NBN Rollout Scrapped

Calliope said:

Of course it has a "large amount of public support." If I were asked whether I would like a faster broadband service, the of course I would say :yes."

Click to expand...

Or you could upgrade from windows 95

I'm not convinced that this isn't about to become obsolete. Sure, wireless data speeds have their limitations but you only need to spend an hour or two around an average 16 year old to realise that this isn't much of a problem in practice. Whatever I can do on a PC with ADSL, they've already done on a phone / iPad more quickly than I can walk to the PC. If wireless is good enough that they can watch live TV etc, then it's good enough for most actual uses I would think.

I do understand that wireless (4G etc) has limitations. But my thinking is that are we getting to the point where those limitations aren't sufficiently serious to actually matter? Surely there's a point that if wireless is good enough, then nobody is really going to care how much better something else is?

It's a bit like saying that MP3 is a truly rotten means of sound recording in terms of audio quality but it's good enough and, combined with the massive convenience it offers, it has gained public acceptance to the point that (vastly superior audio quality) CD's are almost obsolete.

Thinking of all the big format changes over the past 30 or so years, the only one to have really been driven by quality is Bluray, and that hasn't fully displaced DVD's anyway. Looking at the others, Beta was better technically than VHS but it lost since VHS was more commonly produced. Vinyl had better quality than cassettes but it lost due to convenience. CD's sound better than MP3 but the latter is more convenient and has largely taken over. And I've never heard anyone say that image quality is the main advantage of DVD over VHS - it's all about convenience so far as the average person is concerned.

The same goes for just about everything really. The overall trend in society has been very much toward convenience in preference to quality. Witness the rise of fast food, retail chains in everything from fashion to hardware and all the rest. Convenience first, quality second is very much the overall trend.

Now, wireless is a lot more convenient than wired I would think even if wired is technically superior. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm not convinced that the average person is really going to want a wired connection in their house when most of their devices will have a SIM card (or whatever replaces that technology) in them anyway.

All that said, the NBN will have ongoing use for bulk data transfer. It's just the direct connection to every home that I'm not convinced about the long term usefulness of.

Smurph, succintly put, as usual.
The major bulk data users, who just happen to be in the C.B.D's, should be paying for optical upgrades from their premises, to the optical fibre backbone(exchange).
The plebs would be much better served by a national wireless upgrade and an optical upgrade to the c.b.d of regional centres.

sptrawler said:

Smurph, succintly put, as usual.
The major bulk data users, who just happen to be in the C.B.D's, should be paying for optical upgrades from their premises, to the optical fibre backbone(exchange).
The plebs would be much better served by a national wireless upgrade and an optical upgrade to the c.b.d of regional centres.

Click to expand...

Why do they need to be in the CBD?

todster said:

Why do they need to be in the CBD?

Click to expand...

Because that is where the banks, insurance companies, major retailers, are moving your data.
The rest of the users are non critical, with regard security, and the only reason they need bling speed is for non critical or non economy dependant applications.
So why the hell spend stupid money on it? Bit like saying every road in Australia should be built 6 lanes wide because eventualy we will use them.

sptrawler said:

Because that is where the banks, insurance companies, major retailers, are moving your data.
The rest of the users are non critical, with regard security, and the only reason they need bling speed is for non critical or non economy dependant applications.
So why the hell spend stupid money on it? Bit like saying every road in Australia should be built 6 lanes wide because eventualy we will use them.

Click to expand...

todster said:

Click to expand...

Well thats o.k todster, but I played inter school sports against Shay Gap in the 60's. Now if you go to Shay Gap there is nothing there, it has been completely removed.
All the roads have been ripped all the houses are gone, what would have been the point of putting N.B.N there?
There are heaps of towns that governments are allowing to die with fly in fly out, yet you are going to pay for N.B.N to rolled out there, thats dumb.
The only ones that benefit are the companies, they can have brilliant video conferencing untill they shut down and close up shop. Then the town has all this obsolete infrastructure, magic.
Like I have said on numerous occasions, the money would be better spent developing water supplies from the north and supporting farming, food we need.

Smurf1976 said:

snip

Click to expand...

A few point with this:

1. The NBN doesn't mean you are tied to a wired device. The vast majority of iPad data is delivered via WiFi, not cellular networks. WiFi data is, of course, delivered via the fixed network (ie, in future the NBN). Far from limiting the usefulness of wireless networks, the NBN will improve them because it can deliver the speeds that WiFi is capable of. The limitation of WiFi (range) is also the reason why it has this capability. The longer the range of the wireless network, the less capable it is of carrying large volumes of data to a large number of users.

According to the Cisco Visual Networking Index (a regular report on internet trends etc), by 2015 about 60% of data will be delivered wirelessly, but only 7% will be via cellular networks. The rest will be via fixed line WiFi.


2. Cellular performance degrades with more users. If proposing that cellular wireless will displace fixed networks, you must judge it's capability under that level of load. Currently, "21-42Mbps" 3G cellular networks struggle to deliver 5Mbps to users and it's only carrying 6% of total network traffic. Even new "150Mbps" 4G networks are only delivering 10Mbps with a tiny fraction of cellular users. Probably less than 0.5% of total network traffic. Can you imagine what would happen to speeds if it were carrying 20x more data than currently? And that's not even taking into account the >50% growth every year in fixed network traffic.


3. Convenience v quality. Really? The only significant upgrade from the iPad 2 to 3 was for video quality. Even a 4G wireless network cannot stream full quality video to that iPad. You need a WiFi connection. TVs are constantly getting bigger and higher resolution. Just last week, a standard with 16x more pixels than 1080p FullHD was announced. Uncompressed, the 3D video stream requires 1.5Gbps. Compressed about 160Mbps.

Video (of one kind or another) is the driver behind bandwidth growth, and it is increasing exponentially every few years.


A few points you didn't mention...
4. Cellular coverage. It doesn't matter how fast the cellular network is, it cannot overcome physical barriers, whether they be man-made (like buildings) or natural (like hills). The fact is that barriers stop or degrade cellular signals. Blackspots are everywhere. I was upstairs in a 2-story building on the main road of suburban Baulkham Hills the other day, and my "21Mbps" NextG device was getting 0.2Mbps thanks to poor signal. If even Telstra can't serve a heavily populated suburb after 20 years of development, what hope is there for really hilly areas?


5. Monthly cost
It is horrendously expensive to deliver cellular wireless data. The technology has such a short lifespan that equipment replacement is regular and expensive. Each wireless generation is superseded about every 5 years, meaning regular multi-billion dollar upgrades. Then there is the cost of spectrum. More users and/or more data requires more spectrum. More speed requires that it is in contiguous frequency blocks. So there is huge competition between carriers to buy spectrum at lease auctions, driving the price to ridiculous levels. And they only buy it for short periods, so it will only go up in the future.

Telstra 4G (15GB data at ~10Mbps): $99.95/month (without home phone bundle)
iiNet NBN (1000GB data at 100Mbps): $99.95/month (without bundle).
10x speed, 67x volume. That's a pretty big hit for convenience.

Exetel NBN (50GB at 12Mbps): $35.00/month (including phone)
1.2xspeed, 3.3x data for 1/3 the price.



Yes, people want convenience. I myself have an iPad and a couple of iPhones, all with cellular data connections. But they are in addition to my ADSL, as they are for almost everyone. There is simply no decline in fixed network users even as wireless devices boom. People want volume at home/work, and convenience when they're out on the road. That's why cellular and fixed networks are complementary, and one is a valid alternative to the other for only a very small portion of the population.

I havent followed this thread but let me ask a a simple question -

What happens to all the providers including Telstra when this wonderful thing is available to everyone and the public can get connection for $35 a month instead of having to pay $100.

Thanks NBNMyths,

That has clarified a number of points for me. A good post.

gg

Smurf1976 said:

All that said, the NBN will have ongoing use for bulk data transfer. It's just the direct connection to every home that I'm not convinced about the long term usefulness of.

Click to expand...

Thanks Smurf for a very insightful foray into this debate. It is only natural that Myths would bring out his big guns to try to shoot you down, but of course he has unlimited resources. Everyone loves bright and shiny new toys and it is Myths job to sell them. He bases his support of NBN on the argument that most people want one (except Coalition voters.)

Most people want high speed trains, but Australia will never afford them, except maybe, to an airport.

sptrawler said:

Well thats o.k todster, but I played inter school sports against Shay Gap in the 60's. Now if you go to Shay Gap there is nothing there, it has been completely removed.
All the roads have been ripped all the houses are gone, what would have been the point of putting N.B.N there?
There are heaps of towns that governments are allowing to die with fly in fly out, yet you are going to pay for N.B.N to rolled out there, thats dumb.
The only ones that benefit are the companies, they can have brilliant video conferencing untill they shut down and close up shop. Then the town has all this obsolete infrastructure, magic.
Like I have said on numerous occasions, the money would be better spent developing water supplies from the north and supporting farming, food we need.

Click to expand...

Which towns in WA are dying through FIFO?
Lol a stock market forum and you want mining companies to take the more expensive option and build housing/infrastructure.
Shipping ore from Dampier since the early 60s and still a cronic housing shortage.
Did they have a phone service in Shay Gap then,what did that cost do you think?

MrBurns said:

I havent followed this thread but let me ask a a simple question -

What happens to all the providers including Telstra when this wonderful thing is available to everyone and the public can get connection for $35 a month instead of having to pay $100.

Click to expand...

All current ISPs (including Telstra) are or will be providers of NBN services. NBN Co is only a wholesaler. Capability aside, the only real difference to now is that those ISPs will buy access from NBN Co instead of Telstra. Instead of Telstra being a wholesaler and retailer of fixed line services, they will only be a retailer.

For people who want the high end plans, you can still spend $100 or more on an NBN service. It's just that the $100 buys you something much faster than it would now.

Smurf1976 said:

All that said, the NBN will have ongoing use for bulk data transfer. It's just the direct connection to every home that I'm not convinced about the long term usefulness of.

Click to expand...

Thanks Smurf for a very insightful foray into this debate. It is only natural that Myths would bring out his big guns to try to shoot you down, but of course he has unlimited resources. Everyone loves bright and shiny new toys and it is Myths job to sell them. He bases his support of NBN on the argument that most people want one (except Coalition voters.)

Most people want high speed trains, but Australia will never be able to afford them, except maybe, to an airport.

Keep up the good work.

Calliope said:

Thanks Smurf for a very insightful foray into this debate. It is only natural that Myths would bring out his big guns to try to shoot you down, but of course he has unlimited resources.....

Most people want high speed trains, but Australia will never afford them, except maybe, to an airport.

Click to expand...

I assume by "big guns" you mean "inconvenient facts".

And by "unlimited resources" you mean "a large list of bookmarks".


Poor analogy. People might want high speed trains, but they wouldn't be willing to pay the ticket price which would be required to fund the build.

The NBN's "ticket" prices are generally no more than the existing network (and often much less), so affordability is not an issue.

todster said:

Which towns in WA are dying through FIFO?
Lol a stock market forum and you want mining companies to take the more expensive option and build housing/infrastructure.
Shipping ore from Dampier since the early 60s and still a cronic housing shortage.
Did they have a phone service in Shay Gap then,what did that cost do you think?

Click to expand...

Yes I lived in Dampier from1966 - 1968 and there is no doubt the iron ore industry is going to trundle along nicely for a long time yet.
What about Kalgoorlie, the superpit has 7 years reserves of gold, less if the price of gold drops.
Kambalda relying on nickel, shaky at best. They ran the N/W shelf gas pipe right past town, yet didn't reticulate the town. That shows the long term confidence in the towns future, yet we are going to put the N.B.N there.
Mt Magnet, have you been there recently, the locals say F.I.F.O is killing the town?

You can't have it both ways todster, on one hand you are saying mining companies should be taking the cheaper fifo option. Yet we should be taking the more expensive option putting in optical to those towns.

NBNMyths said:

so affordability is not an issue.

Click to expand...

Except to the taxpayer.

Calliope said:

Except to the taxpayer.

Click to expand...

Why? The NBN is funded from bonds, which will be repaid by network revenue (not taxation revenue).

Unless there is either a substantial cost blowout and/or substantially lower revenue (neither of which is likely on current contracts/figures), then the taxpayer has nothing to do with it. So high is the takeup of high-end NBN plans currently, if that trend continues then NBN Co will earn too much revenue and will have to lower their pricing to comply with their SAU.

Conversely, the Coalition's $17bn Fibre To The Node alternative includes on-budget rural subsidies, which "taxpayers" will foot the bill for.

sptrawler said:

Yes I lived in Dampier from1966 - 1968 and there is no doubt the iron ore industry is going to trundle along nicely for a long time yet.
What about Kalgoorlie, the superpit has 7 years reserves of gold, less if the price of gold drops.
Kambalda relying on nickel, shaky at best. They ran the N/W shelf gas pipe right past town, yet didn't reticulate the town. That shows the long term confidence in the towns future, yet we are going to put the N.B.N there.
Mt Magnet, have you been there recently, the locals say F.I.F.O is killing the town?

You can't have it both ways todster, on one hand you are saying mining companies should be taking the cheaper fifo option. Yet we should be taking the more expensive option putting in optical to those towns.

Click to expand...

You have got to be kidding Mt Magnet lol how do you kill something that has been dead for years.
You can't have been there to make a statement like that.

So your saying theres no NG retic in Kalgoorlie?

todster said:

You have got to be kidding Mt Magnet lol how do you kill something that has been dead for years.
You can't have been there to make a statement like that.

So your saying theres no NG retic in Kalgoorlie?

Click to expand...

MT Magnet 2006 census population wait for it...........wait.......ready....456
Awesome example got any more lol.