Opinion: Broadband is needed, and needed now

 
Page 1 of 2 | Single page

Applications in health, environmental and resource management could justify NBN investment.

Many of us have been talking about broadband for at least the past two decades.

Actually, different groups have been having different conversations. That, I think, is why we have made so little progress.

The announcement of the National Broadband Network and the establishment of NBNCo have tilted discussion and debate towards an unhelpful focus on just the infrastructure rollout and what is a massive civil works program.

We need to get a little more perspective, especially around the topic of why we need this infrastructure and how we could put it to good use now. By focusing on the public benefits from possible applications we might also promote a more informed discussion around the possible network service architectures and the public policy issues around access, pricing and regulation.

I argue strongly that the national benefit from broadband infrastructure could probably be justified solely on the social and productivity gains realisable in the areas of health, environmental and resource management. That is without also looking at what we can learn from past patterns of adoption or from emerging trends in demand. It is time we moved away from the simply sloganeering that broadband will simply enable people to download movies and pornography faster and that "it is a conspiracy against taxpayers".

In the case of population health we know we have a major problem. Health and social assistance employ 1.2 million people, and the workforce grew by 12 percent between 1995 and 2000. Nonetheless, this professional workforce is ageing and everyone predicts major skill shortfalls in the near future. My health sector colleagues also tell me that there is little correlation between the number of doctors and health outcomes. More staff is not the simple answer.

This is because national health budgets are escalating out of control. Australia currently spends about $100 billion a year on healthcare, or 10 percent of GDP, and this is predicted to double before the end of the coming decade. This is because the demands on the system continue to increase. Our population is ageing. The 2010 Intergenerational Report estimated that the percentage of Australian aged over 65 will grow from 13.5 percent today to 19.3 percent by 2030.

We are also living longer. Average life expectancy increased by around 30 years over the past century. But there is not necessarily a commensurate improvement in the quality of life as these trends are accompanied by an increase in the incidence of chronic disease and preventable ill-health. Mental health problems are also on the rise.

Moreover, health outcomes are not distributed evenly across communities and levels of health literacy are also uneven but generally disturbingly low. This means that people's ability to manage their own health and well-being and to use health support services effectively is limited. Less than 10 percent of current budgets is allocated to preventative health.

These demand-side pressures are compounded by supply-side inefficiencies, often making the health system a dangerous place to enter. Legacy institutional frameworks produce workforce and service delivery silos and there are wide disparities in the availability of services across the country.

Against this backdrop it would be naïve to suggest that eHealth solutions are the silver bullet. A broad health reform agenda would probably encompass changes in the roles of health professionals, an increasing policy focus on prevention and the promotion of wellbeing, as well as increasing efficiency through technology platforms.

To date, a lot of the e-health implementations have focused on siloed parts of the system. The potential lies in our use of information and communications platforms to reinvent business models and processes across the whole system, as has happened in other service sectors such as wholesale trade, financial services and communications itself. These sectors, significantly, were the main source of Australia's productivity growth from 1994 to 2004. The rhetorical question is "if we can get such gains in other sectors why cannot we do the same in health?"

Read on to Page 2 for Dr Cutler's opinion on the potentials of, and barriers to, effective e-health services.

Copyright © iTnews.com.au . All rights reserved.


Opinion: Broadband is needed, and needed now
Dr Terry Cutler. Credit: CSIRO
"Cant't have your cake and eat it as well, FLashy! The government's legislation has ensured that Telstra transfers it's customers to the NBN, OR ELSE! I wonder how many 12Mb/s voice services there ..."
By ARF102
 
 
 
Comments: 26
brownbear
Jan 17, 2011 10:08 AM
Nice to see one article that is positive about the future benefits of the NBN.
MerariSchroeder
Jan 17, 2011 10:36 AM
"Need" doesn't dictate the form. If it's true that faster internet is required that doesn't mean the current NBN plan is the most suitable. Especially given that wholesale is expected to cost more than current wholesale on copper and HFC.

Any benefits attainable on the NBN are also attainable on a more sensible plan. Such as FTTN, which can achieve 100Mbps today for less cost and with further reach, all with the ability to upgrade to FTTH "as NEEDED".
Rossyduck
Jan 17, 2011 10:50 AM
Nothing new in a wordy and unhelpful article to the cause of e-health. Any one that consistently uses "could probably be" is just flying a kite (with a lack of conviction). We could at least expect some numbers as to the benefits, what the alternatives would produce etc.
antman
Jan 17, 2011 10:50 AM
Well, Marari, I agree that ""Need" doesn't dictate the form", however unless you have access to information the rest of the press do not, wholesale costs of the NBN are not more than the current prices for copper, and substantially cheaper than a current Telstra ADSL2+ port. Furthermore, it seems that you are implying that FTTN can be upgraded to FTTH, which at present it cannot.
If you wish to post information that is at odds with commonly held knowledge, you really need to post references to back up your statements.
Tom Brown
Jan 17, 2011 11:18 AM
Well Merari and Rossyduck your blue liberal blood shows.

Nothing to add Merari and Rossyduck you purposely misrepresent the article. You left out the context, it was cheap, nasty and shows how shallow your position is!
cltw666
Jan 17, 2011 11:39 AM
@Rossyduck Do you think the American knows everything when they decide to goto the moon? What do they gain to goto the moon?

If they were so shorts sighted like you, then we will never know anything. If all the business man do business like you, they will all be bankrupt now. Its call RISK, no pain no gain.
umbria
Jan 17, 2011 11:59 AM
Merari and Rossyduck, as usual, advocate universal broadband and speed increases yet refer to mysterious alternatives. The $25 million NBN Implementation Report of May 2010 revealed that the cheapest way to deliver ubiquitous 12 Mbps wireless to 97% of premises was to first lay fibre in all large towns and cities. This has the effect of offloaded the vast majority of data to fixed fibre, vastly reducing the number of towers needed.

The so-called alternatives - wireless-without-fibre and fibre to the node - were already tested years ago as OPEL and NBN Mark I. They were both abandoned because they could not deliver adequate services within their $5-6 billion budgets. In fact, both would have incurred additional costs bringing the total close to $20.

The alternatives have been evaluated. The winner is fibre-supported universal 12 Mbps universal wireless, plus two satellites, additional backhaul and native multicast built in to minimise video backhaul demand.

This is NBN Mark II. It presents every competing retail operator with equal access to every premise in Australia on a common footing for a standard wholesale charge.

The NBN is the cheapest, greenest, and fairest way to deliver universal broadband, which Rossyduck and Merari claim is their goal. For customers, it will reduce the phone costs of the low-end and average users while permitting unlimited phone calls. It enables the demand of high-end users to be supplied. It is the right solution. If you disagree, please propose your alternative instead of trolling to no apparent purpose.
djzort
Jan 17, 2011 12:11 PM
@cltw666 maybe the Americans should just "GOTO 10" ?

sorry had to be said.

This article is interesting, as it uses the word 'NBN' to draw attention, then proceeds to illustrate how faster network access is almost irrelevant without other more important major work.

for example "Seamless access to patient health records", has nothing to do with access methods.

If "80%" of diagnosis can be made from the patient history, then DSL is just as capable of delivering that history than something that uses optics over the last mile.

"How much would become possible with a high definition Skype-like service" - the answer to this question, is the number of hours our specialists can work.

For those of us withing short driving distance of major hospitals etc, we still wait months and years for consultations. So even if i can have a broadband "hi def skype" consultation, in the 12 months a person had to wait, there is ample time to send medical images via overnight courier.

Thats without considering if a hi-def webcam is of any actual medical value, and what the cost of supporting these devices in peoples homes would be. Given that seniors tend to prefer tellers to ATMs, and cash to eftpos, im going to wager that overwhelmingly or senior australians will prefer to visit a practitioner.


So despite what we could do with faster pipes to everyones home, they still are just pipes. There needs to be people sitting at the end of them, systems to support them, and systems that allow doctors to get the information they need quickly. Thats before considering the additional liability costs of e-consultations.

So on the basis that a common platform and enough doctors can be establised, 99.5% of the benefits out layed can be achieved using existing DSL speeds and overnight couriering of portable storage.
cltw666
Jan 17, 2011 12:36 PM
@djzort you have only considered the current way of how things works.

What if the patient health records are not just text anymore? it contains video of operation, x-ray picture, MRI 3-d model? If I have my patient in front of me, maybe We would wait for the files to get downloaded? or maybe the system automatically download the files before I meet the patient? What happens in emergency? It could safe lives.

I doubt 80% of diagnosis is all said in text.

What if in the future, a doctor is in one place but is overlooking a surgery in another place? Do you think ADSL can cope with that? What about robotic surgeon? USA have got a few of those. Do you think Hi-def is required in these case?

umbria
Jan 17, 2011 12:48 PM
@djzort, two things. You are singing solo if you are suggesting the status quo of 60% ADSL penetration is sufficient.

All parties agree that universal broadband is going to be delivered, because 40% with nothing and 60% with median bandwidth of 2 Mbps down and negligible up is inadequate (cf. ABS 20 September 2010). The question then becomes how to do so, and the best way is fibre-supported wireless as per the NBN.

Second, half our hospital beds and surgery waiting rooms are occupied by people who need a quick face-to-face chat with a doctor. If the physical overheads of travel, appointment booking, bed occupancy and nursing and ancillary staff for some of these patients can be reduced, it will directly free up a chunk of the health budget by postponing the need to add further beds.

A video consultation can be initiated and ended quickly with practically no overhead to the doctor. A sick child at 2 am can be seen by a doctor without the mother having to bundle the children into a car and drive to outpatients. A post-op patient can be sent home with a $100 device to plug into their NBN NTU for video consultation instead of occupying a bed. Many of these solutions are starting to already happen elsewhere, but I would argue that Australia cannot afford not to be the world leader in developing and patenting a lot of the new tech that will be part of the mainstream healthcare delivery of the future. Universal broadband with fast upload capability for two-way video will facilitate this improvement to our quality of life and generate cost savings now and income to Australia in future.
block
Jan 17, 2011 1:23 PM
@cltw666 - the majority of hospitals and surgery's can already get access to high speed internet if they so require. If there is a central repository for medical records (which in WA there isn't) then the hospitals could get access to it if needed. NBN will not help this.

NBN would help some health services from home. How many I don't know. For me it won't provide any benefit. As a young, fit person into sports the only time I go to the doctor or specialist is when I know somethings wrong. The last three times have been for a broken hand, broken clavicle, and a broken nose. These require x-rays (web cams don't currently do this). The follow up appointments where the surgeon asks how it feels, possibly, but he still has a poke and a prod, moves things around which is not possible with a web cam.

I think it can provide some benefits, but for me I know my injuries require a physical person to assess them. Probably mainly because I only go if something is almost breaking through the skin or clicking.
umbria
Jan 17, 2011 4:15 PM
@block, "broken hand, broken clavicle, broken nose" - you should look after yourself! As pointed out in the article, over-65s are likely to make up 19.3 percent of our population by 2030, which will exceed 28 million by 2026 according to the ABS. Being able to do a remote face-to-face doctor visit including a blood pressure check using a BP strap on a loaned or rented device plugged into one of the four ports on the NBN box would certainly lead to a huge saving in health care costs, and would also spare less mobile patients making a journey to the hospital or surgery. Do you disagree? This would be possible right now, except that the upload speed at 95% of people's homes is too slow for acceptable quality video. So when the NBN arrives, it can start happening immediately. Medicare rebates for remote consultation are already legislated, I believe, so we await only the fibre.
Mike_Sadler
Jan 17, 2011 6:24 PM
@block... m-a-t-e! If you weren't on so much pain medication you'd see the irony of how your personal circumstances map DIRECTLY to the restructuring of health that only NBN can deliver us. To paraphrase, by the time you need to see a doctor you REALLY need to see a Doctor. Where you wait patiently while Mrs McGillacutty has her lesions looked at, Mr Pascoe his blood pressure checked, the spinal op chap a quick check of the stitches, can he bend, etc, etc, etc. Wouldn't it be grand if high cost, hands-on medical care was available (almost) instantly to those who needed it RFN because more trivial treatment and diagnostic procedures could be done to and from anywhere? If just 10% of practioner hours delivered at clinics could be otherwise attended to, it'd be like Australia INSTANTLY gained 2300 odd new (but fully trained, operational) GP's. That's just the GP's. If you need only attend a practice/ED when its 'painfully obvious' (trauma) some HD triage to confirm that imaging is required (which you select and book online) and then you don't 'wait' to see the Dr except for actual treatment (if indicated by the pics). Ditto, followup. Better for everyone, yes? Better, faster service, less cost.

Imagine you sustained the injuries of which you speak all at once as a result of a mining/industrial/farming accident. A good St John's volunteer could probaly make you comfortable, ambo's vid link to Triage then take you to imaging so the GP/Orthopod Registrar can 'get cracking' as soon as they see you. But the counselling, both initial and ongoing, for you and the four mates working with you at the time... different story. Psychiatry is the biggest user ($$$$) of Workcover Qld's medical budget. I can't imagine the Psychiatrists ever saying they'd prefer a potential PTSD/grief patient to wait longer for treatment, travel to a major city, stay overnight away from support networks, blah, blah, for a one hour session, instead of a HD video link (including your local GP/allied health provider) quick smart to gauge your relative vunerability? Billable hours for the practioner can also be maximised, so they're on board from both a clinical outcome and financial self interest basis.

BTW, why won't the shrinks live/practice in the country? No professional development, no peer collaboration, no private schools for the kids. No one makes a good latté. NBN can address many of those decentralisation issues too, but HD and ubiquity is key and FTTP is key to HD and ubiquity.

Its W-A-Y bigger than faster downloads for YouTube... but if entertainment hungry consumers can fund the network we use daily for health, education and tele-commuting with their nightlty sports/movie/concert viewing, that's a good outcome, right?. Just like we all pay the toll for the motorway, whether going out to dinner or carting goods across town.

@MerariSchroeder - give it a break. xDSL is not capable of delivering 100Mbps except in fantasy world, certainly not on the current copper CAN, no matter how close you place the 'node'. xDSL is not capable of delivering 12Mbps (let alone 20!!!) to my house today (<7Mbps max), next year nor in 5, 10 or 20 years from now. A single link to evidence of such nonsense is yet to appear, nor I might add, any evidence that the copper CAN will last 10 or 20 years anyway. Let's not start on the long term view... the roadmap to multi-gigabit fibre is already in evidence. Not only is copper/wireless totally incapable of approaching GPON fibre's capabilities today, YOU HAVE NO PLAN for life after copper - ever. Get real. Malcolm Turnbull isn't actually a technical expert on anything much except making money.
packet
Jan 17, 2011 6:29 PM
Fairly convincing article to put aside some of those NBN billions for investment into ehealth?
@antman, can you provide your reference for the inability to transition a FTTN network to FTTH? Why couldn't you transition a HFC network to FTTH?
Bazwalt
Jan 17, 2011 7:34 PM
It really irks me when everyone looks at the NBN project as simply quicker downloads.

From day #1 I have always said that the NBN needs to be looked at as a "Reliable Technology"

The problem with xDSL is that it is all reliant on an age-old system that require a substantial amount of maintenance. With the copper infrastructure already in place - Telstra are still blowing billions on simply repairing the damn thing and making sure it still works.

With Fibre, the maintenance costs would be substantially reduced (not gone - but reduced). This is because you are dealing with a totally different building material.

So please, before you argue that xDSL is capable this and that - take a moment to consider how reliable it is for a good portion of the country.
Pilotyoda
Jan 17, 2011 7:53 PM
The entire cost of the NBN is less than 6 months worth of the health budget. That would not pay for the full cost of training more doctors, nurses, etc and providing the infrastructure (hospitals, diagnostic equipment, etc).

many modern diagnostic procedures are heavily image and graphics intensive and they strain the best of internal networks, The current not-so-broad band system cannot cope.

While I agree we need more spent on health or at least keeping costs down, in the past the only approach has been to restrict staff numbers per patient capita. Meanwhile the administrative costs (boards of management, etc) have ballooned.
The best way of managing costs is to manage the costs of technology and drugs and that could be achieved quite well if the technology costs were approached by a system similar to the PBS, while at the same time as encouraging local development and manufacture of this technology. Currently the bulk of the money spent on this goes overseas, with a big impact on the balance of payments.

The net savings of this multi-pronged approach should well cover the costs of the NBN that would be needed to make this happen.
wlnc832
Jan 17, 2011 11:06 PM
All interesting comments but it would be interesting to understand if any of these comments about the use of the NBN has come from anyone who actually works in the health systems.

Universal broadband access for the delivery of healthcare services is a utopian goal but it wont work without at least three other key implementations;

* a universal patient/client identifier
* a universal provider identifier
* and finally a ubiquitous and complete health record that is accessible from outside the current institutional boundaries (and I include GP surgeries under this category).

These have all been talked about ad nauseum but have not been delivered; mostly due to influences driven by the political and privacy lobbys that can't step outside their squares for the good of the country.

Get these resolved and you might stand more than a snowballs chance in hell of actually creating a health system that we all need; at the moment we have a health system that we all deserve and no amount of investment in he NBN (justifies or not) is going to change that.

Personally I cannot reconcile spending $43 billion (or whatever the amount actually is) to deliver a solution like this when there are oher major elements of infrastructure lacking in this country.
arcanedevice
Jan 18, 2011 9:33 AM
@wlnc - as someone working within the health system, I can tell you that two of the three key implementations you suggest already exist, and the other is making some headway.
The legislation for the Health Identifiers was approved in 2010, and have since been implemented under the management of Medicare Australia.
The concept of a complete health record is great, but until such time as the governing bodies (DoHA and NEHTA)start engaging with ALL stakeholders to develop agreement and standards on what a health record is, this will not be effectively achieved. But having said that, there are already some good examples around the country of how this might work and what it can provide to the health sector.
three_pineapples
Jan 18, 2011 9:38 AM
wlnc832:"Personally I cannot reconcile spending $43 billion (or whatever the amount actually is) to deliver a solution like this when there are oher major elements of infrastructure lacking in this country."

Need I remind you that the money is only being spent on the NBN because we expect to get the money back with a 7% ROI?

It cannot be invested into Health or Roads or Education because these do not give us a monetary ROI. It would just be putting the country into more debt.

I guess I also need to remind you that because the money is being repaid with interest, the taxpayer is NOT paying for the construction of the network.

Did you also read that article which says that the annual health budget is $100bn (that's EACH year) compared to the $2.7bn/year cost of the NBN? Again, we lose all the money put into health, but none of the money going into the NBN.

Sure you can argue that there are benefits to roads and health and education that aren't monetary, but the same can ALSO be said about the NBN. For instance, the ubiquitous fibre coverage is expected to add 1.5% to our GDP, and will allow us as a nation to start producing information services, rather than relying on the resource sector to prop up the economy.

I guess I also need to point out that we spend $4.3bn/year on overseas aid, for which we see no direct return for our money.

The price may seem high for the NBN, but that is only because you haven't put it in perspective. I challenge you to find a better use for the money that provides a 7% ROI.
Maxxi2
Jan 18, 2011 5:13 PM
Hang on people, naturally many folks cannot reconcile the NBN spend - simply because they either lack the required understanding of the commercial model or they are simply politically opposed to anything that the ALP does... Especially something that will clearly support the re-election of the ALP if the NBN is anywhere near as successful as it appears to be already...

Fairly simple, and economics politics101: Always pound on the alternative, ANY alternative and scare folks where-ever possible...

Take the 99.5% assumption from djzort...

99.5% can be achieved with existing infrastructure today? Time to enrol in the Star Trek Club mate cos you are clearly existing on another planet to the rest of us, including the majority of the health industry professionals.

I have been a service provider to the health industry and I can assure you that, IF you actually did some real research you would find the same results, they cannot achieve anywhere even near 99.5% of those requirements with existing infrastructure.

And this is a typical claim and assertion from the idealogically opposed folks: Make a series of absurb and irresponsible assertions and hope some of it sticks...

99.5%? What facts are you basing that on? Working with them and delivering the services over a longer period or reading a few media articles, WP and other forum threads as well as the balanced reports from Tony Abbott...?

MerariSchroeder has his agenda due to his overriding desire to drive wireless networks across the country instead of NBN installed fibre. He is in a tough spot and can never support the NBN in any case nor approach the subject objectively.

The model he needs to push is FTTN then wireless from the node to all the premises. It will tough for him in that respect, though there is clearly merit for that model in some regions, but clearly not for the 93% that can reached with fibre.

Now people, list us the major and well-funded telcos that have lost money building national infrastructure of essential services?

Save your keystrokes if you are thinking of listing telcos that have tried to take on incumbant monopolies, have operated in corrupt environments or are going to be dopey enough to claim Australia is a corrupt environment... >;))

Errrr Mr Tony Abbott, Ms Sophie Mirabella and Mr Andrew Robb: please also refrain from responding this time around... Thanks guys. (Sophie's comments today on the NBN were priceless.... What a political troglodyte...)

Those claiming everything Conroy touches is poisoned can also save their keystrokes, as can the luddites that still think Quigley was the Alcatel-Lucent global CEO...

Those that seem to think that telecoms infrastructure stopped producing profits the day the NBN was conceived can also save their fuming and sabre-rattling for another day. >;))

You would be surprised how many folks still consider reading up on their 5 favorite blogs pages on Wordpress etc as being comprehensive, objective and 99.5% factual research...




Edited by Maxxi2: 18/1/2011 05:21:03 PM
Rossyduck
Jan 20, 2011 8:37 AM
Gosh - certainly brings out the flaming torches and stakes - and I suspect a couple of publisists paid to seek out anything that could be construed as criticism of NBN co. For the record - I love the idea of the NBN and worked hard and tirelessly to achieve it - I however think there are a hell-of-a-lot better ways of implementing it though, including using different fibre architectures to the ones proposed.

But to the point of my criticism of the article - as a suppossd supporting article it is lacking - too much vaccilitating - "possiblies", "maybe's" - if the author is clearly not convinced why should any of the readers (other than those that are desperately seeking to be convinced) - and this is the problem with the NBN Co debate - just too few facts when those facts are out there and not presented. I guess of the discussions 'winc" has hit on the key issue - it is not a matter of a lack of infrastructure - there is already certainly enough HFC broadband out their and fibre to hospitals - it is the systems are just not in place - and there does not seem to be any will to push it. On that basis I doubt the NBN Co network is going to make any significant difference - telemedicine is just not going to spring up becaase there is now fibre. Legislation, vested interests in hospitals, insurance, consumers all need to change.
Mike_Sadler
Jan 20, 2011 1:29 PM
@Rossyduck

Please... read the article. This time its obvious you didn't. How you draw the conclusion Cutler is "clearly not convinced" escapes me... ESL seems the only plausible reason? I also think he covered the need to transform the health sector in concert with technology. I don't see any ambiguity in statements like:

"...it would be naïve to suggest that eHealth solutions are the silver bullet. A broad health reform agenda would probably encompass changes in the roles of health professionals, an increasing policy focus on prevention and the promotion of wellbeing, as well as increasing efficiency through technology platforms..." Just because this article chooses a consensus path in a bid to influence its target audience, to suggest that commentary is only valid if it prescribes what we must do, rather than encourage us to think about the issues and come up with (perhaps novel)solutions together is pretty pathetic.

You then jump immediately from structural, cultural and economic issues that will need to be addressed by non-technologists in their areas of expertise, to a redesign of the network... because... that WILL be the Silver Bullet presumably? Huh? Please, take your attempts at Gaslighting elsewhere.

On the subject of (NBNCo's) network design... I cannot find a URL directing me to your alternative proposition for FTTP... certainly not here. Be a darl and whack it up in this thread will you, so we can see this better (faster? cheaper? more reliable?) alternative please. I think we'd all agree that L1 and L2 need not be identical throughout a network to ensure ubiquity at a user/application level, but I'm fascinated by the prospect of a technology with capabilities beyond that of GPON, 10 GPON, and eventually Course WDM (20x) and Dense WDM (100x), perhaps even OFDMA if they can solve the power usage issues, etc. All of these GPON spawned technologies, as Rossyduck knows, can not only be deployed on the same NBNCo FTTP network currently being rolled out but each can co-exist on the NBNCo PON platform with at least the iteration preceding it; you don't 'have' to upgrade all 32 PON premises if one has a need for increased throughput. Is your alternative so blessed? Is it capable of similar uplink speeds as GPON and its successors?

Forgive me if I don't hold my breath waiting for that URL. I have an NBN favourites folder waiting for similar 'real life' links on Gbps LTE/4G and 100Mbps xDSL that remains empty. Love to hear all about real alternatives, but you know, just one link is a start?

As you hide your identity, I won't acknowledge you've done anything for the NBN, much less 'worked hard and tirelessly' for it. Your bleating here says otherwise. Your lack of knowledge across these technologies would indicate any lack of involvement is probably to be applauded; "... there is already certainly enough HFC broadband out their (sic)..." - Really? :)
Rossyduck
Jan 21, 2011 9:19 AM
Mike - am in good company in suggesting a look at alterantives for the infrastructure. Read some of John Standons reservations. Appreciate where you are coming form and that you hope to sell lots of consumer electronic devices but be a bit wary of the procurement practices - could suddenly find your perfectly good product not allowed fro some reason.
Maxxi2
Jan 21, 2011 10:37 AM
@ Rossyduck: Just gotta love your peception that anyone exercising criticism of your posts must be paid publicists?

Is that really your thinking model and extent of knowledge on the debate?

ie: smart people agree with me and paid publicists do not??

Precious mate.

In the meantime, could you elucidate on the procurement practices you are insinuating will have some detrimental effects on existing market & product strategies?

If you have some clear cut facts on that then this would valuable for us all.

BTW: Unsubstantiated statements and assertions from Robb, Abbott, Turnbull and the blogosphere, as well as myriad opinions and again unsubstantiated predictions from *experts* and media folks do not qualify as facts.

EG:

1+1=2 => fact.

1+1 in the hands of Conroy and Quigley = $50billion wasted => unsubstantiated assertion...

Thanks.
FLashy
Jan 22, 2011 6:24 AM
A fibre based Broadband system is vital for our country to be one step a head of our neighbours in business.
But we should retain that one thing that has kept us connected. That is the copper network of phones.
It doesn't fail when we have natural disasters, the power comes from the local telephone exchange.
Mobile phones are great until you have to charge them up, not 5% of users will have a car charger. The NBN will struggle when there is no power for days, as the IP phone and Internet/PC will need a UPS at home too.
Give us the NBN but don't recover the the good old phone via copper.
ARF102
Jan 22, 2011 3:08 PM
Cant't have your cake and eat it as well, FLashy!
The government's legislation has ensured that Telstra transfers it's customers to the NBN, OR ELSE!

I wonder how many 12Mb/s voice services there will be?
Talk about overkill!
Comments have been disabled for this article.
 
 
 
Top Stories
Australia turns to homegrown drones
Debating the finer points of unmanned aerial vehicle design.
 
The New Zealand telco problem
Opinion: Could Telstra save Kiwi telcos?
 
IT price probe to 'name and shame' gougers
Industry ducking the issue, committee claims.
 
Dr Terry Cutler. Credit: CSIRO
Sign up to receive iTnews email bulletins
   FOLLOW US...

Latest VideosSee all videos »

Latest Comments
Polls
Should the Government enact new legislation to protect copyright holders in the digital age?

   |   View results
Yes
  20%
 
No
  80%
TOTAL VOTES: 521

Vote