Posts by mathew42 719 publicly visible posts • joined 29 Sep 2011
> Most ADSL connections would be luck to get anywhere near the sustained network speeds of 12Mbps.
Actually the only known reliable data from iiNet / Internode published in 2008 showed that for Sydney almost 50% of connections achieved 12Mbps. At the time it was used as evidence to explain that Labor's FTTN plan would deliver little benefit to half of the country. Sadly, Labor's FTTP plan predicted that 50% on fibre would connect at 12Mbps.
> You also forgot the 19% on the 100/40 that pays more than those combined.
I'm curious as to how you arrive at this. Assuming 100 customers The AVC charges are as follows:
12Mbps = $24 * 38% = $912
25Mbps = $27 * 38% = $1026
100Mbps = $38 * 24% = $912 (best case as there will be some 50Mbps customers)
> Now Telstra wanted to charge $35 to keep the copper running.
Telstra's ambit claims for the costs of running the copper network are considered by most to be inflated and the ACCC regularly determines a lower cost.
The NBN pricing model is a compromise between charging based on speed and data. I would argue that it is speed that will deliver the benefits not higher quotas with slower speeds.
NBNCo require steep rises in ARPU to meet the desired ROI. If iiNet want to see cheaper CVC then AVC will need to rise, suppressing the take-up of higher speeds. Extrapolating from the NBNCo Corporate Plan, the price of CVC is forecast to fall by 2.5 times, while the average data usage grows by 18 times = growth in revenue from CVC of 720% when accounting for price falls.
As of February 26th, 38% on fibre have connected at 12Mbps while a further 38% have connected at 25Mbps. Hardly a justification for FTTP.
Going back a few years, a co-worker purchased a house and was intrigued as to how the garage was connected to power. Turned out the previous owner had run an extension cord from the house through the gutter. Not particularly bright, but using two extension cords and joining them in the gutter is another level of stupidity again.
I feel very sorry for those in IT support who have been hassled by CEOs because webapps are down.
It would be interesting to know if the revenue includes deductions for penalties paid by Microsoft to clients for failing to meet the SLA.
Is anyone tracking the availability of the various cloud environments?
Sorry, but this just plain stupid. Having said that I'm still not keen on WPS.
Friends of my kid's school friends having automatic access to my home network? WTF! After several discussions about not installing random games from the PlayStore that want access to everything, the kids have some concept of information security that was reinforced by 'Do that again and you won't be using that tablet!'
MAC filtering by default is just painful especially with family visiting. Looks like it might be time to look at DD-WRT and sin bin all Microsoft OSes into a guest network.
Sadly, the reality is that most Australians don't care.
38% of fibre connections on the NBN are 12Mbps and a further 38% are 25Mbps.
The speed take-up profile is arguably the most accurate estimate that Labor made in the NBNCo Corporate Plans.
Australians who need fast speeds (> 25Mbps) are in a minority and have 2 options:
1. Move to FTTP area now or HFC in the near future
2. Request FoD when it becomes available
When you consider the cost of FoD it is likely to be less than the moving costs.
It is very clear from the NBNCo Corporate Plan that beyond 'FTTP will save Labor from Telstra not co-operating', they had very little clue. As you have correctly suggested HFC is perfectly suitable for the majority. In fact if you use Labor's predictions (close to 50% on 12Mbps in 2026) and current fibre connection data (38% on 12Mbps with a further 38% at 25Mbps) FTTN is also adequate.
Further evidence that Labor didn't have a clue comes from the fact that the first NBNCo Corporate Plan listed speed requirements (mostly above 100Mbps for optimal performance, yet they signed off on a plan where very few would see those speeds.
Low volume traffic in rural areas? That requires an expensive build out with a long distance between the base station and device.
We already have mobile phone networks which cover large parts of the country and SMS for sending small pieces of data. If a telco can come up with a plan which enables many devices that support SMS only or a low quota data plan, then I could see that being much quicker to deploy and more viable.
While I can see the fun in playing chicken with a google car I suspect google would have very good documentary evidence of your behaviour.
In local town, the school bus drivers had a simple arrangement with the local police. If a car was seen driving carelessly around the bus, the local constabulary would pay a visit to the driver and scrutinise the car for defects. For most kids their first car was barely roadworthy so finding defects was trivial.
> My mother is lucky to have FTTP she is on 12/1 which is all she needs.
12Mbps can be easily delivered by HFC, FTTN, 4G and half of ADSL2+ connections. Based on this FTTP is delivering zero benefit. If the speed cap didn't exist then the possibility exists for your mother to explore services that only faster speeds can deliver, but for now they remain unobtainable.
> You would be happy to fork out that extra money to get the speeds like your neighbour can that a $41B network couldn't deliver. Would you say that's $41B dollars well spent.
I see little advantage to Australia in building a network where currently on fibre 38% are connected at 12Mbps, a further 38% are connected at 25Mbps and Labor predicted that in 2028 close to 50% on fibre would be connected at 12Mbps.
> or are you saying that by removing speed tiers - and assuming capitalism doesn't let me down here - forcing 12Mbit users to pay more for an upto 25Mbit service, or worse pay the same as a 100Mbit user if you remove all tiers
What I'm suggesting is a rebalancing of the charging model from a focus on connection fees (AVC) to data charges (CVC). If connection fees are low, then more people will connect. Once people are connected then they can experience the benefits of broadband and will download more simply because it is possible.
> I'd rather tiered speeds and reliable fibre that can support 100Mbit now, 1Gbit/sec shortly and beyond as central components get updated
I'd also assume you can afford to pay for 100Mbps so you don't really care about the impacts of slower speeds on others. You are happy that others are subsidising your cheap high speed connection. However don't be so certain about your 1Gbps connection. 1Gbps NBNCo have available for order by RSPs since December 2013, but currently not a single RSP is selling them. Further to this Labor predicted that in 2026 less than 1% would have 1Gbps connections.
> I'm also fine with people picking the speed they need. unless you want to pay for anyone on a low income (or government allowances) to get a free upgrade to upto** 100mbit, why not just let them pay less for 12mbit.
12mbps delivers very little benefit over what is currently available. Labor's first corporate plan gave several examples of the benefits and each of them required 100Mbps as a minimum. Secondly if you have high speed and a small quota you can choose when to use it (e.g. eHealth video conference, education, etc.) whereas under NBNCo's pricing model you cannot ask for 100Mbps on Thursday between 2-3pm.
> Again that now 5% or even to 20% on 100Mbps makes more revenue than the bottom 50% by 4x
This is based purely on AVC pricing, whereas you need to consider the CVC pricing which is the same regardless of speed tiers.
> Wrong on FTTP NBN guarantee the speed to your ISP.
Please attempt to comprehend my comments about PIR in an earlier post. The interconnection between NBNCo an ISP represents a significant bottleneck because of CVC pricing. You may also wish to read some of the information about serious network performance issues caused by netflix traffic. Further to this I suggest reading the terms & conditions of an RSP. Here is a helpful example: http://www.internode.on.net/residential/fibre_to_the_home/nbn_plans/performance/ which includes this statement "Because of these factors, NBN Fibre Broadband services are described as 'theoretical network maximum speeds'. Your actual speeds may be slower due to factors outside of Internode's control."
> If you can get any better speed that what you currently have you either move or pay more than the cost of FTTP as Simon Hackett has stated that the average of FOD is more the FTTP at $4300
At least we agree that moving is a viable option. $4300 is less than 1% of an average house price and cheaper than repainting or a kitchen / bathroom renovation.
> Plus there is currently at least 5 users with 1Gbps connection.
Can you link to the RSP page where I can order one of these connections?
> Sound much like to Telstra of old now.
NBNCo have behaved very much like Telstra since the day they were established. Do some reading on their negotiating strategy with the ACCC and RSPs. In some areas they made Telstra look soft.
> Every other country known is rolling out FTTP, and then when they complete their FTTP builds will we still be in the higher rankings of global internet speeds ?
Is any other country in the world building a FTTP network with the expected speed tier take up that Labor planned for in the NBNCo Corporate Plan (close to 50% of fibre connections at 12Mbs and less than 5% at 1Gpbs in 2028)?
> Plus when they realise 12mbps or 25mbps is not enough, they can upgrade to guaranteed 50/20 or 100/40 or 1000/400Mbps speeds.
NBNCo FTTP standard AVC is peak information rate (PIR), so no guarantee of speed. If you want committed information rate (CIR) AVC. To give you an understanding of pricing 5/5Mbps is $300/month on top of AVC PIR.
> we WILL miss out on that, as well as TONS of potential from future generations who won't be able to realise their dreams because they DO NOT have the infrastructures to help them realise their dreams.
People who need the faster speeds have two options: move to an area with FTTP or order fibre on demand. You may also note that 1Gbps plans have been available for order from NBNCo since December 2013, but are not being offered by RSPs because Labor's completely screwed pricing model.
People choose where to live for all kinds of reasons like schools or public transport. FTTP will simply be another factor. If you make some crude assumptions about demographics then it would be reasonable to assume that a higher percentage of younger people are most likely to live in apartments or new estates which will have FTTB / FTTP.
> And no there is no debt crisis, and the NBN was to be funded through bonds, if I'm not mistakened
NBNCo does have a serious budget issue. The entire financial plan is based around massive jumps in ARPU which are very challenging when looking at historical trends where people have paid roughly the same or less for faster speeds and higher quotas. NBNCo revenue growth is based on reducing prices at a significantly slower rate than the growth in demand. For example:
* 1000/400Mbps is forecast to fall from $150 to $90, while the average speed grows from 30Mbps to 230Mbps. The price falls by 40% while average speed grows by 760%
* CVC pricing started at $20Mbps/Month when the average data usage is 30GB/Month and falls to $8Mbps/Month when the average data usage is 540GB/month. That is the price falls by 2.5 times, while the average data usage grows by 18 times = growth in revenue from CVC of 720% when accounting for price falls.
Like most of your post, sadly you have been deceived by Labor spin on FTTP. Yes FTTP is a great technology but the artificial financial model Labor constructed crippled the technology to the point where FTTN, FTTB & HFC are viable alternatives.
> “The government not only failed to deliver the NBN, it cut the speed!” is an irresistible political slogan even it it's based on a misunderstanding of technology
The Feb-2015 figures from NBNCo revealed that 38% on fibre opted for the 12Mbps plan and a further 38% opted for the 25Mbps plan. The 12Mbps percentage is below Labor's prediction but 25Mbps is higher.
The Coalition could decide that speed profiles on FTTN are too difficult to manage and simply remove them. Based on current take-up figures this would boost Australia's rankings significantly higher than Labor's FTTP plan, especially when you add FTTP & HFC.
Labor made Australia the laughing stock of the world by building a FTTP network while planning for effective speeds slower than FTTN.
Totally agree. Here are a couple of choice quotes from Quigley:
'But when The Australian approached Senator Conroy and Mr Quigley to describe the level of service users could expect at lesser network speeds, they said high-definition video conferencing was not possible on the NBN's most basic package.
"You certainly can't do high-definition video service on a 1 megabits per second upstream -- it's impossible," Mr Quigley said.'
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/health/low-income-users-denied-health-benefits/story-fn59nokw-1226131713930
"We will have one consistent set of products across the whole national footprint. And that means consistent ubiquitous service up to one gigabit per second," Quigley said in March 2010.
"Everyone keeps talking about 100Mbps. But that's obviously when we're talking about residents. For business, we are allowing for a certain percentage in our dimensioning to structure point-to-point services up to 1Gbps."
http://www.zdnet.com/article/google-fiber-trumps-nbn-speeds-pricing/
> as most of the copper is under ground
Depends on where you are. In many places copper is above ground.
> LOL you pretty much answered you own question there since NBN is only required to deliver 25Mbps or that the CBA said all we would need by 2023 is just 15Mbps considering now in Singapore is now offering 10Gbps service
You've completely missed my point. Labor were not planning for most people on fibre to have 1Gbps connections. They weren't even planning for most to have 100Mbps connections. 1Gbps was only announced as a response to Google Fibre just prior to the 2010 election. Instead Labor were planning for 50% to connect at 12Mbps and we see today from NBNCo's own figures that on fibre 38% are connected at 12Mbps and a further 38% are connected at 25Mbps.
If you are wondering why Labor were planning for so few people to be connected at 1Gbps it is because of the cost.
> That is why the expert panel reason for doing a full FTTP rollout.
Or you could argue it was Labor's haphazard response to Telstra not submitting a reasonable tender to build FTTN.
The reality is that:
- everyone in a new development will receive FTTP
- everyone in highrise will receive FTTB
- everyone in HFC regions will 100Mbps+
- everyone else that requires higher speeds has the choice of moving or paying for direct fibre, which theoretically should add to the value of their house
- less than 24% actually care about speeds faster than 25Mbps based on current take-up rates
> How how about reliable like the poor people after the storms months ago still don't have a phone line let alone an Internet connection.
The last two issues I've had with my internet connection were caused by building constructions along the street where the contractors cut through the copper. If the cables are brought down in a storm then it really doesn't matter if it is fibre or copper.
> But let's look at AVC pricing
Currently NBNCo are losing money on the majority of the AVC pricing and will continue to do so well into the future. Data charges (CVC) are 'expensive' on the NBN because it is used to subsidise the cost of rolling out the infrastructure and is where NBNCo expect to see their revenue growth.
Have you noticed how many RSPs are offering 1Gbps plans which NBNCo made available at a wholesale level in December 2013? Zero, because the plans are simply not financially viable. Labor predicted the 1% on 1Gbps would be reached in 2026! Can you imagine what speeds the rest of the world will see as a baseline in 2026 when 1Gbps is becoming standard in the rest of the world today?
4k streaming of netflix videos to a limited few is not a reasonable justification for what has been described as Australia's largest infrastructure project.
Labor's NBN was designed as a high speed network for a very small privileged few. Labor predicted that in 2026 less than 1% would be connected at 1Gbps while close to 50% on fibre would be connected at 12Mbps.
> The very nature of open source is to exploit someone else work.
The very nature of closed source is to exploit the workers to build up large companies and benefit senior managers / shareholders.
> That's why so worshipped by greed people, those who liked a lot to be paid for their work, but don't like at all to pay for someone's else.
Actually it is more about the freedom. If I don't like what gnome team are doing, then there is unity, cinammon, kde, etc. to choose from.
If I don't like Vista, Windows 8, Windows 8.1, etc. then the only choice is XP an increasingly risky choice. With linux if I really prefer 2.0, I can stay there.
Meanwhile in Australia, gays are campaigning for PrEP a drug which can reduce the risk of infection by up to 90 per cent to have PrEP added to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS), making it government supervised.
"Mr Spencer, 23, admits to occasionally having sex without a condom but says he feels much more relaxed about it since he began using PrEP."
I'm not convinced that government money should go towards encouraging risky behaviour.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-28/prep-five-perspectives-on-the-hiv-prevention-pill/6502124
> THESE are the people that Uber is really fighting - the ones with $200,000 mortgages on their taxi licenses, or the ones who can't even afford the license and drive shifts in someone else's taxi.
I agree those people who have chosen to see a taxi plate license as an investment are at risk from Uber, but I have not seen a decent explanation as to why a plate should cost $500,000. That is simply rent seeking. It is also risky because the government can change the rules at any point in time (e.g. releasing new licences in Victoria) causing a significant drop in values.
Those driving shifts in someone else's taxi which in my experience form the majority of drivers won't really be impacted by who the employer is. In fact they may find the overheads are cheaper with Uber.
> People complain about rude drivers but the last time I had a rude taxi driver was in France.
I agree I haven't encountered a rude taxi driver, but then I take care not to upset drivers. However if you asked about incompetent or unkempt, then plenty of drivers have given me good reason to wish that we already had driverless cars.
> They might not want too but the tax office has pretty wide reaching powers to compel organisations to hand over relevant details.
The ATO have previously worked with eBay to ensure that high volume sellers based in Australia are charging GST so there is an historical precedent. With a ruling like this I would put my house on the ATO to win.
Trust me, I would hold greater hope of winning an argument with my illogical mother-in-law, than the ATO.
Except that NBNCo fits the exact model that you object to. Labor's plan was to sell NBNCo as soon as possible (e.g. it started to show a profit).
In an ideal world, government enterprises would be the most efficient, but in the real world this rarely true. Competition forces private industry to take risks and make hard decisions or disappear. In government it often appears that that decisions will be delayed and extra features added because of an issue impactiong on 0.01%.
Government contracts carry a higher degree of risk because of scope creep and changes in the political climate.
The eHealth records system is unlikely to succeed because GPs don't see any reason or incentive for using it. The data will be poorly maintained because GPs are time poor, their remuneration is declining and there is no reward for entering the data. Additionally, patients can edit their own records making the information untrustworthy from a clinical perspective.
The government should simply disband NBNCo and call for tenders to provide services in the existing 121 PoIs. The concessions would last for 5-10 years and would include pricing caps on wholesale pricing and KPIs that result in bonuses / penalties. In some localities, the concession holder would pay the government and in other localities (e.g. rural) the holder would receive payments to make up for higher costs.
A single company would be prevented from more than 33% of the market to preserve competition.
The NBN presents a challenge for running an RSP with a cheap brand a premium brand: PoI choke point.
At $17.50/Mbps CVC (data) is a significant cost to RSPs. If congestion occurs then packets will be dropped by NBNCo. It isn't possible for the RSP to flag packets as 'premium customer' and 'discount customer', which means high speed / low speed customers and discount / premium customers will be impacted equally. The current Netflix debacle provides ample evidence of this.
Running two connections the PoI reduces the economy of scale benefits.
Abandoning CVC charging will result in faster speeds becoming even more expensive. Currently 38% on fibre are connected at 12Mbps and a further 38% on fibre are connected at 25Mbps. If wholesale prices for faster plans go up then it is likely these percentages would rise.
I hope most of the cash has gone in to the applications for teaching kids how to code by playing snake, pong, minecraft, a terminal based adventure game, etc. My son (9) played the adventure game last night and now he knows how how to use ls, cat, mv, cp and possibly some more when I wasn't watching. My daughter (12) had a similar experience. He has worked through all the other exercises independently. We've let another 8 kids ranging from 8-13 play on our Kano and it and they've each been able to solve the exercises and experimented.
I've ordered the PowerUp, because I'm hopeful that working with the LED board will extend the kids further. Sure I could put it all together for less, but time is money and the kids have something they can use now, rather than waiting for Dad to have some free time.
It will be interesting to see if the demand is higher than the 500 Kano are planning to build.
When the rumours first started, I wondered if Tesla would be selling 're-manufactured' batteries from their cars. Range anxiety, but more importantly size are not as big an issue when the batteries are stuck on the wall in the house, especially if the price is good and the warranty reasonable.
Last year I was sitting on a plane preparing for take-off. We were informed that the co-pilot's microphone wasn't working. After 10 minutes, the solution was to power cycle the aircraft. 15 minutes later we were on our way.
Not as frustrating as the previous incident where the pilot's window wouldn't open. Apparently it is their emergency exit and we couldn't take off with it stuck. After an hour of banging coming from the front, we transferred to another plane. I didn't feel as bad as the person next to me who watched the flight she was originally booked on depart.
> (admittedly with the hope of you using their cloud backend)
I think we refer to that as bait & switch or is it closer to giving away the handle so people buy your razor blades?
> Mostly I think you guys are afraid because for once Microsoft are not being tools about it.
Lets run a little comparison here:
* Win10 on Rasberry Pi: I can run a basic custom written application with a basic UI.
* Linux on Rasberry Pi: I can run the full OS with full UI and with a fast collection of applications. There are a variety of distributions including those for specialised uses (e.g. OpenElec & OSMC media centres, Kano for Education, etc.) and general purpose (Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, ArchOS, etc.)
With Linux you can build your own custom distributions. With Win10, you enter a world of licensing pain.
Australia has the worst of both worlds: speed tiers and quotas. Historically we had Telstra as a monopoly provider which is being replaced by NBNCo as a monopoly provider.
Quotas make sense because it is the transferring data that places load on the network. If you have a 25Mbps connection or a 1Gbps connection streaming Netflix they will both be transferring about the same amount of data. Speed tiers with unlimited plans encourage wasteful consumption and restrict people to a speed they can afford.
Labor were better at the spin, but really they created the mess we are in by developing a dodgy financial model with data charges & speed tiers. As of February (see NBNCo Media Releases) , 38% on Fibre are connected at 12Mbps and a further 38% are connected at 25Mbps. 12Mbps connections are under what Labor predicted, but 25Mbps is well over.
> Labour may have been a chaotic mess. But at least they didn't go around shooting themselves in the foot and publicly embarrassing Australia on the world stage.
Pause and think about it for a moment. The political party that trumpeted 1Gbps connections in response to Google Fibre developed a plan where 50% on fibre were predicted to connect at 12Mbps for the next 15 years and in 2026 less than 1% would be connected at 1Gbps.
I'd have to say those figures sound pretty embarrassing to me.
This quote from How Stuff Works (http://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/engines-equipment/maglev-train2.htm) suggests a valid reason for the 10cm gap:
"A greater gap above the track means that the train would not require complex sensing systems to maintain stability."
It also notes that the Japanese design has rubber wheels so that if a power failure occurs the train simply slows down on wheels.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
