Feeds

back to article Microsoft Australia calls fibre-to-the-premises 'best outcome' for NBN

Microsoft's Australian managing director Pip Marlow has reportedly told an event staged by the Committee for Economic Development of Australia that the nation's new government should not proceed with its policy of a fibre-to-the-node National Broadband Network (NBN). Newswire AAP reports that Marlow argued for the retention of a …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Thumb Up

So if MicroSoft wishes Australia to have fibre to the premises broadband then all they have to do is install it and offer it to everyone at a competitive price. MS is after-all the most important IT company in the world so it should be a mere rounding error to them. I hope Mr. Abbott takes them up on their kind offer and saves the long suffering Aussie taxpayer a very large fortune.

2
5
Silver badge

And then they can hand it all to the NSA since they're an American company......

0
1
Facepalm

Save me from kitchen table budget thinking.

If I said to you,

I will let you borrow $1million dollars, at an interest rate that costs 50,000 dollars a year. You can then invest it in a project that will net you (over the life of the loan) $100,000 a year.

what would you do? I say, you take the free money :)

When a government invests in infrastructure they are investing in greater productivity which means every working person has a greater economic output. They are then worth more money, and companies can pay them more. They are then taxed on the income and the business are taxed on their increased profits.

The digital revolution (which we are currently in) has created such a deflationary impact the Reserve bank is fighting to keep inflation higher than what is naturally occuring, because productivity gains in the last 10 years have been massive.

What the hell do you think will happen when we increase broadband infrastructure in a way that it increases the access speeds, capabilities and service delivery capabilities of companies? MORE TAXES, less spending for gvmt and greater business productivity. IT IS AN END RUN!

THIS IS A SIMPLE EQUATION for anyone who has ever had to make an investment decision. up front cost now, much more monies later.

Having said all that. Labor have not been perfect administrators, they have certainly been over-optimistic but that is because this kind of productivity push is a win/win regardless of whether there are cost overruns because they will recoup it in taxes.

Please. Shut. Up.

Fibre will provide better productivity gains for not much more cost but more time... Mal knows this.. he is just struggling to make the politics work.

FFS. </end rant>

2
2
Anonymous Coward

*All they have to do* is build a national broadband network across the sparse, widely dispersed population of Australia. Right.

You're either trying to be funny or a fool.

1
4
Bronze badge
FAIL

Almost all of Australia's population is NOT widely dispersed, it is crammed into small areas (we call these areas "cities").

4
1
Silver badge

"*All they have to do* is build a national broadband network across the sparse, widely dispersed population of Australia. Right.

You're either trying to be funny or a fool."

Well they did it before with the copper network. Can't they replace the copper network with fibre? Have we forgotten how to dig holes?

Everybody would be happy if the aged and broken copper network was replaced. Why haven't they put fibre in while replacing broken copper?

0
0
Silver badge

"Well they did it before with the copper network"

Ask those out in the sticks how well that's worked out for them.

You know, the ones with their phone lines draped over their front fences.

0
0

I'd prefer Google

If anyone was to build a FTTP network in Australia, I would prefer it was Google.

If the US costings and pricing for Google Fibre can be realised in Australia with even a 50% mark up in costs and quotas it would be significantly cheaper than Labor's NBN.

0
0

Re: Save me from kitchen table budget thinking.

> What the hell do you think will happen when we increase broadband infrastructure in a way that it increases the access speeds, capabilities and service delivery capabilities of companies?

The problem is Labor's NBN wasn't going to deliver super fast broadband to many people. In the NBNCo Corporate Plan (2013) draft is this statement:

"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 government could succeed in building a FTTP network where 50% of connections are slower than HFC, FTTN, 4G and approaching half of ADSL2+ connections.

> MORE TAXES, less spending for gvmt and greater business productivity. IT IS AN END RUN!

Most services on the internet are provided from overseas, which means much of that revenue would flow straight offshore and never be taxed a cent.

> THIS IS A SIMPLE EQUATION for anyone who has ever had to make an investment decision. up front cost now, much more monies later.

FTTN with fibre on demand is the up front cost now model. Labor's FTTP plan was the borrow heavily now and hope that ARPU can rise steeply enough to enable the interest and payment to be paid back.

The problem is that the evidence shows that demand simply isn't there for super fast broadband (100Mbps+) to justify rolling it out to to all premises at the current cost structures. Labor's artificial pricing model and borrowings meant that people would have been paying significantly more for 1Gbps than the cost of installing direct fibre.

1
1
Silver badge

"Ask those out in the sticks how well that's worked out for them."

I AM out the sticks. If I could get fibre draped over my fence, I'd be better off.

In fact, in some places, they run it on the power poles. Yes please. I'll have some power pole fibre please.

1
0
Bronze badge
Facepalm

Re: Save me from kitchen table budget thinking.

Face. Palm.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Save me from kitchen table budget thinking.

> Only a truly incompetent government could succeed in building a FTTP network where 50% of connections are slower than HFC, FTTN, 4G and approaching half of ADSL2+ connections.

Of course, these speeds you quote seem to be a *choice* made by the customer. At least with FTTP they have the option of going to speeds that HFC, FTTN, 4G cannot even dream of achieving.

> The problem is that the evidence shows that demand simply isn't there for super fast broadband (100Mbps+) to justify rolling it out to to all premises at the current cost structures. Labor's artificial pricing model and borrowings meant that people would have been paying significantly more for 1Gbps than the cost of installing direct fibre.

It only takes one event and the demand for super fast broadband will be there, like say the Japanese Olympics being broadcast in 8K. It would be nice to at least have the *option* of getting a golden screwdriver upgrade to a broadband connection that has a hope of sustaining the bit rates 8K video will require.

1
1

Re: Save me from kitchen table budget thinking.

See you misrepresented the numbers entirely.

1) 50% have chosen to only Pay for connection that are slower then HFC, the cable provides the 100/40 but they CHOSE the slower speed as estimated in the business plan for the FTTP. (the take up rates of the higher speeds was actually higher then projected.

2) half the "Premise passed" and connection made are out in the sticks, where the wireless\statelite services were provided to the worst of first which had a stated speed of 12/1 for the wireless side. so the guys that couldnt get faster then dial up are the first to get an upgrade to 12/1 while they lay the fibre elsewhere.

only a truely clueless person can arrive at the conclusions you have. the test sites and first build sites have mainly been where people havent had access to adsl so they want see the benefits until they start using the lowest teir speed. of course the take up rates are slow, Look at the stats for the ACT, the back log to connect the premises pass has doubled even the most optimistic projections.

the problem is that no one understands what the investment means how bad the cables are and that the current rate of government expenditure on the whole project 2-4billion a year out of 375billion revenue, is nothing to spend investing on something thats going to make your money back on anyway.

FTTN has a lower up front cost by 10billion, yay for the coalition, they ongoing costs will wipe that out, and it will cost at least that again to replace the last mile of copper anyway, completely voiding the savings and making it more expensive. in the mean time we deal with corroding cables taped in plastic bags to terminate the last mile of a super fast fibre based network. and get a maximum upgrade of 24mbps (adls who actually gets that speed?) to 50mbps (VDSL1 read the spec) for those right next door to the node.

FTTN takes our current exchange telephone network, breaks it into smaller exchanges and moves them closer to the end user, it does not solve anything, it doesnt future proof, the nation and it doesnt provide an upgrade path (replacing the node, instead of the optics, isnt cost effect).

0
0

Re: Save me from kitchen table budget thinking.

In April 2013, 47% of people chose to pay for slower speeds. It is likely that this number will increase as a reasonable person would expect people wanting 100Mbps to be the first to connect. The sites connected are predominately new estates which tend to include a larger proportion of families with kids. One would expect a higher demand for internet in these areas.

NBNCo's prediction is that only a few of the 12Mbps customers would upgrade to faster speeds. One reason for this is that it is difficult to try the revolutionary services that the NBN could provide if your connectoin doesn't support the speed.

FTTN brings sufficient speed based on Labor's own predictions for ~50% of the population for the next 15 years. It is reasonable to argue that those who want faster speeds should pay for the priviledge. Of course the amusing fact is when you compare ~$300 for direct fibre with $150/month in AVC for 1Gbps it doesn't sound that expensive.

0
0
Bronze badge
Devil

"industry's position is a little self-serving"

Read that as extremely self-serving.

1
0
Bronze badge

Regardless of whether Microsoft gain any traction with Turnbull, explaining their view to the rest of the government is going to be a sisyphean task ... since it involves both technology and economics ...

2
1
Bronze badge

Of course they want it

They think less people will complain about their bloatware patches and "service packs" if theyre capable of sucking them down in seconds, instead of hours.

0
0
Bronze badge
Meh

Re: Of course MS want it

you forgot their OS has a noisy use of networking. They _need_ FTTP so not too many users notice how slow their multicore, GigaRAM computers are. The raspberrians will however be gloating. The irony is most of us agree we need that affordable fat pipe.

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Of course MS want it

I need that fat pipe. So many cat videos, so little time........

1
0
Bronze badge
Headmaster

Re: Of course they want it

less ≠ fewer

0
0
Bronze badge

Time for a win-win deal?

(1) The government wants Microsoft to stop ripping off Australia with price mark-ups on downloadable products.

(2) Microsoft wants the government to implement FTTH.

Here's a crazy idea: how about they agree to give each other what they want? It would boost business and revenue for everyone.

0
0
Silver badge
FAIL

This has nothing to do with what's best

The LNP are ideologically driven purveyors of self-interest.

There is no big picture with these guys.

1
2
Big Brother

You what!

>NBN need only deliver entertainment services

Yea, right the Tony Abort fiber solution will never be able to deliver anything at any speed so forget about any level of quality live HD movies sport etc, because that is exactly what Rupert Murdoch wants, no competition for cable TV.

2
0

What year was that again?

Microsoft is right - FTTP is the best end solution. Problem is that MS has yet again missed the point of the exercise - speeding up the damned rollout.

We're talking about a 10-20 year improvement (and that's being optimistic about Labor's turn and pessimistic about the coalition) in rollout time by going with the FTTN. Is it worth waiting 20 years to get fibre? I don't think it is.

1
1

Re: What year was that again?

You've taken 12-18 months difference in the published schedules and turned it into 10-20 years!

Citation please?

Here's a hint, if you're going to engage in the dissemination of FUD make it slightly believable. Between you and Mathew42 it's lovely to see the coalition has their unquestioning servants working overtime even after the election.

0
1

Samsung B2710

Hi Tim Bates

Unrelated Question:

I have been trying hard to use by Samsung B2710 as a hotspot with my laptop. To no avail..

On 5 May 2011 you said you use your "Samsung B2710 connected by USB to my laptop when I need internet access out and about."

Any tips on how I can do this?

Samsung said to use their "Network Connection" software -but this does not seem to lik with the phone.

Samsung Kies does, but that seems to have not internet connection facility..

Any help appreciated!

I've been trying to figure out how to contact you..

Regards,

Nathan

Australia

[email address removed by moderator]

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.