A Petition Pertaining to NBN in Australia - Lets get FTTH

Discussion in 'Networking, Telephony & Internet' started by Schnooper, Sep 11, 2013.

  1. Apokalipse

    Apokalipse Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2006
    Messages:
    4,250
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Yeah, "up to 100mbps" (actually more like "up to 80"), but more likely not even 25mbps, unless they build about three times the number of nodes.
     
  2. itsmydamnation

    itsmydamnation Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2003
    Messages:
    10,402
    Location:
    Canberra
    he can bang on all he wants, just because he bands on about it doesn't mean shit. G fast is designed for ~100 meter runs :rolleyes: . Vectoring only helps cross talk, If cross talk is your big problem then you are already fucked.

    There is Turnbull then there is reality.
     
  3. Exige

    Exige (Banned or Deleted)

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2012
    Messages:
    515
    Seems the only way he is going to manage 90% is to build more exchanges.

    Oh wait, he meant 90% of the LIBERAL electorates.
     
  4. caspian

    caspian Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,364
    Location:
    Melbourne
    what's going to happen is going to happen regardless of what the geek community thinks. business at that level doesn't get decided on the basis of the extremities of the bell curve.

    continue arguing how may electrons will fit on the head of an angel dancing on a pinhead if you like, but you know how much difference it will make?








    that much.
     
  5. Exige

    Exige (Banned or Deleted)

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2012
    Messages:
    515
    http://www.abc.net.au/technology/articles/2013/09/19/3851924.htm

    I know that the Liberal apologists and FTTN nay-sayers will just write off this article without critically reading it (I challenge them to read it before mouthing off !), but the quotes in the article are quite telling. This is information that is in the public domain, anybody can go looking for it and verify it.

    Telstra themselves have stated that the copper network is not 'fine', it's not going to suitable for another 20 years, and the mere fact that the cotractors union is advising it's contractors against guaranteeing their work for 14 days, FOURTEEN DAYS is a very, very worrying sign.

    If you purchased a service or a product from a shop for $50 that the retailer states will last 'another 100 hundred years' ()and it lasted for less than 14 days you would outraged. And before I listen to people bemoaning that it was a despicable union that is advising this, just think for a minute what their primary function is. It is to PROTECT THEIR MEMBERS. They aren't handing out this advice to be political, hell this is the first time I've even seen any mention of the statement outside of their website. They are telling contractors not to put a guarantee on their work for such a ludicrously short time because the repairs they are expected to make are completely inadequate.

    At this point, it should also be noted that the 14 day figure comes from Telstra itself. They EXPECT a repair to only last 14 days. After 14 days, it's all icing on the cake ! What a complete joke.

    In all deference to your experience in the field of DSL communications Caspian, I've not yet seen you say you've gone done into Telstra pits and expected them for yourself. You cannot categorically say that the copper network is fine, and I'd reasonably expect you to have a lot of stories where you had to sit on your hands and wait for Telstra to repair something on their network . I'd be curious actually if you would care to give a rough estimate in percentages of where faults lie when you've been involved. I wonder if it's less or greater than 50% where your equipment is configured and working, but the line between devices has faulted.

    We also have the fact that Caspian himself is telling us that distance is not the limiting factor in ADSL connections, it's quality of the copper line that causes attenuation and leads to a lowering of speed. You don't have to look any further that OCAU and people's (admittedly not scientific, but somewhat indicative) Speedtest results to show that some people have very poor copper lines, and experience dropouts when ever the pits fill up with water. You have posters on this forum talk about proper management of home based copper networking, insisting on properly sealed conduit and minimum trench depths to protect lengths of copper routinely under 30 metres. But Telstra is allowed to have HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of kilometres of copper lines that terminate with no more protection that of a common plastic bag, or worse, something like this :[​IMG]

    Again using an inaccurate method of measurement, I'm at least 2.5kms from the exchange, more likely about 3.5kms. My sync speeds fluctuate between 5700 and 6100 as reported by my modem (I don't understand why it would change, I'm just reporting numbers that I'm reading from the modem). I doubt very much that this house will have the guaranteed 25mbs that Mr Turnbull has promised by 2019. I also like the fact that the proviso is there that if you don't vote the Coalition in for a second term, they can wipe their hands clean of that little promise.

    But in the end, what is a political promise worth anyway ? How many times have we been promised things by both sides of politics only to be told after the fact that it was either a) never viable and shouldn't have been promised, or b) claimed that if the other side of politics hadn't worked against it we might have had it. Are we foolish to keep thinking that any politicians promise is worth a tinkers damn, and how do we change this ?
     
    Last edited: Sep 23, 2013
  6. chip

    chip Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    3,696
    Location:
    Pooraka Maccas drivethrough
    http://www.businessspectator.com.au...rmation-technology/nbn-board-has-run-away-why
    Alan Kohler makes the argument that by allowing competion, the coalition's NBN plan undermines the previous NBN's model of profitable urban areas subsidising less profitable rural/remote areas. Mind you, rural Australians are so used to getting the shitty end of stick they probably won't notice by now.

    Also, Ziggy Switkowski? They can't be serious. Next we'll hear that Sol Trujillo will be joining the project.

    The coalition's NBN plan allowed for $90/year per connection in maintenance (about 720 million a year all up). Are there any mainteance costs for the FTTP NBN around?
     
  7. ThankDog

    ThankDog (Banned or Deleted)

    Joined:
    May 22, 2013
    Messages:
    3,875
    Location:
    Ballarat aka Boganville
    What does it mean when that Turnbull is the shareholder of the NBN now?
     
  8. Zzapped

    Zzapped Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2001
    Messages:
    12,350
    Location:
    Madora Bay
    Count yourself lucky mate, I live in Perth and we dont even get stickers any more for our administrative fees :shock:
     
  9. chip

    chip Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    3,696
    Location:
    Pooraka Maccas drivethrough
    He's the Minister, the Govt owns NBNco.
     
  10. flinchy

    flinchy Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Messages:
    6,356
    Location:
    Northlakes
    iahh i don't live in caloundra any more, north lakes personally.. i actually had a REALLY good connection in bellvista!

    business is in Virginia.


    I'm sorry, but can you explain why you're so anti good-NBN, when at least one is DEFINITELY going to be installed.. and the current likely option is going to cost more long term...

    i'm not saying i'm entitled to it, and it should be done because my one specific case has benefits.. i'm giving my experience/needs as a SINGLE VERY COMMON EXAMPLE

    i really don't know how you're all getting so confused over such a simple concept.

    what i'm really getting from you, is that no one should get connected even to the FTTN, and it's a total waste of money... what are you doing in this thread?
     
    Last edited: Sep 23, 2013
  11. flinchy

    flinchy Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Messages:
    6,356
    Location:
    Northlakes

    you claim to be an expert, then in the next breath you make the laughable statement that fiber optics will be obsoleted any time within the next few decades? rofl.

    you should have purchased the best one you can afford for your use (likely the 4k one, as the 3d one is really a dead end gimmick tech), assuming, among many complex decision making conditions, you actually use the television enough to benefit form the extra expense.. assuming the 4k one is more expensive..
     
  12. Apokalipse

    Apokalipse Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2006
    Messages:
    4,250
    Location:
    Melbourne
    You seriously underestimate how much this helps businesses.

    You might as well be arguing we don't need more than 640KB of memory.
     
  13. ir0nhide

    ir0nhide Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Messages:
    4,239
    Location:
    Adelaide
    I'm not anti-NBN, and if you took the time you'd see I'm very pro-FTTP.

    If you took the time to let my post penetrate your brain, you'd see that I was attempting to shine a light on your death spiral of self deception in the hope that you would acknowledge that yes, stuff is more expensive and you might as well spend some time restructuring your business to accommodate that.

    This is a complete waste of time, added to my (small) ignore list.
     
  14. ir0nhide

    ir0nhide Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Messages:
    4,239
    Location:
    Adelaide
    I think Capsian is alluding to the fact that while there may be strong arguments for FTTP, there are two things stopping it happening: a mandate (real or not) from the general population to the Liberal party that includes FTTH and a lack of perceived value in FTTP from businesses as a whole. If Australians and businesses really cared that much, we would be hearing about it.
     
  15. Apokalipse

    Apokalipse Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2006
    Messages:
    4,250
    Location:
    Melbourne
    A lot of businesses do care about it. You don't hear about it, because the Murdoch media actively opposes it.
     
  16. Maldark

    Maldark Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2004
    Messages:
    591
    Location:
    Newcastle, NSW
    How does nobody get this, YOU (the tax payer) are not paying for FTTH, not 1c, it's not coming out of other money that could be used for hospitals or housing the poor or anything else, it came from LOANS. The company, and the money it produces from the network will pay off the interest and eventually the loan, costing you nothing. How do proponents of FTTN miss this?! The coalition plan won't be faster, isn't much cheaper and will likely not make a return on investment (due to canabalised profits from competing networks and the lack of high speed plans that rake in most of the money) and due to this won't be able to pay back the loans. In this situation, we WILL have to pay, us, the tax payer, billions of dollars.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2013
  17. flu!d

    flu!d KDE Neon 5.16

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    13,581
    Well it's gotta be done at some stage, what are we supposed to do - Sit on our hands until our aging network degrades to the point that we may as well be using two cans and a piece of string?

    Good economic management isn't necessarily about not spending money and it's defiantly got nothing to do with a surplus.
     
  18. Maldark

    Maldark Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2004
    Messages:
    591
    Location:
    Newcastle, NSW
    I'm confused, I'm for the NBN, for FTTH against FTTN. Tech argument aside, I was just saying the FTTH network will pay for itself and not cost any taxpayer money, whereas the FTTN likely will. Because the arguments thrown around in this thread seem to be all about cost, I'm saying they're all irrelevant.

    I want the FTTH done now, it should have been done years ago, and it should be built outside in.

    As a graduate in Photonics and Physics and a life long scientist, I'm sick of seeing bureaucratic smokescreens get in the way of good science and good economics (simple math). They lie, cheat and steal to force their lame opinions on the populace instead of asking the experts and trusting them to know more than what they do, because trust me, we fucking do.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2013
  19. caspian

    caspian Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,364
    Location:
    Melbourne
    and he's the primary representative of the government in that respect, and thus what he says, goes.


    yeah, that's what I thought you'd say.

    I should spend $16k on a device for which there is no current use (because there's no 4K media out there) and nor is there likely to be for some time yet. by the time there is, the hardware will be obsolete and need to be upgraded, so I'm stuck with a very expensive asset that's not yet depreciated enough for me to be able to afford to discard it, and at the same time I still don't have the latest technology - just so I can say I have it.

    in the meantime, I paid a little over $3k for a nice 3D HD TV for which there is shitloads of media available, including blurays on sale for less than $10, and if you think 3D is a gimmick, you obviously don't have much experience with it because it's damn good.

    so, to summarise -

    there's no point spending a whole bunch of money on something just to be able to say you've got it, even if you don't really have a use for it. you're far better off spending less money on something that you can use now, and upgrading later when required. you know, like the entire world works?

    rather like the NBN, really.


    here's another question for you to have another go and see if you're getting the point.

    I need a new NAS drive for storing streaming media because my old one is just about exhausted. should I:

    (a) buy a Synology or Drobo 5-bay, fill it with 3TB disks in RAID5, get about 13TB @ 80% efficiency, cost about $1800, and be comfortable in the knowledge that at my estimated rate of consumption I'm good for about 6 years.

    (b) go mad and buy an 8-bay chassis and all 4TB disks, gives me about 29TB formatted. at estimated rates of consumption, that means I am solid until about 2025, but it will cost me more like $6500.

    here's some factors to take into account when making your recommendation:

    - estimated rate of consumption is based on previous, current and projected use with realistic allowance for growth.
    - no, I don't have a crystal ball regarding what might happen in the future. but looking at emergent technologies that aren't even usable now (ooh, like 4K) at absolute worst my consumption rate goes up about three times, which means I can only store 2600 pieces of media. oh woe is me, that's about triple my current collection, assuming every single piece is worst-case sized, and I never discard anything.
    - I can upgrade the cheaper solution with larger discs if needed. the more expensive one is already maxed out.
    - I have absolutely no need for the larger solution. my ego is not defined by showing off to others.
    - by the time the small solution is exhausted, both solutions would be obsolete, out of warranty, and no doubt superseded by something better. I'll be in a much better position to write off the cheaper solution *that I actually used* for a newer technology, than the larger one *I basically haven't* because I can't afford to.
    - my decision isn't governed by the fact that someone else up the block has something better (and to give you an idea, I have a 4PB SAN at work), or that some people are still using floppies. it's governed by what I need and want to pay for.

    let's see how you go with this one. for bonus points, say why and how you arrived at the decision.

    despite the convenient fact that the situation I pose is quite genuine, you may note a certain deliberate similarity with the topic under discussion. so, in essence, you've really got a choice of seeing the point or continuing to display your ignorance of it.


    and by the way, yes I'm an industry professional, far more than you know.


    I'm more than willing to be convinced to change my point of view by a valid argument. flinchy just hasn't managed it yet, and I can't see it happening soon.

    as I posted before, I am very much in favour of FTTP as a concept. it's just that the cost and more importantly delivery time are real problems in delivery of it - I have a fairly good view of the challenges of recabling the entire country, and it's not something lightly done.



    what should not have happened was that we should have never permitted the sale of the national telecommunications infrastructure provider into private ownership. publicly owned Telstra might not have been the most cool and hip bleeding-edge organisation, but at least they were driven by government appreciation of consumer need, and not just what turned them a buck.

    if that had not happened, chances are we would not need the NBN at all, because a publicly owned Telstra would already be it. all we are doing is reinventing the wheel we already had and discarded.

    I agree completely about outside-in. the priority should be:

    - greenfields areas with no infrastructure at all
    - brownfields areas with no broadband access
    - brownfields areas with poor performance
    - brownfields areas with no competitive access
    - brownfields areas with competitive access/respectable performance

    the precise order of these could be argued, for instance 3 and 4. personally though I think that if you're stuck on a congested Telstra cabinet, albeit with a choice of ISP, you need an upgrade worse than someone who is stranded on 100Mbps Bigpond cable only.

    as an industry professional with a fair depth of experience with all the technologies concerned, I think I understand the challenges and costs involved.

    as a confirmed computer geek myself, I want fast, ubiquitous access as much as anyone.

    as the holder of an economics degree, I understand the market and business forces involved.

    as a fairly jaundiced and skeptical voter, I think all politicians would sell their mother to win a vote. I agree that they frequently either don't bother to ask an expert opinion, or if they do, ignore it - but that's because politics isn't about facts, it's about what you can convince people they are. those are two very different things, and my own experiences bear out that while Joe Average Voter might have an opinion on many topics, it's frequently based on very incomplete information fed to them by politicians and the media, who are as biased as anyone else out there.



    and after all that, you know what?

    I'd still rather have an NBN that was available pretty much everywhere sooner, rather than eventually, sometime - because most of the complaints I see are about lack of access and performance caused by distance. the "interim" LNP NBN addresses both of those concerns.

    bleeding edge performance for a relative few now, with the rest to come over 10 years, doesn't really cut it.

    yes, that means the NBN will be an evolutionary thing delivered in incremental stages. yes, it means it will cost more overall. but it will benefit more people sooner, to the degree that we actually need now, and that's what wins for me.

    ol' flinchy will be along shortly to tell me I'm wrong for not going bleeding edge right up, and that's cool, because he doesn't understand the economics of a television worth a few grand. I don't expect him to grasp the idea of a national infrastructure project worth multiple tens of billions of dollars.
     
  20. chip

    chip Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    3,696
    Location:
    Pooraka Maccas drivethrough
    Well this analogy might hold some water if the coalition's NBN plan was touted as costing 1/5th the previous government's plan to build. Instead, they've estimated it'll cost ~2/3rds as much to build, and that's assuming they get Telstra's network for free. If Telstra stick to their previous asking price, it'll be 7/8ths the cost.

    A 3D 1080 TV for 87% the cost of a 4K TV doesn't sound like such a good analogy now, does it?

    It's been pointed out multiple times that the coalition's FTTN plan will cost almost as much as the last govt's FTTP plan, but you keep ignoring this. Spending almost as much to get a minor speed bump a year or two sooner is not a compelling argument for me.

    Edit: also, infrastructure becomes more expensive to build over time, not cheaper to buy like consumer electronics. Building a network with a longer userful life and lower operatings costs will save money over time.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2013

Share This Page

Advertisement: