[LINK] The Liberal's broadband proposal.
jwhit at melbpc.org.au
Wed Aug 11 13:13:36 AEST 2010
At 09:51 AM 11/08/2010, Paul Brooks wrote:
>They aren't talking infrastructure operators, they are referring to
>retail service providers - ISPs for most people.
>If you are within DSL range of an enabled exchange, you already have
>several hundred 'suppliers' to choose from. If you are on HFC, you have
>a choice of one (HFC network operators live in Bankworld, but I digress).
>If you have mobile 3G coverage, you have a choice of ~6 providers (?)
>over 3 sets of infrastructure - but you won't get your minimum peak 12 Mbps.
And like most systems, the devil is in the details. I'm in one of
those outer suburbs where Telstra has installed limiting equipment,
so the best DSL speed I can get is 1.5mbps. HFC does go by my house,
which means the limit to one supplier (guess who again). Then there
are the promises of multiple 3G providers. Well, that may seem
reasonable, unless you have a bunch of hills around your house like
my friend does. You can look at the pretty webpage with coverage, but
as soon as you turn up to the provider store, they put your address
in their refined system (not available to the public) to find out,
sorry mate, we can't guarantee you'll get anything at your place.
So, no, the Libs are all confused about what would happen under their
"plan" (**cough**). It all depends on where you live and what you
need to do under the CURRENT available services. There won't be any
more under their "plan" except perhaps more backhaul. But if you
can't get to that backbone, won't matter a hill of beans.
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
jwhit at janwhitaker.com
Our truest response to the irrationality of the world is to paint or
sing or write, for only in such response do we find truth.
~Madeline L'Engle, writer
_ __________________ _
More information about the Link