A crowdsourced campaign that aims to buy advertisements calling for Australia's national broadband network (NBN) to stick with its original fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP) plan has soared past its $AUD15,000 funding target and now has a war chest of over $40,000 to splash. The campaign's original aim was to raise enough cash to pop …
All hail the mandate
What always annoys me about politics is the way someone like Malcolm Turnbull can equate winning an election (by however much) with support for every one of that party's policies.
Further, even if some of the population of Australia did specifically vote Liberal on the basis of their revised NBN plan, those people are unlikely to have done so with even a basic understanding of the real technical details, as opposed to just absorbing the endless NBN-bashing colour spreads in the that wonderful paragon or journalistic integrity that is the Murdoch-controlled press.
Which option is the 'best' one, once all has been considered, is still a matter for debate but there can be no doubt that FTTH will provide better speed - especially for uploads - and better future-proofing.
Better speed on FTTP is a myth
> there can be no doubt that FTTH will provide better speed
Reading this quote from NBNCo's Corporate Plan (2013 draft) brings the above statement into question:
"As at 30 April 2013, 26% of NBN Co’s FTTP End-Users were on the highest available wholesale speed tier (100/40 Mbps), whilst 47% were on the entry-level wholesale speed tier (12/1 Mbps). These compare with 18% and 49% respectively forecast for FY2013 in the 2012-15 Corporate Plan."
Only a truly incompetent Labor government could succeed in proposing to build a FTTP network where 50% of connections are slower than HFC, FTTN, 4G and approaching half of ADSL2+ connections.
Re: Better speed on FTTP is a myth
I accept those figures - I have no reason to doubt them - but perhaps I should have been clearer.
What I meant was that, as a technology, FTTH/P is superior. That people using FTTP only CHOOSE to buy plans at 12Mbps (or 20 or 40, etc...) is hardly relevant.
The thinking that runs: people are only using X so lets only install X is why I have to rewire my apartment, why traffic is horrible in Sydney and why peak hour western line trains are deliberately slowed so as not to exceed the bridge capacity.
Installing FTTH is future-proofing and are rare example of out government (at any level) thinking ahead rather than taking the easier option.
Re: Better speed on FTTP is a myth
> What I meant was that, as a technology, FTTH/P is superior. That people using FTTP only CHOOSE to buy plans at 12Mbps (or 20 or 40, etc...) is hardly relevant.
I don't disagree with you, but there is no point building the gold-plated solution if it isn't going to be used. The people on faster plans have to subsidise those people on slower plans. There comes a point where fibre on demand is a better solution. We are at significant risk of building a white elephant which costs to much to access the speeds which would change how people use the Internet.
> Installing FTTH is future-proofing and are rare example of out government (at any level) thinking ahead rather than taking the easier option.
Except the reality is that FTTN was the previous Labor government's preferred option and if Telstra had submitted a reasonable proposal it is what most of Australia would have by now. FTTP was an attempt to save face by the government.
Re: Better speed on FTTP is a myth
>> "I don't disagree with you, but there is no point building the gold-plated solution if it isn't going to be used."
I agree 100% - but that is not what you were saying. You were saying that is isn't currently used. My point is that FTTP will allow for pretty much any foreseeable increase in demand that can be reasonably accommodated.
I believe that the extra speed of FTTP would indeed be used, though of course not by everyone and not necessarily right off the bat. That doesn't mean it's not worthwhile. With infrastructure you really should overspec because one thing we should all have learned is that 640KB is not enough.
As someone dealing with MSPs, I can tell you that the current lagging infrastructure is indeed a barrier to economic growth. We have clients with location that are are by necessity in areas that simply aren't well supported by Telstra and as a result can only connect to ADSL(1). The other option is to install fibre to the site and the expense is really quite a barrier. This client is unable to implement a proper, centralised (or cloud-based) database due to several sites being in this situation.
That is money for an MSP not being spent, money on software developers not being spent, money on data center colo not being spent. That's tax dollars not being earned by the government due to poor telecommunications infrastructure.
I realise a FTTN would also address this but don't suspect for a moment that there won't be exactly the same good area vs bad area situation we have now.
(sorry for any typos - in a rush!)
Thanks for spreading the word, Simon. I hope that seeing a large number of people prepared to stump up cash to support this campaign will have some influence on government thinking.
(and, yes, I have chipped in).
Tony says no
He also says no to a Science minister
He also says no to climate change
He also says yes to a sky deity.
I think you are forgetting the pricing is so outrageous that it precludes many from getting the faster speeds. I think that is by design to justify that FTTH is not needed. Or it could be simple Australian tradition of excessive price gouging. Pricing directly affects demand, in this case very negatively.
Broadband speeds and pricing in Australia are horrid. I moved here from the USA and was shocked at the cost and shoddy service, slow speeds and low caps per plan. Compare your infrastructure, capacity and pricing to more progressive countries and you see how truly sad things are. I am comparing to the USA which is no star when it comes to broadband. If you compare Australia to South Korea, Hong Kong and Singapore and you will see what is possible without the maleficent corruption present in Australia.
Australia is 20/30 in the survey.
FTTN is good for Telstra, but net will result in little for you with the current pricing. It does however offer incumbents a lucrative flow of tax dollars. Way to go Australia, turning the clock backwards as fast as you can. Look at the profit margins and how the incumbents have so far warped the NBN to their own machinations. It has been a crass rip off, wrapped in a bow for the existing industry. They promised you a pony and are giving you the bit left in the field instead. Expect things to get worse with the current government; they will make you eat said pony by-products, and pay for the privilege.
- Just TWO climate committee MPs contradict IPCC: The two with SCIENCE degrees
- 14 antivirus apps found to have security problems
- Apple winks at parents: C'mon, get your kid a tweaked Macbook Pro
- Feature Scotland's BIG question: Will independence cost me my broadband?
- Driverless car SQUADRONS to hit Britain in 2015