"Little demand for super-fast broadband"

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:32:27 +1100, B J Foster

Post by B J Foster
A high-speed broadband network launched by Telstra over a year ago and
available to nearly one million premises has attracted just 200 customers.
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268174866621
Now lemme see $43b/(22x200) = $4.8 million per ... aw, forget it!
Coalition continues to oppose Telstra break up
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268171435159

I think the people are awake that what is *described* as "super fast"
just won't happen over a worn and wearing out copper wire connection
This is a typical genuine Broadband speed in USa
Loading Image...

Australia
http://cas.awm.gov.au/screen_img/H09572

Petzl
--
"Dieu est mon droit" God is my legal right

annily

2010-03-10 11:01:12 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:32:27 +1100, B J Foster

And your point is?

Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately I'm not
one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which may or may not influence my opinions.

Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF

2010-03-10 12:44:43 UTC

Post by annily
Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately I'm not
one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

How would you like some batts as a consolation prize?
--

- KRudd at his finest.

"The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!"
- Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.

"This is the recession we had to have!"
- Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.

"Silly old bugger!"
- Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke
responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.

"By 1990, no child will live in poverty"
- Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.

"A billion trees ..."
- Borke, pissed as a newt again.

"Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the governor
general!"
- Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his
appointee for Governor General John Kerr.

"SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU DUMB CUNT!"
- FlangesBum on learning the truth about Labour's economic capabilities.

"I don't care what you fuckers think!"
- KRudd the KRude Rat at his finest again.

"We'll just change it all when we get in."
- Garrett the carrott

regn.pickfod

2010-03-10 18:43:01 UTC

Post by Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF

Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF "

Post by annily
Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately I'm
not one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

How would you like some batts as a consolation prize?

Gawd damn, can't even _give_ them away ...

petzl

2010-03-11 10:45:09 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:32:27 +1100, B J Foster

And your point is?
Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately I'm not
one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

I'm in Sydney and most get this on worn out copper wire (asdl2+)
Loading Image...

And where Telstra are offering optic connectects everyone can get your
8 Mpps and just dont neeed the $200+ monthly bill for something from
Telstra thats probably lies
Petzl
--
Our parliaments need to obey our Constitutions,
the judiciary must apply the law
"Dieu est mon droit"

Rod Speed

2010-03-11 19:00:58 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:32:27 +1100, B J Foster

Post by B J Foster
A high-speed broadband network launched by Telstra over a year ago
and available to nearly one million premises has attracted just
200 customers.
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268174866621
Now lemme see $43b/(22x200) = $4.8 million per ... aw, forget it!
Coalition continues to oppose Telstra break up
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268171435159

I think the people are awake that what is *described* as "super
fast" just won't happen over a worn and wearing out copper wire
connection This is a typical genuine Broadband speed in USa
http://www.speedtest.net/result/739103211.png

And your point is?
Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately I'm
not one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

I'm in Sydney and most get this on worn out copper wire (asdl2+)
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

Petzl

2010-03-11 20:31:18 UTC

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:00:58 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Petzl
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:32:27 +1100, B J Foster

Post by B J Foster
A high-speed broadband network launched by Telstra over a year ago
and available to nearly one million premises has attracted just
200 customers.
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268174866621
Now lemme see $43b/(22x200) = $4.8 million per ... aw, forget it!
Coalition continues to oppose Telstra break up
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268171435159

I think the people are awake that what is *described* as "super
fast" just won't happen over a worn and wearing out copper wire
connection This is a typical genuine Broadband speed in USa
http://www.speedtest.net/result/739103211.png

And your point is?
Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately I'm
not one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

I'm in Sydney and most get this on worn out copper wire (asdl2+)
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

What you missed out in the Catholic Club?
--
Petzl
http://tinyurl.com/atheist-mp3

annily

2010-03-12 00:01:18 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:00:58 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Petzl
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:32:27 +1100, B J Foster

Post by B J Foster
A high-speed broadband network launched by Telstra over a year ago
and available to nearly one million premises has attracted just
200 customers.
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268174866621
Now lemme see $43b/(22x200) = $4.8 million per ... aw, forget it!
Coalition continues to oppose Telstra break up
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268171435159

I think the people are awake that what is *described* as "super
fast" just won't happen over a worn and wearing out copper wire
connection This is a typical genuine Broadband speed in USa
http://www.speedtest.net/result/739103211.png

And your point is?
Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately I'm
not one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

I'm in Sydney and most get this on worn out copper wire (asdl2+)
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

What you missed out in the Catholic Club?

I have no idea what that means, but your statement that most people in
Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps is obvious nonsense.

--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which may or may not influence my opinions.

Peter Webb

2010-03-12 01:55:13 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:00:58 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Petzl
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:32:27 +1100, B J Foster

Post by B J Foster
A high-speed broadband network launched by Telstra over a year ago
and available to nearly one million premises has attracted just
200 customers.
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268174866621
Now lemme see $43b/(22x200) = $4.8 million per ... aw, forget it!
Coalition continues to oppose Telstra break up
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268171435159

I think the people are awake that what is *described* as "super
fast" just won't happen over a worn and wearing out copper wire
connection This is a typical genuine Broadband speed in USa
http://www.speedtest.net/result/739103211.png

And your point is?
Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately I'm
not one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

I'm in Sydney and most get this on worn out copper wire (asdl2+)
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

What you missed out in the Catholic Club?

I have no idea what that means, but your statement that most people in
Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps is obvious nonsense.
--

Everybody in Sydney can get 660 kbps if they want. Indeed, over 70% of
households already have either Telstra or Optus cable runing past their door
and they can have 12 Mbps if they want to pay for it. Many more live close
enough to an exchange to get ADSL2 if they want.

Everybody in Sydeny can buy high speed broadband if they want it. Just as
everybody in Sydney can buy a car capable of 300 kms if they want to pay for
it.

Trouble is, not everybody needs or wants a car that can go 300 kms/hr or an
internet connection at 10 Mbps.

Now, the government is buying everybody a sports car for no apparent reason
other than they are nice to have. (Good). But they are using my money to do
it. (Bad).

Petzl

2010-03-12 02:07:07 UTC

Post by petzl
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

I have no idea what that means, but your statement that most people in
Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps is obvious nonsense.
--

What I said was Telstra in main area's of Sydney have maintained or
replaced the copper wire and then where the copper wire is best put in
optic fibre
I have been in many surrounding Sydney suburbs where the copper wire
needs replacing, This has been reported by media
It's no wonder that Optus have a higher Market capitalization than
Telstra (and it's shrinking)
Petzl
--
"Dieu est mon droit" God is my legal right

annily

2010-03-12 02:16:22 UTC

Post by petzl
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

I have no idea what that means, but your statement that most people in
Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps is obvious nonsense.
--

What I said was Telstra in main area's of Sydney have maintained or
replaced the copper wire and then where the copper wire is best put in
optic fibre

What you said (and what I was objecting to) was:

"most people in Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps"

which is obviously not true.

--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which may or may not influence my opinions.

Petzl

2010-03-12 02:49:46 UTC

Post by petzl
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

I have no idea what that means, but your statement that most people in
Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps is obvious nonsense.
--

What I said was Telstra in main area's of Sydney have maintained or
replaced the copper wire and then where the copper wire is best put in
optic fibre

"most people in Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps"
which is obviously not true.

I'm finding it both disgusting and true
You post from Adelaide? so I don't see how you would know
--
Petzl
http://tinyurl.com/atheist-mp3

annily

2010-03-12 03:42:33 UTC

Post by petzl
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

I have no idea what that means, but your statement that most people in
Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps is obvious nonsense.
--

What I said was Telstra in main area's of Sydney have maintained or
replaced the copper wire and then where the copper wire is best put in
optic fibre

"most people in Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps"
which is obviously not true.

I'm finding it both disgusting and true

LOL. So just because you get those speeds, you assume most people in
Sydney do?

Post by Petzl
You post from Adelaide? so I don't see how you would know

Just because you're in Sydney doesn't mean you'd know either. Everyone's
line is different. I've seen lots of speeds posted in various forums,
and I can assure you that your quoted speeds are not typical of people
in Sydney or indeed most other places in Australia.

--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which may or may not influence my opinions.

Petzl

2010-03-12 04:06:46 UTC

Post by annily
Just because you're in Sydney doesn't mean you'd know either. Everyone's
line is different. I've seen lots of speeds posted in various forums,
and I can assure you that your quoted speeds are not typical of people
in Sydney or indeed most other places in Australia.

Not only my suburb that I have been called to
I often get asked to look at workmates and friends connections.
Admittedly mostly when the connection is poor.
Petzl
--
The National Security Hotline
Terrorism
1800 123 400

annily

2010-03-12 04:59:13 UTC

Not only my suburb that I have been called to
I often get asked to look at workmates and friends connections.
Admittedly mostly when the connection is poor.

Yeah, that's a point. You probably see the worst cases.

If you typically get 660 kbps download speed (as per that speed test you
linked to), what speed does your modem usually sync at?

--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which may or may not influence my opinions.

Petzl

2010-03-12 05:29:44 UTC

Not only my suburb that I have been called to
I often get asked to look at workmates and friends connections.
Admittedly mostly when the connection is poor.

Yeah, that's a point. You probably see the worst cases.
If you typically get 660 kbps download speed (as per that speed test you
linked to), what speed does your modem usually sync at?

960/256 Kbps
My suburb (Glen Alpine NSW) the copperwire has for over 20 years
needed replacing many cannot even get a land line those that do have
difficulty even getting a modem connection.
This is a good link to check you distance to exchange and expected
speed
http://www.adsl2exchanges.com.au/viewexchange.php?Exchange=CBTN
Petzl
--
The National Security Hotline
Terrorism
1800 123 400

Peter Webb

2010-03-12 07:58:50 UTC

Not only my suburb that I have been called to
I often get asked to look at workmates and friends connections.
Admittedly mostly when the connection is poor.

Yeah, that's a point. You probably see the worst cases.
If you typically get 660 kbps download speed (as per that speed test you
linked to), what speed does your modem usually sync at?

http://www.bigpond.com/internet/plans/wireless/?2473PSEM&s_kwcid=TC|4296|wireless%20broadband%20sydney||S||3402011031

annily

2010-03-12 08:56:10 UTC

Not only my suburb that I have been called to
I often get asked to look at workmates and friends connections.
Admittedly mostly when the connection is poor.

Yeah, that's a point. You probably see the worst cases.
If you typically get 660 kbps download speed (as per that speed test you
linked to), what speed does your modem usually sync at?

960/256 Kbps

That's interesting. I thought Telstra was supposed to guarantee a
minimum of 1500 kbps downstream.

Post by Petzl
My suburb (Glen Alpine NSW) the copperwire has for over 20 years
needed replacing many cannot even get a land line those that do have
difficulty even getting a modem connection.
This is a good link to check you distance to exchange and expected
speed
http://www.adsl2exchanges.com.au/viewexchange.php?Exchange=CBTN

Yeah, I use that site a lot. It does often underestimate cable lengths
(and hence overestimate speeds) though.

--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which may or may not influence my opinions.

Hunter

2010-03-12 07:30:16 UTC

Not only my suburb that I have been called to
I often get asked to look at workmates and friends connections.
Admittedly mostly when the connection is poor.

Yeah, that's a point. You probably see the worst cases.
If you typically get 660 kbps download speed (as per that speed test you
linked to), what speed does your modem usually sync at?

The extent of Pretzl's stupidity. I used to have a landline which was
crackly as fuck on voice calls, but the 56K modem other than the odd
disconnect was perfectly fine. The delusional pretzl claims they can not
even use a modem (and he's made this claim on numerous occasions, not to
mention attempting to rewrite the constitution and finding nothing wrong
with pedophilia at the hands of priests). He's a complete fucking loon
who wouldn't know honesty if it bit him on the arse in short....

Rod Speed

2010-03-13 00:00:20 UTC

Post by annily
Just because you're in Sydney doesn't mean you'd know either.
Everyone's line is different. I've seen lots of speeds posted in
various forums, and I can assure you that your quoted speeds are
not typical of people in Sydney or indeed most other places in
Australia.

Not only my suburb that I have been called to
I often get asked to look at workmates and friends connections.
Admittedly mostly when the connection is poor.

Yeah, that's a point. You probably see the worst cases.
If you typically get 660 kbps download speed (as per that speed test
you linked to), what speed does your modem usually sync at?

960/256 Kbps

Another lie.

Post by Petzl
My suburb (Glen Alpine NSW) the copperwire has for over 20 years
needed replacing many cannot even get a land line those that do have
difficulty even getting a modem connection.

Another lie.

Post by Petzl
This is a good link to check you distance to exchange and expected speed
http://www.adsl2exchanges.com.au/viewexchange.php?Exchange=CBTN

Irrelevant to your lies.

Rod Speed

2010-03-12 23:52:14 UTC

Post by annily
Just because you're in Sydney doesn't mean you'd know either.
Everyone's line is different. I've seen lots of speeds posted in
various forums, and I can assure you that your quoted speeds are not
typical of people in Sydney or indeed most other places in Australia.

Not only my suburb that I have been called to
I often get asked to look at workmates and friends connections.

But you're so stupid that you cant even manage to grasp that
that say absolutely NOTHING about what all in sydney get.

Post by Petzl
Admittedly mostly when the connection is poor.

Funny that.

And you're so stupid that you cant even manage to
work out why they cant get a dialup connection either.

Rod Speed

2010-03-12 23:45:36 UTC

Post by petzl
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

I have no idea what that means, but your statement that most people
in Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps is obvious nonsense.

What I said was Telstra in main area's of Sydney have maintained or
replaced the copper wire and then where the copper wire is best put
in optic fibre

"most people in Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps"
which is obviously not true.

I'm finding it both disgusting and true

But then you never did have a clue.

Post by Petzl
You post from Adelaide? so I don't see how you would know

From the number of people in sydney that get a lot better than 660K, fuckwit.

Hunter

2010-03-12 03:02:04 UTC

Post by petzl
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

I have no idea what that means, but your statement that most people
in Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps is obvious nonsense.
--

What I said was Telstra in main area's of Sydney have maintained or
replaced the copper wire and then where the copper wire is best put in
optic fibre

"most people in Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps"
which is obviously not true.

He's been pushing that barrow just as hard as his creative rewriting of
our constitution to mean the exact opposite to what it says and the
court interprets it to mean. He's a religious nutter and quite stupid,
when he gets on a band-wagon no amount of evidence will ever pull him
off, he'll be making that same claim in a year just like he was a year
ago, regardless of what you point out to him.

Rod Speed

2010-03-12 02:54:04 UTC

Post by petzl
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

I have no idea what that means, but your statement that most people
in Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps is obvious nonsense.
--

Only in your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasyland.

Post by Petzl
(and it's shrinking)

Petzl

2010-03-12 03:31:23 UTC

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:54:04 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Petzl
It's no wonder that Optus have a higher Market capitalization than Telstra

Only in your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasyland.

Post by Petzl
(and it's shrinking)

Senator Minchin
"This extraordinary attack on Telstra is such that the Telstra share
price has been so depressed that Optus is now the biggest
telecommunications provider in the Australian market by market
capitalisation"
Petzl
--
The National Security Hotline
Terrorism
1800 123 400

B J Foster

2010-03-12 18:33:20 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:54:04 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Petzl
It's no wonder that Optus have a higher Market capitalization than Telstra

Only in your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasyland.

Post by Petzl
(and it's shrinking)

Optus is not a listed company

Over & out.

Rod Speed

2010-03-12 23:49:45 UTC

Post by Petzl
It's no wonder that Optus have a higher Market capitalization than Telstra

Only in your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasyland.

Post by Petzl
(and it's shrinking)

He's a fool.
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=TLS.AX
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=sgt.AX

Petzl

2010-03-13 00:10:58 UTC

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 10:49:45 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Petzl
Senator Minchin
"This extraordinary attack on Telstra is such that the Telstra share
price has been so depressed that Optus is now the biggest
telecommunications provider in the Australian market by market
capitalisation"

He's a fool.
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=TLS.AX
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=sgt.AX

TLS 38.1 Billion
SGT 39.4 Billion
Looks like you need a night out at the Catholic Club Rod
Petzl
--
"Dieu est mon droit" God is my legal right

Rod Speed

2010-03-13 09:34:21 UTC

Pretzl lied

He's a fool.
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=TLS.AX
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=sgt.AX

TLS 38.1 Billion
SGT 39.4 Billion

Caught lying, as always.

Petzl

2010-03-13 10:21:09 UTC

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:34:21 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Rod Speed
He's a fool.
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=TLS.AX
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=sgt.AX

TLS 38.1 Billion
SGT 39.4 Billion

Caught lying, as always.

You know I don't lie Rod
Check it yourself
Go to
http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/
put
au:TLS
in box click "advanced chart" button
THEN click
"detailed quote"
Market Cap: 38.1 Billion
Do same for
au:SGT
Market Cap: 39.4 Billion
--
Petzl
http://tinyurl.com/atheist-mp3

Rod Speed

2010-03-13 19:36:09 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:34:21 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Rod Speed
He's a fool.
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=TLS.AX
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=sgt.AX

TLS 38.1 Billion
SGT 39.4 Billion

Caught lying, as always.

You know I don't lie Rod

I know you lie, gutless.

Post by Petzl
Check it yourself
Go to
http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/
put
au:TLS
in box click "advanced chart" button
THEN click
"detailed quote"
Market Cap: 38.1 Billion
Do same for
au:SGT
Market Cap: 39.4 Billion

Pity about my links, liar.

Petzl

2010-03-14 02:10:13 UTC

On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 06:36:09 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Petzl
On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:34:21 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Rod Speed
He's a fool.
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=TLS.AX
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=sgt.AX

TLS 38.1 Billion
SGT 39.4 Billion

Caught lying, as always.

You know I don't lie Rod

I know you lie, gutless.

Pity about my links, liar.

Your link is wrong?

TLS Market Cap: 38,075.81
SGT Market Cap: 1,206.01
Petzl
--
The National Security Hotline
Terrorism
1800 123 400

Rod Speed

2010-03-14 03:03:12 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 06:36:09 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Petzl
On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:34:21 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Rod Speed
He's a fool.
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=TLS.AX
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=sgt.AX

TLS 38.1 Billion
SGT 39.4 Billion

Caught lying, as always.

You know I don't lie Rod

I know you lie, gutless.

Pity about my links, liar.

Your link is wrong?

Nope.

Pity about
http://www.digitallook.com/cgi-bin/dlmedia/security.cgi?username=&ac=&csi=822760
http://www.shares.com.au/forum/showthread.php?p=124757
http://markets.smh.com.au/apps/qt/quote.ac?code=SGT
etc etc etc

Post by Petzl
TLS Market Cap: 38,075.81
SGT Market Cap: 1,206.01
Petzl

Sunny

2010-03-14 00:38:30 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:34:21 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Rod Speed
He's a fool.
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=TLS.AX
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=sgt.AX

TLS 38.1 Billion
SGT 39.4 Billion

Caught lying, as always.

You know I don't lie Rod

Cough - splutter - cough - ughh.

Hunter

2010-03-13 14:16:04 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:34:21 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Rod Speed
He's a fool.
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=TLS.AX
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=sgt.AX

TLS 38.1 Billion
SGT 39.4 Billion

Caught lying, as always.

You know I don't lie Rod

That's all you do pretzl.

Peter Webb

2010-03-12 04:59:27 UTC

Post by petzl
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

I have no idea what that means, but your statement that most people in
Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps is obvious nonsense.
--

Telstra Market Cap: $38 billion
Optus Market Cap: $14 billion

Gee, you are probably the guy who wrote the NBN business case. Only someone
with as little knowledge as you of the Australian telecommunications market
could think its a good idea.

Petzl

2010-03-12 05:34:16 UTC

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:59:27 +1100, "Peter Webb"

Post by Peter Webb
Telstra Market Cap: $38 billion
Optus Market Cap: $14 billion
Gee, you are probably the guy who wrote the NBN business case. Only someone
with as little knowledge as you of the Australian telecommunications market
could think its a good idea.

Where you get your market cap from?
Just read in paper that Optus was the greater
http://mybiz.optus.com.au/news/111648/nbn-dead-without-telstra-minchin.html
"This extraordinary attack on Telstra is such that the Telstra share
price has been so depressed that Optus is now the biggest
telecommunications provider in the Australian market by market
capitalisation," Senator Minchin said.

Peter Webb

2010-03-12 07:56:06 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:59:27 +1100, "Peter Webb"

Minchin generally knows what he is talking about. But in this case, unless
he has some strange interpretation:

1. Optus is not a publicly listed company in Australia
2. SingTel, its parent, is. SingTel owns a lot more than Optus.
3. Too complicate matters, I think (but don't quote me) SingTel is also
listed in Singapore.
4. To much further complicate matters, the term "market cap" usually means
just those shares which are traded on the market. The ASX does not include
the Singapore Government ownership of SingTel fully in its calculations of
SingTel market capitalisation.

As Optus is not a public company as such, we must rely on analysts estimates
until such time as part of it is sold.

Common sense says that this is much less than Telstra, which in fact leads
Optus in every market segment - mobile, Pay TV, internet, fixed line and
data.

My figure of $14b is based upon my recollection (sorry) of recent
speculation that 25% of Optus would fetch $3.5b, but I can't dig it up.

Petzl

2010-03-12 08:14:46 UTC

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 18:56:06 +1100, "Peter Webb"

Post by Peter Webb
Minchin generally knows what he is talking about. But in this case, unless
1. Optus is not a publicly listed company in Australia
2. SingTel, its parent, is. SingTel owns a lot more than Optus.
3. Too complicate matters, I think (but don't quote me) SingTel is also
listed in Singapore.
4. To much further complicate matters, the term "market cap" usually means
just those shares which are traded on the market. The ASX does not include
the Singapore Government ownership of SingTel fully in its calculations of
SingTel market capitalisation.
As Optus is not a public company as such, we must rely on analysts estimates
until such time as part of it is sold.
Common sense says that this is much less than Telstra, which in fact leads
Optus in every market segment - mobile, Pay TV, internet, fixed line and
data.
My figure of $14b is based upon my recollection (sorry) of recent
speculation that 25% of Optus would fetch $3.5b, but I can't dig it up.

That's OK.
Market cap is what one would get or total value of all market shares.
Singtel are the outright owner of "Cable & Wireless Optus (CWO)".
That don't mean they are not prepared to sell or have offers for?
--
Petzl
http://tinyurl.com/atheist-mp3

Rod Speed

2010-03-13 00:06:04 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 18:56:06 +1100, "Peter Webb"

Post by Peter Webb
Minchin generally knows what he is talking about. But in this case,
1. Optus is not a publicly listed company in Australia
2. SingTel, its parent, is. SingTel owns a lot more than Optus.
3. Too complicate matters, I think (but don't quote me) SingTel is
also listed in Singapore.
4. To much further complicate matters, the term "market cap" usually
means just those shares which are traded on the market. The ASX does
not include the Singapore Government ownership of SingTel fully in
its calculations of SingTel market capitalisation.
As Optus is not a public company as such, we must rely on analysts
estimates until such time as part of it is sold.
Common sense says that this is much less than Telstra, which in fact
leads Optus in every market segment - mobile, Pay TV, internet,
fixed line and data.
My figure of $14b is based upon my recollection (sorry) of recent
speculation that 25% of Optus would fetch $3.5b, but I can't dig it up.

That's OK.
Market cap is what one would get

Nope.

Post by Petzl
or total value of all market shares.

Not the same thing.

Post by Petzl
Singtel are the outright owner of "Cable & Wireless Optus (CWO)".
That don't mean they are not prepared to sell or have offers for?

Irrelevant to the market cap of that particular telco.

Addinall

2010-03-13 19:54:46 UTC

On Mar 12, 5:56 pm, "Peter Webb"

Post by Peter Webb

Post by Petzl
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:59:27 +1100, "Peter Webb"

Where you get your market cap from?
Just read in paper that Optus was the greater
http://mybiz.optus.com.au/news/111648/nbn-dead-without-telstra-minchi...
"This extraordinary attack on Telstra is such that the Telstra share
price has been so depressed that Optus is now the biggest
telecommunications provider in the Australian market by market
capitalisation," Senator Minchin said.

Minchin generally knows what he is talking about. But in this case, unless
1. Optus is not a publicly listed company in Australia
2. SingTel, its parent, is. SingTel owns a lot more than Optus.
3. Too complicate matters, I think (but don't quote me) SingTel is also
listed in Singapore.
4. To much further complicate matters, the term "market cap" usually means
just those shares which are traded on the market. The ASX does not include
the Singapore Government ownership of SingTel fully in its calculations of
SingTel market capitalisation.
As Optus is not a public company as such, we must rely on analysts estimates
until such time as part of it is sold.
Common sense says that this is much less than Telstra, which in fact leads
Optus in every market segment - mobile, Pay TV, internet, fixed line and
data.
My figure of $14b is based upon my recollection (sorry) of recent
speculation that 25% of Optus would fetch $3.5b, but I can't dig it up.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

The internet section(s) much less. I have worked for them twice, and
used the services
a few dozen times.

Telstra is huge in comparison to the OPTUS data network.
Even though OPTUS have splashed out a ridiculous amount
of money on Maquarie Park. Even if it does look like the
interior of a Tardis, the company still sucks.

Mark Addinall.

B J Foster

2010-03-12 18:34:36 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:59:27 +1100, "Peter Webb"

The last time you quoted someone, it was Fred Nile.

Rod Speed

2010-03-13 00:02:48 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:59:27 +1100, "Peter Webb"

Post by Peter Webb
Telstra Market Cap: $38 billion
Optus Market Cap: $14 billion
Gee, you are probably the guy who wrote the NBN business case. Only
someone with as little knowledge as you of the Australian
telecommunications market could think its a good idea.

Where you get your market cap from?

http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=TLS.AX
http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/aks?s=sgt.AX

Post by Petzl
Just read in paper that Optus was the greater
http://mybiz.optus.com.au/news/111648/nbn-dead-without-telstra-minchin.html
"This extraordinary attack on Telstra is such that the Telstra
share price has been so depressed that Optus is now the
biggest telecommunications provider in the Australian
market by market capitalisation," Senator Minchin said.

That fool has never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.

You're so stupid you cant even check his claims for yourself.

B J Foster

2010-03-12 18:25:08 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:00:58 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Petzl
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:32:27 +1100, B J Foster

Post by B J Foster
A high-speed broadband network launched by Telstra over a year ago
and available to nearly one million premises has attracted just
200 customers.
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268174866621
Now lemme see $43b/(22x200) = $4.8 million per ... aw, forget it!
Coalition continues to oppose Telstra break up
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268171435159

I think the people are awake that what is *described* as "super
fast" just won't happen over a worn and wearing out copper wire
connection This is a typical genuine Broadband speed in USa
http://www.speedtest.net/result/739103211.png

And your point is?
Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately I'm
not one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

I'm in Sydney and most get this on worn out copper wire (asdl2+)
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

What you missed out in the Catholic Club?

I have no idea what that means, but your statement that most people in
Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps is obvious nonsense.

Ssshhhh. Most people in Sydney are paying for speeds many times that.

Are you in Adelaide?

annily

2010-03-13 00:48:57 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:00:58 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Petzl
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:32:27 +1100, B J Foster

Post by B J Foster
A high-speed broadband network launched by Telstra over a year ago
and available to nearly one million premises has attracted just
200 customers.
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268174866621
Now lemme see $43b/(22x200) = $4.8 million per ... aw, forget it!
Coalition continues to oppose Telstra break up
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268171435159

I think the people are awake that what is *described* as "super
fast" just won't happen over a worn and wearing out copper wire
connection This is a typical genuine Broadband speed in USa
http://www.speedtest.net/result/739103211.png

And your point is?
Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately I'm
not one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

I'm in Sydney and most get this on worn out copper wire (asdl2+)
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

What you missed out in the Catholic Club?

I have no idea what that means, but your statement that most people in
Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps is obvious nonsense.

Ssshhhh. Most people in Sydney are paying for speeds many times that.

Yes, and most are getting such speeds. That was my point.

Post by B J Foster
Are you in Adelaide?

Yes. Relevance?

--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which may or may not influence my opinions.

B J Foster

2010-03-13 00:52:51 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:00:58 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Post by Petzl
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:32:27 +1100, B J Foster

Post by B J Foster
A high-speed broadband network launched by Telstra over a year ago
and available to nearly one million premises has attracted just
200 customers.
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268174866621
Now lemme see $43b/(22x200) = $4.8 million per ... aw, forget it!
Coalition continues to oppose Telstra break up
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268171435159

I think the people are awake that what is *described* as "super
fast" just won't happen over a worn and wearing out copper wire
connection This is a typical genuine Broadband speed in USa
http://www.speedtest.net/result/739103211.png

And your point is?
Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately I'm
not one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

I'm in Sydney and most get this on worn out copper wire (asdl2+)
http://www.speedtest.net/result/743549189.png

Another bare faced lie.

What you missed out in the Catholic Club?

I have no idea what that means, but your statement that most people
in Sydney get download speeds of 660 kbps is obvious nonsense.

Ssshhhh. Most people in Sydney are paying for speeds many times that.

Yes, and most are getting such speeds. That was my point.

Post by B J Foster
Are you in Adelaide?

Yes. Relevance?

Does it have the Internet yet?

Petzl

2010-03-13 01:08:02 UTC

Post by annily
Yes, and most are getting such speeds. That was my point.

Those in Whirlpool and like groups do
Those who don't get wireless (and why many are just geting mobile with
no landline unless with Optus)
I hope you realize there are also shills touting in such groups
stating what a great service such and such give
Petzl
--
"Dieu est mon droit" God is my legal right

Eunometic

2010-03-15 10:23:50 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:32:27 +1100, B J Foster

And your point is?
Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately I'm not
one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

8Mbs is not really fast, I get between 15Mbit and occaisionly 32Mbit
when I pay for it on Telstra Cable (ie along with foxtell though you
don't need Foxtell along with it)

This is how to get fast speeds while avoiding the limitations of ADSL
with distance from exchange. The Coax/Optical network does not fade
with distance.

Speeds of 25 are pleasant to use. Speeds of 50Mb are common in
Japan, USA and Europe.

They enable services such as video on demand, internet protocol TV,
virtual conferencing. You should be able to view a High Defintion
full size image of a loved one sitting or standing next to you.

Post by annily
--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which may or may not influence my opinions.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Rod Speed

2010-03-15 19:51:57 UTC

I think the people are awake that what is *described* as "super
fast" just won't happen over a worn and wearing out copper wire
connection This is a typical genuine Broadband speed in USa
http://www.speedtest.net/result/739103211.png

And your point is?
Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately
I'm not one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

Pity it has a much bigger problem, what you get depends on what others are doing.

Post by Eunometic
Speeds of 25 are pleasant to use. Speeds of
50Mb are common in Japan, USA and Europe.

Pigs arse they are.

Post by Eunometic
They enable services such as video on demand, internet protocol TV, virtual conferencing.

We have all those.

Post by Eunometic
You should be able to view a High Defintion full size image of a loved one sitting or standing next to you.

Completely stupid to be spending $43B class money for that.

annily

2010-03-16 01:16:47 UTC

Post by Eunometic

Post by Petzl
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:32:27 +1100, B J Foster

And your point is?
Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately I'm not
one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

8Mbs is not really fast,

I never implied it was. I was replying to the OP, who gave an example of
8 Mbps speed in the US and implied it was much better than in Australia.

Post by Eunometic
I get between 15Mbit and occaisionly 32Mbit
when I pay for it on Telstra Cable (ie along with foxtell though you
don't need Foxtell along with it)
This is how to get fast speeds while avoiding the limitations of ADSL
with distance from exchange.

Yes, and pay through the nose for it.

--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which may or may not influence my opinions.

Eunometic

2010-03-16 08:16:19 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:32:27 +1100, B J Foster

And your point is?
Plenty of people in Australia get 8 Mbps or more (unfortunately I'm not
one of them as I'm too far from my exchange).

8Mbs is not really fast,

I never implied it was. I was replying to the OP, who gave an example of
8 Mbps speed in the US and implied it was much better than in Australia.

Yes, and pay through the nose for it.

I spend maybe $89 instead of $59, about $30 more than others but the
network is fast and I'm not having to deal with the kiddies and their
downloads. For $7.50 week its worth not having to compete with
networks offering slow 'unlimited broadband plans' that are congested
with gammers and torrent downloaders.

Rod Speed

2010-03-10 18:18:43 UTC

I think the people are awake that what is *described* as "super fast"
just won't happen over a worn and wearing out copper wire connection

That doesnt use the copper wire connection, fool.

Post by Petzl
This is a typical genuine Broadband speed in USa
http://www.speedtest.net/result/739103211.png
Australia
http://cas.awm.gov.au/screen_img/H09572

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have never ever had a fucking
clue and why the only time you get to drive anything that matters, they keep you on rails.

2010-03-10 10:58:38 UTC

Okay, it is available to one million people.
they managed to get 200 customers and collect $269 each, a total of
$53.800.
If they would offer it for $80 each and a million custumers take it up, they
would collect $80 Million.
Can anyone tell me if the manager at telstra gets a bonus for his idiotic
business practice?

Post by B J Foster
Coalition continues to oppose Telstra break up
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268171435159
Meanwhile, anyone have any ideas on what to do with a mountain of batts?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2010/03/09/2840721.htm

B J Foster

2010-03-10 12:38:16 UTC

Okay, it is available to one million people.
they managed to get 200 customers and collect $269 each, a total of
$53.800.
If they would offer it for $80 each and a million custumers take it up,
they would collect $80 Million.
Can anyone tell me if the manager at telstra gets a bonus for his
idiotic business practice?

You are assuming elastic demand. There is *no* evidence that any more
than the 200 would respond to a price drop.

Secondly, the $43 billion is around $10k per premise. I'd like to see
you make a profit at $80/month. Or to put it another way, $80m x 10 =
$800m is less than 2% of the $43b capital cost. Have fun trying to make
a business case. Oh, and when you have, do please send a copy to Mr
Conroy - he's been too busy with golf to do the sums...

2010-03-10 14:12:40 UTC

Okay, it is available to one million people.
they managed to get 200 customers and collect $269 each, a total of
$53.800.
If they would offer it for $80 each and a million custumers take it up,
they would collect $80 Million.
Can anyone tell me if the manager at telstra gets a bonus for his idiotic
business practice?

You are assuming elastic demand. There is *no* evidence that any more than
the 200 would respond to a price drop.
Secondly, the $43 billion is around $10k per premise. I'd like to see you
make a profit at $80/month. Or to put it another way, $80m x 10 = $800m is
less than 2% of the $43b capital cost. Have fun trying to make a business
case. Oh, and when you have, do please send a copy to Mr Conroy - he's
been too busy with golf to do the sums.

As I understand from your post, the connections are there but are not used.
It doesn't matter how much it did cost, you work to make the maximum money
out of what you have got.
As you get more customers you can add more services such as Pay tv over the
internet. You can add a doctors service for minor illness with prescriptions
to print. How much will that save the Government? You can add cut price
university education across the world using the internet. In fact, more than
50% of work that is being done in Offices can be done over the internet. You
save billions on roadworks and public transport.
Thank God they didn't look at the cost when they build the railways and the
harbour bridge. In fact, it did cost the poms a lot of money to come here.
Maybe they should have staid at home

B J Foster

2010-03-10 18:13:49 UTC

Post by B J Foster
A high-speed broadband network launched by Telstra over a year ago
and available to nearly one million premises has attracted just 200
customers.
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268174866621
Now lemme see $43b/(22x200) = $4.8 million per ... aw, forget it!

Okay, it is available to one million people.
they managed to get 200 customers and collect $269 each, a total of
$53.800.
If they would offer it for $80 each and a million custumers take it
up, they would collect $80 Million.
Can anyone tell me if the manager at telstra gets a bonus for his
idiotic business practice?

You are assuming elastic demand. There is *no* evidence that any more
than the 200 would respond to a price drop.
Secondly, the $43 billion is around $10k per premise. I'd like to see
you make a profit at $80/month. Or to put it another way, $80m x 10 =
$800m is less than 2% of the $43b capital cost. Have fun trying to
make a business case. Oh, and when you have, do please send a copy to
Mr Conroy - he's been too busy with golf to do the sums.

As I understand from your post, the connections are there but are not used.

Not necessarily. They could be wireless, which BTW *is* what people want
or it could be that Telstra has built the backhaul (aka 'FTTN') but
not the 'last mile' - which is 90% of the infrastructure.

And now the Labor party which knows nothing about telecommunications,
less about peoples' needs and is simply unable to manage money, thinks
it can manage the rollout of 'last mile' that no-one needs a) because
ADSL2 is adequate and b) because people want wireless.

I heard from someone in the industry that they are hiring a lot of
lawyers and middle manager types cast off from existing Telcos which are
shedding their middle-manager layers. When nothing gets done, they will
simple contract it all out - which was the starting point.

The NBN is a strategy re-nationalise Telecommunications under the trojan
of bringing Telstra to heel. They will end up using public money to
subsidise price dumping and kill off the telco industry.

We should have paid attention when someone pointed out all the commies
in Rudd's team.

Post by HD
It doesn't matter how much it did cost, you work to make the maximum
money out of what you have got.
As you get more customers you can add more services such as Pay tv over
the internet. You can add a doctors service for minor illness with
prescriptions to print. How much will that save the Government? You can
add cut price university education across the world using the internet.
In fact, more than 50% of work that is being done in Offices can be done
over the internet. You save billions on roadworks and public transport.
Thank God they didn't look at the cost when they build the railways and
the harbour bridge. In fact, it did cost the poms a lot of money to come
here. Maybe they should have staid at home

B J Foster

2010-03-11 10:52:23 UTC

...

Post by B J Foster
The NBN is a strategy re-nationalise Telecommunications under the trojan
of bringing Telstra to heel. They will end up using public money to
subsidise price dumping and kill off the telco industry.
We should have paid attention when someone pointed out all the commies
in Rudd's team.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/why_hasnt_gillard_been_honest

Post by HD
It doesn't matter how much it did cost, you work to make the maximum
money out of what you have got.
As you get more customers you can add more services such as Pay tv
over the internet. You can add a doctors service for minor illness
with prescriptions to print. How much will that save the Government?
You can add cut price university education across the world using the
internet. In fact, more than 50% of work that is being done in Offices
can be done over the internet. You save billions on roadworks and
public transport.
Thank God they didn't look at the cost when they build the railways
and the harbour bridge. In fact, it did cost the poms a lot of money
to come here. Maybe they should have staid at home

Frank Slootweg

2010-03-11 20:03:01 UTC

B J Foster <***@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote:
[...]

Post by B J Foster
And now the Labor party which knows nothing about telecommunications,
less about peoples' needs and is simply unable to manage money, thinks
it can manage the rollout of 'last mile' that no-one needs a) because
ADSL2 is adequate and b) because people want wireless.

ADSL2 is adequate for *you/some/most*. So what? I live in The
Netherlands. I started on 300/64 Kbps, which evolved - free of charge -
to 3000/500 Kbps. That same cable company is now also providing 25/4 Mbps
and 50/5 Mbps, the latter at some AUD 100 / month (i.e. little over a
third of Telstra's 100 Mbps cable service). Do you really think they
would be upgrading their network all the time if there was no market for
it?

"b) because people want wireless"? You mean that 'people' *also* want
wireless. They don't want *just* wireless, because - compared to a fixed
wire/cable - wireless is too slow, too expensive, too unreliable, etc..

And guess what, I have *both* cable and wireless Internet, just like I
have a 'fixed' and mobile phone. Who would have thought of *that*!?

Face it, one-size-fits-all doesn't exist, i.e. also not in networking.

[...]

B J Foster

2010-03-11 20:07:16 UTC

ADSL2 is adequate for *you/some/most*. So what? I live in The
Netherlands. I started on 300/64 Kbps, which evolved - free of charge -
to 3000/500 Kbps. That same cable company is now also providing 25/4 Mbps
and 50/5 Mbps, the latter at some AUD 100 / month (i.e. little over a
third of Telstra's 100 Mbps cable service). Do you really think they
would be upgrading their network all the time if there was no market for
it?
"b) because people want wireless"? You mean that 'people' *also* want
wireless. They don't want *just* wireless, because - compared to a fixed
wire/cable - wireless is too slow, too expensive, too unreliable, etc..
And guess what, I have *both* cable and wireless Internet, just like I
have a 'fixed' and mobile phone. Who would have thought of *that*!?
Face it, one-size-fits-all doesn't exist, i.e. also not in networking.

And that it precisely what the government is planning.

Frank Slootweg

2010-03-11 20:27:23 UTC

ADSL2 is adequate for *you/some/most*. So what? I live in The
Netherlands. I started on 300/64 Kbps, which evolved - free of charge -
to 3000/500 Kbps. That same cable company is now also providing 25/4 Mbps
and 50/5 Mbps, the latter at some AUD 100 / month (i.e. little over a
third of Telstra's 100 Mbps cable service). Do you really think they
would be upgrading their network all the time if there was no market for
it?
"b) because people want wireless"? You mean that 'people' *also* want
wireless. They don't want *just* wireless, because - compared to a fixed
wire/cable - wireless is too slow, too expensive, too unreliable, etc..
And guess what, I have *both* cable and wireless Internet, just like I
have a 'fixed' and mobile phone. Who would have thought of *that*!?
Face it, one-size-fits-all doesn't exist, i.e. also not in networking.

And that it precisely what the government is planning.

AFAIK, that's not true. They - the government - may plan to make 100
Mbps *available* to 'everybody', but that does not mean that that will
be the only type of network or/and speed in the whole of Oz. The
majority of the population will *also* have the choices which they have
now. Feel free to bash your government, but last time I checked, Oz
wasn't *really* a dictatorship! :-)

B J Foster

2010-03-11 21:31:34 UTC

ADSL2 is adequate for *you/some/most*. So what? I live in The
Netherlands. I started on 300/64 Kbps, which evolved - free of charge -
to 3000/500 Kbps. That same cable company is now also providing 25/4 Mbps
and 50/5 Mbps, the latter at some AUD 100 / month (i.e. little over a
third of Telstra's 100 Mbps cable service). Do you really think they
would be upgrading their network all the time if there was no market for
it?
"b) because people want wireless"? You mean that 'people' *also* want
wireless. They don't want *just* wireless, because - compared to a fixed
wire/cable - wireless is too slow, too expensive, too unreliable, etc..
And guess what, I have *both* cable and wireless Internet, just like I
have a 'fixed' and mobile phone. Who would have thought of *that*!?
Face it, one-size-fits-all doesn't exist, i.e. also not in networking.

And that it precisely what the government is planning.

What do you think will happen to the other service providers when the
government enters the business?

If they sell it for (say) $100 per month and there is embarassingly low
takeup, they will simply drop the price and the taxpayer will subsidies
it. As a result, all of the other tlcos will go out of business.

This is what happens whe political objectives predominate over
commercial/market objectives.

Post by Frank Slootweg
The
majority of the population will *also* have the choices which they have
now. Feel free to bash your government, but last time I checked, Oz
wasn't *really* a dictatorship! :-)

No they won't. Once telecommunications is nationalised we will have no
choice.

I now pay less that $50/month for adequate bandwidth. By the time these
turkeys are finished *if* my provider survives, I'll be paying for both
service (private) and stupidity (government, as a taxpayer).

And you're damn right, it a democracy.

Rod Speed

2010-03-12 02:32:33 UTC

Post by B J Foster
And now the Labor party which knows nothing about
telecommunications, less about peoples' needs and is simply
unable to manage money, thinks it can manage the rollout of 'last
mile' that no-one needs a) because ADSL2 is adequate and b)
because people want wireless.

ADSL2 is adequate for *you/some/most*. So what? I live in The
Netherlands. I started on 300/64 Kbps, which evolved - free of
charge - to 3000/500 Kbps. That same cable company is now also
providing 25/4 Mbps and 50/5 Mbps, the latter at some AUD 100 /
month (i.e. little over a third of Telstra's 100 Mbps cable
service). Do you really think they would be upgrading their
network all the time if there was no market for it?
"b) because people want wireless"? You mean that 'people' *also*
want wireless. They don't want *just* wireless, because - compared
to a fixed wire/cable - wireless is too slow, too expensive, too
unreliable, etc.. And guess what, I have *both* cable and wireless Internet, just
like I have a 'fixed' and mobile phone. Who would have thought of
*that*!? Face it, one-size-fits-all doesn't exist, i.e. also not in
networking.

And that it precisely what the government is planning.

What do you think will happen to the other service providers when the government enters the business?

Nothing special. They carry on regardless and the NBN ends up with fuck
all customers because their service will have to cost a hell of a lot more.

If they sell it for (say) $100 per month and there is embarassingly low takeup, they will simply drop the price and
the taxpayer will subsidies it.

Bet that doesnt happen, essentially because they will get the bums
rush at the ballot box if they are stupid enough to go that route.

As a result, all of the other tlcos will go out of business.

Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.

This is what happens whe political objectives predominate over
commercial/market objectives.

How odd that you cant list even a single example of that ever happening in this country.

Post by Frank Slootweg
The majority of the population will *also* have the choices which they have now. Feel free to bash your government,
but last time I checked, Oz wasn't *really* a dictatorship! :-)

No they won't. Once telecommunications is nationalised

Taint gunna happen. No govt is actually stupid enough to spend what that would require.

Not even Labor.

we will have no choice.

Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.

I now pay less that $50/month for adequate bandwidth. By the time
these turkeys are finished *if* my provider survives, I'll be paying
for both service (private) and stupidity (government, as a taxpayer).

You just claimed that they would charge LESS than the current ISPs do, fuckwit.

And you're damn right, it a democracy.

B J Foster

2010-03-12 18:40:37 UTC

Post by B J Foster
And now the Labor party which knows nothing about
telecommunications, less about peoples' needs and is simply
unable to manage money, thinks it can manage the rollout of 'last
mile' that no-one needs a) because ADSL2 is adequate and b)
because people want wireless.

ADSL2 is adequate for *you/some/most*. So what? I live in The
Netherlands. I started on 300/64 Kbps, which evolved - free of
charge - to 3000/500 Kbps. That same cable company is now also
providing 25/4 Mbps and 50/5 Mbps, the latter at some AUD 100 /
month (i.e. little over a third of Telstra's 100 Mbps cable
service). Do you really think they would be upgrading their
network all the time if there was no market for it?
"b) because people want wireless"? You mean that 'people' *also*
want wireless. They don't want *just* wireless, because - compared
to a fixed wire/cable - wireless is too slow, too expensive, too
unreliable, etc.. And guess what, I have *both* cable and wireless Internet, just
like I have a 'fixed' and mobile phone. Who would have thought of
*that*!? Face it, one-size-fits-all doesn't exist, i.e. also not in
networking.

And that it precisely what the government is planning.

What do you think will happen to the other service providers when the government enters the business?

Nothing special. They carry on regardless and the NBN ends up with fuck
all customers because their service will have to cost a hell of a lot more.

If they sell it for (say) $100 per month and there is embarassingly low takeup, they will simply drop the price and
the taxpayer will subsidies it.

Bet that doesnt happen, essentially because they will get the bums
rush at the ballot box if they are stupid enough to go that route.

They *are* going that route, Speedy boy:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/09/15/2686143.htm

As a result, all of the other tlcos will go out of business.

Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.

This is what happens whe political objectives predominate over
commercial/market objectives.

How odd that you cant list even a single example of that ever happening in this country.

Post by Frank Slootweg
The majority of the population will *also* have the choices which they have now. Feel free to bash your government,
but last time I checked, Oz wasn't *really* a dictatorship! :-)

No they won't. Once telecommunications is nationalised

Taint gunna happen. No govt is actually stupid enough to spend what that would require.
Not even Labor.

we will have no choice.

Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.

You just claimed that they would charge LESS than the current ISPs do, fuckwit.

As a taxpayer, you silly moron, you will be paying for *whatever* they do.

And you're damn right, it a democracy.

Rod Speed

2010-03-13 00:11:20 UTC

Post by B J Foster
And now the Labor party which knows nothing about
telecommunications, less about peoples' needs and is simply
unable to manage money, thinks it can manage the rollout of
'last mile' that no-one needs a) because ADSL2 is adequate and
b) because people want wireless.

ADSL2 is adequate for *you/some/most*. So what? I live in The
Netherlands. I started on 300/64 Kbps, which evolved - free of
charge - to 3000/500 Kbps. That same cable company is now also
providing 25/4 Mbps and 50/5 Mbps, the latter at some AUD 100 /
month (i.e. little over a third of Telstra's 100 Mbps cable
service). Do you really think they would be upgrading their
network all the time if there was no market for it?
"b) because people want wireless"? You mean that 'people' *also* want wireless. They don't want *just*
wireless, because - compared to a fixed wire/cable - wireless is too slow, too expensive, too
unreliable, etc.. And guess what, I have *both* cable and
wireless Internet, just like I have a 'fixed' and mobile phone.
Who would have thought of *that*!? Face it, one-size-fits-all
doesn't exist, i.e. also not in networking.

And that it precisely what the government is planning.

What do you think will happen to the other service providers when
the government enters the business?

Nothing special. They carry on regardless and the NBN ends up with fuck all customers because their service will have
to cost a hell of a lot more.

Post by B J Foster
If they sell it for (say) $100 per month and there is embarassingly low takeup, they will simply drop the price and
the taxpayer will subsidies it.

Bet that doesnt happen, essentially because they will get the bums
rush at the ballot box if they are stupid enough to go that route.

They *are* going that route,

Like hell they are.

Post by B J Foster
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/09/15/2686143.htm

Doesnt say anything even remotely resembling anything like that.

And that wont get thru the senate anyway.

Post by B J Foster
As a result, all of the other tlcos will go out of business.

Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.

Post by B J Foster
This is what happens whe political objectives predominate over commercial/market objectives.

How odd that you cant list even a single example of that ever happening in this country.

Post by Frank Slootweg
The majority of the population will *also* have the choices which
they have now. Feel free to bash your government, but last time I
checked, Oz wasn't *really* a dictatorship! :-)

No they won't. Once telecommunications is nationalised

Taint gunna happen. No govt is actually stupid enough to spend what that would require.
Not even Labor.

Post by B J Foster
we will have no choice.

Only in your pathetic little pig ignorant fantasyland.

Post by B J Foster
I now pay less that $50/month for adequate bandwidth. By the time
these turkeys are finished *if* my provider survives, I'll be paying
for both service (private) and stupidity (government, as a taxpayer).

You just claimed that they would charge LESS than the current ISPs do, fuckwit.

As a taxpayer, you silly moron, you will be paying for *whatever* they do.

Nope, because that wont get thru the senate, fuckwit.

Post by B J Foster
And you're damn right, it a democracy.

Hunter

2010-03-11 04:17:40 UTC

Post by B J Foster
A high-speed broadband network launched by Telstra over a year ago
and available to nearly one million premises has attracted just 200
customers.
http://www.misaustralia.com/viewer.aspx?EDP://1268174866621
Now lemme see $43b/(22x200) = $4.8 million per ... aw, forget it!

Okay, it is available to one million people.
they managed to get 200 customers and collect $269 each, a total of
$53.800.
If they would offer it for $80 each and a million custumers take it
up, they would collect $80 Million.
Can anyone tell me if the manager at telstra gets a bonus for his
idiotic business practice?

You are assuming elastic demand. There is *no* evidence that any more
than the 200 would respond to a price drop.
Secondly, the $43 billion is around $10k per premise. I'd like to see
you make a profit at $80/month. Or to put it another way, $80m x 10 =
$800m is less than 2% of the $43b capital cost. Have fun trying to
make a business case. Oh, and when you have, do please send a copy to
Mr Conroy - he's been too busy with golf to do the sums.

As I understand from your post, the connections are there but are not used.
It doesn't matter how much it did cost, you work to make the maximum
money out of what you have got.
As you get more customers you can add more services such as Pay tv over
the internet. You can add a doctors service for minor illness with
prescriptions to print. How much will that save the Government? You can
add cut price university education across the world using the internet.
In fact, more than 50% of work that is being done in Offices can be done
over the internet. You save billions on roadworks and public transport.
Thank God they didn't look at the cost when they build the railways and
the harbour bridge. In fact, it did cost the poms a lot of money to come
here. Maybe they should have staid at home

All of the above is completely irrelevant. All of that could have been
achieved with a standard internet connection. The fact is Labor are so
determined to roll out their NBN that they're ignoring that most are
happy with their fast and cheap internet, they don't need nor want a
little faster and a truckload more expensive. They're costing us money
for nothing.

What they really should have done, and most would've supported, is sort
out reliable internet for remote areas that get fuck all (and I don't
just mean towns out in whoop whoop, I mean suburban areas on the
fringes, or anywhere else where internet connections are unreliable).
Instead the fat cats in Labor are trying to pretend we're Japan at costs
that none of us will be able to afford, or will be willing to pay even
for those of us that can, when adsl2+ is more than adequate for 90% of
the population and costs a pittance in comparison.

B J Foster

2010-03-11 09:43:49 UTC

...

... when adsl2+ is more than adequate for 90% of
the population and costs a pittance in comparison.

I recall at the time the NBN was announced that iiNet said that they
could reach 90% of the population with their (then) current rollout plan.

KRudd the Dud

2010-03-10 16:37:22 UTC

Post by B J Foster
Now lemme see $43b/(22x200) = $4.8 million per ... aw, forget it!

Okay, it is available to one million people. they managed to get 200
customers and collect $269 each, a total of $53.800. If they would offer
it for $80 each and a million custumers take it up, they would collect
$80 Million.
Can anyone tell me if the manager at telstra gets a bonus for his
idiotic business practice?

Can you guarantee that one million would take it up if $80-00?

No. Thought not.

Hunter

2010-03-11 04:25:23 UTC

Okay, it is available to one million people.
they managed to get 200 customers and collect $269 each, a total of
$53.800.
If they would offer it for $80 each and a million custumers take it up,
they would collect $80 Million.
Can anyone tell me if the manager at telstra gets a bonus for his
idiotic business practice?

Pipedream on those figures. Most are happy with ADSL2+ for even less.
Say you only get a 10x increment. 200 becomes 2000 (this I could see
being feasible at 80 bucks a month). Still fuck all and showing a
criminal waste of money by the government. This should be considered
their case study, and should lead to an abandonment of the plan (which
they already should've known would be the case if they'd done even the
remotest amount of honest market research).

At the end of the day people don't need 100 meg to the desktop on the
internet. Especially since they're never going to see it anyway, these
people seem completely ignorant of the bottlenecks enroute and at the
other end. This is more suited to business with VPN tunnels between
sites, but even then business already has it's avenues for this sort of
service without the NBN.

B J Foster

2010-03-10 19:03:49 UTC

From the NBN site:

"Wireless

While the specific technology used to provide wireless broadband
services varies, each service provider uses radio frequencies to
transmit and receive data between their customers and a local
transmission point. Normally, this requires a number of base stations,
similar to mobile phone towers, which transmit to customers who have a
small transmitter/receiver connected to their computers or other digital
devices".
http://www.nbnco.com.au/our-network/glossary-of-terms#w

Oh dear, typical wishy-washy public service stuff. Accurate but it says
little - and of course, the key attribute is ignored because it is
central to the argument that public money is being wasted.

"Requires no 'last mile' infrastructure"

2010-03-14 10:12:07 UTC

I see the tag line is:
"Analysts say Telstra lost share in the broadband market because it
kept prices too high for too long".

Meanwhile in the USA Google has decided to cut the crap with the
government and roll out 1Gb/s FTTH to 500,000 consumers as a test!

Back in the 80s I remember having to force people to upgrade their LAN
to 10Mb/s over similar protests that they couldn't see the need for
such ridiculously fast connectivity. Good thing we built in the
ability to go to 100Mb/s and 1Gb's on the same infrastructure. Now
they are asking for 10Gb/s and people still can't work out why we need
a fast national broadband network!

DM

Rod Speed

2010-03-14 17:53:26 UTC

"Analysts say Telstra lost share in the broadband market because it
kept prices too high for too long".
Meanwhile in the USA Google has decided to cut the crap with the
government and roll out 1Gb/s FTTH to 500,000 consumers as a test!
Back in the 80s I remember having to force people to upgrade their
LAN to 10Mb/s over similar protests that they couldn't see the need
for such ridiculously fast connectivity. Good thing we built in the
ability to go to 100Mb/s and 1Gb's on the same infrastructure.
Now they are asking for 10Gb/s and people still can't work
out why we need a fast national broadband network!

And its all academic anyway if the NBN doesnt make it thru the Senate.

The most we will have done is piss a few millions
against the wall on the bullshit we have seen so far.

Hardly the end of civilisation as we know it.

We've pissed much more than that against the wall on the insulation debacle.

B J Foster

2010-03-14 19:20:06 UTC

Who is "they"?

Hey, lets count them and see what the costs are, shall we?

Post by Rod Speed
And its all academic anyway if the NBN doesnt make it thru the Senate.

It won't. It's a lot of crap, just like ETS.

And Rudd is distancing himself from the DD option because of the polls.

Post by Rod Speed
The most we will have done is piss a few millions
against the wall on the bullshit we have seen so far.
Hardly the end of civilisation as we know it.
We've pissed much more than that against the wall on the insulation debacle.

Rod Speed

2010-03-14 19:58:16 UTC

Who is "they"?

Those in the operation he was doing that in presumably.

Post by B J Foster
Hey, lets count them and see what the costs are, shall we?

Why bother.

Post by Rod Speed
And its all academic anyway if the NBN doesnt make it thru the Senate.

It won't. It's a lot of crap, just like ETS.

Going to be interesting to see if he goes for a double dissolution
at the normal time tho. He might get them all thru that way.

Might not too, gunna be interesting to see what the voters
do about the complete fuckups like the insulation fiasco.

No chance it will be a one term govt, but it might well not end up with
enough to get the shit thru even with a double dissolution election.

Post by B J Foster
And Rudd is distancing himself from the DD option because of the polls.

Try that again in english.

B J Foster

2010-03-14 20:06:52 UTC

Who is "they"?

Those in the operation he was doing that in presumably.

Post by B J Foster
Hey, lets count them and see what the costs are, shall we?

Why bother.

Cos 43 billion divided by 3 is a shade under 15 billion per pop (excuse
the pun) but 43 billion divided by 4.3 million is .... ah, never mind.

Post by Rod Speed
And its all academic anyway if the NBN doesnt make it thru the Senate.

It won't. It's a lot of crap, just like ETS.

Going to be interesting to see if he goes for a double dissolution
at the normal time tho. He might get them all thru that way.

The electorate doesn't like DD and will punish whoever is perceived to
have caused it.

Post by Rod Speed
Might not too, gunna be interesting to see what the voters
do about the complete fuckups like the insulation fiasco.
No chance it will be a one term govt, but it might well not end up with
enough to get the shit thru even with a double dissolution election.

Post by B J Foster
And Rudd is distancing himself from the DD option because of the polls.

Try that again in english.

Rudd is distancing himself from the DD option because of the polls.

Rod Speed

2010-03-14 23:35:59 UTC

"Analysts say Telstra lost share in the broadband market because
it kept prices too high for too long".
Meanwhile in the USA Google has decided to cut the crap with the
government and roll out 1Gb/s FTTH to 500,000 consumers as a test!
Back in the 80s I remember having to force people to upgrade their
LAN to 10Mb/s over similar protests that they couldn't see the
need for such ridiculously fast connectivity. Good thing we built
in the ability to go to 100Mb/s and 1Gb's on the same infrastructure.
Now they are asking for 10Gb/s and people still can't work
out why we need a fast national broadband network!

Who is "they"?

Those in the operation he was doing that in presumably.

Post by B J Foster
Hey, lets count them and see what the costs are, shall we?

Why bother.

Cos 43 billion

That number is straight from someone's arse,
even you should be able to tell that from the smell.

Post by B J Foster
divided by 3

That number is straight from your arse we can tell that from the smell.

Post by B J Foster
is a shade under 15 billion per pop (excuse the pun) but 43 billion divided by 4.3 million is .... ah, never mind.

Post by Rod Speed
And its all academic anyway if the NBN doesnt make it thru the Senate.

It won't. It's a lot of crap, just like ETS.

Going to be interesting to see if he goes for a double dissolution
at the normal time tho. He might get them all thru that way.

The electorate doesn't like DD

That isnt clear when it happens at the time for a normal election.

Post by B J Foster
and will punish whoever is perceived to have caused it.

That isnt clear when it happens at the time for a normal election.

Post by Rod Speed
Might not too, gunna be interesting to see what the voters
do about the complete fuckups like the insulation fiasco.
No chance it will be a one term govt, but it might well not end up with enough to get the shit thru even with a
double dissolution election.

Post by B J Foster
And Rudd is distancing himself from the DD option because of the polls.

Try that again in english.

Rudd is distancing himself from the DD option because of the polls.

Pathetic.

B J Foster

2010-03-15 09:35:23 UTC

"Analysts say Telstra lost share in the broadband market because
it kept prices too high for too long".
Meanwhile in the USA Google has decided to cut the crap with the
government and roll out 1Gb/s FTTH to 500,000 consumers as a test!
Back in the 80s I remember having to force people to upgrade their
LAN to 10Mb/s over similar protests that they couldn't see the
need for such ridiculously fast connectivity. Good thing we built
in the ability to go to 100Mb/s and 1Gb's on the same infrastructure.
Now they are asking for 10Gb/s and people still can't work
out why we need a fast national broadband network!

Who is "they"?

Those in the operation he was doing that in presumably.

Post by B J Foster
Hey, lets count them and see what the costs are, shall we?

Why bother.

Cos 43 billion

That number is straight from someone's arse,
even you should be able to tell that from the smell.

Yeah, who's?

Post by B J Foster
Rudd is distancing himself from the DD option because of the polls.

Pathetic.

Indeed.

Rod Speed

2010-03-15 19:47:35 UTC

"Analysts say Telstra lost share in the broadband market because
it kept prices too high for too long".
Meanwhile in the USA Google has decided to cut the crap with the
government and roll out 1Gb/s FTTH to 500,000 consumers as a test!
Back in the 80s I remember having to force people to upgrade
their LAN to 10Mb/s over similar protests that they couldn't see the need for such ridiculously fast
connectivity. Good thing we built in the ability to go to 100Mb/s and 1Gb's on the same infrastructure.
Now they are asking for 10Gb/s and people still can't work
out why we need a fast national broadband network!

Who is "they"?

Those in the operation he was doing that in presumably.

Post by B J Foster
Hey, lets count them and see what the costs are, shall we?

Why bother.

Cos 43 billion

That number is straight from someone's arse,
even you should be able to tell that from the smell.

Yeah, who's?

Who cares ? It was clearly straight from someone's arse when the FTTN tender process failed.

B J Foster

2010-03-15 20:22:03 UTC

"Analysts say Telstra lost share in the broadband market because
it kept prices too high for too long".
Meanwhile in the USA Google has decided to cut the crap with the
government and roll out 1Gb/s FTTH to 500,000 consumers as a test!
Back in the 80s I remember having to force people to upgrade
their LAN to 10Mb/s over similar protests that they couldn't see the need for such ridiculously fast
connectivity. Good thing we built in the ability to go to 100Mb/s and 1Gb's on the same infrastructure.
Now they are asking for 10Gb/s and people still can't work
out why we need a fast national broadband network!

Who is "they"?

Those in the operation he was doing that in presumably.

Post by B J Foster
Hey, lets count them and see what the costs are, shall we?

Why bother.

Cos 43 billion

That number is straight from someone's arse,
even you should be able to tell that from the smell.

Yeah, who's?

Who cares ? It was clearly straight from someone's arse when the FTTN tender process failed.

Are you thick? Clearly, the taxpayer cares - and on behalf of their
grandchildren.

Rod Speed

2010-03-15 22:18:20 UTC

"Analysts say Telstra lost share in the broadband market because it kept prices too high for too long".
Meanwhile in the USA Google has decided to cut the crap with the government and roll out 1Gb/s FTTH to 500,000
consumers as a test!
Back in the 80s I remember having to force people to upgrade
their LAN to 10Mb/s over similar protests that they couldn't
see the need for such ridiculously fast connectivity. Good
thing we built in the ability to go to 100Mb/s and 1Gb's on
the same infrastructure.
Now they are asking for 10Gb/s and people still can't work
out why we need a fast national broadband network!

Who is "they"?

Those in the operation he was doing that in presumably.

Post by B J Foster
Hey, lets count them and see what the costs are, shall we?

Why bother.

Cos 43 billion

That number is straight from someone's arse,
even you should be able to tell that from the smell.

Yeah, who's?

Who cares ? It was clearly straight from someone's arse when the FTTN tender process failed.

Are you thick?

No need to ask you that, the answer is obvious.

Post by B J Foster
Clearly, the taxpayer cares - and on behalf of their grandchildren.

Like hell they do when it wont even get thru the Senate, stupid.

2010-03-15 22:30:56 UTC

"Analysts say Telstra lost share in the broadband market because it kept prices too high for too long".
Meanwhile in the USA Google has decided to cut the crap with the government and roll out 1Gb/s FTTH to 500,000
consumers as a test!
Back in the 80s I remember having to force people to upgrade
their LAN to 10Mb/s over similar protests that they couldn't
see the need for such ridiculously fast connectivity. Good
thing we built in the ability to go to 100Mb/s and 1Gb's on
the same infrastructure.
Now they are asking for 10Gb/s and people still can't work
out why we need a fast national broadband network!

Who is "they"?

Those in the operation he was doing that in presumably.

Post by B J Foster
Hey, lets count them and see what the costs are, shall we?

Why bother.

Cos 43 billion

That number is straight from someone's arse,
even you should be able to tell that from the smell.

Yeah, who's?

Who cares ? It was clearly straight from someone's arse when the FTTN tender process failed.

Are you thick?

No need to ask you that, the answer is obvious.

Post by B J Foster
Clearly, the taxpayer cares - and on behalf of their grandchildren.

Like hell they do when it wont even get thru the Senate, stupid.

That merely shows the Libs don't care about our grandchildren.

DM

Rod Speed

2010-03-15 23:50:52 UTC

"Analysts say Telstra lost share in the broadband market
because it kept prices too high for too long". Meanwhile in
the USA Google has decided to cut the crap with the government
and roll out 1Gb/s FTTH to 500,000 consumers as a test!
Back in the 80s I remember having to force people to upgrade
their LAN to 10Mb/s over similar protests that they couldn't
see the need for such ridiculously fast connectivity. Good
thing we built in the ability to go to 100Mb/s and 1Gb's on
the same infrastructure.
Now they are asking for 10Gb/s and people still can't work
out why we need a fast national broadband network!

Who is "they"?

Those in the operation he was doing that in presumably.

Post by B J Foster
Hey, lets count them and see what the costs are, shall we?

Why bother.

Cos 43 billion

That number is straight from someone's arse,
even you should be able to tell that from the smell.

Yeah, who's?

Who cares ? It was clearly straight from someone's arse when the FTTN tender process failed.

Are you thick?

No need to ask you that, the answer is obvious.

Post by B J Foster
Clearly, the taxpayer cares - and on behalf of their grandchildren.

Like hell they do when it wont even get thru the Senate, stupid.

That merely shows the Libs don't care about our grandchildren.

Nope, it actually shows that they have enough of a clue to have grasped
that there are plenty of much better things to spend $43B class money on.

Sunny

2010-03-16 06:28:15 UTC

"DM" <d-***@adfa.edu.au> wrote in message news:6297c0f5-2e34-46af-b9b1-***@n7g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 16, 8:18 am, "Rod Speed" <***@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>.

Post by Rod Speed
Like hell they do when it wont even get thru the Senate, stupid.

That merely shows the Libs don't care about our grandchildren.
DM

Bullshit, there are many, more important things to spend tax payers money
on.
(Than watching movies on a computer)

2010-03-14 23:46:36 UTC

Post by Rod Speed
Might not too, gunna be interesting to see what the voters
do about the complete fuckups like the insulation fiasco.

The insulation scheme was only a political fiasco. In the real world
they insulated well over a million extra homes with no noticeable
increase in deaths by electrocution and only the expected number of
shonky installs and frauds for the industry. Anything to do with roofs
or ceilings has a high fraud rate because so few people are willing or
able to get up there and inspect the quality of the work closely.

The ALP was politically inept in handling the situation, but there
really wasn't a problem that hasn't already been there for decades.
OH&S in the industry is a State responsibility anyway, as is quality
management and it was up to the homeowner to select an installer.
Garrett was an idiot not to have pointed this out.

Back to broadband though, if Google can deliver 1Gb/s to 500,000 US
consumers as a *test*, its obvious the way the industry is heading in
the long term. The people who reckon a length of wet string is good
enough and reject FTTH are out of touch.

The future is cloud computing, internet based storage and software as
a service. I'm already finding 100Mb/s struggling to cope inside my
LAN. In 5 years time we will flounder if we can't get that kind of
speed out of our WAN.

DM

DM

Rod Speed

2010-03-15 03:33:44 UTC

Post by Rod Speed
Might not too, gunna be interesting to see what the voters
do about the complete fuckups like the insulation fiasco.

The insulation scheme was only a political fiasco.

Thats all that matters as far as what the voters do is concerned.

Bet they decide that clowns that cant even manage to insulate houses
without killing people aint exactly who should be running the hospital system.

Post by DM
In the real world they insulated well over a million extra homes
with no noticeable increase in deaths by electrocution and only
the expected number of shonky installs and frauds for the industry.

Most of the voters wont see it that way, even if that is true.

Post by DM
Anything to do with roofs or ceilings has a high fraud
rate because so few people are willing or able to get
up there and inspect the quality of the work closely.

Most arent even capable of 'inspecting' the work
to see if it complys with the standards required.

Post by DM
The ALP was politically inept in handling the situation,

And thats what matters with the voters.

Post by DM
but there really wasn't a problem that hasn't already been there for decades.

Bullshit. The real problem is who they allowed to do that sort of work.

Post by DM
OH&S in the industry is a State responsibility anyway,

Irrelevant to what the voters will do with their votes.

Post by DM
as is quality management

Wrong when the commonwealth is paying for that work.

Post by DM
and it was up to the homeowner to select an installer.

Pity that the govt didnt ensure that it weeded out most of the shonks.

Post by DM
Garrett was an idiot not to have pointed this out.

He did point that out. No one took any notice.

Post by DM
Back to broadband though, if Google can deliver 1Gb/s
to 500,000 US consumers as a *test*, its obvious the
way the industry is heading in the long term.

Sure, but the problem aint the speed, its the idea that
it makes any sense at all to be doing FTTP right now.

That makes absolutely no sense whatever when most can
have a pretty decent broadband connection if they want it.

It might have made a little sense to be doing FTTP for those
who cant get a decent broadband service, but that approach
has the even bigger problem of the cost for just those.

Post by DM
The people who reckon a length of wet string
is good enough and reject FTTH are out of touch.

Most have enough of a clue to realise that the current broadband available is fine.

Post by DM
The future is cloud computing, internet based storage and software as a service.

Like hell it is for most.

Post by DM
I'm already finding 100Mb/s struggling to cope inside my LAN.

Your problem. No way it makes any sense to be spending more than $43B for that reason.

Post by DM
In 5 years time we will flounder if we can't get that kind of speed out of our WAN.

Its completely trivial to do 1Gb on the NBN. Another example of where
Labor has never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.

It doesnt however make any sense to be spending more than $43B on that.

Addinall

2010-03-15 04:57:22 UTC

Post by Rod Speed
Might not too, gunna be interesting to see what the voters
do about the complete fuckups like the insulation fiasco.

The insulation scheme was only a political fiasco. In the real world
they insulated well over a million extra homes with no noticeable
increase in deaths by electrocution and only the expected number of
shonky installs and frauds for the industry. Anything to do with roofs
or ceilings has a high fraud rate because so few people are willing or
able to get up there and inspect the quality of the work closely.
The ALP was politically inept in handling the situation, but there
really wasn't a problem that hasn't already been there for decades.
OH&S in the industry is a State responsibility anyway, as is quality
management and it was up to the homeowner to select an installer.
Garrett was an idiot not to have pointed this out.
Back to broadband though, if Google can deliver 1Gb/s to 500,000 US
consumers as a *test*, its obvious the way the industry is heading in
the long term. The people who reckon a length of wet string is good
enough and reject FTTH are out of touch.

I disagree. Picking 500,000 people in dense populations from the
USSA population is probably quite do-able. FTTH is a nonsense
at the moment in this country:

1. just the logistics of digging the holes and laying the pipe to
each premises isn't do-able. Think of all old Sydney, Melbourne
and Brisbane that needs laying.

2. And for what? Most people don't require this speed. If they
did people would have already purchased it. As mentioned,
I am hardly a newbie at working on the net, and I use up
6-7 GB per MONTH. Currently at ISDN rate (speed) or
slower. It does everything I need it to do.

3. I might support a NBN of the model was FTTN, increased
wireless coverage from these points, and enough ports to
carry those that WANT FTTH.

Post by DM
The future is cloud computing,

Unsure on that. A public utility software delivery paradigm
was proposed in 1968 and I don't see it being adopted at any
speed.

Post by DM
internet based storage

Strongly disagree. Local or near storage is cheap and fast.
A 1Gbps or 10Gbps SAN, iSCSI or NAS is cheap to build.
I just bought a TB of storage for $280. That cost me a few million
not so long ago at the Department of Minerals and Petroleum.
And I can't see the big end of town outsourcing data security
in a big hurry.

Post by DM
and software as
a service.

Software as a service is an interesting model.
I don't know how popular it is going to be. It
seems like re-visiting the promise of 'thin-client'
on a global scale. It never got popular on a MAN.
Even at LAN speeds. Just the mention of Citrix
will get me running from a room screaming ;-)

Post by DM
I'm already finding 100Mb/s struggling to cope inside my
LAN.

Buy better switches. Upgrade to a Gbit network for internal
traffic. Analise what traffic is causing the problems, and why?
Segment. Internal proxies. Bridged near storage.......

Post by DM
In 5 years time we will flounder if we can't get that kind of
speed out of our WAN.

For such a large infrastructure investment, whoever is doing it needs
to present a need, and a willingness for the population to take it
up at MARKET RATES. Otherwise we are back in the old boat and
can expect a NBN Co 'sell-off' shortly, with no shareholder, Telstra
or
NBN Co doing any good on investment.

Sorry, the idea is crap. You could do it in Canberra, for the sake
of Canberrans, paid for by the rest of Australia, but laying a pipe
out to lot 164, Cheepie, QLD is a joke that will never happen.

Mark.

Post by DM
DM
DM

BO,,,N,OZ

2010-03-15 05:14:10 UTC

Post by Rod Speed
Might not too, gunna be interesting to see what the voters
do about the complete fuckups like the insulation fiasco.

The insulation scheme was only a political fiasco. In the real world
they insulated well over a million extra homes with no noticeable
increase in deaths by electrocution and only the expected number of
shonky installs and frauds for the industry. Anything to do with roofs
or ceilings has a high fraud rate because so few people are willing or
able to get up there and inspect the quality of the work closely.
The ALP was politically inept in handling the situation, but there
really wasn't a problem that hasn't already been there for decades.
OH&S in the industry is a State responsibility anyway, as is quality
management and it was up to the homeowner to select an installer.
Garrett was an idiot not to have pointed this out.
Back to broadband though, if Google can deliver 1Gb/s to 500,000 US
consumers as a *test*, its obvious the way the industry is heading in
the long term. The people who reckon a length of wet string is good
enough and reject FTTH are out of touch.

2. And for what? Most people don't require this speed. If they
did people would have already purchased it. As mentioned,
I am hardly a newbie at working on the net, and I use up
6-7 GB per MONTH. Currently at ISDN rate (speed) or
slower. It does everything I need it to do.
======================================

You remind me of Bill Gates who once said, "Why would anyone ever need more
than 640kB of computer memory"!

Multiple TV channels over the internet is just one example of the need for
more speed.

Interactive internet TV will probably replace broadcast TV one day.

Warmest Regards

0zb0n

"In one of the more expensive ironies of history, the expenditure of more
than $US50 billion on research into global warming since 1990 has failed to
demonstrate any human-caused climate trend, let alone a dangerous one."

Bob Carter, Research Professor of Geology, James Cook University, Townsville

asdf

2010-03-15 05:28:14 UTC

Post by Addinall

Post by Rod Speed
Might not too, gunna be interesting to see what the voters
do about the complete fuckups like the insulation fiasco.

The insulation scheme was only a political fiasco. In the real world
they insulated well over a million extra homes with no noticeable
increase in deaths by electrocution and only the expected number of
shonky installs and frauds for the industry. Anything to do with
roofs or ceilings has a high fraud rate because so few people are
willing or able to get up there and inspect the quality of the work
closely.
The ALP was politically inept in handling the situation, but there
really wasn't a problem that hasn't already been there for decades.
OH&S in the industry is a State responsibility anyway, as is quality
management and it was up to the homeowner to select an installer.
Garrett was an idiot not to have pointed this out.
Back to broadband though, if Google can deliver 1Gb/s to 500,000 US
consumers as a *test*, its obvious the way the industry is heading in
the long term. The people who reckon a length of wet string is good
enough and reject FTTH are out of touch.

I disagree. Picking 500,000 people in dense populations from the
USSA population is probably quite do-able. FTTH is a nonsense
1. just the logistics of digging the holes and laying the pipe to
each premises isn't do-able. Think of all old Sydney, Melbourne
and Brisbane that needs laying.
2. And for what? Most people don't require this speed. If they
did people would have already purchased it. As mentioned,
I am hardly a newbie at working on the net, and I use up
6-7 GB per MONTH. Currently at ISDN rate (speed) or
slower. It does everything I need it to do.

They don't need it.... *yet*.

Let's see what's over the horizon, shall we...

IPTV - here already, but unusable in Aus.
Proper video conferencing. I don't mean bitsy skype or instant messenging
video.
A whole bunch of stuff that hasn't been invented yet. That's right,
Virginia, if we haven't got the roads, we can't carry the trucks, let alone
build them.

I have close friends and colleagues that live in the UK and Europe who laugh
at our 'broadband' speeds. They shake their heads in wonderment that I am
still able to conduct a profitable business using my net connection.

It might do everything YOU need to do, but it sure won't sustain an economy
into the future, Mark.

Post by Addinall
3. I might support a NBN of the model was FTTN, increased
wireless coverage from these points, and enough ports to
carry those that WANT FTTH.

Post by DM
The future is cloud computing,

Unsure on that. A public utility software delivery paradigm
was proposed in 1968 and I don't see it being adopted at any
speed.

Post by DM
internet based storage

Post by DM
and software as
a service.

Post by DM
I'm already finding 100Mb/s struggling to cope inside my
LAN.

Buy better switches. Upgrade to a Gbit network for internal
traffic. Analise what traffic is causing the problems, and why?
Segment. Internal proxies. Bridged near storage.......

Post by DM
In 5 years time we will flounder if we can't get that kind of
speed out of our WAN.

For such a large infrastructure investment, whoever is doing it needs
to present a need, and a willingness for the population to take it
up at MARKET RATES. Otherwise we are back in the old boat and
can expect a NBN Co 'sell-off' shortly, with no shareholder, Telstra
or
NBN Co doing any good on investment.
Sorry, the idea is crap. You could do it in Canberra, for the sake
of Canberrans, paid for by the rest of Australia, but laying a pipe
out to lot 164, Cheepie, QLD is a joke that will never happen.

That's right... they shouldn't have electricity or the phone either. It's
too expensive.... and they should tear up all those pesky sealed roads while
they're at it, I'm sure they don't use them enough in the bush.

If they want electricity, the phone, or the internet, tell them to move into
the CBD.

FFS.

Rod Speed

2010-03-15 05:50:31 UTC

Post by Addinall

Post by Rod Speed
Might not too, gunna be interesting to see what the voters
do about the complete fuckups like the insulation fiasco.

The insulation scheme was only a political fiasco. In the real world
they insulated well over a million extra homes with no noticeable
increase in deaths by electrocution and only the expected number of
shonky installs and frauds for the industry. Anything to do with roofs or ceilings has a high fraud rate because so
few people are willing or able to get up there and inspect the quality of the work closely.
The ALP was politically inept in handling the situation, but there
really wasn't a problem that hasn't already been there for decades.
OH&S in the industry is a State responsibility anyway, as is quality
management and it was up to the homeowner to select an installer.
Garrett was an idiot not to have pointed this out.
Back to broadband though, if Google can deliver 1Gb/s to 500,000 US
consumers as a *test*, its obvious the way the industry is heading
in the long term. The people who reckon a length of wet string is
good enough and reject FTTH are out of touch.

They don't need it.... *yet*.

If they ever do, THEN is the time to be spending $43B class money.

Post by asdf
Let's see what's over the horizon, shall we...
IPTV - here already, but unusable in Aus.

Pigs arse its unusuable.

Post by asdf
Proper video conferencing.

Fuck it. Hardly anyone bothers.

Post by asdf
I don't mean bitsy skype or instant messenging video.

Makes absolutely no sense to be spending anything like $43B to get that.

Post by asdf
A whole bunch of stuff that hasn't been invented yet.

When it does show up, THEN is the time to consider whether
it makes any sense to be spending anything like $43B

Post by asdf
That's right, Virginia, if we haven't got the roads, we can't carry the trucks, let alone build them.

Doesnt work like that with one country in the entire world.

Post by asdf
I have close friends and colleagues that live in the UK and Europe who laugh at our 'broadband' speeds.

Who cares ? They're welcome to stay there.

Post by asdf
They shake their heads in wonderment that I am still able to conduct a profitable business using my net connection.

Makes absolutely no sense to be spending anything
like $43B just so some fools in europe stop laughing.

Post by asdf
It might do everything YOU need to do, but it sure won't sustain an economy into the future, Mark.

If it doesnt, THEN will be the time to spend anything like $43B.

Post by Addinall
3. I might support a NBN of the model was FTTN, increased
wireless coverage from these points, and enough ports to
carry those that WANT FTTH.

Post by DM
The future is cloud computing,

Unsure on that. A public utility software delivery paradigm was proposed in 1968 and I don't see it being adopted at
any speed.

Post by DM
internet based storage

Post by DM
and software as a service.

Post by DM
I'm already finding 100Mb/s struggling to cope inside my LAN.

Buy better switches. Upgrade to a Gbit network for internal
traffic. Analise what traffic is causing the problems, and why?
Segment. Internal proxies. Bridged near storage.......

Post by DM
In 5 years time we will flounder if we can't get that kind of
speed out of our WAN.

For such a large infrastructure investment, whoever is doing it needs
to present a need, and a willingness for the population to take it
up at MARKET RATES. Otherwise we are back in the old boat and
can expect a NBN Co 'sell-off' shortly, with no shareholder, Telstra
or NBN Co doing any good on investment.
Sorry, the idea is crap. You could do it in Canberra, for the sake
of Canberrans, paid for by the rest of Australia, but laying a pipe
out to lot 164, Cheepie, QLD is a joke that will never happen.

You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out.

Post by asdf
If they want electricity, the phone, or the internet, tell them to move into the CBD.
FFS.

Nope tell fools like you to go and fuck yourself instead.

asdf

2010-03-15 06:05:22 UTC

Post by Rod Speed
Might not too, gunna be interesting to see what the voters
do about the complete fuckups like the insulation fiasco.

The insulation scheme was only a political fiasco. In the real
world they insulated well over a million extra homes with no noticeable
increase in deaths by electrocution and only the expected number of
shonky installs and frauds for the industry. Anything to do with
roofs or ceilings has a high fraud rate because so few people are
willing or able to get up there and inspect the quality of the
work closely.
The ALP was politically inept in handling the situation, but there
really wasn't a problem that hasn't already been there for decades.
OH&S in the industry is a State responsibility anyway, as is
quality management and it was up to the homeowner to select an
installer.
Garrett was an idiot not to have pointed this out.
Back to broadband though, if Google can deliver 1Gb/s to 500,000 US
consumers as a *test*, its obvious the way the industry is heading
in the long term. The people who reckon a length of wet string is
good enough and reject FTTH are out of touch.

They don't need it.... *yet*.

If they ever do, THEN is the time to be spending $43B class money.

Post by asdf
Let's see what's over the horizon, shall we...
IPTV - here already, but unusable in Aus.

Pigs arse its unusuable.

It is on current bandwidth. I'm not talking about poxy iView. I'm talking
about proper IPTV.

Post by asdf
Proper video conferencing.

Fuck it. Hardly anyone bothers.

A self-fulfilling prophecy. The reason nobody bothers is that it's not worth
the bother. Given decent bandwidth and you'd see take-up, as has happened in
Europe and the US.

Post by asdf
I don't mean bitsy skype or instant messenging video.

Makes absolutely no sense to be spending anything like $43B to get that.

Post by asdf
A whole bunch of stuff that hasn't been invented yet.

When it does show up, THEN is the time to consider whether
it makes any sense to be spending anything like $43B

No, the time to spend is now, then you've got an infrastructure on which to
build a business. Historically, Australia is very good at "waiting
until...". By then it's all too late.

Post by asdf
That's right, Virginia, if we haven't got the roads, we can't carry
the trucks, let alone build them.

Doesnt work like that with one country in the entire world.

That's because we are sooooo far behind it isn't funny, thanks to the
previous government, and it's parade of Luddites... Alston, then Coonan,
then Bishop... woeful. Asleep at the wheel.

Post by asdf
I have close friends and colleagues that live in the UK and Europe
who laugh at our 'broadband' speeds.

Who cares ? They're welcome to stay there.

Well, they're miles in front, and we've been left behind. Yet again.

If you want to be part of the wider economy, then you have to compete on
equal terms.

Post by asdf
They shake their heads in wonderment that I am still able to conduct
a profitable business using my net connection.

Makes absolutely no sense to be spending anything
like $43B just so some fools in europe stop laughing.

The only reason it's so expensive is that we have failed comprehensively to
invest on sufficient infrastructure in the last 10 years. We've got an awful
lot of catching up to do.

Post by asdf
It might do everything YOU need to do, but it sure won't sustain an
economy into the future, Mark.

If it doesnt, THEN will be the time to spend anything like $43B.

What? When YOU'RE ready? LMGDAO

There are a lot of tech-based industries we've already lost.

Hell, if things don't improve I'll take mine offshore. It's cheaper, quicker
and more accessible in Sth Korea, Japan, UK, Europe, USA... even India.

You're basically saying that you don't want to compete for investment, jobs
and the future.

Post by Addinall
3. I might support a NBN of the model was FTTN, increased
wireless coverage from these points, and enough ports to
carry those that WANT FTTH.

Post by DM
The future is cloud computing,

Unsure on that. A public utility software delivery paradigm was
proposed in 1968 and I don't see it being adopted at any speed.

Post by DM
internet based storage

Post by DM
and software as a service.

Post by DM
I'm already finding 100Mb/s struggling to cope inside my LAN.

Buy better switches. Upgrade to a Gbit network for internal
traffic. Analise what traffic is causing the problems, and why?
Segment. Internal proxies. Bridged near storage.......

Post by DM
In 5 years time we will flounder if we can't get that kind of
speed out of our WAN.

For such a large infrastructure investment, whoever is doing it
needs to present a need, and a willingness for the population to take it
up at MARKET RATES. Otherwise we are back in the old boat and
can expect a NBN Co 'sell-off' shortly, with no shareholder, Telstra
or NBN Co doing any good on investment.
Sorry, the idea is crap. You could do it in Canberra, for the sake
of Canberrans, paid for by the rest of Australia, but laying a pipe
out to lot 164, Cheepie, QLD is a joke that will never happen.

You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out.

Sarcasm is obviously lost on you.

Post by asdf
If they want electricity, the phone, or the internet, tell them to move into the CBD.
FFS.

Nope tell fools like you to go and fuck yourself instead.

Clever.

Not. Is that the best you can do?

Rod Speed

2010-03-15 08:44:31 UTC

Post by Rod Speed
Might not too, gunna be interesting to see what the voters
do about the complete fuckups like the insulation fiasco.

The insulation scheme was only a political fiasco. In the real
world they insulated well over a million extra homes with no
noticeable increase in deaths by electrocution and only the
expected number of shonky installs and frauds for the industry.
Anything to do with roofs or ceilings has a high fraud rate because so few people are willing or able to get up
there and inspect the quality of the work closely.
The ALP was politically inept in handling the situation, but there
really wasn't a problem that hasn't already been there for
decades. OH&S in the industry is a State responsibility anyway,
as is quality management and it was up to the homeowner to select an
installer.
Garrett was an idiot not to have pointed this out.
Back to broadband though, if Google can deliver 1Gb/s to 500,000
US consumers as a *test*, its obvious the way the industry is
heading in the long term. The people who reckon a length of wet string is
good enough and reject FTTH are out of touch.

They don't need it.... *yet*.

If they ever do, THEN is the time to be spending $43B class money.

Post by asdf
Let's see what's over the horizon, shall we...
IPTV - here already, but unusable in Aus.

Pigs arse its unusuable.

It is on current bandwidth.

Pigs arse it is.

Post by asdf
I'm not talking about poxy iView. I'm talking about proper IPTV.

There's a lot more around than just iView.

Post by asdf
Proper video conferencing.

Fuck it. Hardly anyone bothers.

A self-fulfilling prophecy.

Nope, hardly anyone bothers even when there is 1Gb net connections.

Post by asdf
The reason nobody bothers is that it's not worth the bother.

Nope, hardly anyone bothers even when there is no bother 1Gb net connections.

Post by asdf
Given decent bandwidth and you'd see take-up,

Another pig ignorant lie.

Post by asdf
as has happened in Europe and the US.

Pigs arse it has.

Post by asdf
I don't mean bitsy skype or instant messenging video.

Makes absolutely no sense to be spending anything like $43B to get that.

Post by asdf
A whole bunch of stuff that hasn't been invented yet.

When it does show up, THEN is the time to consider whether
it makes any sense to be spending anything like $43B

No, the time to spend is now,

Wrong. It makes absolutely no sense whatever to be spending $43B class
money unless you know with absolute certainty that its necessary to do that.

Post by asdf
then you've got an infrastructure on which to build a business.

It makes absolutely no sense what so ever to be
doing FTTH for $43B class money for business.

Post by asdf
Historically, Australia is very good at "waiting until...". By then it's all too late.

How odd that it never ever has been too late.

Post by asdf
That's right, Virginia, if we haven't got the roads, we can't carry the trucks, let alone build them.

Doesnt work like that with one country in the entire world.

That's because we are sooooo far behind it isn't funny, thanks to the previous government, and it's parade of
Luddites... Alston, then Coonan, then Bishop... woeful. Asleep at the wheel.

Your mindless pig ignorant bigotry has nothing to do with that earlier stupid claim of yours.

Post by asdf
I have close friends and colleagues that live in the UK and Europe who laugh at our 'broadband' speeds.

Who cares ? They're welcome to stay there.

Well, they're miles in front,

Pigs arse they are.

Post by asdf
and we've been left behind. Yet again.

Pigs arse we have. We didnt even get a recession with the GFC, fool.

Post by asdf
If you want to be part of the wider economy, then you have to compete on equal terms.

We didnt even get a recession with the GFC, fool.

Post by asdf
They shake their heads in wonderment that I am still able to conduct a profitable business using my net connection.

Makes absolutely no sense to be spending anything
like $43B just so some fools in europe stop laughing.

The only reason it's so expensive is that we have failed comprehensively to invest on sufficient infrastructure in the
last 10 years.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

Post by asdf
We've got an awful lot of catching up to do.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

Post by asdf
It might do everything YOU need to do, but it sure won't sustain an economy into the future, Mark.

If it doesnt, THEN will be the time to spend anything like $43B.

What? When YOU'RE ready? LMGDAO

We didnt even get a recession with the GFC, fool.

Post by asdf
There are a lot of tech-based industries we've already lost.

Another bare faced pig ignorant lie.

Post by asdf
Hell, if things don't improve I'll take mine offshore.

You're welcome to fuck off to anywhere that is stupid enough to have you.

Post by asdf
It's cheaper, quicker and more accessible in Sth Korea, Japan, UK, Europe, USA... even India.

None of those are stupid enough to have you.

Post by asdf
You're basically saying that you don't want to compete for investment, jobs and the future.

We didnt even get a recession with the GFC, fool.

Post by Addinall
3. I might support a NBN of the model was FTTN, increased
wireless coverage from these points, and enough ports to
carry those that WANT FTTH.

Post by DM
The future is cloud computing,

Unsure on that. A public utility software delivery paradigm was
proposed in 1968 and I don't see it being adopted at any speed.

Post by DM
internet based storage

Post by DM
and software as a service.

Post by DM
I'm already finding 100Mb/s struggling to cope inside my LAN.

Buy better switches. Upgrade to a Gbit network for internal
traffic. Analise what traffic is causing the problems, and why?
Segment. Internal proxies. Bridged near storage.......

Post by DM
In 5 years time we will flounder if we can't get that kind of
speed out of our WAN.

For such a large infrastructure investment, whoever is doing it
needs to present a need, and a willingness for the population to
take it up at MARKET RATES. Otherwise we are back in the old boat
and can expect a NBN Co 'sell-off' shortly, with no shareholder,
Telstra or NBN Co doing any good on investment.
Sorry, the idea is crap. You could do it in Canberra, for the sake
of Canberrans, paid for by the rest of Australia, but laying a pipe
out to lot 164, Cheepie, QLD is a joke that will never happen.

You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out.

Sarcasm is obviously lost on you.

Fools like you in spades, child.

Post by asdf
If they want electricity, the phone, or the internet, tell them to move into the CBD.
FFS.

Nope tell fools like you to go and fuck yourself instead.

Clever.

Pathetic.

Post by asdf
Not. Is that the best you can do?

No need to ask you, the answer is obvious.

Rod Speed

2010-03-15 05:42:54 UTC

Post by Addinall

Post by Rod Speed
Might not too, gunna be interesting to see what the voters
do about the complete fuckups like the insulation fiasco.

The insulation scheme was only a political fiasco. In the real world
they insulated well over a million extra homes with no noticeable
increase in deaths by electrocution and only the expected number of
shonky installs and frauds for the industry. Anything to do with roofs
or ceilings has a high fraud rate because so few people are willing
or able to get up there and inspect the quality of the work closely.
The ALP was politically inept in handling the situation, but there
really wasn't a problem that hasn't already been there for decades.
OH&S in the industry is a State responsibility anyway, as is quality
management and it was up to the homeowner to select an installer.
Garrett was an idiot not to have pointed this out.
Back to broadband though, if Google can deliver 1Gb/s to 500,000 US
consumers as a *test*, its obvious the way the industry is heading in
the long term. The people who reckon a length of wet string is good
enough and reject FTTH are out of touch.

I disagree. Picking 500,000 people in dense populations
from the USSA population is probably quite do-able.

More strictly it doesnt make any sense to be spending anything like
$43B on FTTP when we have perfectly adequate broadband for most.

Post by Addinall
1. just the logistics of digging the holes and
laying the pipe to each premises isn't do-able.

They dont dig holes and lay pipe, they run it down the power poles.

And they dont dig holes any lay pipe anymore either, they punch
it thru hydraulically if they dont want it on the power poles.

Post by Addinall
Think of all old Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane that needs laying.

The absolute vast bulk of it has power poles.

Post by Addinall
2. And for what? Most people don't require this speed.

Yep, most dont even bother to pay for the highest speed broadband available.

Post by Addinall
If they did people would have already purchased it.

There still are a few that cant just buy it, but there arent all that many of those now.

Post by Addinall
As mentioned, I am hardly a newbie at working on the net,
and I use up 6-7 GB per MONTH. Currently at ISDN rate
(speed) or slower. It does everything I need it to do.

And it makes absolutely no sense at all to be spending
anything like $43B for those who want something faster.

Post by Addinall
3. I might support a NBN of the model was FTTN,
increased wireless coverage from these points,
and enough ports to carry those that WANT FTTH.

Post by DM
The future is cloud computing,

Unsure on that.

Like hell it is for the bulk of domestic consumers.

Post by Addinall
A public utility software delivery paradigm was proposed in
1968 and I don't see it being adopted at any speed.

Post by DM
internet based storage

Strongly disagree. Local or near storage is cheap and fast.
A 1Gbps or 10Gbps SAN, iSCSI or NAS is cheap to build.
I just bought a TB of storage for $280.

I just bought 1.5TB for $130

Post by Addinall
That cost me a few million not so long ago at the Department
of Minerals and Petroleum. And I can't see the big end of town
outsourcing data security in a big hurry.

Post by DM
and software as a service.

Software as a service is an interesting model.

Not when it costs $43B up front to have it it aint.

Post by Addinall
I don't know how popular it is going to be.

Not is the answer.

Post by Addinall
It seems like re-visiting the promise of 'thin-client' on a global scale.

And it makes absolutely no sense to be spending $43B on that.

Post by Addinall
It never got popular on a MAN. Even at LAN speeds. Just the
mention of Citrix will get me running from a room screaming ;-)

Post by DM
I'm already finding 100Mb/s struggling to cope inside my LAN.

Buy better switches. Upgrade to a Gbit network for internal
traffic. Analise what traffic is causing the problems, and why?
Segment. Internal proxies. Bridged near storage.......

Post by DM
In 5 years time we will flounder if we can't get that kind of speed out of our WAN.

For such a large infrastructure investment, whoever is doing it
needs to present a need, and a willingness for the population
to take it up at MARKET RATES. Otherwise we are back in
the old boat and can expect a NBN Co 'sell-off' shortly, with no
shareholder, Telstra or NBN Co doing any good on investment.
Sorry, the idea is crap. You could do it in Canberra, for the sake
of Canberrans, paid for by the rest of Australia, but laying a pipe
out to lot 164, Cheepie, QLD is a joke that will never happen.

Petzl

2010-03-15 06:26:25 UTC

On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 21:57:22 -0700 (PDT), Addinall

Post by Addinall
1. just the logistics of digging the holes and laying the pipe to
each premises isn't do-able. Think of all old Sydney, Melbourne
and Brisbane that needs laying.

Seen them laying optic to all the schools some years ago.
Didn't take long about 3 months they just used existing conduit
--
Petzl
http://tinyurl.com/atheist-mp3

Sunny

2010-03-15 07:00:21 UTC

Post by Petzl
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 21:57:22 -0700 (PDT), Addinall

Post by Addinall
1. just the logistics of digging the holes and laying the pipe to
each premises isn't do-able. Think of all old Sydney, Melbourne
and Brisbane that needs laying.

Seen them laying optic to all the schools some years ago.
Didn't take long about 3 months they just used existing conduit

"Them" jammed the existing conduit in my street laying Foxtel/Internet
cable, and had to dig down and break through the Telstra conduit to fix
it. "Them" said at the time, that nothing else would ever fit through the
conduit now.

Petzl

2010-03-15 07:10:39 UTC

Post by Sunny

Post by Petzl
Seen them laying optic to all the schools some years ago.
Didn't take long about 3 months they just used existing conduit

I can't remember "them's" name but were contractors
Fact is the copper wire is not going to last
Telstra got it for nothing and most certainly in most suburbs they
won't replace it. In my suburb it mainly shot and needed replacing
over 20 years ago. Where they might maintain it is in CBD only, not
sure of legalities but if Telstra's copperwire is clogging up the
streets conduit it can be hauled out
--
Petzl
Battle Hymn of the Republic

http://tinyurl.com/8vqqxd

Sunny

2010-03-15 07:37:35 UTC

Post by Sunny

Post by Petzl
Seen them laying optic to all the schools some years ago.
Didn't take long about 3 months they just used existing conduit

Right, will only take 30 years if they start right now.

Petzl

2010-03-15 08:54:31 UTC

Post by Petzl
Seen them laying optic to all the schools some years ago.
Didn't take long about 3 months they just used existing conduit

Right, will only take 30 years if they start right now.

Not if they use all the unemployed insulation people
Petzl
--
"Dieu est mon droit" God is my legal right

Rod Speed

2010-03-15 19:45:00 UTC

Post by Petzl
Seen them laying optic to all the schools some years ago.
Didn't take long about 3 months they just used existing conduit

"Them" jammed the existing conduit in my street laying
Foxtel/Internet cable, and had to dig down and break through the
Telstra conduit to fix it. "Them" said at the time, that nothing
else would ever fit through the conduit now.

Right, will only take 30 years if they start right now.

Not if they use all the unemployed insulation people

They are completely useless. So stupid that they cant follow even the
most basic instructions to not use metal fasteners with foil insulation.

So completely useless for doing an NBN if you actually want it to work, fool.

Rod Speed

2010-03-15 08:48:32 UTC

Post by Sunny

Post by Petzl
Seen them laying optic to all the schools some years ago.
Didn't take long about 3 months they just used existing conduit

"Them" jammed the existing conduit in my street laying
Foxtel/Internet cable, and had to dig down and break through the
Telstra conduit to fix it. "Them" said at the time, that nothing
else would ever fit through the conduit now.

I can't remember "them's" name but were contractors
Fact is the copper wire is not going to last

Nothing is going to last, fuckwit.

Post by Petzl
Telstra got it for nothing

Another pig ignorant lie.

Post by Petzl
and most certainly in most suburbs they won't replace it.

Another pig ignorant lie.

Post by Petzl
In my suburb it mainly shot and needed replacing over 20 years ago.

Another pig ignorant lie.

Post by Petzl
Where they might maintain it is in CBD only,

Another pig ignorant lie.

Post by Petzl
not sure of legalities but if Telstra's copperwire is
clogging up the streets conduit it can be hauled out

Another pig ignorant lie.

Rod Speed

2010-03-15 08:45:42 UTC