ALP scrap the NBN

[Jovial Monk]

Heh, duelling network topologies:

Yesterday Kohler wrote an article on Business Spectator, titled “The Coalition’s NBN policy is madness.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs. ... enDocument" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Turnbull can back yesterday at Kohler writing “Alan Kohler’s NBN fantasy”.

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs. ... enDocument" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Apparently Kohler & Turnbull spoke for an hour on the phone last night about it and Kohler published the follow today.

Sorry Malcolm, it’s still crazy

The basic problem, as I see it, is that on this subject the Coalition will go to the election with a plan that won’t be very popular, based on saving money. Everybody’s looking forward to getting fibre: Malcolm Turnbull is going to be the party pooper, coming just as things are getting interesting and pulling the plug on the stereo.

Worse, the money saved – Turnbull estimates $20 billion – can’t be spent elsewhere or used to bring down taxes, because it is capital expenditure, not operating expenditure.

Campaigning on saving money is not usually recommended, and I’m not sure the next election will be fought on the need to bring down government debt, since it’s not too high in Australia to begin with.

…The other problem is that maintenance of the copper access network is now $600-700 million a year as it deteriorates. Over 20 years that adds up to about $15 billion, wiping away most of the savings from using the copper in the first place. The $20 billion in savings is just a guess anyway: it probably won’t be that much because savings never are what you think they’ll be.

The final thing to remember is that the Coalition is not proposing to go back to the way things were. The NBN Co would still be a monopoly provider of wholesale broadband access – it would just do it with fibre only as far as neighbourhood cabinets and then copper the rest of the way – for most but not all, since more than a million premises will already have fibre all the way.

Also, the new minister would have to sack the entire senior management of the NBN Co and hire a whole new team because Mike Quigley and the rest of them all believe passionately in fibre to the premises. And he would have to tell all the service providers that have been gearing up to FTTP, including Telstra, that – terribly sorry – you have to change all your planning to FTTN now.

Full article here – http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs. ... ph&src=rot" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

From PB

The NBN is needed, brings our communication system into the 21st century and the cost is a pittance, less than .1% of all Govt spending over 10 years ($40Bn our of $5Trn) and the opportunity cost of not proceeding with it is much more than the $.5–$.7Bn just maintaining the copper, it is our international copetitiveness in business, in education, in medicine etc!

Fast wireless broadband—always an orphan in data moving—requires fibre everywhere to work. NBN and 4, 5. .G go hand in hand.

Super Forger you are an imbecile!

[Jovial Monk]

OMG! Just how much of a hypocrite is Malcolm Turnbull?

Was watching Lateline last night, Emma Alberichi interviewing Malcolm. I was tired and have written Turnbull off as a joke as Shadow Comms Minister and just thought that Malcolm was blinking sooooo rapidly what he was saying was obviously just a bunch of lies. Should have listened more carefully because I missed this little pearler:

Turnbull defends France Telecom investment

OPPOSITION communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull says his investment in France Telecom is about value and not a political statement about the French telecommunications company's plan for a fibre-to-the-home (FTTH) rollout.
Herald Sun Digital Pass

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy on Tuesday accused Mr Turnbull of "rank hypocrisy" in investing in France Telecom's FTTH rollout while backing an inferior broadband network in Australia.

France Telecom plans to rollout a FTTH network to 15 million French homes by 2020.

Mr Turnbull updated his register of member's interests on August 16 to note his investment in France Telecom.

. . . .

"With France Telecom, I thought they were good value."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaki ... 6455107597" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I am sure France Telecom FTTH rollout is good value and it follows therefor that the NBN is good value! Thank you for telling the truth for once, Malcolm!

Go to the Lateline website (abc.net.au/lateline) and watch Malcolm blink at the speed of light as he rolls out his lying tosh!

[IQS.RLOW]

FT is a private company

Chalk and cheese

[Jovial Monk]

Both FTTH. FTTH obviously not too expensive etc etc that Malcolm has failed to say about the NBN. Chalk and chalk.

Any difference will be due to geography and demographics—Australia much bigger and more sparsely populated than France.

Thanks for conceding the argument IQ.

[Rorschach]

The fact that Australia is much bigger and sparsely populated is a good reason not to build the NBN.
Apart from the fact that technology changes will make it obsolete shortly after it is finished.
Oh and I like the copper network for my phone thanks.

[Super Nova]

Here is the UK's strategy that differs from Australia's by "backing Fibre To The Cabinet as a potential medium-term solution is simple" and that " if fibre to the home is still the best way to get the very highest speeds, private sector companies will invest to provide it" which is consistent with the approach I proposed in a thread here 2 years ago.

Note the "if ... still the best way" approach and leave the final miles to private sector. Who knows what is the "best" way for each situation is and who should foot the bill.

A much more pragmatic way of handling the equivent issue of NBN here in the UK.

Initially, much of this speed increase will be achieved by a Fibre To The Cabinet (FTTC) system, in which high-speed fibre cabling is connected to a cabinet near a user's home.

Internet data will then travel the final distance through copper cabling, which is slower. The possible connection speed available via FTTC decreases as it travels further away from the cabinet.

Because of this issue, Mr Hunt said FTTC will only be a temporary measure.

"The reason we are backing Fibre To The Cabinet as a potential medium-term solution is simple: The increase in speeds that it allows - 80 Mbps certainly but in certain cases up to 1 gigabit - will comfortably create Europe's biggest and most profitable high-speed broadband market," he said.

"And in doing so we will create the conditions whereby, if fibre to the home is still the best way to get the very highest speeds, private sector companies will invest to provide it."

Fibre To the Home (FTTH) allows a fibre-speed connection to reach individual homes without the need for slower copper cabling.

Link: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-19316824

PS: Yes Monk I have read you comments on your blog. Here is evidence that it can be achieved in a different way without commiting one company to provide the total end to end solution and one that is fibre to every house funded/guaranteed by the government

[mantra]

"And in doing so we will create the conditions whereby, if fibre to the home is still the best way to get the very highest speeds, private sector companies will invest to provide it."

I still can't see the point. It's going to be compulsory eventually and costly especially for people like me who have huge trees running over the existing copper cables. How the hell are they going to install fibre without destroying everything in its path?

And SN you raised the fact about the sparseness and great distances which will have to be covered here. When Telstra was broken up and sold - those in the outback were promised a decent phone and internet service. It never happened. Now we have to invest billions in Telstra all over again and those in the country will be no better off as it is just impossible to run fibre over thousands of kms. Meanwhile Telstra are culling staff by the hundreds again for even more outsourcing, so even Australian jobs aren't going to benefit.

Serious modifications will have to be made - but meanwhile costs are still spiralling.

[Jovial Monk]

Don’t you ever bother doing any reading Mantra? (Bit like your hero Abbott there ) If you have a phone the fibre will be run out through the same ducts as your phone line.

Had to visit hospital today, carrying two big bulky envelopes of XRays: with the NBN the radiologist would send high def pictures to my GP who could then send them to the hospital, at higher resolution than the photos I was carting around. Just one benefit of FTTH.

Can’t do this with ADSL/ADSL2/VDSL/HFC/FTTN because they do not supply the bandwidth, esp the bandwidth up.

Turnbull disses FTTH then invests in it, in France. Exuent Truffles minus credibility.

[mantra]

Don’t you ever bother doing any reading Mantra? (Bit like your hero Abbott there ) If you have a phone the fibre will be run out through the same ducts as your phone line.

Had to visit hospital today, carrying two big bulky envelopes of XRays: with the NBN the radiologist would send high def pictures to my GP who could then send them to the hospital, at higher resolution than the photos I was carting around. Just one benefit of FTTH.

Can’t do this with ADSL/ADSL2/VDSL/HFC/FTTN because they do not supply the bandwidth, esp the bandwidth up.

Turnbull disses FTTH then invests in it, in France. Exuent Truffles minus credibility.

Radiologists are already sending scans and X-rays through to the GP when they've been read. They're not encountering problems. Obviously the reports are sent also.

Isn't fibre optic larger than copper wire? It won't be as easy as you suggest.

[Jovial Monk]

The individual fibres are thinner than a human hair! One fibre (via the use of encryption) can serve more than one property.

You could really read up on it a bit Mantra. The thread on my board or NBN Co’s website, etc.