge that they need them to keep traffic off their mobile network and retain customers through the use of bundling discounts, they can’t make any money via fixed line broadband alone to upgrade it (i.e. it needs external investment). And because of this, it seems the logical conclusion is for the government to come along and do it, since the fixed line network we are left with is the one that the providers can afford to maintain with the minimum investment. And then in ten years time, we’ll run out of spectrum, and when that happens… what exactly is your plan to deal with that then?
The NBNCo Corporate plan states that the number of wireless only homes is 13% and rising at 1% a year (see page 116). So it is not a tiny amount. Combine that with the fact that NBNCo are forecasting 50% of customers will choose 12/1Mbps and the future for wireless at the bottom end looks bright.
For those of us wanting faster, cheaper broadband, less customers on the NBNCo will cause prices to be higher.
“For those of us wanting faster, cheaper broadband, less customers on the NBNCo will cause prices to be higher.”
Well you won’t get “faster, cheaper broadband” from Wireless services that’s for sure. As more and more people sign up for the wireless service providers will attempt to encourage you into not using the service so that they can reduce contention ratios, so prices will go up.
The result being that you’ll have more expensive services, or slower services, one of the two. This is a failing of wireless technology, and one that won’t be avoided any-time soon.
The interesting thing however that you noted is that “it is in the business case’ well… with that in mind, don’t you think they would have, I dunno, compensated for it then? Seems logical that if you make an assumption that you’re going to lose customers to wireless networks that you might want to include the impact in your projections of uptake.
How about instead of quoting NBN Co OWN BUSINESS CASE as to why it will fail, why don’t you quote another source that shows that the business case is fundamentally flawed? Like is the 1% migration factor too conservative? Is the 70% up-take estimate an overestimation?
Do you have any fixed at your place…?
My question was to alain/advocate (or whoever else, he calls himself today)…!
The increasingly desperate attempts to divert the subject matter to off-topic irrelevance gets more frenetic everyday – if you don’t like the heat get out of the kitchen.
Debate me then… There now what!
Now tell us why you despicable post under multiple names…?
Run Forrest…!
While I think that outer areas should get the NBN first it’s not the best way financially to do it. NBNco need to generate revenue quickly so that the taxpayer is not investing as much. This is why tax payers aren’t paying 40-50 billion like some whould have us believe.
Basically you do what Telstra or Optus would do and target high density areas first so that you get a good ROI. The difference is that the NBN will use the revenue to keep going until 93% of the population are connected by fibre.
If you started from the low density areas you would need a bigger investment from taxpayers because NBN wouldn’t have the revenue coming in to pay for it.
I’m on Optus HFC and I would be happy to be one of the last to be connected to the NBN but most likely I will have the opportunity within 4-5 years to be connected. Economics will dictate the roll out not who should or shouldn’t have it first.
Martin Eddy wrote:
“Economics will dictate the roll out not who should or shouldn’t have it first.”
Really? If Economics dictated this, then the private sector would have already done it.
No, the government has already basically decided that as long as it gets its money back (ie revenue neutral over a number of years), its emphasis is on social factors, not economics. In light of this, a regional prioritization makes perfect sense.
Chris Watts wrote:
‘Really? If Economics dictated this, then the private sector would have already done it.’
That’s exactly why the private sector only go for the low hanging fruit.
@Martin Eddy
The low hanging fruit as is being picked by the private companies, and it isn’t fixed line BB.
http://www.theage.com.au/digital-life/mobiles/telcos-urged-to-get-smart-as-mobile-usage-explodes-20110202-1ad69.html
We know. We know they can make more return from mobile broadband. We know it is easier for them to roll out. We know that consumers prefer it. But unfortunately, as we are starting to find out, it isn’t clean sailing.
As I have been saying: we need to invest in ways to keep the spectrum free so that this explosion of usage doesn’t result in the networks grinding to a screaming halt as providers suddenly realise that they don’t have enough capacity, or they can’t afford to upgrade.
Telecoms should be investing in both fixed line and mobile networks. Having the best mobile network in the world is useless if it is contented all the time (which is happening to NextG). Having the best fixed line network in the world is also useless if we can only use it in the safety of our homes and businesses and if market trends dictate consumerism (the agruement against the NBN, i.e. we’re going mobile).
It is often said they mobile wireless is supplimentary (Additional; added to supply what is wanted – Wikitionary), and this may have been true a few years ago. But now, it is probably more acruate to say that wireless is complementary to fixed line broadband (Something which completes, something which combines with something else to make up a complete whole; loosely, something perceived to be a harmonious or desirable partner or addition – Wikitionary).
Without fixed line broadband we will be stuck in contention with low data quotas, without mobile broadband we are tethered to one place. We need both. We should invest in BOTH. And I’m sure companies will find that Mobile Wireless won’t remain the low hanging fruit for long.
The private sector couldn’t do shit because we don’t even have a ‘free’ market in last mile telecommunications infrustructure
There is a ridiculous amount of regulation (due to ACCC/government) and any company has to compete against a vertically integrated monopoly who (again thanks to the government) was forced to provide ULL/LSS prices at the lowest possible cost margin
In other words, economics dictates that the best solution is to fix all this shit (regulation, law and Telstra splitting wise) and then private companies will easily be able to invest into upgrading our infrastructure. Thats what is happening around the world
In fact in regards to everything infrastructure wise in telecommunications that is NOT last mile, private companies in Australia have been doing almost all the investing (mobile and backhaul)
“In other words, economics dictates that the best solution is to fix all this shit (regulation, law and Telstra splitting wise) and then private companies will easily be able to invest into upgrading our infrastructure. Thats what is happening around the world”
And in the mean time we’ll be stuck with barely even half decent broadband way behind the rest of the world because the industry needs time to “recover” from the “dark ages” of Telecommications that were created by the very things you just mention. If it’s the governments fault, they should be cleaning it up.
And if not by the NBN, they need to be forcing the hands of providers such that they do clean it up in due haste.
RS you didnt answer my questions.
and i didnt say ### everyone. i said if its your choice not to have HFC when its in your street then your not going to require the NBN for the same reasons you didnt take up cable.
for 2 years (ending about 15months ago) i lived in a suburb where i only had a 5mb adsl2 line. i wasnt crying wheres my cable ,nbn ect… but once again as a person that has a choice of optus HFC or only 2 adsl2 providers TPG, telstra otherwise its primitive adsl BTW my adsl2 was verry poor where i live and im verry close to the exchange…
so if your like i was just a short time ago get off your high horse and ask daddy if you can wash his car to pay for the $256 cable install. and youll never look back. if HFC isnt an option where you live everything i said isnt implied for you. and i do support better broadband for your suburb , but not at the cost of thousands of others losing their high speed serivce. not just my self. your realy a homer simpson if you think im the only person on the HFC network.
Ron are you still carrying on, my I hit a nerve eh? Ouch….
But when YOU grow up and have something intelligent to say, rather than “wash daddy’s car” or something equally brilliant [sic] (in reply to my, obviously embarrassing ((for you)) disclosure of your utter selfishness) and IF you actually do ever get over my truthful comment, come back for more home truths.
Enjoy your cable Ron…!
Will landlords be forced to provide this to tenants, or will tenants be left without a home phone and any internet except wireless?
sue, it is my understanding that both parties have to agree to the install.
the owner as its their property, and the resident as they need to come in to the house for the install.
but in VIC i dont think they are being given an option to “opt out”
That’s a good question, Sue. Also, some of the older people I come into contact with are worried about their phone service – they want to know whether they’ll be forced to sign up with an ISP just to have the home phone when their copper is ripped out, and how much that will cost, and how reliable it will be. The NBN-spruikers are not doing a very good job explaining things to people who are not tech-heads.
@Gordon, most oldies with basic needs now choose to pay $20.95 a month for Telstra Home Budget, less a $33 rebate each quarter. Then they pay for either phone calls, a call plan, or both, and some also have a dialup or ADSL service. Very few pensioner households would be paying less than $50 a month in total, yet $50 will buy a 12 Mbps NBN service and 50 GB of data (cf NBN Corporate Plan fig 8.18). The median ADSL speed in Australia is 2 Mbps (cf ABS 20/9/2010).
Their existing cordless phone base station will plug into one of the RJ11 VoIP ports on the NBN box, instead of the PSTN socket. The difference is that they won’t pay anything for national phone calls, because everyone has an NBN phone. VoIP only consumes 14 MB/hr in each direction, so the data volume (even for the lonely or teenagers) is so negligible it will be absorbed into the connection cost.
As to reliability, your cordless phone stops working now in a blackout because the base station needs power. But NBNCo’s Corporate Plan included allowance for battery backup to cover extended blackouts, so it is actually more reliable than now, not less. There are of course hundreds of ways to do this, so expect to see an intelligent subset of options tailored to different situations.
Note that some older wired phones which needed the occasional 48V pulse to function will not work. You can buy a cordless phone for $20 these days, so this is hardly a problem except to those who want to make it one.
Cheaper. Faster. No extra for unlimited national calls. More reliable. And available to all Australians, not just 60% of us.
But I completely agree that the government has failed utterly to explain all of this. Community groups in Armidale have filled the knowledge gap, and the take-up rate there is now over 90%.
“As to reliability, your cordless phone stops working now in a blackout because the base station needs power. But NBNCo’s Corporate Plan included allowance for battery backup to cover extended blackouts, so it is actually more reliable than now, not less”
First of all you are assuming most handsets are cordless phones, secondly your explanation of the NBN box with built in battery backed UPS unit insinuates that the cordless phone base station power will be backed up from this – incorrect..
“There are of course hundreds of ways to do this, so expect to see an intelligent subset of options tailored to different situations.”
Ahh yeah right I see, we are rolling out the NBN, we will work out the detail afterward, is that what you mean?
“Cheaper. Faster. No extra for unlimited national calls. More reliable. And available to all Australians, not just 60% of us.”
Who said it would be no extra for ‘unlimited calls national calls’? – all of the current ISP’s selling NBN Plans charge for phone calls over and above the monthly BB charge.
Oh I left out one: What 40% of Australians today cannot make a telephone call – and to whom this will be fixed by the NBN?
“First of all you are assuming most handsets are cordless phones”
They are, at least in the residental sector. I haven’t actually seen a corded phone, bar the one attached to a fax machine (and those are quite rare I might point out, I’ve only seen 2 in the same time period, and one of them was at work), in use in a home for the past 4 years.
“secondly your explanation of the NBN box with built in battery backed UPS unit insinuates that the cordless phone base station power will be backed up from this – incorrect..”
I’ll give you that, you are accurate on this, a common misconception about the battery seems to be that is some kind of UPS, it’s not, it a battery for the ONT, good for about 6 hrs, nothing more. You need a UPS, you’ll still need to get a UPS.
“Ahh yeah right I see, we are rolling out the NBN, we will work out the detail afterward, is that what you mean?”
The trying to solve that particular issue has already resulted in NBN Co commiting to give out an inital battery with every ONT they issue, depsite the fact that only a small subset of the population will actually need a backup solution.
This problem has been gone, over, and over, and over again. And quite frankly, I don’t think some of you will be happy with any solution we come up with. FTTH is a passive data transit medium, meaning you need an alternative power source, this is unavoidable. Now, let me point out a few things to you as well:
Exchanges require power to run, if they are flooded out and power is cut to them, they only have a limited amount of fuel on site for backup purposes. Usually ABOUT 6 TO 8 HOURS worth. If more fuel can be delievered to the area, then fine, you have a longer life for that particular affected area, and granted this is an advantage, but in the kind of circumstances we’re talking about, chances are they’ll decide to evecuate if they can’t get fuel to your exchange. And if they can get fuel to your exchange, they can get batteries to your home as well. Just like they will hand out radios and batteries, blankets, water, and food, etc. I’m sure a couple of ONT batteries can easily be added to the mix.
I’m sorry, but if you seriously think that an exchange which uses huge amounts of power to keep itself running, is still able to operate for a protracted period of time after the power has been cut to a geographic area, you are kind of deluded.
This isn’t a bigger deal as you’re trying to make it out to be. Seriously.
Oh, and Telstra phone customers (on Telstra copper) will simply become Telstra fibre customers (on NBN fibre). Just plug the phone across into the new socket.
Is it just me or does every article on this site have constant flaming by the same trolls?
I mean really … I wish I had that much free time, however have to get back to work without finishing this article because most of the comments are nothing but useless dribble from the same 4 people ? if at all possible could you four trolls find some other site to rant your dribble at/on ? me personally I’d prefer to only read valid comments … not childish arguments from troll with too much time on there hands.
We have our regulars, Kris, but I think there is a good, well-informed debate on both sides — a lot of open minds in the middle ;)
OK fair call, I suppose there’s a need for people to “heat” a debate to get people talking …. just this lunch hour reading these NBN articles and the amount of “I know you are, you said you are so what am I” just made my head spin a little …. but I guess that’s my fault for reading into such a big debate where people are very strong on their opinions :)
Oh I completely agree — I get tired of the debate and sometimes don’t read it all myself … especially when people post tomes and tomes on the NBN ;)
Congrats everyone — this article was just mentioned in a Senate session in Federal Parliament by Senator Scott Ludlam!
I am an IT consultant, my job requires me to use the internet. If I can get it, I can work from home. I live in Sydney.. I can really use the NBN.
Why does some farmer living out in regional areas need 100Mbit of download speeds? Granted, if they don’t have an existing connection they should get it first but if they already have ADSL I think it is outright stupid to go and upgrade those sites before the cities.
Having said that I agree with previous comments, service black spots in metropolitan areas that can’t get even get ADSL first, followed by rural areas with no decent connection, then back to cities and finally rural areas with standard ADSL.
I would also think there is a real threat to NBN even being rolled out in major cities if mobile services can provide cheaper and comparable service, in which case NBN would be a total flop.
I expect Palmerston in Gungahlin to be last!
Given that Palmerston has been waiting 16-plus years for a decent broadband service and there is no priority given to Palmerston residents. It would have been a cool thing to have focussed on Gungahlin residents who have been suffering the lack of broadband the longest – indeed Palmerston was supposed to be the first broadband suburb in Australia – project killed off due to John Howard and the mindless mandarins at Telstra – they couldn’t see the future if it was on the end of their pointy noses!
At the moment I only use wireless as promised versus actual ADSL speeds are a joke! The lack of broadband has meant I could not easily develop a home-based Internet dependent business for over a decade. Hoping that the current developments of NBN in Gungahlin and Palmerston in particular bear fruit!
Ah … as always … it is the starting that is the bottleneck! A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step; or, as in our case in Gungahlin and in long suffering Palmerston in particular, a journey of a thousand terabytes begins with a single bit – the important bit – starting!
Just coming back from yet another trip to South Korea – where broadband is plentiful the lack of it for almost two decades grates even more! But I still expect Palmerston to be last …
Comments are closed.