NBN network.

[Pinelli]

When thinking of wireless speeds, biggest thing to remember is that they invariably (Particularly the fed opposition and their ra-ra brigade) talk it up and talk about speeds that are actually PER CELL, not per user. 150M in the labs as a lone user might translate into more like 100M in the field, distributed among maybe 20 or more concurrent users so thy advocate replacing the NBN with an ADSL speed-like service with more performance issues and less competition.

Whether its fibre, adsl or wireless, it all gets aggregated at some bottleneck downstream somewhere. Fibre might be 100MBPs to your door, but how much from your local exchange to the rest of the network? Jamboree Heights exchange in Brisbane probably handles 20,000 premises. I'll bet it won't have a 2TBps connection to the rest of the world.

At the end of the day, it'll be VHS/Beta all over again. Beta was by far the better product technically. Wireless will win because it will actually do what people want at a price they're happy with. Some will take up fibre because they're given 'free' connection, but in reality that's being subsudised by all taxpayers, including the 7% that won't have fibre as an option.

If the government had been real dinki-di about this, they wouldn't have mandated a single solution for 93% of houses - it would have been a mix based on local situations and the market. However that's too complex for them to sell to the public (and to be honest, probably too complex for Conroy to get his head around anyway).

 

[KraftyPg]

The best bit is no matter how good the network is in your house or your street or even your city, when your downloading all your illegal music. movies, porn and software chances are you still don't know if it's coming off a dial up connection in upper east Mongolia.

 

[Pinelli]

Anyone see Malcom Turnbull on tv getting photos taken while sitting in front of the laptop.

Why are we paying some bloke to whinge and complain a network he knows nothing about, !@#$ the people decided they want the fibre network over a wireless network that will be outdated when finished by voting for Labour.

How many people in politics do we need to whinge and complain, all we need is someone to get on with the job.

Dave.

Just catching up on a thread I hadn't come across before - I know this post is a little old, but I can't let it pass.

Turnbull is probably the only federal polly who DOES know what he is talking about in the case of the NBN. He made his money in running one of the largest independent ISPs in Australia before selling it off.

If you read his stuff carefully, what he objects to (quite rightly) is the one size fits all solution Labor is using for the NBN. Not everyone will want fibre, not everyone will use fibre, not everyone will afford fibre, but that's all we get as an option. In order to make it work, they are REDUCING competition in the marketplace. This will lead to higher prices than we would otherwise get in a properly competitive market. The only way prices will be competitive is if they are taxpayer subsidised, which effectively means that non-users (generally lower income people) will be subsidising high speed broadband for wealthier people. I don't mean rich, just those with enough cash to splash around a bit on say suspension lifts, bull bars and camper trailers i include myself in that lot obviously. Plenty of people don't have that cash.


Because the NBN has no position in the wireless broadband market, if wireless takes off, we can kiss our multi-billion dollar public investment goodbye.

A much better position would be a complex mix of fibre and wireless, distributed appropriately to local conditions and local market demand. This is what the Liberals wanted to take to the election - they just didn't do it very well.

One other thing to think about is that Telstra, losing the copper network and local exchanges, no longer has to maintain the huge quantities of battery banks that keep hundreeds exchanges alive during blackouts and natural disasters. The NBN now has to maintain 10million plus batteries in customer premises, so that phones keep working in emergency situations. That is a recent decision, which will add to the cost of the NBN service. So, higher prices, or higher taxpayer subsidies.

Fibre is fantastic. As it has been designed and sold, it's the wrong solution for our country as a whole.

 

[KraftyPg]

Turnbull is probably the only federal polly who DOES know what he is talking about in the case of the NBN. He made his money in running one of the largest independent ISPs in Australia before selling it off.

Over the years I've worked and dealt with a number of ISP's including some of the largest independent ones and in just about every company no matter how big they are the idiot at the helm knows bugger all about the technical aspect and more about the business aspects and to my way of thinking that's the best way for it to be.

I don't know what Turnbull really does and doesn't know but there is no way I'd suggest he knows about ISP's, NBN and broadband just because he steered an expensive ship that had ISP written on the side.

 

[Pinelli]

Whilst I generally agree with what you've said, it still doesn't address a few fundamentals which I have concerns with (keeping in mind that I am a fully licenced electrician and telecommunications cabler, have qualifications in fibre cable testing, and am currently part way through a bachelor of electrical and communcations engineering degree at university - so I have a general idea of what i am talking about, but not quite a fully fledged "expert" yet):
- Necessity - Sure, it would be great to have fibre right up to the ethernet port on the back of my computer, just as it would be great to have my own 4 lane highway that originates at my garage and terminates in front of my carpark at work, but cost versus reward makes it not worthwhile. An exaggeration perhaps, but I think I've made my point.
- Forecasting the future - By proposing an almost completely fibre-oriented solution, the government are basically prescribing the future to us. Had they gone for a more mixed approach, it would broaden the direction of future technology, and in my view, mobility is the future. Fibre is infinitely faster and better than copper, but let's not forget that even fibre has vastly improved and even changed standard gauge since it's introduction 15-20 years ago, so whilst it is here and now and very good, there's nothing to say it won't be replaced by some uber-fast silicon superconductor cable or something in the next 10-20-50 years... then we'll have spent $43b on an obsolete technology; if we shared that sum amongst mixed technology then we would expose ourselves to much less risk of that happening.

You mention that mobile broadband at the moment is slow, inconsistent and expensive. I agree 100%, and is exactly the reason why I think the NBN solution should include re-engineering of the way we transmit mobile data. I know 4G is on the way, which throws up an interesting situation, will people even use the NBN if they can more affordably subscribe to mobile 4G coverage on their mobile devices? - forego some speed for the added convenience, freedom and lower expense?

Another few issues which I have not been able to find answers on:
- Will the NBN solution provide the hardware at the network boundary to convert the light signals to electrical signals for transmission over the copper cabling within the subscriber's building? Or will they just provide every premises with an unterminated fibre core and the resident looks after the rest?
- Even if it does, the transmission over the 20-50 metres of the copper cable in the building is going to strangle the bandwidth of the fibre anyway to a large extent, so although it will still be better than having a hew kms of copper between you and the exchange, it will still only be as fast as it's slowest point.
- The copper cabling in 99.9% of homes/buildings will be cat3 voice grade copper or worse, which is shit/utterly useless for moderate-to-high speed data transmission, subject to high levels of alien crosstalk & EMI, is the NBN going to re-cable everyone's house in CAT6/CAT7 UTP copper (or multi mode fibre, for that matter) as part of the subscription? What's that going to cost the subscriber? Or is that included in the $43b estimate? Or has this dilemma not even been thought of by the government yet?
- What about people who rent? Are they going to pay exorbident connection/re-cabling costs, only to have to move house in 6-12 months? I think not....

I could go on for a long time with these questions/concerns, but at the end of the day, people need to realise that if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. If consumers think they are going to get 10gb/s broadband by 2020 for an even remotely comparable price as they are paying for ADSL now, they are dreaming....

I can answer those questions - first off though - replacing fibre optics with some silicon cable???? Fibre optics is made of glass, which is silicon dioxide Already silicon. Farly compelx silicon though, I might add. If anyone remembers learning about index of refraction at school or tafe, good optical fibre has a variable index of refaction that changes from the centre to the edge.

The NBN will terminate the fibre at your house and provide a Optical Termination Node (OTN), which will convert the fibre to copper. with an RJ45 ethernet socket.
20-50m of copper, if good quality, will not degrade the signal much. Bandwidth will still be high.
The NBN will not pay to upgrade the copper wiring in your house. That will be up to the home owner. Expect to pay between $500 to $3000 to have it done professionaly (and legally). Or throw a wireless access point on the OTN, but don't expect 100MBps.
Renters in high rent homes will be fine - they will expect the NBN to be installed for the money they pay. Think professionals where the company is paying the rent. Middle and lower income renters will be stuffed, or they will pay a premium for NBN connection. No landlord will fork out the money to wire a house if they are unable to raise the rent.

As I mentioned in another post today, power will come from 240V, and also from a battery backup in the OTN, which the NBN will have to test and possibly replace every couple of years to ensure reliability of service. That'll probably contribute to about $5-10/month of the cost of the service at the end of the day.

(If it helps, I do have a degree in telecommunications engineering, have worked for telstra in the past designing the initial optical fibre cable tv rollout for Brisbane, and currently also work at CQU for the Engineering Faculty as a tutor for engineering students, on top of my day job as a Physics teacher)

 

[Pinelli]

Over the years I've worked and dealt with a number of ISP's including some of the largest independent ones and in just about every company no matter how big they are the idiot at the helm knows bugger all about the technical aspect and more about the business aspects and to my way of thinking that's the best way for it to be.

I don't know what Turnbull really does and doesn't know but there is no way I'd suggest he knows about ISP's, NBN and broadband just because he steered an expensive ship that had ISP written on the side.

He wasn't hired to manage it. He built it up from scratch. He knows his stuff.

 

[terryc]

LOL Kraty, you're probably true about management, but your earlier post bout using my broadband for illegal downloads in incorrect.

There are plenty of legit downloads of music, movies, etc. VDO, out of copyright, <can not think of the music place>.

Just received a love letter from Hel$tra today. Now going to be timed and charged in minute blocks rather than 30 second blocks. unfortunately, with our usage pattern, hel$tra is still the cheapest for voice.

Comments about bottle necks are also correct. A lot of my online entertainment regularly stutters from bottlenecks in the USA, so the capitalist USA comms system is not a good roll model.

 

[KraftyPg]

He wasn't hired to manage it. He built it up from scratch. He knows his stuff.

I never said he was hired I said being the top dog doesn't automatically mean he's got the knowledge, no matter how he got there.

LOL Kraty, you're probably true about management, but your earlier post bout using my broadband for illegal downloads in incorrect.

Whoa there neddy back the horsey up a few paces, it was a blanket statement I wasn't blaming you for downloading all the illegal porn (although we know someone has to be so don't be ashamed to admit it if it is you).

 

[Pinelli]

I never said he was hired I said being the top dog doesn't automatically mean he's got the knowledge, no matter how he got there.

Generally speaking you may be right.

In this instance, Turnbull knows his stuff. If you can find quotes where it is obvious he is talking out of his arse about technical matters, I'm open to be corrected.

 

[Dave]

I work in the exchanges everyday.

Guess how the exchanges are connected to each other and the Nodes.

Its not wireless.

Wireless tends to drop out often etc.

Fibre is the better option and hence why I used me vote to get the NBN instead of the talked up wireless.

 

[Pinelli]

I work in the exchanges everyday.

Guess how the exchanges are connected to each other and the Nodes.

Its not wireless.

Wireless tends to drop out often etc.

Fibre is the better option and hence why I used me vote to get the NBN instead of the talked up wireless.

Different purpose to domestic use.

And they're not all connected by fibre. Some do use microwave or radio, although not many.

I agree technically fibre is better, but it doesn't suit every purpose, which is why a one size fits all solution is wrong.

 

[Biscuits]

The issue with NBN is about infrastructure, not service or prices.

It is not the governments job to regulate the market for prices. it is the governments job to provide the ability to provide the service.

Wireless is unreliable as a tradie turning up for a quote, it suffers from geographical and structural conditions. A hard line to my house will be more reliable than a wireless connection to Hel$stra (i like that name). There customer service already sucks and today they announced another 100 call center jobs to go to Phillipines.

I'm with yo Dave. I will vote Labour for as long as i need to to get the NBN done.

Until man discovers something faster then the speed of light i'm sticking with fibre optics, the only part that will need upgrading will be the bit at each end turning 10110001 into flashes.

 

[WIR35]

There's no question that fibre is faster and greater bandwidth then any other option we currently have available.

My point is that we are becoming a mobile society. The current crop of people my age and younger (and a lot of people older) use the internet more away from home than they do when they're at home. My HTC gets more use than my work laptop, my work PC and my home laptop put together. I use it for all of my work emails, GPS navigation, web browsing while on site, viewing/saving files to the server as well as facebook & web browsing for personal stuff out and about. The only thing I don't use it for is file downloads. My situation is typical for most people around my age and younger, and I would assume for the future young people of Australia.

Like I said, I will be getting both NBN and 4G services but there will be a very large number of people who won't be able to afford both and I bet my balls that when they are faced with the choice, they will choose 4G mobile in droves, over the NBN. I have gradually warmed to the NBN, but I still don't think it's the silver bullet solution and I very strongly agree with those who have said there should be a multi-faceted approach. It's not too late to tweak a few things.

 

[Biscuits]

I think we are confusing a Mobile phone service with Broadband service. 4G however fast it turns out to be will still only be a mobile phone service for mobile devices. The NBN is meant to be a wholistic home broadband service, that will eventually, be. Phone, IPTV, Internet, plus whatever else they can think to invent.

4G is for mobile phones and portable devices. I don't see how we can judge a service that is not even widley available on affordability. When ADSL was being release it was expensive and they didn't scrap it because 3G was invented. The 2 technologies can exist side by side. And as time went on and more providers entered the market, prices fell. as will NBN.

Once the FTTH service is a common place item, the prices will come down, I don't see 4G as standalone internet being any cheaper than NBN. I know which data limit i would rather be on. I will take the 50-100 gig packages on the NBN over a 2 gig limit on 4G anyday.

 

[Pinelli]

Until man discovers something faster then the speed of light i'm sticking with fibre optics, the only part that will need upgrading will be the bit at each end turning 10110001 into flashes.

Actually, the speed of light in fibre optics is only 2/3 that of radio waves in air or a vacuum (it's all light, or EM radiation rather, along with microwaves, X-Rays UV, IR etc), however that's only part of the story when it comes to bandwidth.

You're going to have a hell of a time dragging your phone and laptop around jobs with you, if you're trailing fibre back to the office...

 

[Biscuits]

Lucky for me i don't live in a vacum. I understand how it all works as i am trained in Radar, Sonar, HF, UHF and many other means of transmitting. I still believe it will be a long time before fibre is out dated so the money spent will be worth it.

Wireless has a long way to come before i will be impressed with its capability. As i don't live in a major center and will not benefit froms its use, i believe the NBN is on the right track as it gives us 'choice'. you either choose to use it or not, if not that is fine but when you sell your house and move the next owner may want that choice.

 

[Pinelli]

No one has said wireless is technically better than fibre. The speed of light comment was meant to be taken lightly. but obviously you can see the benefits in 'wireless' communication in the right circumstances, given your training. Otherwise we'd be slinging fibre between our fourbys to work our UHF radios, hey?

But the government is shutting down the copper network, including ADSL, and is making it hard for other technologies to compete, therefore people have less choice. Choosing to use it or not is not as good a choice as fibre or ADSL or wireless or whatever suits your purposes and budget best. And less choice or competition will mean more expensive connections or bigger taxpayer subsidies. A different model would see money spent later (which is money saved) for the same utility.

It may not affect you, but there will be people who would have been happy on a $20 a month ADSL package, who will not be able to afford wireless or fibre. And you (as a taxpayer) will still be paying to have fibre run into their house so they can have a landline if they want, for which the current copper cable already works well.

If the government decided to run the national car fleet in the same way, we'd all have the choice of a Prius or no car at all. Some choice.

 

[the_bluester]

The probelm is that the "Speed of light" stuff is getting trotted out regularly and unerringly derails the debate on what really matters into debate about rubbish, who cares what large fraction of the speed of light the signal propagates down SMOF cable at, what matters is that it does not stop working in the rain and it does not go slower when your neighbor signs up too (Unless of course there is insufficient backhaul, which wireless is just as dependant on)

The simple fact of the matter is that fibre is transmitting vastly greater volumes of data at a slightly slower point to point speed than the speed of light. Arguing about the handful of microseconds difference from the speed of light in a vacuum for the signal to get back to whatever aggregation point is its first stop on the way to wherever it is going is just silly..

 

[terryc]

Horse for courses guys and gals.
We need both. The wireless access points(whatever they are) will not work and be able to carry sufficient data unless they have something better like fibre behind it all.

NBN is really about providing electronic roadways and then various (W/I/?)SPs will provide your actual services.

Biscuits. I disagee with your dichotomy of voice and data. Voice traffic has been digital(data) in the truns for decades. The only real difference these days is what the devices at each end do with it; auditory or visual.

As far as I'm concerned, they are all rorting us for whatever they can get.

As to the expense, I just view the NBN in the same light as the Sydney Harbour Bridge, the Snowy mountains scheme, the transcontinental highway and railway, etc. What pisses me of is that they want to sell it off at the end and we will have the Telstra monopoly all over again.

 

[the_bluester]

Regardless of selling it off, at least if they are legally prevented form selling retail services we would no longer have the situation where the network owner who sells services wholesale to other providers is also directly competing with it's own wholesale customers in the retail market.