* Posts by Vid

15 publicly visible posts • joined 23 Jun 2016

Telstra drops nbn™ in it as it wears compo for broadband speed ads


Re: Speed tier take-up is similar across technologies

And 35% can't even get 50Mbps as a peak speed no matter what the congestion...that's more than 1 in 3 customers! 6-8% can't even get 25Mbps most of the time, and again that has nothing to do with the RSPs in any way.


Congestion isn't the only problem...6-8% on FTTN couldn't get over 25MBPS (and often not even that high) even if they had a 1:1 ratio.


Re: 3 this would require

Which of course it is...

nbn™ needs copper to build FTTN: another 15,000 km of it


Re: @ vid


That was a test system, meaning they were part of the trial phase used to see what would work.

There were test systems deployed for the trials in 2010, but the first POI wasn't even installed until May 2012, and the Telstra agreement was finally signed in March of 2012.

The reason that the Quigley plan called for Fixed Wireless and Sat for the near term is that to make those 7% of places FTTP would increase the cost more than 50%. That is a bad decision...

That said, the cost of FTTP drops drastically as cost cuttings are discovered over time. For example, the Verizon cost per premises started out at almost $5,000, but over a few years it has dropped to about $800.

In NZ, the cost per premises reduced from almost $5k to $2k already...

For the outlying 7%, converting them to FTTP would have taken longer, but as the costs reduced they would most certainly have been converted.

Your "Dude from Telstra" was an idiot...and comparing an NTD to an ethernet port makes no sense at all. An NTD has several ethernet ports, but that is not what terminates your signal. I don't think you understand what you are talking about...


"As it happens, it was part of the ALP NBN Plan for us to be put on FW"

The ALP commercial rollout only lasted just over a year. There were significant programs under way even then to change and improve that rollout (project Fox, skinny fibre, etc...). The point being, that ALP plan under Quigley was constantly improving, so reading what the plan was at the beginning is not a clear indicator of what the end product would have been...


As usual your numbers and conclusions are ridiculous Mathew...it is the reason you have been named troll on most every Forum I have read.

Only a fool would think that building a network like the NBN should be focused on what demand is last week or today...since it takes a decade to build it, the network must be focused on what will be required in a decade. That need has been expected to be at least 1Gbps by 2020...this is expected by every modern country in the world except us, and even quite a few 3rd world countries. We are fast becoming irrelevant in the Global economy, and this MTM is one of the biggest causes...

Competition and wholesale costs, not lack of fibre, crimp broadband in Australia


Re: FTTN could be faster than FTTP

"the internet connections with the fastest peak speeds are 4G"

Due to the actions or inactions that the Coalition are performing which have totally decimated the NBN, that is probably true...though many on FTTP are faster, the 4G connections are more ubiquitous. One could say that this was a plan created by the NBN Co Directors (most of whom are Telstra shareholders) to bolster their own earnings...

"Labor predicted..."

No, they never did...creating a business plan is not a "prediction". But considering that they had control for only a year of commercial rollout, it is hard to fault anything they did as most of it has been done by others...


Re: Ban unlimited plans

It appears you don't even read what you post...the article from 2008 that had some wild speculation about Comcast adding limits is more proof that they do NOT want to do it, for if they did don't you think that in 9 years they might have done something?

You also didn't read any of the articles that you or I posted and appear to be doing nothing but trolling...

Even if only 5 to 10% take up the connection, it says that 600 Million (the VAST majority of homes) will have a connection that is usable at 1 Gbps. So your "feeling" is obviously grossly inaccurate as apparently most of your "points" appear to be.

Just because not everyone owns a car is no reason to not build highways...

You apparently have no idea what G.Fast is...and it is not being developed here at all or anywhere for 2020 deployment. The TRIAL will hit Gbps in 2019, not a deployment.

You continue to Trumpify these very old articles and claim that together they have some bizarre meaning, much to the degradation of your reputation...


Re: Ban unlimited plans

"RSPs in most countries are trying to move away from unlimited plans "

Please list those "RSPs" as I have not seen them...is this something you thought you read somewhere?

"I suggest the reality is that only a few countries are expecting 1Gbps networks across metropolitan areas"

And you would be wrong...


According to Deloitte (and most other research firms now...)

"we forecast about 600 million subscribers may be on networks that offer a Gigabit tariff as of 2020, representing the majority of connected homes in the world"

New Zealand, Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand, Taiwan, Japan, China, India, (just to name a few in this region), and most all countries will have a Gigabit offering to their entire populace by 2020. All of them are unlimited as well...

Sorry to burst your cool hypothesis, but it just doesn't hold up to the facts.


Re: Ban unlimited plans

People expect unmetered internet because that is the way it is for the rest of the world. People expect Gigabit because the rest of the world is expecting it by 2020. Small countries and large countries, rich countries and poor countries, they will all surpass us in the next 3 years...

Oz government on its Centrelink debacle: 'This is fine'


Re: Communication


"some welfare recipients aren't comfortable with scrutiny"

I have no problem with scrutiny...I am pedantic in following Centrelink's direction and advice and I can document everything.

You are apparently ignorant of the procedure here, so you are speaking as a political pundit instead of as a human being, so let me help you out...

Firstly, there is no method of correcting the assumptions in the letter, no matter what kind of proof or documentation you have. Calling Centrelink results in a frustrating few hours of finding out this rather astonishing problem...nor is there any way to email, post, courier, or visit any office or person that can accept your documentation on the subject. In my own case, 5 years ago I received income as a Director of a company (Directors Fees) that was actually at a loss compared to my business expenses. I was instructed by Centrelink at the time to file quarterly P/L statements and balance sheets (which I did). I left the company, but it was a difficult period to pay rent and food after having most of my assets wiped out after the GFC. Being close to retirement age, it is near impossible to get any sort of paid work...but I do volunteer work rather than sit around, so I have actually worked a good week in exchange for my Centrelink payment (I think it earns me about $4/hour if you calculated it out).

These are the actual facts instead of what you imagine the facts are...



Unfortunately, the reason that the Minister is unaware of any problems is that the system has been designed to prevent questioning or reporting any problems. None of the call centres can help (I have spent many hours trying), and there is no means of obtaining clarity or disputing the debt notices.

We have been told that we must just pay the money listed in the notice (which are invariably incorrect according to most folks I have spoken to), and then some sort of dispute is available after that (though the dispute process appears to be a mystery still)...no exceptions.

Will the Government then reimburse us for interest or business losses from this process?


Plausible deniability?

When the Minister says that he is "not aware" of any of the problems, it seems that he is determined to keep it that way...

Quigley: FTTP wasn't a failed project


Re: Secretive Nonsense

Fortunately for us, Quigley backs his assertions up with facts and figures.

You should probably do a bit more study as very, very few front yards require digging for FTTP. The install is done through the existing pipes and poles.

Also, while the current NBN Co is very secretive and redact almost everything as Commercial in Confidence, the Labor NBN Co had almost none of this...


Cut the faecal matter...

Isn't it strange that FTTP is so much cheaper to deploy in every country but ours...and not by a small amount. I believe Verizon now place the cost per premise at $800, and Chorus in NZ are down to about $2300...compare that to the "New NBN Co" estimate of $4400 here in Australia, and you get a picture of a company management team that is either lying or too incompetent to continue.