"What's wrong with the NBN?" (ABC 4-Corners summary)

twig on 24/10/2017 - 10:07
Last edited 24/10/2017 - 10:10

Link to video: http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/whats-wrong-with-the-nbn/9077…

From the start, Australia's National Broadband Network was billed as a game changer that would future proof the nation by delivering super fast internet services.

Almost a decade on from those promises, there's a growing number of angry residential customers and small businesses who are bitterly disappointed with the NBN.

"I am a very, very frustrated NBN customer… What I've got is a trench running halfway up the driveway and a piece of PVC pipe with a rope running through it - and that's all." Customer

On Monday night, as the NBN reaches a milestone, passing the half-way point in its rollout, Four Corners investigates the problems fuelling this dissatisfaction.

"Nobody knows what anybody else is doing. The retail service providers don't know what NBN Co is doing, I don't know what either of them are doing, and NBN Co don't seem to know what they themselves have done." Software developer

For many Australians, the NBN has turned out to be a lottery. Not all customers are receiving the same connections. And in some regional areas there is a stark digital divide, between those with high-speed fibre to the premises, and neighbours stuck with old copper connections who worry they're becoming digital second class citizens.

"On the left hand side as we're driving down this street, those houses can have access to fibre to the node. On the right hand side, they're fibre to the premises, so this is the digital divide." Former Mayor

We examine what's driving the decision making about the rollout, and investigate
why some customers are being short-changed on expensive data plans that fail to deliver what they promise."

"We definitely feel like we're being ripped off." Customer

As critics warn that Australia will soon be a decade behind its near neighbour New Zealand in the digital transformation, reporter Geoff Thompson visits New Zealand's 'Gigatown', Dunedin, to look at how superfast broadband is transforming the way they do business. Back in Australia, the government insists the NBN is going to plan and will be steadily upgraded.

"The NBN will be fit for purpose. It will support the needs that Australians have. But no network, no technology, is ever set in stone. There are always upgrades." Communications Minister

In interviews with the Communications Minister and the current and former heads of NBN Co. we examine whether a decade of politicking has compromised the ability of the NBN to deliver for all Australians.

"I just feel incredibly disappointed that an opportunity to build a first class network that would set Australia up for the future was squandered, and squandered for the wrong reasons." Former NBN executive

Internet

Comments

        • NobalaKoba on 26/10/2017 - 17:27
          +1

          @Jackson: I've tried 4k streaming many times, it always spends 3 quarters of the time buffering.

    • Pacify on 25/10/2017 - 18:50

      Wireless is great for low data usage applications.

      But thats about it. Its going to be a very long time before wireless is an actual competitor to fibre

    • tassietigermaniac on 26/10/2017 - 01:57
      +2

      Take it from someone who works in a NOC for a large Telco… No, 5g wouldn't have fixed anything. It would have been a huge step backwards and unmaintainable. Not to mention so much more expensive…

    • MercSal on 24/10/2017 - 11:28
      +18

      Wonderful, that's great, but your anecdote is not representative of australia.

        • MercSal on 24/10/2017 - 11:45
          +25

          Mate, you clearly have more of an axe to grind than the ABC. The MTM NBN has a number of significant issues. The ABC is reporting on them. That is their remit and purpose. They did the same when Labor had power, and about the original fibre NBN.

        • smartazz104 on 25/10/2017 - 17:48
          +8

          @Skramit: It would be to the ignorant and inward-looking portion of the population.

        • Pacify on 25/10/2017 - 18:51

          Your bias is showing.

        • NobalaKoba on 26/10/2017 - 02:59
          +1

          Notice how you've been negged? NBN has reached a milestone and passed the halfway point in its roll-out.

          That means that if NBN wasn't problematic, then you would have received plus votes that cancel out the negs, that's not the case. That means that the majority of people disagree with you, and are using their limited number of negs they get daily against you.

          By you making this comment and being negged, you're actually proving the opposite of what you want to, as you're showing the large number of people who have problems with the NBN, and that it isn't complete rubbish.

          I agree with your statement that there's a percentage of people with issues with the NBN, but unfortunately, it's a very large percentage.

        • Skramit on 26/10/2017 - 09:21
          -3

          @BradleyDS2: Disagree. The reaction is still over-blown IMO.

    • papachris on 24/10/2017 - 21:42
      +10

      "…politically hijacked and biased public funded media source"

      LOL at this tired old Murdoch line. Are you Rupert or Donald?

      You don't have to watch (or listen to) all that much ABC material to see them attack the Labor party too. You just need to be unbiased yourself to recognise it…

    • Aids on 25/10/2017 - 09:56
      +3

      There is data out there that shows that the ABC is slightly biased toward the right. This tired old argument has no basis, it just seems that way because every other media source is so corrupt and 90% biased to the right that the balanced ABC seems left leaning in comparison.

      • [Deactivated] on 27/10/2017 - 22:54

        Well they say if you're attacked by both the government and opposition at the same time you must stand somewhere in the middle!

    • smux on 25/10/2017 - 11:02

      Malcolm…?

    • mobius on 25/10/2017 - 15:03

      Spoken like a true conservative.

  • pernunz on 24/10/2017 - 11:32
    +16

    What's wrong is that there's a lack of clarity between NBN Co, ISP's, and the end consumer.

    NBN Co charges ISP's ~$10 per Mbps per month for line speed. So, a theoretical ISP consisting of one customer can give a constant speed of 1Mbps all the time.
    Another theoretical ISP consisting of 1000 customers gets 1000Mbps to distribute to all of it's customers. If they are all using the internet at the same time, they can all only get 1Mbps. These customers are sold different plans of "12Mbps", "25Mbps", or "100Mbps", which is only a theoretical maximum that they can receive assuming the ISP has enough capacity.

    Even then, as was the case with one of the customers on the show, using FTTN and FTTC, at a customers house, depending on how far the copper runs, a theoretical maximum speed for them could be 24Mbps. In this case, there is no benefit to the end user to pay for any speed greater than 25Mbps.

    This was missing from the 4 corners piece. The liberal party member was saying "most people only get slower plans", but if people cannot get faster internet because of the technology used, or if their ISP doesn't buy enough bandwidth, the customer doesn't ever get the faster speeds, so they 'downgrade' their plan to meet what they get in reality.

    • NBN Co needs to adjust it's pricing model so ISP's get more bandwidth to pass on to their customers. This will see more customers buy more expensive plans.
    • NBN Co / ISP's need to disclose to customers what type of technology is currently available at a specific premises, and therefore disclose a customers theoretical maximum speed based on the technology used at each address.

    Each of the above will give the end user a better customer experience, however it will hurt the finances of both NBN Co and ISP's.

    • abb on 24/10/2017 - 12:31
      +1

      I think that's pretty clear, at least to the ISPs. The higher contention ratio (users:bandwidth) they have, the more profit they make. "Power users" know to shop around for ISPs with better ratios, but the average Joe does not. Maybe NBN Co should require ISPs to advertise their contention ratios?

      • pernunz on 24/10/2017 - 12:41

        The contention ratio would change on a daily basis, and doesn't provide much information to the end consumer. If an ISP has excess bandwidth on a regular basis they will likely reduce the amount of bandwidth they purchase.

      • [Deactivated] on 27/10/2017 - 22:55

        Maybe they could do something like free range labelling! (Your POI currently has 1500 users:mbit on average in the last 60 days)

        Since there is only 100 odd POIs this could be maintained by all RSPs (which should know these figures anyway!)

    • pernunz on 25/10/2017 - 08:15
      +1

      That being said, it looks like NBN Co might be doing something good in the future.

      https://www.itnews.com.au/news/nbn-co-looks-to-launch-uncong…

    • santoitaliano on 26/10/2017 - 10:40
      +4

      Completely agree.

      I believe, at the moment, it is easier for an ISP to blame NBN instead of acknowledging they have not purchased enough bandwidth to support their customers.

      There is a lot of fear about copper. My cable connection i've had the past 18 years has been fantastic. 100Mbps down, horrible 1.5mbps throttled upload. Once we get FTTC should be better again assuming my ISP doesn't skimp on bandwidth which is the most likely outcome.

      The other issue is that most people will complain about getting 25Mbps but will not pay the extra money to get a 50, or 100Mbps connection. It is then not a question of whether the network is capable but rather does the customer see value for money. We don't know if the network is capable as the ISPs are not transparent on whether the bandwidth is actually a problem, or specifically their purchased allocation of it.

  • shaybisc on 24/10/2017 - 11:32
    +1

    In the entire 4 Corners they didn't mention fixed wireless once. Fibre to the anywhere- I should be so lucky- that's for the next street up.

  • grog on 24/10/2017 - 11:48
    +16

    In 1946 approx the Australian government said "we are going to put all of Australias telephone lines underground"

    And they did.
    [even in remote parts of the western Australian wheat
    belt]

    It took them around 25 years but they did it.

    In 2009 the Australian government said " we are going to give the majority of australian houses 100mb fibre to the premise"

    They put $46 billion in a big bucket and quarantined it to pay for this new 100mb fibre.

    And they started the rollout.

    After the project was finished they were going to sell it to telco conglomerates to get the money back.

    If the cost blew out over $46 billion, telco conglomerates would pay the extra as it was rolled out.

    In september 2013 the majority of australian voters decided that i was not going to get 100mb fibre to my house.

    In a recent financial report the head of nbn co said he was trying to contain the cost for FTTN etc to between $51 and 56 billion"

    One of my previous jobs was fixing faults in australias copper phone lines and we did it the proper way, not in a hurry to fix the fault as i was on a salary.

    Australias copper phone wires are currently below world engineering standards.

    If this new fast "broadband" has copper somewhere along the length to my house i am doomed.

  • Chubbsmcfatflabs on 24/10/2017 - 13:10
    +68

    I worked at NBN for a time. I went in with high hopes, thinking I was doing something good for the country.

    But it was a very ordinary place to work, bullying managerial behavior, nepotism, jobs for the boys, political appointees, it goes on..

    I Left after 18mths..took 6 mths off after, as I was burnt out and heartily shattered & disenchanted with business & work by what I had experienced.

    I considered whistleblowing, I really did, but there was no protections in place as there is now. I had a family to support.

    They built the company first, then decided to build the backbone.

    All the billing and OSS systems were built before the company had any real customers. spent Millions on customer service staff and process, when there were no customers. Built a completely new process to support the business when all they had to do was to emulate a Telstra or Optus. Employed staff to support customers who were non existent. Staff traveled on the company $$ from Melbourne to Sydney and vice versa for 1 meeting, they got hire cars, visited relatives, went on Holidays using the points from Virgin flights, Platinum Frequent flyer was seen as an achievement.

    Consultants were brought in who used to work for the management that hired them.

    The staff were paid 25% more than market rate as a way of keeping them at the company.

    There was no performance management process so you couldn't remove poor performers. when salary Bands were introduced, none of the staff could get salary increases because they were either getting paid in excess of the band their job was classified in, or where doing a job lower than the salary demanded.

    NBN was never run like an engineering build. If it was run like a snowy river scheme, freeway build or the like than it would have been completed.

    Because "someone" had the bright idea of setting up a govt/bus enterprise and wanted to get a return on investment, the project was doomed to failure.

    Necessary infrastructure is not a profit making enterprise for a government, its something that has to be done to support the economy like water, power, rail lines etc.

    Anyway I learnt a lot from my NBN experience and I think that there should be a royal commission into it. Its criminal.

      • giventofly on 27/10/2017 - 17:46

        It's people like you that are silent in the face of injustice. I fear the majority of Australia is like you, innately incurious and it's going to lead to stifled progress in this country. You need to get a sense of justice and realise that your taxpayer money was completely squandered on a lie by the LNP.

        There is no forward thinking with this government. As needs grow, the existing methodology for the NBN will be already be obsolete for those that are on FTTN/FTTC.

        • boomramada on 27/10/2017 - 18:37
          -1

          You misunderstood me, he didn't whistle blow when it should be, he was enjoying his pay packet and everyone who work there had families to support to. And now comments on this forum, more of a ranting than whistle blowing.
          Damage is done!!.
          That's why I meant by no point reading it further….

        • giventofly on 27/10/2017 - 19:04

          @boomramada:
          Ok, sorry for misunderstanding.

          I meant what I said but now it isn't directed at you.

          I wouldn't hold it against them, though. Very easy to be idealistic when not in that position.

    • vinni9284 on 25/10/2017 - 07:54

      Thank you for sharing.

      It seems rotten from the inside (core) as well as it is on the outside.

    • usbc activist on 25/10/2017 - 08:43
      +5

      I too worked at a time at NBN. I agree with everything you have written. It was my first job after serving a long period at an evil global consulting company. At the start, it had the startup vibe and lots of work gets used to be done and then started the outsourcing with innumerable vendors. They do not talk to each other. My pay was stagnant where as people who have no clue what they were doing but were close to the management were given hikes and promotions. I finally left and working another company which is not that bad, but I have the peace of mind to concentrate on improving my skill

    • ACTGBilly on 26/10/2017 - 07:35

      Thanks for sharing. This is a comment that provides insight about some of the failure that is outside of the direct politics of FTTP vs FTTN. I think the public against private perspective is definitely worth looking at. However, others smarter than me have mentioned that the NBN “Co” part was mainly done so that it would get past the opposition at the time and get built at all. I’m sorry for you and annoyed at the greed that you had to endure from managerial/business types.

    • ACTGBilly on 26/10/2017 - 07:46
      +1

      Murdoch Press joining in on the bashing (perhaps without realising it): http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/inquirer/stuck-in-the-n… (soft paywall)

    • Lancerx on 27/10/2017 - 11:33

      Sounds like typical government sector management skill. I agree there should be a royal commission to make those in charge pay for wasting billions of taxpayers' money! It's a freaking crime! Blow the whistle please!

      • boomramada on 27/10/2017 - 16:04

        Everyone have families to support and money to enjoy, why would they blow a whistle ?? typical bad management. Yay, I got so many negatives :)

  • thord on 24/10/2017 - 13:52
    +37

    It's a disgrace and people should face jail over it.

    The Liberal's sabotage of the NBN cost the country tens of billions of dollars in infrastructure alone, and probably hundreds of billions of dollars lost to the economy. They should be hung.

    It honestly makes me want to leave australia.

    This is something that will not be fixed for decades, probably 30+ years we'll be behind the rest of the world. It's been the biggest disaster and mishandled project australia has ever had.

    • papachris on 24/10/2017 - 21:51
      +7

      Well, "hanged" anyway.

      But seriously, add the downgrading of NBN to the downgrading of renewable energy sources and the end of local manufacturing, and we are in grave danger of losing our "lucky country" moniker. The world will soon enough stop ordering our coal, uranium, etc and we'll be stuffed.

      And no Pauline/Tony, it's nothing to do with "boat people" either…

    • Shiny Mew on 25/10/2017 - 08:08

      I've always wanted to leave Australia for Germany or Scandinavia. Alas, getting citizenship is not so easy. :/

      • MrTweek on 25/10/2017 - 12:22
        +5

        Citizenship is the last step of migrating, not the first ;)

    • arcticmonkey on 27/10/2017 - 10:54

      I agree. The Liberals had big opportunities to roll out the original NBN and create jobs around renewable energy. They failed. They have really set us back 20-30 years.

      I guess Malcolm is an ex banker with a reported net worth of over $150 million. He probably won't need a job in technology or energy to sustain a high quality of life.

      I haven't even started on the cuts to health or education since the Liberals come in.

  • [Deactivated] on 24/10/2017 - 16:00
    -5

    I have 500/500 for $90
    Works great.

  • monkeybusiness on 24/10/2017 - 19:34
    +24

    What went wrong was that politics got in the way of good public policy. Both parties are equally at fault.

    Mistake 1: The idea that was conceived was too ambitious and targets/budgets used was the "best-case scenario" based on many assumptions which turned out to be false. This all come down to politics. Given Australia's vast landscape and population density compared to our Asian counterparts and NZ, it was far too costly to aim to provide FTTP for 93% of the population in the timeframe they wanted. I'm not saying don't provide it at all but that this target was too high given the infrastructure that needed to be built in places with low population density. Far more places should have gone with alternative "mix of technologies".

    Mistake 2: Implementation and costs. They wanted this to be a profit making business but yet none of the implementation plans make sense due to political reasons. A proper business would have taken advantage of economies of scale which means targeting areas that had the highest population density first. This means that you would have more people going on the NBN sooner rather than later and getting a return on your investment earlier in the lifecycle of the project. Imagine what would have happened if they rolled out the major hubs of Sydney/Melbourne/Brisbane early on to get people on ASAP rather than sticking to the politics of benefiting marginal seats in small country towns. Putting 5Km of cables to serve 1 house in woop woop went ahead instead of 5Km of cables in the cities where it would have provided dozens of residences in multiple suburbs on to the NBN.

    This isn't a debate for country vs City but just purely a simple business analysis of what went wrong.

    Imagine what would have been said in the 2013 election had the NBN already hit 50% of the populations due to the density in cities rather than the small population it hit with the country towns.

    Mistake 3: Scrapping the whole FTTP alltogether. The state of the NBN led to a vast range of compromises and concessions in order to roll it out ASAP.

    Mistake 4: Failure to recognize that the technology landscape is fast changing and things become redundant if they are not implemented ASAP. This comes back to point 2. None of the implementation made sense from a business point of view which was why no Aussie Telcos wanted to build it the way the Govt wanted it to in the first place.

    Its sad but we have no one to blame but both political parties and the system that brought us here.

    • tryagain on 25/10/2017 - 10:23
      +4

      Most realistic, unbiased comment yet. I think the politics of both majors played a big part, I also think there are 2 who were independents who demanded the "rural area's first" as part of their price for support for supply also get of waaaay too easily.

      • monkeybusiness on 25/10/2017 - 19:41
        +1

        Yes. Essentially they held the rest of Australia hostage so their regional areas got NBN first. Then NBN Co didn't have the business sense to do what was needed. This project was doomed from the start from the minute it was sold as a political item to get people on board rather than do what is actually best for Australia.

    • juicebox12 on 26/10/2017 - 12:59
      +1

      While I completely agree with your sentiment (politics skewering policy), I disagree with the notion that both parties are equally at fault.

      I don't support either major party (Australian Sex Party FTW), but to pin the equal blame on Labor (the policy's creators) is ignoring the literal hatchet job the Liberals did to undermine any success the project had, at the behest of an 'unknown' external influence (Telstra/Murdoch/Foxtel/commercial TV/Gaddafi/lizard people).

      The Libs plan is to gain ideological and political capital as another 'big government' project fails, making private enterprise the only 'proper' alternative.

      Mistake 1 is typical of any massive government infrastructure project- the over-promising of targets to win hearts and minds, and of course cost overruns as the practicalities and incidentals outside of the plan in the physical world. 93% fibre was perhaps too grandiose initially considering the physical requirements of laying cable to remote premises. I'm not against a mix of technologies being used, none of them should require an increased investment in copper and copper support infrastructure.

      Mistake 2 comes down to ease of initial implementation. While the 'cities first' plan makes more business sense to generate earlier revenue, it doesn't take into account the complexities of city infrastructure (namely accessibility and competition networks). It's much easier to get the project going by starting the build on lower friction jobs (ie. small/mid rural areas and emerging satellite cities) than to put everything on hold while you plan for the highly complex ones. Being a government-run NATIONAL network, the object here is to get the vast majority of Australians connected, so the order in which they are is not as relevant as if say TPG were doing it. TPG would not be servicing remote areas with fixed wireless or fibre though, that's for damn sure…

      Mistake 3 - Scrapping fibre as the primary fixed line medium, combined with (and exacerbated by) the CVC pricing model (NBN -> ISP), are what I would consider the two most prominent issues in this whole saga, outside of politics and treason. The scalability and resilience of fibre optic cable over copper made it the obvious choice 20 years ago; now this logic is beyond embarrassing, just malicious and shameful.

      Mistake 4 - true to some extent (tech landscape changing quickly), but we miss out on having a tech landscape at all if we don't at least try to bring things up to scratch and build a better future. At least a fibre network with a low uptake rate and bad initial commercial viability only becomes more relevant as tech pervades life further. If we sell it off (which I would generally disagree), it's at least worth more to the buyer with way lower maintenance and upgrade ongoings vs a calamitous concoction of copper.

      So, e-compadre, while I agree most of what you're describing, I strongly retort the notion both parties are equally to blame. Labor's plan wasn't without issues, but it WAS a plan; it originated from independent public servants working in the Treasury with a mandate to benefit all Australians in the least discriminatory fashion. The Liberal party had no policy response to its unveiling aside from NO, and two successive Liberal governments have vivisected the project to ensure its eventual demise and bolster their ideological narrative.

      Regardless - we are all in this cluster-kake together, and it's up to us to remember this come election time. If the person/party you're considering voting for supports (or has no position on):
      - Copper
      - Coal
      - regulated Coitus
      …then I would argue it's your duty as an Australian and a stakeholder in our economy to direct your preference elsewhere.

      • monkeybusiness on 26/10/2017 - 23:02
        +2

        Whilst I do agree that the Libs plan to change the whole FTTP plan is an atrocity, it was in reality in response to what the NBN has achieved up to that point. I really do not think the Libs could have been justified to cut the NBN had the targets been achieved in any meaningful way. Just look at the numbers and the market penetration the NBN had when the Libs took over.

        While yes Libs are at fault for changing it from FTTP to FTTN, it was also Labor that sold us and pushed through a NBN that was unfeasible to begin with. Is it not also their fault for promising something that was unrealistic and impossible to deliver to begin with? There is no doubt a fibre option network was needed but to sell it to the Australian public that it would cost signficantly less than reality is a crime in itself.

        Note that the NBN was initially offered to the Telcos to build but none of them opted to do so as they knew the project is unfeasible and unprofitable to do so given the government mandate of it having to roll it out in the bush first. Maybe the government should have been truthful up front that this whole project was about internet for the bush as in reality this is what it was aiming for but then again it would not have gotten the support to build it if they came out with that tag line. Hence politics coming into play of promising something and under budgeting costs just to sell it to the public.

  • FatBlanket on 25/10/2017 - 06:20
    +2

    The majority voted for this to happen. People weren't blindsided. The country is going to shit and it's exactly what the majority deserve.

    • smartazz104 on 25/10/2017 - 17:51
      +8

      A very slim majority.

      • FatBlanket on 25/10/2017 - 17:51
        +9

        How dare you

    • OzzyOzbourne on 26/10/2017 - 22:58
      +1

      Actually a majority of people voted for other parties.

    • [Deactivated] on 27/10/2017 - 10:35

      Your comment seems perfectly legitimate. Thank you for it :)

    • giventofly on 27/10/2017 - 17:47

      We have the government we deserve. No one earning under $250,000 should ever vote for the LNP as they are.

  • sardines on 25/10/2017 - 08:39
    +1

    It should have been done in stages of need not political map. For example hospitals, schools etc then hubs of communities -community centres, then other needs then technology reviewed and then homes.

    • DavidFong on 28/10/2017 - 09:01

      Certainly in the case of my community health centre, Internet/network access was already provided by microwave links by the early 2000s.
      And that link was sourced from the nearby Royal Melbourne Hospital.

      (as an aside, the microwave link was intermittently interrupted by construction activity of the new Women's Hospital in 2008,
      darned construction cranes!)

      I rather suspect all significant major health services migrated from ADSL2 some time ago…

  • sleet on 25/10/2017 - 09:23
    +8

    Politicians should be held accountable for our tax money. Investigations need to be made into these deals regarding Malcolm Turnbull.

    Australians need to wake up. Liberal has been a joke with the likes of Tony Abbott, Joe Hockey and even Malcolm Turnbull with no backbone. Labour isn't far off the mark.

    • OzzyOzbourne on 26/10/2017 - 12:28

      Problem is, we do vote for different governments, but they still don't fix anything, just blame the previous government

      • papachris on 27/10/2017 - 00:57

        Yes, this is one of the major problems with party democracy, and it seems to be getting worse.

        How many years since Libs gained power? Yet if you can bear to watch Question Time, almost EVERY "away" question is answered with "it's Labor's fault", and EVERY "home" question is designed to allow the minister to say "it's Labor's fault". There is no governing any more.

        The Democrats are gone, the Greens are idiots, and now the only independent that is close to sane is returning to SA…

  • Ozpit on 25/10/2017 - 10:34
    -2

    Anyone with any nous knew from the word go that the nbn would quickly become a white elephant anyway, because rapidly-developing satellite or community-based hotspot technology will soon become the norm. Having said that, all we are hearing are the crap nbn experiences; there's a lot (i.e. a lot) of folk/businesses out there who find it a big improvement on what they had before. Not that I would ever defend a white elephant (they are never likely to become extinct) :-)

    • xravisher on 25/10/2017 - 11:03
      +5

      cable / copper and fibre are generally more reliable and faster than wireless and satellite.

      Satellite being the worst during bad weather.

      Wireless generally has worse latency which 'can' become an issue when it comes to real time applications and online gaming.

      All the countries who DO have the best internet to my knowledge DO NOT use wireless or satellite as their primary backbone.

      However they almost always use it as a secondary or tertiary backup, if the main line does fail.

      CAVEAT: Australia is doing comparatively very well globally with its mobile internet

      • Ozpit on 25/10/2017 - 13:03

        … soon, not now. And the norm, not exclusively. Mark my words.

    • Pacify on 25/10/2017 - 18:54
      +3

      because rapidly-developing satellite or community-based hotspot technology will soon become the norm

      Thats not true at all.

      Fibre has no real competitor, and its unlikely that anything that can move the same volume of data at the same price will become available anytime soon. It was a pretty safe investment.

    • thord on 26/10/2017 - 13:55
      +2

      It won't.

      Every wireless or satelite connection goes back to a fibre optic wired line.

      It's true wireless will become ubiquitous, but it cannot carry the bandwidth required now or in the future, and that's not a failure of our current technology, that's due to the fundamental laws of physics. We don't have that much of the electromagnetic spectrum to work with. You saturate it, and that's it.

      Wireless will be used in the future for everything yes, but every home should still have a fibre connection for high data use. Mobile cannot sustain high data use.

      • Zachary on 29/10/2017 - 21:54

        It's true wireless will become ubiquitous, but it cannot carry the bandwidth required now or in the future, and that's not a failure of our current technology, that's due to the fundamental laws of physics. We don't have that much of the electromagnetic spectrum to work with. You saturate it, and that's it.

        What if in future we find a way to break those fundamental laws of physics? OR find a way around in somehow? Maybe with some magic/spiritual hebo jebo stuff? hahahaa…. :P Perhaps we're just missing key ingredients to bypass this limitation? Like a material that's probably deep in space(…which we'll first need to find a way to create a shuttleship that can sustain people for the duration of the space journey exploration mission….) or underground(as we've not completely discovered Earth and so we could maybe find some unidentified mineral that could do this for us….?) on Earth?

        …shouldn't dismiss the future like it will never happen…

    • tassietigermaniac on 27/10/2017 - 10:14

      I hate to say it, but that's just plain wrong. To deliver the speed you'd need HUGE towers, the likes of which we don't have yet. We'd need to build fibre directly to all of them anyway, and even then maintaining wireless tech is a very expensive thing. It would also need constant upgrades. Fibre is the better choice for these reasons. Wireless won't be a substitute for the next 50 years I imagine

  • knk on 25/10/2017 - 10:40
    +2

    For me logically the FTTN scenario, when it works should be fine.

    The problem is now, they have to maintain the copper network which I imagine is ludicrously expensive. Having a uniform FTTP network would have made more sense no?

    • [Deactivated] on 25/10/2017 - 18:53
      +1

      It's fine to say it's good enough for 80% of the population but me and many others we feel like we've been given decade old technology which is sometimes reliable and is required for work. Imagine a bus or water system that's worked 90% of the time and you'll understand how it may be impacting others.

      Copper is useable but it isn't reliable or desirable.

      Example my line drops out ~3 times a night and I live 150m from the node. I just have to wait 5-20mins for reconnection. It won't be getting replaced as I've been put on fttn. If it rains no internet. I know streets particularly on beachfront suburbs where everyone has this problem.

      • cryptos on 26/10/2017 - 01:49
        +1

        Assuming Telstra will not fix it, grab some silicon and disposable gloves, locate you cable in the nearest pit (if you can) if the pair connections are exposed grab a handful of silicion and glob it on

        • tassietigermaniac on 27/10/2017 - 10:17
          +2

          Absolutely do not do this. It might fix it, but it's illegal to do so and will void any chance of making health insurance claims if something happens while you're down there as well as exposing yourself to liability if anything goes wrong. Only Telstra are allowed to touch those pits.

          Not worth the risk

      • knk on 26/10/2017 - 18:07

        I require it for work, however speeds with about 5mbit upstream would be sufficient.

        I did say when it works though, and I wouldn't consider your frequent dropouts working or acceptable.

      • Zachary on 29/10/2017 - 22:24

        If it rains no internet.

        …but the cable(s) is all covered up….how can rain affect it….? Unless some parts aren't covered up….but I thought it was just a straight through cable from the exchange building….maybe I'm wrong….

    • Pacify on 25/10/2017 - 18:56
      +1

      Will it be fine in 10 years though? Look at the growth in data over just the last 5 years, its an incredible growth industry.

  • OzzyOzbourne on 25/10/2017 - 10:44
    +2

    When you are allowed to switch off a customer's existing system and force them to use a new system which is slower and more expensive, then publicly state they should be paying even more if they want a faster system, then you are going to annoy your customers.

    On top of that, with a lack of any alternative, you don't really have to care either.

  • havabeer on 25/10/2017 - 11:51
    +4

    It further goes to show LNP incompetence on the matter, their fear that 5G will somehow be the favoured choice of consumers. Maybe so in the many areas where they have installed inferior FTTN, HFC, Fixed Wireless and Satellite solutions. Which granted probably accounts for more customers than it doesn't, every failure of the NBN can be attributed to the LNP.

  • [Deactivated] on 25/10/2017 - 13:13
    +3

    The original plan sounded great and originally got my vote even though I do not normally vote labor, I voted Labor again to keep the plan going alas people believing the cost cutting promises of the LNP amongst the rest of Labors bad policies in other matters leaves us where we are today. I believe wireless will probably overtake the system in a matter of years depending on pricing and the NBN will be left to public institutions and otherwise mostly unused like home phones now

    • horsome on 25/10/2017 - 14:13
      -3

      I went wireless, amazing how well it works, and its cheaper!!!

      Re politics Labours initial plan was too politically motivated and implementation was very poor tbh. Libs just carrying the incompetent flag onwards as it's easier to blame.

      • twig on 25/10/2017 - 15:22
        +1

        Why do you think Labor's NBN was politically motivated?
        They're building the infrastructure that people want and need.
        The infrastructure that Telstra and other ISPs won't build outside of the metro areas.

        • ArjaytheGuy on 26/10/2017 - 01:02
          +2

          well.. that does sound like Labor part politics doesn't it?

          Building infrastructure, investing in big ideas, funding schools to improve their facilities (and in so doing try to keep builders and other tradies in work during a financial crisis (well.. the GFC at least… things here didn't quite get that bad… at that stage at least).

          Yes that's total political motivation on Labor's behalf.

        • Munki on 26/10/2017 - 08:25
          +3

          @ArjaytheGuy: If you put it like that, then of course it's politically motivated. Everything politicians do is politically motivated. That's the essence of their job.

          However, Labor's NBN had the people's interests in mind. The NBN we are getting now, does not.

        • ArjaytheGuy on 27/10/2017 - 16:00
          -1

          @Munki:

          Yep, I agree entirely Munki… I'm curious about what sort of politcal motivation Horsome thinks was going on (other than maybe deliver a quality service and reap all the good PR and support that comes from that)… but… there are still people who believe that there was a "Carbon Tax" and that the Liberals did the right thing by scrapping it (despite setting up no alternate revenue stream for the nation AND doing nothing to ensure utilities bills reduced the way that they claimed they would.

  • Tiller76 on 25/10/2017 - 14:26
    +3

    Easy fixed. People/Companies with names starting with 'A', can use the internet during the 0:00am hour, 'B' has the 1:00am, 'C' has 2:00am hour etc. Names with Y and Z can't use the internet.

  • [Deactivated] on 25/10/2017 - 15:04

    TLDR version - :(

  • vid_ghost on 25/10/2017 - 16:09
    +10

    "What's wrong with the NBN?"

    WHOEVER VOTED FOR LIBERALS!!!! WHO CHANGED IT FROM A 100-1000 (10,000mbps using colour Specrim) TO 25-100MBPS AGING COPPER VDSL/HFC

    THATS WHATS WRONG WITH THE NBN

    Oh and the aging copper costs billions in maintenance per year to keep up and running vs NEW fiber with a much, much lower maintenance cost.

    • [Deactivated] on 25/10/2017 - 16:19
      +1

      Voting for whichever party is based on multiple points, not just the NBN.

      If you think Labour would complete the project as planned, within the budget, that's another fallacy. The NBN was a nice campaign subject and a collateral damage for Liberals. The real problem with the NBN stems from the same national flaw we have - social capitalism. Big corporates have so much leverage that politicians handout contracts in exchange for campaign funding and political support.

      The power grid upgrade (massive waste of money), Victorian desalination plants, power retailers… just to name a few. The problem exist will exist regardless of whether Labour or Liberal (and whoever else becomes a major political party) is in power.

      Whilst you're directing your frustration at one political party, both sides are having a ball making deals to line their own pockets at our expense.

      I'm not siding either party here. Simply redirecting your cynicism and not be fooled by one campaign slogan or another.

      • vid_ghost on 25/10/2017 - 16:25
        +13

        Labour would have completed the project with issues and setbacks but at the end of the day we would have been left with a simple FIBER network capable of 10,000MBPS to future proof our country VS the rest of the world

        What we get now is a patchwork of mixed technologies that's super complicated and will need to be upgraded again by the time they finish it.. Spending another 40+ Billion dollars and ending up costing twice what the Labor option was giving us in the first place.

        The liberals have turned this network into a never ending money pit.

        The original 2007 Liberal plan was to give Telstra or Optus 25Billion dollars of FREE tax payer money and cross their fingers that one of them would provide people who dont have fast internet "something better" LOL they lost that election. THANK GOD!!

        • tryagain on 25/10/2017 - 19:55

          The fact that rusted on Labor voters constantly claim that the Libs are only building half of Labours proposed NBN to cut costs but then claim the Labor could/would have built the original anywhere within a semblance of the original proposed budget lacks any kind of rational thinking.

        • [Deactivated] on 25/10/2017 - 20:39
          +1

          Both parties have loyal followings that will defend the party's actions and only dwell on the positives.

          This is no different to brand loyalty.

          Good leaders, good policies, revolutionaries… They can exist under any banner.

          Unfortunately, both leading parties are useless but things can change. When the time comes, vote with an educated mind, not a blind allegiance.

        • linkii on 25/10/2017 - 23:28
          +4

          @tryagain:

          That's why Liberal is failing so badly. They are building shitter network that is costing more.

          Reason why it's costing more?
          They are using copper which costs 10 times more to maintain but is 10percent cheaper to buy. So what you have in the end is a network that is 10percent cheaper but because of higher maintenance costs, the costs blows out enormously

          In the future they will have to replace all the copper with fibre anyway and also get rid of all additional hardware they have to purchase right now to keep the copper working. All this for a vastly inferior network.

          Nothing to do with being a Labor vs liberal.. It's all about the policy.

        • tryagain on 25/10/2017 - 23:44
          +1

          @ko0l:

          They are using copper which costs 10 times more to maintain but is 10percent cheaper to buy. So what you have in the end is a network that is 10percent cheaper but because of higher maintenance costs, the costs blows out enormously

          Your figures don't make sense, can you cite them from somewhere reputable, or did you just make them up to fit your story?

        • tryagain on 26/10/2017 - 02:26
          +1

          @ko0l:

          So those articles contradict your 10% cheaper, Looks like FTTN is 55% cheaper to build, Taking into account the future value of the construction savings, I can't see the increased maintenance costs ever eroding those savings.

          Also from the articles, it appears the cost to maintain the fibre isn't public knowledge, so although we kind of know roughly how much the copper costs to maintain, you cant compare it too fibre.

          The last article is interesting, plenty of contention in the comments of the figures, to the point where they corrected the article, but still interesting figures none the less.

        • Munki on 26/10/2017 - 08:29
          +1

          @tshow: This has nothing to do with allegiances to parties. This is to do with the technology behind the NBN being offered by the two different parties. There is a big difference here. The one proposed by Labor is superior to the one the Libs are offering. It's that simple.

        • [Deactivated] on 26/10/2017 - 11:39

          @Munki:

          The one proposed by Labor is indeed superior but a proposal and execution are two vastly different things.

          Both parties repeatedly dishonour their campaign promises. Plans and actions are different.

          I can start a party and promise lower taxes, better healthcare, better education, remove tolls, control telcos, and cap the price of power. I will not get elected but I've made one heck of a promise. Does that mean that whichever party won has made a mess because they didn't deliver on my plans?

        • Munki on 26/10/2017 - 12:12
          +2

          @tshow: Regardless of execution (this is pure speculation that Labor's implementation would also be disastrous), the original NBN should have been a single goal for all parties - because it is beneficial to the people of Australia. You know, the people who these politicians are meant to be working for. But no, the Liberals instead came up with an inferior alternative with a "proposed lower cost" (which turns out to have been completely fudged), all in order to get votes.

          The bottom line is: Australia needs the NBN that Labor proposed. The Libs should not have jeopardised that purely for political gain.

        • [Deactivated] on 26/10/2017 - 12:30
          -1

          @Munki:
          All that is true.

          I think a more objective way of putting it is that we need a FTTN fibre network. It isn't a Labor design. It is a tried and true set up that has been running for years in other countries.

          Liberals mess up "Labor's" NBN. They messed up the NBN. Period. No credit to either party.

        • tassietigermaniac on 27/10/2017 - 10:24

          @tryagain:

          They would have been over budget, but it would only have ended up costing roughly what it has anyway due to redesigning costs and all the copper they need to order. That's not even taking into account the worst bit, the ongoing maintenance costs!!!

        • tryagain on 27/10/2017 - 10:51
          +2

          @tassietigermaniac: Have a look at the figures, FTTP cost per premise is $4400 FTTN cost per premise is $2100, maintenance costs for FTTN per house is $60 more pa but the interest savings are greater than the maintenance costs.
          The NBN forecast costs to complete Labours plan was $74-$84 billion, compared with the Lib's $46-$56 billion, FTTN is about 55% more expensive, saying that they would have cost the same is just wrong on all accounts.
          The question of value, however, is more debatable there is an argument that says people pay more for FTTN as opposed FTTP so, therefore, the return on FTTP is greater and therefore a better investment, I do suspect however as the NBN is rolled out and existing internet plans which you can compare to disappear we will see the effect of the monopoly come into effect and we will all be paying the higher cost whether we like it or not.

        • tryagain on 27/10/2017 - 11:17
          +1

          The original 2007 Liberal plan was to give Telstra or Optus 25Billion dollars of FREE tax payer money and cross their fingers that one of them would provide people who dont have fast internet "something better" LOL they lost that election. THANK GOD!!

          I'm not so sure, if you look how we compare worldwide with our wireless speeds (pretty good) that Telstra and Optus have built, predominately without government funding (Gov does subsidise some rural coverage) and compare that with how the fixed line speed compares to other countries (pretty bad), It wouldn't be hard to argue that subsidising the telco's would have been the much wiser move.

        • tassietigermaniac on 27/10/2017 - 11:19
          +1

          @tryagain:

          Good points, I tend to lose track of the financials as they hold no direct interest to me. For me this project was not about profit, it was about future proofing Australia. The drastically reduced maintenance costs are just an added bonus.

          The cost of connections where Copper doesn't already exist is actually only around $2400. Do you think maybe a better solution would be to use FTTP for all the existing copper sites, but use FTTP for all new sites? Sadly, they're still connection new sites onto copper.

          What monopoly are you referring to? Telco's are finally free of Telstra! As long as NBN remains government-owned there should be no monopoly issues (which is a whole argument in itself, I know)

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join