Posts by Matthew Poole
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Fibre will be coming here at the same rate as everywhere else, if not faster. We're three times the city Wellington is :P
-
AS: much of Auckland, and by that I mean Greater Auckland, doesn't have overhead wires. In a lot of places we don't even have anything except lamp posts. Yes, people would say no to having them back again. They're thicker than phone lines, for a start, and people like the clear sight-lines they currently enjoy.
-
but what I have mostly seen on TV is soldiers digging with shovels and their hands.
Yes, that's right. They're using light-weight, non-mechanised tools on the pile. Think about what they're trying to achieve. At this point, people are quite likely still alive. Consider how long after other major earthquakes survivors have been found. To put in heavy machinery, or pneumatic drills, is to risk causing sub-surface shifting that could kill people who are currently alive.
Also, in the absence of structural engineering advice, doing anything that puts major stress on the pile is risking collapse. People, with hand tools, are the safest way of doing something that doesn't require expert assessment.Responding to a structural collapse is a huge undertaking. A major earthquake multiplies that by several orders of magnitude. The basic guideline for an Urban Search And Rescue task force is that they can cope with one collapsed structure. These are the experts, with weeks of full-time training to even become a member, on-going training, a structural engineer to assess the task before anything is done, and still a lot of their work involves digging with shovels, trowels and hands. Their expertise is in getting into heavily collapsed areas, shoring things up as they go. They're experts in confined-space rescue, not demolition. The soldiers will be lucky to have basic introductory training in how to deal with structural collapse, so they're doing exactly the right thing by getting in there with just their hands and spades.
-
Heh, you're a spring chicken.
Not in the least. I've been around for the majority of the time the internet has been commercially available in this country. I was just illustrating how recently it was that we were getting shafted on even basic speeds, never mind real broadband.
The OECD working document that someone posted is interesting. It suggests that their definition of broadband for the period 2010-2020 will have to be revised from the current 256kbps to 50/20Mbps. We've got the head of Chorus saying that, in essence, 20Mbps should be enough for anybody.
We're fucked :/ -
Briso said:
The idea behind the Institute FibreCo model, and the National Party's fibre build, is that there will be a greater return on investment (As I understand it - someone tell me if I'm wrong) than is currently the case. I just don't see that happening.
Network infrastructure isn't something that should generate spectacular returns. It's meant to be a safe investment, not an especially profitable one. Pension funds invest in network infrastructure, people wanting high growth don't.
The whole point of a national fibre company is that it would be somewhat freed from the expectations of high returns that plague retail telecommunications. Telecom is, in part, hamstrung by the fact that it's lead its shareholders to expect, if not demand, good stock growth (up until the unbundling announcement) and high dividends (which it still returns). A properly-run (ie: not gouging the fuck out of the market) telecommunications network doesn't lend itself to that approach. If the network can be laid and operated by a company that does nothing else, it doesn't have any expectations on it to contribute lots to the bottom line. It just has to plod along, doing what it does, doing it well, and giving everyone access. -
OK. Orcon used to offer max/max ADSL with 100GB data allowance for $200/month. That's no longer available. Their replacement is a "starting rate" of $120/month with 25GB, and that's on their ADSL2+ service. I find it utterly absurd that all we see in this country is faster speeds for higher prices and the same or less data.
XNet offer plans that will allow well in excess of 100GB downloaded for a lot less than $200/month.Yes, I'm not prepared to pay a huge amount (but remember for the average kiwi the fact that I'd be prepared to spend $175/month for an internet connection makes me a total fruit loop) for that kind of speed. Because speed alone is worthless if you can't do anything with the connection. I used to joke back in the day, all of about two years ago, that when Telecom finally allowed maximum rate DSL it would be accompanied by a 100MB cap after which you'd be throttled to something approximating slow dialup for the rest of the month. That's still the mindset that appears to exist when plans are formulated by ISPs in this country.
-
I'm very curious about the Herald's definition of "pork", really. I'd barely consider National's fibre pledge to be pork, since it's actually spending that's of demonstrable value to the nation. I certainly don't consider funding for surgery, or emergency services, to be pork.
When I think of pork-barrel politics, I think of the infamous Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska, worth nearly USD1b and of benefit to 50 people on an island. Oh, and all the local companies that get to build the damn thing. That is pork-barrel politics! -
50/20 with 100GB? You're joking, right? We can get 100GB now with downstream speeds half that and upstream speeds not even in spitting distance.
Seriously, caps are the thing that kill us the most. I could probably convince the flatmates to wear $150-175/month for that kind of speed, but 100GB? Do the maths. It's bad enough Xtra offering a 200MB cap with 2Mb DSL! -
Then Auckland will risk missing out.
Wishful thinking on your part. The figures, from NZI's estimates at least, appear to be based on ducting not overhead.
The big advantage of ducted is that errant car drivers, of which NZ has more than a few, don't knock out large swathes of connectivity if they happen to hit an inconvenient pole. That was a major reason for Auckland's undergrounding work, plus those big wooden poles are very unforgiving to motor vehicles so there are safety benefits also. -
I would have thought that stringing fibre from phone poles (of which there are an awful lot around the country) would significantly reduce the cost of rolling out fibre. Telstra clear has cables festooned all over the place in various Wellington burbs, and Citylink in wellington has their little blue cables strung thoughout the city. They tend to fade into the background pretty quickly.
No reason, aside from NIMBYism why it couldn't happen with a fibre roll-out.
Ain't going to fly in Auckland. A significant part of the reason that Auckland doesn't have TCL cable is that the Auckland City Council said nay to overhead lines. District plan forbids new ones unless it's absolutely imperative. Big ups to them, coz the lines are bloody ugly. I lived in Avalon for 18 months, and while I was able to eventually ignore the visual pollution of a single fat cable festooned from the lamp posts on my street it was impossible not to see the veritable jungles of wires overhead in the CBD.
Toss in the significant work that's been done up this way to get rid of any overhead wires, and it's trying to poke runny brown stuff uphill with a small piece of tree to not do a ducted rollout in Auckland.