Welcome to a new theme, this theme is a little more, readable, and much easier to read, and allows a little more focus on the comments section, which I don’t think many others were finding too easily in the previous theme. This theme is a little more easier on the eyes, drops the green effect that I never really liked, and gives this blog something that.. well, I like the look of!
Open Source software, Sydney Lawrence, is a classic example of how the works of one can go to support the many, with the work of just one, Linux has turned into an operating system that a user can install and do most, if not all the same on a Windows box for, well nothing. It’s not an apples to oranges comparison, and neither is the new news that it’s cheaper and better value to get a Three Mobile Wireless Internet Connection, than it is to get a fixed ADSL connection. One would think the aging, outdated copper technology would, by now, be very cheap in cost, as the network has been eroded away, or the other fact, the price paid has been returned many times over.
Oh, and Sydney, I do hope you realise I check and reply to your comments (and anyone elses), if they warrant a reply. I don’t ignore you, I reply to them onsite, you do have to check back to see the responses!
Back to the topic, Australia’s latest statistics on broadband and telephone services have yet again (for the nth time in half as many months) been slammed for being slow, expensive or poor value (or all three).
The maximum speed that can be offered (in some exchanges due to restrictions placed by the greedy pigs over at Telstra) has risen to 20Mbps, with other rivals offering speeds of up to 24Mbps, and 2.5Mbit up stream.
The generally available maximum speed to anywhere with DSL coverage is 8Mbit, with a artificially capped 384kbps (0.3Mbit) upload.
Now, recently Craig Breen blamed the limits of the technology, but Craig Breen, as can be seen in the comments he makes on NWAT, is clearly an uninformed individual, and just like Rhonda, the NWAT Media Matters blogger, finds it easier to pull ‘facts’ from the ass, then they do to research the writings and realise that the comments made are absolute trash.
Relax Sydney, it’s true, refer to yesterday’s blog where I posted a copy of Craig Breen’s post, and refer to this NWAT article (with a reply by me) outlining where Rhonda pulled ‘facts’ from her rear, and completely ballsed it up: http://www.nowwearetalking.com.au/Home/PageBlogComments.aspx?mid=321&pid=582
And I just flicked over to the main discussion page of Broadband Australia while fetching that link, and saw this:
Jason, maybe the reason Telstra is getting slammed with the fine is the ACCC is bias, or maybe its because when the ACCC dropped the pricing to a ridiculous low they also thought it was a great idea for Telstra to repay companies the difference in price for a few years previous to the change.
Bias heh? Really? What do you base this bias on? What evidence do you have to support your claims? Would you assert to those claims in a court of law? No? Why make them then?
This just outlines the types of people, and just how clearly uninformed they are. Anyone who researched the issue would know it’s not because of bias, or a ‘fine’, it’s because the decision was to backdate the $2.50 LSS price to when iiNet first lodged the complaint, some 2 or so years ago. That’s why. That’s how silly the people who post at that site look, but I notice the editor didn’t add this fact to the post, the editor titled the post as ‘Maybe the reason is bias’.
As we can see, the editor clearly wants to shape the views on the site to that in favour of Telstra, and in reading that website, you should keep this in mind.
Further read Vasso’s comment below, suggesting I am involved in IIN. I’ve only ever watched them and I’ve watched TLS, NAB, CBA and a few others for a few years now, without any intent on buying, realising that just as much as they go higher, there’s just as much risk they’ll go lower. My reply on the site just then outlines this fact and a few others, wonder if it’ll make it live?
Back to the article, again.
It’s not fair to compare Australia to France, Italy, or Sweden, as they are closer together, and have a more dense population, so delivering high speed broadband services is much more cost effective.
However, what is a well, should be an eye opening issue, for those out there that can open their eyes and not generate false, claims nothing short of libel, you’ll see that our telephone services cost small business around $36,000 in Australia, in the US, the same would be available for $14,000.
The Australian article is located here: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22080536-5013404,00.html
For Australian small businesses, phone and internet costs are the third highest in the world. That’s right, 1, 2, 3. Australia is 3rd most expensive. This isn’t something we should be aiming for number 1 on, in fact, this is where our broadband ranking should be, and swap the telephone costs with the speed rankings on broadband services.
It’s time for action in the telecommunications area, and it’s time a decision was made over the future direction of this country.
Let me make one future driven decision right now.
Telstra, a company with a conflict of interest in retail should not be allowed the rights to building a fibre to the node network. We all learn from our mistakes, and one mistake that was made is allowing an infrastructure provider to be a retail provider also.
This needs to change in any new network, the model proposed and agreed to needs to be a model that no retail company can have full control over the infrastructure company, ever. Simply because they are overcome with greed, they become the filth of society, and all of a sudden the nation is held ransom to the hands of greed, and not held ransom to the hands of competition and innovation.
The only good thing in the report (and it’s not that good) is that costs have come down 26% since 1997. If you look at that, why on earth has Telstra been pushing line rental UP?
Why on earth am I paying $80 for a service people in the city pay $50 for, which is faster, and in cases more value added?
The answer is clear, Telstra.
Everywhere I look, the one problem that constantly surrounds the issues in the telecommunications arena, is Telstra, they are the root cause of all problems. Every one of them. Regional Backhaul is expensive? Blame Telstra. No ADSL2+ on an ADSL2+ DSLAM? Blame Telstra. No investment in regional areas due to uncertain times ahead? Blame Telstra.
If Telstra ever want to paint themselves a good corporate image, at all, they need to start doing what’s good, not what’s good just for shareholders, but what’s good for a nation as a whole, and that is: Join the G9 proposal and make it work, or withdraw the proposal and sign a legal action waiver.
It’s the only good thing they can do. I think the best option for everyone is them joining Telstra, will they? No, why give up the high profits they make when they can drop around 20% of shareholder funds in frivilous legal claims and court time and maintain the current situation. They want to maintain the current situation for as long as they can.
Soon the bubble is going to pop for Telstra and it’s shareholders and reality will strike. They won’t get to build FTTN, no government in their right mind is going to allow Telstra a monopoly again, they’ve learnt from their mistakes, never again, ever. They had the chance, they blew it. Now, the best they’ll do is pick up, clean up, and join the G9 and make a return on the ADSL2+ infrastructure they rolled out and is losing value fast due to being artificially limited and devaluing over time.