Telstra criticises G9

From:
http://www2.skynews.com.au/business/...aspx?id=201374

Telstra has accused the G9 consortium of setting Australia's broadband plans
back several years.

G9, which includes players such as Optus and Macquarie Telecom, has a plan
to build a high speed broadband network, which would rival a similar plan
from Telstra.

But the Telco giant says the G9 plan is unrealistic, because it doesn't own
the current network on which its upgrade plan is based. Speaking on Sky News
Sunday Business, Telstra's Director of Regulatory, Dr Tony Warren said, 'I
liken that to putting out a detailed set of specifications for the upgrade
of my harbourside mansion. Only problem is, I don't have a harbourside
mansion.'

Citigroup's Chief Telecommunications analyst, Tim Smeallie, says the G9 plan
is achievable, although it will be expensive. 'The key issue is can a new
network be built? At a simple level, yes. But the costs would be
astronomical to effectively replicate Telstra's network,' he said.

---

› See More: Telstra criticises G9

Alan Parkington <[email protected]> wrote:

> From:
> http://www2.skynews.com.au/business/...aspx?id=201374

> Telstra has accused the G9 consortium of setting Australia's broadband plans back several years.

Wota ****ing surprise. Pity no one cept stupid ****wit
mexican arse lickers would ever buy that lie.

> G9, which includes players such as Optus and Macquarie Telecom, has a plan to build a high speed broadband network,
> which would rival a similar plan from Telstra.

And if the coalition gets reelected, given that Telstra has blown
all its feet right off, time after time after time on relations with the
govt, three guesses who will get the nod on the govt's spending.

> But the Telco giant says the G9 plan is unrealistic,

Corse they would claim that...

> because it doesn't own the current network on which its upgrade plan is based.

Easily fixed by leglislation, ****wit yanks.

> Speaking on Sky News Sunday Business, Telstra's Director of
> Regulatory, Dr Tony Warren said, 'I liken that to putting out a
> detailed set of specifications for the upgrade of my harbourside
> mansion. Only problem is, I don't have a harbourside mansion.'

Your problem, ****wit.

> Citigroup's Chief Telecommunications analyst, Tim Smeallie,

Smelly by name, smelly by nature.

> says the G9 plan is achievable, although it will be expensive.

The govt wont care, they will be spending a tiny part of what
they got when they flogged off telstra to all those stupid suckers.

> 'The key issue is can a new network be built?

Corse it can.

> At a simple level, yes. But the costs would be astronomical to effectively replicate Telstra's network,' he said.

No need to do that, ****wit.

Alan Parkington wrote...

> From:
> http://www2.skynews.com.au/business/...aspx?id=201374
>
> Telstra has accused the G9 consortium of setting Australia's broadband plans
> back several years.

Here we go again....

Now folks, who thinks that Telstra accusing G9 of setting broadband in Oz back
years is somewhat pot-kettle-blackish?

It wasn't too long ago when Bill Gates (whatever you think of the guy) got stuck
into Ziggy and his cronies over Telstra's policies on internet and telecomms in
general.

Let's start with restricting ADSL1 to a max of 1500/256 when it clearly is able
to run at 8mbps with no problems.

Then look at its current policy of putting in technology blockers in new housing
estates which restrict a lot of people to dialup, and horribly slow dialup at
that.

Ten years ago, Telstra could have invested a couple of billion dollars in
upgrading its entire network, retiring old and failing copper cabling. Instead,
it continued to slog along with high maintenance infrastructure that has
effectively restricted whatever data services that is available to Australians
to what we have at present.

Then there is Telstra's "premium" pricing policy which limits the level of ADSL
takeup to entry level services for most Australians. For those that can get
broadband via their phone services, that is.


--
A Meltdown? One of those annoying buzzwords. We prefer to
think of it as an unrequested fission surplus!

"Marts" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:0j76k3lnm474dd8oaa4c2dum2ka3f86ber@martz_57.com...
> Alan Parkington wrote...
>
>> From:
>> http://www2.skynews.com.au/business/...aspx?id=201374
>>
>> Telstra has accused the G9 consortium of setting Australia's broadband
>> plans
>> back several years.
>
> Here we go again....
>
> Now folks, who thinks that Telstra accusing G9 of setting broadband in Oz
> back
> years is somewhat pot-kettle-blackish?
>
> It wasn't too long ago when Bill Gates (whatever you think of the guy) got
> stuck
> into Ziggy and his cronies over Telstra's policies on internet and
> telecomms in
> general.

Telstra brought $29 ADSL to the masses

> Let's start with restricting ADSL1 to a max of 1500/256 when it clearly is
> able
> to run at 8mbps with no problems.

The "problem" is actually the customers. Who whinge that Joe Blow got
5192/384 when they "only" could achieve 3084/384.

Solution: set a minimum speed and offer than to all.

Telstra uncapped it when they believed that customers were sufficiently
educated to cope, but you still get utter ****wits like Kwyj, who, paying
$10-$15 more than 1500, complained that he was restriced to 3000 because of
infrastructure.

Even though that 3000 for $10-$15 more was better than 1500, in value

> Then look at its current policy of putting in technology blockers in new
> housing
> estates which restrict a lot of people to dialup, and horribly slow dialup
> at
> that.

Sure, its a conspiracy. Wanker.

My housing estate is fully copper to the exchange, thanks for asking

> Ten years ago, Telstra could have invested a couple of billion dollars in
> upgrading its entire network, retiring old and failing copper cabling.
> Instead,

They did spend a couple of billion changing all the exchanges to AXE and
S12.

There is no "old and failing copper" to be "retired". it's either faulty or
not. If its faulty, it gets replaced

> Then there is Telstra's "premium" pricing policy which limits the level of
> ADSL
> takeup to entry level services for most Australians. For those that can
> get

Entry level is 256. And Telstra say more than 60% of all BP customers are on
Liberty, which would not be entry level

> broadband via their phone services, that is.

Which is most people
>
>
> --
> A Meltdown? One of those annoying buzzwords. We prefer to
> think of it as an unrequested fission surplus!

Michael wrote...


> Telstra uncapped it when they believed that customers were sufficiently
> educated to cope, but you still get utter ****wits like Kwyj, who, paying

How big of Telstra, condescending pricks.

> > Ten years ago, Telstra could have invested a couple of billion dollars in
> > upgrading its entire network, retiring old and failing copper cabling.
> > Instead,
>
> They did spend a couple of billion changing all the exchanges to AXE and
> S12.
>
> There is no "old and failing copper" to be "retired". it's either faulty or
> not. If its faulty, it gets replaced

Good. I'll give Telstra a call and tell 'em that "Michael" sent me. Get them to
replace my line which goes spastic whenever it rains, and I get widly varying
line sync speeds, anything from 14mbits down to 8mbits, and sometimes lower, if
it's that bad that the ISP has to swap me over to a standard 1.5mbit profile...


--
Our last fight was my fault: My wife asked me "What's on the
TV?" I said,"Dust!"

"Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Telstra uncapped it when they believed that customers were sufficiently
> educated to cope, but you still get utter ****wits like Kwyj, who, paying
> $10-$15 more than 1500, complained that he was restriced to 3000 because
> of infrastructure.

Care to back up that claim you lying ****?

I was quite happy with the 3.5Mbps I was getting.
I got pissed off when Telstra's incompetence dropped that to 32kbps-750kbps
(varying) and refused to do anything about it.

--
Kwyj.

"Marts" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:a3sjk39prj677u8rdknit8gltjihjlvoru@martz_57.com...
> Michael wrote...
>
>
>> Telstra uncapped it when they believed that customers were sufficiently
>> educated to cope, but you still get utter ****wits like Kwyj, who, paying
>
> How big of Telstra, condescending pricks.
>
>> > Ten years ago, Telstra could have invested a couple of billion dollars
>> > in
>> > upgrading its entire network, retiring old and failing copper cabling.
>> > Instead,
>>
>> They did spend a couple of billion changing all the exchanges to AXE and
>> S12.
>>
>> There is no "old and failing copper" to be "retired". it's either faulty
>> or
>> not. If its faulty, it gets replaced
>
> Good. I'll give Telstra a call and tell 'em that "Michael" sent me. Get
> them to
> replace my line which goes spastic whenever it rains, and I get widly
> varying
> line sync speeds, anything from 14mbits down to 8mbits, and sometimes
> lower, if
> it's that bad that the ISP has to swap me over to a standard 1.5mbit
> profile...

As I said, its either faulty or not.

if you report it and they confirm its faulty, they will fix or replace it.

"Kwyjibo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Telstra uncapped it when they believed that customers were sufficiently
>> educated to cope, but you still get utter ****wits like Kwyj, who, paying
>> $10-$15 more than 1500, complained that he was restriced to 3000 because
>> of infrastructure.
>
> Care to back up that claim you lying ****?

Whirlpool search is your friend, if you cant remember the crap you were
spouting

> I was quite happy with the 3.5Mbps I was getting.

Liar

> I got pissed off when Telstra's incompetence dropped that to
> 32kbps-750kbps (varying) and refused to do anything about it.

Crap

"Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Kwyjibo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> Telstra uncapped it when they believed that customers were sufficiently
>>> educated to cope, but you still get utter ****wits like Kwyj, who,
>>> paying $10-$15 more than 1500, complained that he was restriced to 3000
>>> because of infrastructure.
>>
>> Care to back up that claim you lying ****?
>
> Whirlpool search is your friend, if you cant remember the crap you were
> spouting

If it's that simple, provide a link ****wit.
Other than the posts I made following Telstra's ****up that caused dismal
sync speeds, the only posts I made in relation to my iiNet speed were
complimentary.

Prove me wrong you lying ****.

>
>> I was quite happy with the 3.5Mbps I was getting.
>
> Liar

Nope.

>> I got pissed off when Telstra's incompetence dropped that to
>> 32kbps-750kbps (varying) and refused to do anything about it.
>
> Crap

Wrong again.

--
Kwyj.

Michael wrote...

> As I said, its either faulty or not.
>
> if you report it and they confirm its faulty, they will fix or replace it.

I have. They have and they won't. The fault lies in the crap cabling that
comprises my line. It's made up of sections of alum conductor as well as copper.
Telstra won't give me an entirely new line.

So, I'm stuck with what I have.

Luckily we're in a drought, so for the most part it's fairly stable. But line
attenuation is still higher than what it should be given the cable run length,
so I'm limited to around 14mbits, max.

And yeah, that's heaps better than someone else's 512kbits or even someone on 2
or 3 mbits ADSL2+ who lives further out. The fact though remains that my line
cannot achieve its full potential and goes spastic when it rains.

And when it rains try getting a tech out there and then to trace the fault as
it's occuring. Nope, you'll be lucky to see one within 2 or 3 days, after the
rain has stopped and the cabling has been given a chance to dry out, with the
fault disappearing.

"Marts" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:mkeuk3pgclkmsf42tbbnhphohk2riq1vqa@martz_57.com...
> Michael wrote...
>
>> As I said, its either faulty or not.
>>
>> if you report it and they confirm its faulty, they will fix or replace
>> it.
>
> I have. They have and they won't. The fault lies in the crap cabling that
> comprises my line. It's made up of sections of alum conductor as well as
> copper.
> Telstra won't give me an entirely new line.

Forget what your line is comprised of - its irrelevant.

You pay for a SERVICE, not physical infrastructure. You pay for a logical
circuit back to the exchange. you do not pay for an individual wire - no
matter what it is comprised of.

if your service doesnt work - you report it and get it fixed. whether fixing
is to move you to a new pair or not.

if you have to repeat this cycle more than once every 2 months, id raise it
with the TIO

> So, I'm stuck with what I have.
>
> Luckily we're in a drought, so for the most part it's fairly stable. But
> line
> attenuation is still higher than what it should be given the cable run
> length,
> so I'm limited to around 14mbits, max.

and they dont guarantee you any particular figure on attentuation, so its
irrelevant

> And yeah, that's heaps better than someone else's 512kbits or even someone
> on 2
> or 3 mbits ADSL2+ who lives further out. The fact though remains that my
> line
> cannot achieve its full potential and goes spastic when it rains.

report a fault as above

> And when it rains try getting a tech out there and then to trace the fault
> as
> it's occuring. Nope, you'll be lucky to see one within 2 or 3 days, after
> the
> rain has stopped and the cabling has been given a chance to dry out, with
> the
> fault disappearing.

thats not your problem - the number of times you report the SAME fault adds
weight to your arguments for replacement. it is irrelevant whether they
catch it in the act or not
>

"Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>

> and they dont guarantee you any particular figure on attentuation, so its
> irrelevant

They may not make the guarantee publicly, but there is an internal
engineering standard for attenuation which must be met.
I don't recall the exact figure, but it definitely exists.

--
Kwyj.

Michael wrote...

> > I have. They have and they won't. The fault lies in the crap cabling that
> > comprises my line. It's made up of sections of alum conductor as well as
> > copper. Telstra won't give me an entirely new line.
>
> Forget what your line is comprised of - its irrelevant.

No, it's not. It is what is causing my varying line conditions. When it rains,
it's just gets worse.

The very composition of an aluminium conductor causes interference problems
compared to a copper run. Now, if the all the cabling from my neighborhood is
constructed of the same material then it won't matter if I'm put onto another
pair. The basic problem will still be there. I can only hope that the weather
related issues are fixed if the alternative pair is in better condition.

Kwyjibo wrote...

> Other than the posts I made following Telstra's ****up that caused dismal
> sync speeds, the only posts I made in relation to my iiNet speed were
> complimentary.

Was this issue ever resolved? If so, how? What was the outcome?

Kwyjibo wrote...

> "Michael" <[email protected]> wrote in message

> > and they dont guarantee you any particular figure on attentuation, so its
> > irrelevant
>
> They may not make the guarantee publicly, but there is an internal

So, really, you could apply for ADSL2+, get connected, only to find that your
line sync speed is no faster than a DSL1 service, and that there is **** all
that you can do about it?