Resources from Explaining the NBN Thread
Computer Worlds NBN 101 series:
NBN 101: The case for wireless broadband
NBN 101: The Economic Argument
NBN 101: The Internet or applications?
NBN 101: Floating the submarine cable question
About 4g LTE real world speeds.
…the provider estimates that a real connection on a populated network should average between 5Mbps to 12Mbps in download rates and between 2Mbps to 5Mbps for uploads … The speed is significantly less than the theoretical 100Mbps promised by Long Term Evolution (LTE), the chosen standard
Quigley: Why an all-wireless NBN is pointless
To get a committed rate of 5 Mbps, you would need 80,000 cell sites,” Quigley said. We have 16,000 today so we’d need to multiply today’s wireless networks by five to get a committed information rate of 5 Mbps to 60 percent of premises.
This could be a useful resource http://www.broadband-forum.org/downloads/About_Fiber.pdf
see page 6 chart which demonstrates the way in which fiber doesn’t decease in speed as distance increases like xDSL.
Here is another article that outlines a bunch of counter arguments
And counter-counter article here http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s3012555.htm
And of course
Also related article here, see attached graphs at bottom.
The FTTH council has a number of interesting articles and documents.
About Germanys need for FTTH http://www.ftthcouncil.eu/documents/press_release/2010/PR2010_German_Campaign_Final.pdf
About UK being potentially last to adopt FTTH in Europe, interesting because some detractors use them as an example of why not to have FTTH. http://www.ftthcouncil.eu/documents/press_release/2010/PR2010_UK_Campaign_Final.pdf
FTTH business guide, interesting read has section on Why Fiber, and FTTH case studies. http://www.awt.be/contenu/tel/res/FTTH-Business-Guide-v1.pdf
About the EU targets for 2020
“The document requests 30Mbps bandwidth for each European household and at least 100Mbps for 50% of households by 2020″
FTTH Benefit Compendium
Some people claim no countries are interested in FTTH and it’s all wireless – not true – as we speak 49 countries are rolling out FTTH, have rolled out FTTH, or are planning to
Whilst many other countries are happy with ADSL, one thing to keep in mind is ADSL speed is determined by distance from the exchange, here is a map showing global population density – if everyone lives close to the exchange, sync speeds will be far higher.
Unfortunately for Australia the average DSL sync speed is 9.5Mbps-8Mbps, according to Exetel – meaning around half get lower than 8Mbps, let alone the 24Mbps figure.
Many people also raise the question if people care broadband, We are actually in the top 10 Broadband penetration list, at 80% penetration, only 1% behind South Korea
See page 6 chart “Fixed Bandwidth Demand”, the orange line shows projected copper speeds, the green line is demand. (chart by itself http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/files/2010/09/nbn1.PNG)
State of Australian Economy
Problems with doing Cost Benefit Analysis
Mobile Internet Congestion
Why not spend on health instead of NBN?
Can’t find the original poster of the following
Special interests in health, as in other areas of public policy, hold sway, with the public and the community largely excluded. The health media has gone missing on the following.
• At the April COAG meeting, State governments and their health bureaucracies were left in control of hospitals. Kevin Rudd described it as the ‘greatest reform in health since Medicare’. That was nonsense. John Brumby and the states won the arguments over hospitals and got a lot more money to boot. Where were the professional and searching journalists in mainstream media? We were all overwhelmed by the spin.
• Compared with many other countries, we have a much higher number of hospital beds. Australian governments have an obsession with hospitals at the expense of non-hospital care. But no journalist to my knowledge has examined this obsession we have with hospitals and hospital beds.
The Hayman Solution
FTTH and Environment
Why GPON and not PTP?
http://www.argo-contar.com/news/PON-mitsubishi.pdf (Rapid Growth of FTTH by Use of PON in Japan)
IPTV and the end of cable TV
Neilson’s Law and LTE
Maybe it would be best fit in the ‘why the private sector can’t do this’ section? It essentially proves we have fantastic population density in some areas, yet even in areas suchas Sydney you still really only have access to DSL. and if your extremely lucky HFC. One would assume if the private sector was going to do it, they would have done it already in areas that have massive return potential.
Or even, say, surfers paradise, a picture says a thousand words and might emphasise the situation more:
All that density, yet it’s littered with congested RIM’s, no HFC or FTTH, 3G is congested (I experianced it firsthand) – many places there can’t even get DSL as the RIM’s are mostly out of ports..
If you wan’t a picture of what a CBA looks like, here is the one made by Japan’s NTT in 2006 for their FTTH scheme. http://22.214.171.124/iicp/chousakenkyu/seika/pdf/2006-05.pdf
The backhaul component of the NBN is only $3.5B. And a lot of that may well be just the purchase of dark fibre that’s already there that has been put in place by businesses.
Extract from “Building broadband: Strategies and policies for the developing world” available from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTINFORMATIONANDCOMMUNICATIONANDTECHNOLOGIES/Resources/282822-1208273252769/Building_broadband.pdf
If I remember correctly then Australia’s GDP is about $1 Trillion then 1% is $10 Billion. There is a nice graph just after the extract below which I can’t include here which estimates the GDP increase due to a 10% increase in penetration for a high income country to be about 1.21% ($12 billion, makes the cost of the NBN seem cheap)
The World Bank has found that in low- and middle-income countries every 10 percentage point increase in broadband penetration accelerates economic growth by 1.38 percentage points—more than in high-income countries and more than for other telecommunications services (Figure 1).16 In a similar study, McKinsey & Company estimates that ?a 10 percent increase in broadband household penetration delivers a boost to a country‘s GDP that ranges from 0.1 percent to 1.4 percent.?17 Booz & Company found that ?10 percent higher broadband penetration in a specific year is correlated to 1.5 percent greater labor productivity growth over the following five years.? Booz also suggests that ?countries in the top tier of broadband penetration have exhibited 2 percent higher GDP growth than countries in the bottom tier.?18 These studies are the latest in the already extensive work estimating broadband‘s economic impact.19
How is that not worthwhile? unlimited VoIP phone is $9.
$29 – 20GB
$49 – 200GB
$69 – 400GB
$99 – 1TB
Your currently paying $340 for ‘up to’ 24Mbps with no limit, looking in your post history, you sync at 6Mbps.
2. What happens to all those people – and there are plenty (including businesses) – with alarm/alert systems that rely on the current phone network? Are the compatible with the NBN (at last I heard they weren’t)?
You mean the issues raised here?
On the other hand The Australian reported on this topic using this headline
NBN obsoletes a million security systems: ASIAL
Looking over the ASIAL report, it doesn’t actually say that a million security systems will be obsolete (but of course that makes a better headline).
They do have a number of legitimate concerns that need to be addressed:
1. Back to base reporting depends on the comms line being secure. The feels that the NBN line may vulnerable to tampering (which a custom-laid copper phone line might not). This probably doesn’t apply to most installations though. NBN won’t be any less secure than the average home phone line – anybody can cut my phone line at the front of the house. Gas, Water and Power too (to cut off the first 2 you just need to turn a valve).
But critical for some businesses such as banks – and homes with life support systems.
2. Backup power in the event of mains failure. This is a non-issue as the NBN ONT already has provision for a backup battery.
Battery is not provided in the Tassie trial – but can be connected at the user’s discretion and cost.
There seems to be disagreement as to whether or not it should be mandatory
3. Tamper-monitoring of the NBN ONT – now that it is an integral part of the Alarm system. This is much the same as (1). A really high-secure site would want the ONT and fibre line in a locked room or tamper-proof. Again this is not a concern for most homes.
4. PSTN emulation – the NBN ONT already provides two ports for phone. This should not be a problem.
5. The NBN installation might interrupt Alarm comms and trigger a false alarm. This can easily be addressed by operational procedures and training. Maybe coordinate with the Alarm company. No big drama.
6. Support for low-speed 1200 bps modems – there’s no reason the NBN analogue phone interface should have any more problem with this that the A-D converters at the exchange. Some current VoIP adapters might have cause problems by using < 64kbit/sec codecs, but there’s no reason for an ONT to do that.
“POTS port is G.711″ (the same standard as existing Telstra phone services.)
7. Network Performance by multiple RSPs vs Telstra. Only becomes a problem if the user changes from a premium phone service to a cheap one. Alarm companies should disallow that.
The “million alarms obsolete” looks like a beat-up to me.
This article appeared in the New York Times today, and I thought that it might offer a somewhat more balanced – and accurate – approach to some of the background facts about fibre transmission than appear in the Australian!
And people still think wireless will cut it………
http://www.nbnco.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/main/site-base/main-areas/publications-and-announcements/latest-announcements/mike_quigley_presentation_to_commsday_melbourne_summit <– in the podcast listed in the most recent announcement, Mike made mention of the standard wholesale costs – check out at around the 13min mark.
It was something log the lines of: standard pricing for an RSP to access the Point-of-Interconnect, which then fans out to all premises either via fiver, sat or fixed wireless.
There has been plenty of discussion that there may be different price points for an RSP to provide access to different technology users – but this section of speech seems to be clarifying information to me that there will be 1 price across the entire customer base.
for the PoI: check out slide 9 of http://www.nbnco.com.au/wps/wcm/connect/f0f58180444b2b5baa02aad59810a037/Commsday+Melbourne+13+Oct+2010+PDF.pdf?MOD=AJPERES
Access Economics: FTTN NBN would boost GDP by $8-23 billion
STEPHEN CONROY: I’ll happily come back to that, but I need to go back to Malcolm’s fantasy. He said the majority, the vast majority of Australians can access and exchanges ADSL2+ enabled. Only 500 of 5,000 exchanges are ADSL2+ enabled. And I invite Malcolm to read … to read John McCarthy in the Courier-Mail. In the last couple of days he wrote an Op-Ed piece which said that getting broadband in inner-city Brisbane is science fiction. I invite him to read The Drum, Max Pesch, who described Surry Hills experience in Sydney.
TONY JONES: Well, hang on a sec! Hold on, hold on, hold on. You’ve raised the question of the costs per household, Malcolm Turnbull. Now, I think you’ve written it’ll be $4,000 per household. Tony Abbott say it’ll be $5,000 per household. The visiting Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim Helu say it’ll be $7,000 per household. Who’s right?
STEPHEN CONROY: But that’s a completely false representation. This is investing in an asset that will last up to 40 years. If you take even Malcolm’s $4,000 and stretch that across 40 years, it’s about 13 cents a day.
So, you can’t say that you add up the whole total cost for asset that lasts up to 40 years and suddenly try and bemuse and trick ordinary Australians that that’s the actual cost. This is an asset over 40 years, Tony! 13 cents a day!
^^ Conroy, Turnbull clash over NBN cost
Malcolm Turnbull’s new line of attack on the NBN is aimed at end user pricing. His reasoning is that if a wholesale price of around $35 is charged to retailers (as put forward in the NBN implementation report) it will result in an end user price of around $65 to $70 per month – which he says is “higher than most people are paying now”.
His statement seems like folly to anybody who is already paying for broadband and telephony service in this country. Given most already pay $60 for regular broadband, plus $30 line rental to get it – or around $65 for ‘naked’ DSL with voice-over-IP (VoIP) – it’s doubtful there would be many people upset with paying $65 for much greater 100Mbps speeds and a stable voice service from the NBN.
Curbing the NBN’s cost
Optus targets NBN wireless fans and fibre critics
In my suburb of Seventeen Mile Rocks, Telstra has told us the service is full, that there is no waiting list and they can’t help. Optus doesn’t service our area and we’ve tried a variety of different systems.
Currently we are stuck with 3G mobile, which works slowly because we are in a gully and hardly at all when there’s cloud cover. We found one spot in the house where, if we are lucky, we can get a two-bar reception. If it’s raining it’s better to read a book, but so far it’s the best system we’ve had.
^ Wired-up future is the right way for rural and suburban Australia