When Australia goes to the polls on August 21st, citizens will vote for more than men and the traditional issues they represent -- the ballots cast will directly impact the country's national broadband plan. Where Australia's ruling Labor party
had pledged A$43 billion for an up-to-100Mbps fiber optic network fed directly to
90 99 percent of homes (and
agreed to pay A$11 billion to Telstra) over the next seven to eight years, the opposing Liberal-National coalition says if elected, it will scrap that notion in favor of a cheaper A$6.3 billion plan. That money would create a fiber-optic backbone by 2017 but actually connects homes with hybrid fiber-coaxial connections, DSL and about A$2 billion worth of wireless, with a minimum promised speed of 12Mbps. The coalition says these services would cover 97 percent of Australians, with satellite coverage for the final 3 percent, and that those networks receiving funds from the project and connecting to the backbone would have to compete based on pricing (set by the country's Competition and Consumer Commission) and pledge
open access. Having never lived in Australia ourselves, we don't know what's best, but we're pretty sure we wouldn't be satisfied with the 12Mbps end of the Liberal-National stick.
Update: Labor plan is to bring 100Mbps to 99 percent of the population, not 90 percent as originally stated.
posted August 10th 2010 9:50PM
GOD I HATE THIS COUNTRY! This election isnt about policy's, its all about Gillard's (current PM) new hair style, fashion choice and Abbotts crazy christian values wanting to degrade the quality and speed of our vastly growing network demands. it was only recently when we had the choice of internet plan greater than 60GB at a reasonable, affordable price. a couple of months ago i was paying $90 for 60GB (20gb between the times of 12PM-12AM (on-peak) and 40gb between the times of 12AM-12PM (off-peak)) now i get 150GB (75gb on-peak and 75gb off-peak) (sorry for the bad syntax but im in a hurry)
I've been debating this one a while now. I've just moved back to Australia after 9 years in Europe, and I'm a telco manager. This affects my career. Here's my 2 cents worth:
Liberal's policy is not going to work in the timescale. They need frequency bandwidth which won't be free till 2014 (analogue TV decom). It does cost less, and I love that it's not geographically bound as we all use mobile devices now, and that's proliferating to most peoples daily lives. It's clear from their policy docs released yesterday that they have not thought this through.
Labour NBN costs a lot, but will catch up to Asia etc which, business wise, is key to our economy going forward. We home users may not need highest speed now, but what we do over the internet is changing fast. It's still 6 years away so if this bandwidth exists in leading countries, new ideas will make use of it. Privatising post deployment does seem a risk, as we know the damage private ownership profiteering can cause from the Telstra experience. The internet filter is unlikely to get through parliament in the next term, providing we have balanced senate control. Labour just won't have enough seats to force it through. Downside is cost, but I think it will pay for itself over time. Just think how much is saved if 5 million people work from home even 1 day a week. I'd pay for that service.
Green party seem to have the best policy for this. Support the NBN and it's benefits. Reject the nationwide filter, and promote local PC solutions under parental control, with ISP support. Ignore wireless for now (in fibre areas), as market demand will grow this area anyway. Also, after watching a 1hr debate with the 3 parties it's clear only the Green's communications minister Scott Ludlam gets this. (I'd vote Green if I could just to get him a seat. Sharp guy!) See it here: http://www.youtube.com/australiavotes
No-one has yet said anything about contention ratio's or pipelines to services outside Australia. Our country links are going to need a ridiculous boost to support the hunger of any new network. That's the bit that will kill costs.
I arrived back in Oz too late to enrol to vote, but for the first time in my life, I'm really hoping Greens get a stack of votes... a balance of technical advancement and freedom now hangs on it!
@Indefinite Implosion
I've been in Sydney for 2 days and it's ridiculous. No free WiFi -- ANYWHERE. My hotel internet connection is total rubbish. The bandwidth caps and costs on the home plans I see advertised are ridiculous.
@Indefinite Implosion
Protip - The Greens are giving their preferences to Labor. So you're not even throwing away your vote!
Voting for the greens! Even though they're with labour we won't have the ranga in power and still get our broadband! Our speeds are bad at max 32mbps down and 3mbps down
@Indefinite Implosion
Aussie tax payer here, all for having my dollars going to having RAD internet speeds instead of mediocre. Greens sounds like a solid bet. Maybe the Sex party? lol
For anyone who doesn't know what "hybrid fiber-coaxial" means:
It's the technical name for Cable Internet.
Ironically Comcast Cable in the US offers 12Mbps as their standard tier.
Cable internet tends to be unreliable as it's essentially a radio signal that's very susceptible to noise.
DSL tends to be more reliable but its distance limitations make it feasible only in dense cities.
Neither option is as scalable bandwidth wise as fiber.
It's also the only one that can support gigabit speeds today.
Yeah, at least they're getting SOME support from their government. All we get from the FCC are empty promises while Douche-gle and Very-scum bury net neutrality in a deep hole and leave us with broadband speeds that make America the joke of the free world. You'd have to move to Haiti to get worse internet.
@Indefinite Implosion Also, we are in a similar situation in New Zealand. One argument they make against fiber to the home is that it requires costly upgrades to each home, involving fiber connection from the street, re-wiring the home for fiber, and installing fiber equipment. There is the potential that this cost falls on to homeowners.
I do believe, however, that this is an essential and logical step to make, to keep up in the information age. It is a worthwhile investment to make.
Stupid stupid people, claim to know stuff about technology but do not realize 12mbps is 5.4GB/s or basically a 720p 80 minute movie.
Anyways Verizon spent about 22b for 12 million homes available to get it then add on the fact only about 5.6million. Then theres the other hidden cost of installing it to the home itself.
@FtL1776 "Stupid stupid people, claim to know stuff about technology but do not realize 12mbps is 5.4GB/s or basically a 720p 80 minute movie."
Come again?
12mbps means 12 megabit per second, or about 1.5 megabyte per second. Less if you include packet overhead.
5.4GB/s means 5.4 gigabyte per second, a speed some 3500 times higher.
An 80 minute 720p movie in h.264 format usually ends up at a data size of ~2GB. Cue most 45-minute 720p TV episodes clocking in at 1.1GB.
Then again your post was probably sarcasm that got lost in translation over the Internet, right?
@Mike10010100 If you're concerned about privatisation and competition, then rest assured the government company that's building the network (NBN Co) will be privatised, which is why the $43bn cost isn't really accurate, as it doesn't even take into account the return when it's sold.
@Indefinite Implosion greens suck defs stay with julia gillard just for the internet
@Indefinite Implosion
If I can just cut through all the bull crap on here for a moment please.
Forget the Greens, they an only say these things because they aren't going to run government, believe me if their policies were costed like the two major parties you wouldn't love them so much.
The Labor plan will introduce the NBN not to 99% of the population but to 93% if I remember correctly. The rest will be covered by wireless technology. It will cost us $43bn maybe a little less... which for us in Australia isn't loose change. The Philosophy is to have a 100% government owned company build and run this network, and if I remember correctly in 5 years sell it off to the Private sector... correct me if i'm wrong.
The Liberal plan will essentially create a backbone for ISP companies to run their own lines to houses from the node/host. True the government won't deliver 100mb/s speeds but that doesn't stop the private enterprise from exceeding it. For example Telstra have a Fiber Optic network in Melbourne delivering 100mb/s.... it exists, and they've announced a roll out in South East Queensland for 18,000 homes. (notice we aren't capping speed, these are MINIMUM speeds). The minimum speed from the liberals will be 12mb/s. (it's also $6bn)
The difference is in the philosophy... for heavens sake, the government didn't but in ADSL2+ the bloody private sector did. Wake up.
The policy of the Liberals is an absolute joke and shows an contempt for the vast majority of people in Australia. It also shows that they are totally lacking a concept of the communications network connectivity at the current time.
People have raised the whole issue of RIM's, this is the very problem of getting higher bandwidth to the consumers via ADSL based technology. There are two main limiting factors, the first being back-haul from the RIM or C-Mux back to the exchange. The libs have said they will increase some back-haul but I sincerely doubt they understand the concept of RIM/CMux connectivity and doubt they will increase back-haul to all of these devices on the current network. Add to this the attenuation of ADSL on various gauges of copper wire which can significantly reduce the speed of ADSL. Even ADSL2+ speed reduces significantly after 1.5km. Add to the this that cable faults due to gel cable are a constant source of issues currently.
Further to current CAN issues are things such as loading coils, lightning arrestors and excessive transmission losses. People in these scenarios may well not get the FTTP simply due to low populations densities and may be served by Wireless technology or satellite. The Wireless scenario may be deliver high speeds close to the towers but get away from the towers or in topographically challenged areas the signal will be all but none existent. Additionally if the wireless tower/base station has a high level of usage speeds will also suffer. Once again it's back down to tower capacity and bandwidth on the back-haul. Satellite as a last resort is probably better than nothing but it is slow in comparison and that's without getting into the cost of it. Both wireless and satellite have lag issues and are far from suitable in some applications, the lag is particularly noticeable in gaming.
The Libs will do this patchwork quilt if elected and then realise down the track that we will now have to roll out a fibre network. Get with the times Libs!!!
The only way for our country to move forward with real speed is to head down the the FTTP concept that the ALP proposes and has started implementing. This is one of those major nation building investments that is essential for future IT markets to work in this country. If the FTTP is abandoned we will lose so much, in 10 years we will realise what a lost opportunity it was to have a truly world class communications network. In all reality if a country has poor communications how can it move forward.
Labor is going to spend $43 billion of taxpayers money on the NBN. Thats about $2000 for every man woman and child in Oz. Applying the efficiencies that this government of clowns achieved with the BER programme (they managed to pay over four times what they should have paid for $16billion worth of school halls), I'd prefer they got right out of the provision of goods and services.
Sure, we'd all love blindingly fast internet speeds, and I'd love to drive a Maserati, but lets stick to what's affordable. And let's ensure we get value for money.
The Labor Party are idiots, and with any luck, in a few weeks they'll have been turfed out.
@Arobert
Whilst I agree Labour made some big mistakes, sadly the Libs are allergic to investing in long term infrastructure roll-outs. They can deliver surpluses but in the long term the lack of investment does screw us all over..
@Arobert & that $2000 is going to help my small business (& many others) compete on the global stage, amongst countless other things. This is the kind of infrastructure Investment I want our government to make. The internet is not all just about how fast we can stream/download a movie..
@Arobert
Are you trying to argue the stimulus program was not necessary?
Because you'd be dead wrong if you are....
In-short (I'm happy to counter in much more detail if you want to continue this) ...
If zilch was done, the cost to the economy would've been "far" greater than what was out-laid for the stimulus programs.
LOL, when is any govt run project more efficient than free enterprise?
And I suggest you listen to Brad Orgill's speech on the BER inquiry, your figure of 4x is a but "off the mark".
@Mike10010100
Because the Labour idea ensures the company that eventually owns the network is separate to the retailers. The Liberal idea is to not really give us fast internet and worse entrench the position of Telstra which operates a virtual monopoly with no other companies really able to compete on anything near an even playing field. Which is why are broadband is currently so far behind and so very expensive.
P.S. The NBN is a given if Labour wins, but the Internet Filter will be blocked by the greens and libs in the senate, so it is a real red herring..
The NBN is the way to go. As the Fibre back-haul gets rolled out of the the next few years more Exchanges will have DSLAM's Installed, and more 3G towers will be built allowing regional areas to get good speeds at competitive prices,
Anyway Australia's internet value is getting better and better. My plan just went from 120GB ADSL2+ for $99 to 240GB at the same price.
Even Telstra offer 200GB plans.
Can you correct your figures. It should be 93% rather than 99%. Was upped from 90% to 93% - Source: http://www.alp.org.au/agenda/nbn/
@aigarius Finland and Norway are also very socialist. Would you trade personal freedoms for faster broadband?
@Pearl Jam No, it hasn't. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/10/2979293.htm
@topherluvstech
That's is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard, where have you got this notion that people in Finland/Norway don't have freedoms?
@Mike10010100
because it goes back to the current model which hasn't been freakin working for over a decade. There's had to be constant govt intervention because of monopistics practices that have strangled the entire industry for freakin yrs.
How could you now be aware of that, are you in the telcoms industry? (I am)
Despite the Liiberals characterisations, the NBN absolutely prioritises datacomms infrastructure for competition, far better than it ever has been.
@(Unverified) typo correction:
"How could you not be aware of that, are you in the telco industry? (I've been in it as a sysadmin for 10yrs)
Just reminds me how horrible the internet access in the U.S. is. I'm still stuck with 4Mb DSL and the houses down the road still have dialup. It only ever runs near 4 meg two days out of the month. The rest of the time its
@Timerider
Cut off the rest of my comment cause i used a less than sign.
Was saying the rest of the time its less than 1Mb and 300 ping times to servers 50 miles away.
@topherluvstech
LOL, you've got to be frackin kidding me.
Talk about ignorant...
I guess you're a card carrying member of that truly great social movement called the tea party too right?
With your glorious leader Sarah Palin at the helm what could go wrong.
I'd like to thank both parties for providing concrete reasons for my decision not to vote in this election. Labor's Internet filter clinched my non-vote for them and the Coalition's plan isn't much better than what many of us have now.
Not to mention that all political promises, especially those made in an election campaign, can be broken. I wouldn't trust either side to live up to this until the man knocks on my door to hook me up.
This is the problem with some political groups.
They'll place these partial improvements only for them to have to replace those not soon after the job is done.
Why not just get the new stuff down there now allowing for more time and innovation before the next advance in the technology.
Quick update - the NBN Co is announcing today that their fibre will have 1 gigabit speeds instead of 100 megabit.
http://www.theage.com.au/technology/technology-news/nbn-to-announce-huge-increase-in-speed-20100812-1205s.html
Best case scenario for the election result is having Labor retain power and build the NBN, and having the Greens with the balance of power in the Senate so they can block the filter.
Worst case scenario is having the Liberals in power - no NBN, a crappy "how long can we extend this tech" alternative, and a filter at least as bad as Labor's plan.
What's that? The Libs have said they oppose the filter and won't have one? I say, bullshizenhousen. Does anyone honestly believe that mad monk Tony Abbott, given the chance to block abortion and euthanasia websites, wouldn't take it? Of course he would.
@craigg Libs have said they will vote against the filter. The Greens will also. So it won't get through the senate.
I don't care what happens. Either way the internet speed will be improved. In Perth you are lucky to get over 5 mbps...mine is an average of 0.5 mbps...12 mbps sounds AWESOME! Let alone 100, or as they are saying now, up to 10 times more!