Typical home speeds might make more sense

[ghost]

I was delighted to share this on Facebook, but as a pal pointed out, typical home speeds are going to be closer to 100Mb/40mb.

In the interests of correctness, but also in the interests of not getting a pasting by some smartarse, would it make sense to give people a choice of typical residential speeds? It'll still beat the pants off whatever's in the right hand column

(Fork it and add it myself? In what spare time, son?)

[Smerity]

I was going to say the same. "Full" NBN still wins in a completely fair fight. Leaving the numbers unfair just means people can completely ignore the overall point that we need these faster speeds and instead argue the numbers are unfair.

I'd suggest you either

• Make the LNP's NBN the full theoretical speed (75100 Mb/s down, X up) and leave Labor's NBN with 1Gb/s down, 400 Mb/s up
• Move Labour's NBN numbers down to what is available currently (100Mb/s down, 40Mb/s up)

If you're happy with this being done, I'll happily fork it and do it for you.

Edit: Oops, I wrote 75 Mbps previously

[ghost]

Haha, I just looked at the source. That's a really clever way to specify the speeds. I am definitely happy to deal with this myself.

With that said, some of the demos might need adjustment so as not to make people wait 10x as long to be wowed.

[Smerity]

On second thought, it's kind of unfair however you look at it. If you set it to (1000/400 | 100/40) for (Labour | Liberal), that unfairly advantages Liberal. You only get those speeds if (a) VDSL2 is on your exchange, (b) your copper line is still good, and (c) you live less than 500 metres from the exchange.

If you set it to 100/40 and 25/5 then it's not as impressive and it doesn't point out that we're future proofed for 1000/400 whilst Liberal is permanently stuck at best hitting 100/40.

Relaying those points to people who look at the page will likely take too long and be too intensive, hampering the spread of the message. If Liberal can leave out both upload speeds and 1Gbps connections from their Fast. Affordable. Sooner. document then I think it's fine to simplify the message for ease of understanding.

[ghost]

Did you mean 100/40 for the Coalition? That would still be completely fictional, though, wouldn't it?

It is still possible to make this message clear and understandable with realistic speeds.

On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Stephen Merity notifications@github.comwrote:

On second thought, it's kind of unfair however you look at it. If you set it to 1000/400 and 100/40 for Lbr/LNP, that unfairly advantages LNP. You only get those speeds if (a) VDSL2 is on your exchange, (b) your copper line is still good, and (c) you live less than 500 metres from the exchange.

If you set it to 100/40 and 25/5 then it's not as impressive and it doesn't point out that we're future proofed for 1000/400 whilst LNP is permanently stuck at best hitting 100/40.

Relaying those points to people who look at the page will likely take too long and be too intensive, hampering the spread of the message. If LNP can leave out both upload speeds and 1Gbps connections from their Fast. Affordable. Sooner.http://lpa.webcontent.s3.amazonaws.com/NBN/The%20Coalition%E2%80%99s%20Plan%20for%20Fast%20Broadband%20and%20an%20Affordable%20NBN.pdfdocument then I think it's fine to simplify the message for ease of understanding.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/brotchie/howfastisthenbn.com.au/issues/3#issuecomment-17530830 .

Regards, Raena

[Smerity]

Sorry for confusion, I meant Coalition's plan using copper. For the majority of Australia 100/40 is fictional but it is theoretically possible for some people. If you're within 500 metres of the exchange you can get 100/40 using VDSL2. If you're <800 metres you can get 60/20 and 800-1500 metres gives you 40/10. Of course, just as you're X metres from the exchange doesn't guarantee you'll be able to get those speeds in the same way that ADSL2+ offers up to 24Mb/s yet you may achieve far lower.

Turnbull retweeting French VDSL2 usage Wikipedia article on VDSL2 and usage around the world

[ghost]

I was more confused about where you got 75/x from before and then 100/40 in the next, I think.

Is this something that can be solved through wording instead, then? The way this reads at the moment still kind of implies 'hey guys this is totes what you'll have in your house'.

Reframing it so it's closer to saying 'This is what 1Gb/s really looks/feels like' should still achieve the right balance of wow-factor and truthfulness.

[chocky005]

"If you set it to 100/40 and 25/5 then it's not as impressive and it doesn't point out that we're future proofed for 1000/400 whilst Liberal is permanently stuck at best hitting 100/40."

I think you should compare Apples with Apples other wise this whole site will loose credibility and be seen as a stupid Labour stunt.

You have also compared the fastest possible speed on the Labour NBN vers the min speed on the Lib NBN.

On the Labour NBN you can get 1gb connection just like you can get a 12mb connection on Fibre. On the Lib's NBN you can get 1gb connection but you will have to pay $2250 approx. according to MT. Also we don't know if the retailers/IPS like Telstra will offer to connect people as a FTTP for free if they sing up to a x year contact.

[aidansteele]

Like issue #5, it would be great if there was a citation for the possible speeds. This site is the only place that I've seen the Coalition's plan described as 25/5. Have the Coalition specified any upload speed anywhere?

[Smerity]

The Coalition are incredibly light on details and literally don't even mention the word "upload" in Fast. Affordable. Sooner. likely as that's one area they explicitly lose and don't want to acknowledge it. I'm not sure where the other cited speeds are being pulled from but all the ones I've stated are pulled from the base technology they're planning to use. Even then it's complicated as VDSL2 rapidly falls from 100/40 to far worse speeds (60/20 @ 500-800 metres, 40/10 @ 800-1200 [dist to exchange]). VDSL2 also needs to be installed on an exchange by exchange basis, just as ADSL2+ needs to be. Some exchanges will never be covered. Even then, an enormous chunk of the continent will be living > 500 metres away from the exchange. We also haven't discussed line quality either.

@chocky005 Making any reference to connecting to FTTP in the Coalition plan is unfair imho. There are so few details, no agreements with any of the major parties and we don't know if the quoted $2,250 is anywhere near accurate or based upon any firm numbers. We don't know if there'll be lock in like Telstra vs Optus phone lines: if I purchase a fibre connection from Telstra and want to move to [Optus, TPG, iiNet, ...], do I need to install a new fibre connection for example?

tldr; The numbers aren't perfect but no set of numbers can be in this situation. The current numbers are at least representative of the situation. Labour's NBN can reach 1000/400 (or higher looking at the tech). The Coalition is stating that 25/5 is all that's needed for the average household[1]. They're responded that speeds may improve beyond that but as I mentioned above, it's complicated and the majority of Australians won't be able to reach those speeds. The page indicates numerous everyday situations in which 25/5 is painfully inappropriate and doesn't even discuss things like Netflix style television, where 25/5 would be useless for an average family of three or four.

I was initially in agreement that the numbers weren't "fair" but moving it in any other direction unfairly favours the Coalition, especially considering the majority of their planning is conjecture.

[1]; "We are absolutely confident that 25 megs is going to be enough, more than enough, for the average household"

[aidansteele]

@Smerity I hate to be pedantic, but we can't give either party credit for things they haven't actually said. In your tl;dr, the Coalition haven't stated that "25/5 is all that's needed for the average household", they said "25 megs" -- no mention of upload. The only time Turnbull has addressed it is in saying that "the market will take care of it".

[Smerity]

Feel free to be pedantic, this hasn't devolved into anything but a reasonable discussion so far so I'm happy for you to point out my shortcomings =] I agree, I should have left out /5 (I got confuzzled as I was writing 25/5 earlier) and have striked it out.

Speaking of the number for the site, however, 25/5 doesn't seem unreasonable in my mind. I believe they were referring to ADSL2+ when they referenced "25 megs". ADSL2+ actually has a slower upstream than 5 Mbps. None of the copper line tech has truly significant uploads other than VDSL2 and that, as referenced earlier, is full of issues (re: line quality and distance to exchange) and maxes out around 40Mbps with a more accurate upperbound average of 20 or 10Mbps for upload.

I'd be really happy to be proven wrong, but the Coalition haven't said much at all about their proposed uploads. Approximations need to be made due to the lack of information.

Thanks for being pedantic though, I agree that statement stretched too far.

"Mr Turnbull has made no promises regarding upload speeds." (discussing this site)

[freman]

Perhaps simply pointing out that these are absolutely best case speeds on the very best plans offered under both options - you can always opt to go slower on Labor, but you can't go faster on Coalition.

Perhaps an option to account for a 50% drop in speed on the Labor side for various routing/path issues between your home and servers, and similarly options on the coalition side to account for distance > 500 meters from node, shoddy copper cable, and rain (so, up to a 90% drop in speed - out here we've been known to get disconnected at the first drop of rain)

[ghost]

http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/blogs/malcolms-blog/conroy-flings-fud/Surprise! — Sent from mobile

On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 6:03 PM, freman notifications@github.com wrote:

Perhaps simply pointing out that these are absolutely best case speeds on the very best plans offered under both options - you can always opt to go slower on Labor, but you can't go faster on Coalition.

Perhaps an option to account for a 50% drop in speed on the Labor side for various routing/path issues between your home and servers, and similarly options on the coalition side to account for distance > 500 meters from node, shoddy copper cable, and rain (so, up to a 90% drop in speed - out here we've been known to get disconnected at the first drop of rain)

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/brotchie/howfastisthenbn.com.au/issues/3#issuecomment-17591767

[chocky005]

All I'm saying you should make it clear that you are comparing a connection that is running at the min speed on the lib's NBN plan that has not purchased the fibre to the house option for what ever it cost. Yes the Libs have said that for the moment a large part of the population only needs 25mb and this is a minimum and they say it will between 25-100mb but they also said in the same documents that if a person wanted fibre they can pay for it to be installed.

Yes we don't know the exact speed that everyone will get as it will be similar to ADSL and depend on your distance.

Yes Copper is slower than fibre

Yes there is little to no word on upload speed

If you are going to take quotes out of documents don't lie and take things out of context. The site compares the min speed of one party verses the max speed of the other party.

My personal opinion is it should be FTTP but I just feel you should be honest about the info on this site. I think the roll-out and sites that are getting the NBN first could be done better and the current NBN designs with a one size fits all and limiting who is allowed to install the Fibre is not as well designed as it could be but this is not what this website is talking about and more a whirlpool thing to talk about.

Compare Apples with Apples and give people the full info not half.

[brotchie]

Copy of the response I wrote on Reddit.

I've added some annotations to the website now if you click the button all the way down the bottom. Namely these links:

Gigbit announcement http://www.nbnco.com.au/blog/nbn-gigabit-available-december.html

Abbott's "25 megs is good enough" quote http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yL7bHtr3-eU&t=3m40s

My rationale behind the speeds was that the NBN FTTP, as envisaged by Labor, can well handle 1000/400. It's unlikely that you'll pull the full 1000 down or 400 up due to a multitude of factors, but I aimed for a simple, ideal-case scenario, that the lay-person could understand.

I chose the 25Mbps download on the Coalition's side because

1. By 2016 that's their guaranteed speed; and
2. Tony Abbott expressed that 25 megs would be "more than enough for the average household". I wanted to convince the public that this is definitely not the case.

I chose the 5Mbps upload because xDSL technology tends to have an upload speed varying from 1-3Mbps when a download of 25Mbps is achievable. I was optimistic and chose 5Mbps.

The site was more a commentary on both party's visions for the future. Labor obviously understands the technology, or employed consultants that did, and they've implemented a system that's capable of Gbit (and more into the future). The Liberals expression that 25 megs is enough for the average household shows that they're out of touch with the exponential growth in connectivity and bandwidth usage.

[ghost]

Then you need to be clearer in your wording and your message. 

It'd be as simple as saying:

• Tony Abbott thinks 25 is enough.
• This is what 25 looks like. 
• And this is what 1000 looks like. 

Not "your house has" (many won't be connected at the states speeds in either model).  — Sent from mobile

On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 10:04 AM, James Brotchie notifications@github.com wrote:

Cop of the response I wrote on Reddit. I've added some annotations to the website now if you click the button all the way down the bottom. Namely these links: Gigbit announcement http://www.nbnco.com.au/blog/nbn-gigabit-available-december.html Abbott's "25 megs is good enough" quote http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yL7bHtr3-eU&t=3m40s My rationale behind the speeds was that the NBN FTTP, as envisaged by Labor, can well handle 1000/400. It's unlikely that you'll pull the full 1000 down or 400 up due to a multitude of factors, but I aimed for a simple, ideal-case scenario, that the lay-person could understand. I chose the 25Mbps download on the Coalition's side because

1. By 2016 that's their guaranteed speed; and

2. Tony Abbott expressed that 25 megs would be "more than enough for the average household". I wanted to convince the public that this is definitely not the case. I chose the 5Mbps upload because xDSL technology tends to have an upload speed varying from 1-3Mbps when a download of 25Mbps is achievable. I was optimistic and chose 5Mbps. The site was more a commentary on both party's visions for the future. Labor obviously understands the technology, or employed consultants that did, and they've implemented a system that's capable of Gbit (and more into the future). The Liberals expression that 25 megs is enough for the average household shows that they're out of touch with the exponential growth in connectivity and bandwidth usage.

   Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/brotchie/howfastisthenbn.com.au/issues/3#issuecomment-17641851

[aidansteele]

@chocky005 It's not comparing the minimum speed of one proposal to the max speed of another proposal. It's comparing the minimum guaranteed speed available to people. Just because 1G/400M is the guaranteed minimum available on fibre doesn't mean that it's the minimum speed on offer.

Likewise, just because the Coalition guarantee a minimum 25M/? doesn't mean that people won't have the option of selecting a slower speed. Can you imagine the outrage if the Coalition forced everyone to take up 25M/? and didn't give people the option of a slower (and cheaper) option?

Do you understand the difference? It's a valid and very important comparison to make. No one has any idea how much the fibre installation will cost under the Coalition policy. As such, it's no more useful than the situation pre-NBN: anyone can currently purchase fibre if they have $X0,000+.

[chocky005]

I think this is looking much better

@aidansteele The problem with the original site was it was comparing the speed with no real justification around how and why these where the speeds. The site now explains why the 2 speeds have the selected. I'm sorry about my first post I just could not articulate what I was meaning.

Let hope what ever happens we get something that will not be crap and not easily upgradable.