|
brad77b
Jul 1, 2008 2:58 AM
|
Im not disputing that Simon from Internode doesn't know his stuff. He does, and usually offers a well rounded opinion. But in this case he has a significant vested interest in this topic, so I think we need to take what he says with a grain of salt.
He has invested a hell of a lot of money into rolling out DSLAMs into exchanges, most of which will become completely redundant if the copper path to the customer is ditched.
Just because it can work (with effects) does not necessarily means it is necessary to ensure healthy competition.
This could be make or break for some ISP's with large DSLAM investments.
Comment made about the PC Authority article:
Internode says don’t ditch ADSL?
Internode is putting in the call to save copper-line broadband. But is it already too late?
What do you think? Join the discussion. |
|
nix
Jul 1, 2008 8:52 AM
|
Telstra wants to push forward with fibre because the cost of entry for other ISPs will be enormous, meaning they will have little to no competition in that area. Personally, I'm happy with my ADSL1 connection speeds. Talking about the obsolecense of ADSL is a little premature. |
|
toeknee93
Jul 1, 2008 12:54 PM
|
Its not such a good thing when the incumbent supplier tries to force its competitors out of business.
Internode, like all the other ISPs that are trying to provide ADSL services using their own equipment, should be concerned that when Telstra makes a statement about how they want to deliver services many people believe it without question.
If Telstra wins the tender for the NBN, which seems increasingly likely, it cannot be allowed arbitrarily decide what is and isn't acceptable as service offerings.
The issue of provisioning services for the NBN has to provide some level of consumer choice. And one thing that stands out with Telstra is their track record of no allowing consumer choice.
If you look at Telstra's behavior in the ADSL space you can see how this will probably work in the NBN space. When Telstra started deploying ADSL1 equipment it created a set of artificial constraints for provisioning. They restricted the speed and the signal loss to "protect their network".
Curiously enough, as soon as they had real competition in the ADSL space with competitors being allowed to install their own infrastructure these "restrictions" suddenly became considerably looser. And we also found out that most of the ADSL equipment that Telstra had installed was already ADSL2 capable, so "magically" any exchange that had a competitor providing ADSL2 could also have an ADSL2 service from Telstra.
Of course it would be much more advantageous for the NBN owner, whoever it ends up being, to just cut the copper at the node. No more expensive maintenance of long copper runs, simpler infrastructure deployment. Wonderful. And it has the added bonus of stranding millions of dollars of infrastructure investment from competitors.
I can see Tesltra deciding, if it wins the NBN, that the government mandate is for 12Mb/s links. VDSL2 is capable of delivering 100Mb/s in many cases, but I'm sure that Telstra will say that 12Mb/s is the target, so 12Mb/s is what you get.
Oh, and all those other competitors that can already provide 12Mb/s or more, they won't be able to give you anything because the copper doesn't go back to the exchange any more. Maybe you would like to look at our NextG offering...
The operator of the NBN has to be constrained to avoid behaving like a monopolist. Telstra is an unabashed monopolist and makes no bones about it.
If that means that the NBN has to be deployed to allow the existing ADSL infrastructure and suppliers to co-exist for some time it will guarantee that there will be competition. Having one of the people who has been a true innovator in Australian telecommunications warn us that what the incumbent says isn't necessarily so, I for one would say "Keep up the good work keeping them honest". |
|
toeknee93
Jul 1, 2008 12:54 PM
|
Its not such a good thing when the incumbent supplier tries to force its competitors out of business.
Internode, like all the other ISPs that are trying to provide ADSL services using their own equipment, should be concerned that when Telstra makes a statement about how they want to deliver services many people believe it without question.
If Telstra wins the tender for the NBN, which seems increasingly likely, it cannot be allowed arbitrarily decide what is and isn't acceptable as service offerings.
The issue of provisioning services for the NBN has to provide some level of consumer choice. And one thing that stands out with Telstra is their track record of no allowing consumer choice.
If you look at Telstra's behavior in the ADSL space you can see how this will probably work in the NBN space. When Telstra started deploying ADSL1 equipment it created a set of artificial constraints for provisioning. They restricted the speed and the signal loss to "protect their network".
Curiously enough, as soon as they had real competition in the ADSL space with competitors being allowed to install their own infrastructure these "restrictions" suddenly became considerably looser. And we also found out that most of the ADSL equipment that Telstra had installed was already ADSL2 capable, so "magically" any exchange that had a competitor providing ADSL2 could also have an ADSL2 service from Telstra.
Of course it would be much more advantageous for the NBN owner, whoever it ends up being, to just cut the copper at the node. No more expensive maintenance of long copper runs, simpler infrastructure deployment. Wonderful. And it has the added bonus of stranding millions of dollars of infrastructure investment from competitors.
I can see Tesltra deciding, if it wins the NBN, that the government mandate is for 12Mb/s links. VDSL2 is capable of delivering 100Mb/s in many cases, but I'm sure that Telstra will say that 12Mb/s is the target, so 12Mb/s is what you get.
Oh, and all those other competitors that can already provide 12Mb/s or more, they won't be able to give you anything because the copper doesn't go back to the exchange any more. Maybe you would like to look at our NextG offering...
The operator of the NBN has to be constrained to avoid behaving like a monopolist. Telstra is an unabashed monopolist and makes no bones about it.
If that means that the NBN has to be deployed to allow the existing ADSL infrastructure and suppliers to co-exist for some time it will guarantee that there will be competition. Having one of the people who has been a true innovator in Australian telecommunications warn us that what the incumbent says isn't necessarily so, I for one would say "Keep up the good work keeping them honest". |
|
tesseractau
Jul 6, 2008 9:56 AM
|
I agree that Simon Hackett is an astute observer of the broadband scene, and is closely involved because he runs one of the most functional ISPs this country has. BUT the reason Telstra wants to go NBN is to (while we are all watching) move the goal posts for broadband and return the state of play to where it was 15 years ago, when if you wanted internet, there was only one place to go (enter list of one here...). And they are doing it right under our noses.
Another question (or two) for the student -
1) who pays for the installation of the fibre link to your front door
2) who pays for the new modem you will need
3) and (since I live within sight of the Black Stump) how far can a fibre-based signal travel from the "exchange" (node, whatever) before signal degradation becomes an issue (this will be based on the quality of cable used, which will probably be as low as they can get away with - then they can charge you for the cost of a repeater to boost the signal to where you can use it)
I see this whole issue as being two steps forward for those who live in Suburbia, and any where from one to five steps backward for those of us who live outside major metropolitan areas. Note here that major country towns are NOT major metropolitan areas.
Simon Hackett is correct in that there should be coexistence of both current and new technologies, to allow migration where appropriate and the use of current systems where they are the solution which gives better service. Service here, of course, includes the cost to the consumer of providing that service.
How does all this affect the current audio telephone system? Will we all have to buy new IPPhone-type handsets just to talk to the neighbours?
Ahh, Technology!!! |
|
ufo8mycow
Jul 21, 2008 7:03 PM
|
We are going to go back by 20years if Telstra win the FTTN Bid. ISP's will only be able to resell Telstra's product again. Internode was the First ISP to bring out DSL2+ Services, Telstra didn’t want to even know about such technology. With out these ISP's competing and developing new products the country is going to go backwards. |