Itís funny as my old connection was terrible but nbn for me is amazing, well in comparison to Australian residents.
The push to force people to subscribe to NBN by shutting down the Telstra copper wire landline network seems to have taken an interesting turn.
A while back we received the standard Telstra letter stating that the copper wire service would be disconnected 18 months after the NBN HFC (Hybrid Fibre Coaxial) cable and junction box is installed on the outside of our house.
With 2 months or so to go before compulsory disconnection, I thought I'd better get an exact date as we are still on ADSL2+ with TPG. I phoned the Telstra NBN phone no. and was told that due to the high level of complaints and issues regarding the NBN service (to the telecommunications ombudsman?), an investigation is currently being undertaken.
As far as the compulsory disconnection date for the copper landline service, I was told that nothing would happen before the end of September 2018 and I would have 18 months from this date to switch over. This was great news (if true) as possibly it falls into the time-frame for 5G technology to have settled in.
The most surprising part of the conversation was when I was told that no new NBN connections were currently occurring, yet i was still being spruked the Telstra NBN plans. I was told that Telstra would have higher average speeds than competitors due to the larger chunk of bandwidth they had purchased and would always ensure there direct customers would have priority! Of course there is nothing in writing to guarantee an average or a minimum speed for that matter. Sounds feasible (illegal?) with the copper network but not sure about NBN as NBN Co. own the network.
NBN - Numnuts' Broken Network.
Itís funny as my old connection was terrible but nbn for me is amazing, well in comparison to Australian residents.
We switched to the NBN immediately it became available in our area, reliable and fast.
A lot of the HFC network was found to be insufficient for NBN purpose so there has been a delay in deploying NBN in HFC areas. You will most likely see FTTC (fibre to the curb) or FTTN in HFC areas. I know that telcos have been put under the spotlight recently so the likes of Telstra will be less contended than others but then again it comes at a cost. I recently had my Telstra NBN increased from 25/5 to 50/20 for free and have noticed a significant improvement so there is plenty of bandwidth out there.
I've had ADSL, ADSL2+ and now have the NBN HFC, a step up from basic at 25 mps...Apparently the NBN guarantee that you will not receive less than 1/2 the advertised rate (even at 1/2 the speed it is far better than ADSL2+)...NBN is supposed to be more stable...I'm happy with my connection...Every time I ring Melbourne to do a speed check it has never been below 22 mps...I do at times use the internet at odd times, namely 2 or 3 am and have had no internet only once or twice...Whilst it is a little inconvenient at the time, I'm OK with that, as it completely outstrips anything I've had before regarding reliability....
My understanding is NBN co control the reliability and speeds not the providers...It's up to them to give you the best deals...I use Belong, a lower priced provider, powered by Telstra and enjoy the fact that throughout the times I've been with them, with all the different connection platforms, I don't have to pay any set up fees, plus they have been pretty quick to set the connections up as well...
As you are with TPG, I'd suggest you call up TPG and ask them about what they can provide in the way of speeds and also check out a few different NBN providers to make your needs are met at the right price. I don't know, but you may get a better deal than Telstra.
There are definitely suburbs where the switch off has already been completed; but as far as I know those are all FTTP/N, not HFC.
In the FTTN areas it makes perfect sense for a compulsory and timely switch off, so they can maximise speeds available on the copper lines under VDSL2. With everything else (FTTP, HFC) itís more about cost-saving and deduplication, not about service quality or performance.
Apart from the Turnbull inspired "dumbing down" of the technology (and he knew he was doing it at the time), the two main problems with the NBN are mostly a rerun of all the earlier technologies.
1) Joining fibre correctly is tricky and too many NBN techs would probably be failed if I were testing them. When we were rolling out fibre in the early 1990s, most of my guys took a few goes before getting the connections to work reliably in the longer term. Then Howard stopped the street rollout in Kewdale about 100 metres from the largest site we prewired with fibre... Howard could not see the point in investing in fibre when he wanted to flog Telstra off and scoop the cash. Result: locally owned client went broke due to lack of bandwidth to the outside world with a 1Gb internal network. Now owned by the US. Yep - still annoyed 'bout that one. For history buffs: S Korea was just finishing their fibre at the time. Wake up Australia...
2) Just like early dial up, satellite, cable and ADSL the cheaper routers (aka "modems") are utter garbage and deliver in line with their cost. Almost all the NBN fails I encounter belong to one of those two categories. The odd exception being "copper wire disconnects" in those "mixed mode" disaster areas (probably the same techs who cannot join fibre - they cannot join copper either...) mooted by the former Minister for (mis)Communications - and that is an entirely foreseeable and easily avoidable problem. At the end of the day a bi-metal strip will always play up long term - and the thinner the wire the earlier the failure.
As for wireless, where do they think the underlying bandwidth comes from? Yep - fibre. To rub salt in that wound, the worldwide power consumption of wireless comms now exceeds the total power consumption of a few African nations. It is incredibly energy inefficient. Wireless is also quite error prone, so retransmitting the data also ups the power consumption - error rates above 30% are still pretty common. So people are actually paying money to their Telco for tranmission errors... Great money spinner if not so hot as a tech idea. Then those ***** useless apps update themselves using the users bandwidth - even the ones that are never used. More power wastage. So the solution to all that is to use really heavy compression - so one device compresses the data then every wireless device out there chews up even more power decompressing that same data stream. Think of a power consumption figure for decompression and multiply it by the number of users worldwide. Scary.
Luckily I am now semi-retired so I can watch the train wreck without being involved in fixing the mess.
PS: The company I founded went on to install over 2000 WANs using virtually every tech available (mwave, radio etc as well as the usual culprits).
The complaints and issues that many people seem to have is widely publicised so until this gets sorted or 5G comes along at a good price, NBN won't be getting our business for as long as we can possibly hold out. We easily stream Netflix on ADSL2+ and only rarely have buffering issues on some of the catch-up TV sites.
The only way to keep ISPs honest is to have them charge on the average speed users achieve at realistic times of the day and charge only for what they provide, not on a BS theoretical speed.
Last edited by CafeLotta; 14th March 2018 at 01:25 PM.
"NBN won't be getting our business for as long as we can possibly hold out"
I have been on Telstra HFC for many years enjoying download speeds of around 100Mb/sec but only 2Mb upload.
I changed to Telstra NBN HFC when it became available and it is rock-solid, my 7pm Speedtest gives Ping 8ms Download 95Mbps Upload 38Mbps
My monthly costs reduced from $150 to $99 with a bundle of highest speed unlimited data, free local and national calls plus basic Foxtel.
You didn't win first prize in the NBN lottery (FTTP) but with HFC you have the luxury of keeping the ADSL2+ for a short time while you move to HFC.
So, will 5G Compete with the NBN?
"There is a great deal of excitement about the opportunities 5G will provide.
But its full capacity will only be achieved through very large investments in infrastructure.
Like today’s 4G network, large data downloads for video streaming and other bandwidth-hungry applications will likely be more expensive using 5G than using the NBN."
CafeLotta, I am no fan of the implementation of the NBN but my experience has matched Valvesters. I also am on HFC and have similar speeds, almost always 95mb down though sometimes as low as 92mb down and 33 to 38mb down. Accounting for transmission overhead these numbers are as expected.
The first article you link is about 6 months old, quite a bit has changed since then. The ACCC has issued guidelines suggesting ISP advertise 'average download speeds' during the evening peak of 19.00 to 23.00 which most are doing. Also both Telstra and Optus have made huge refunds to tens of thousands of clients who couldn't achieve speeds advertised. If you look at your preferred supplier, TPG, they advertise NBN speeds now with 'average download speeds'.
The second part of connecting beside speed is the CVC or Connectivity Virtual Circuit - in laymans terms how much upload and download bandwidth your isp buys on your behalf. When Telstra was speaking to you they were correct in saying they could probably offer better speeds as they do buy more CVC per client as do a couple of other premium suppliers like Aussie Broadband. This is not due to priority on the NBN just they have bought enough bandwidth. CVC has proven an issue of much frustration with most suppliers not buying enough with users then fighting for what little is there. This is so much so that NBN has recognised the problem and had a bundled discount for 50mb download speeds with attached adequate CVC to isp to encourage better results for clients. It has and and the average speed has gone up due to this.
As you have stated you are HFC you get a supplied modem (but not a router though some isp may offer to supply this) the Arris CM8200 which is docsis 3.1. This is quite a good modem with no problem achieving the speeds valvster and I are getting all day long. Trials with docsis 3.1 (compared to the previous 3.0) are getting 1gb down and 100mb up, though who knows what that will translate to in real life. You can add a quality router of your own behind the Arris modem.
One issue is the isp, TPG were honest when they didn't want to quote minimum speeds and good on them. They are a mid to lower level supplier (even though they are a big company), meaning they sell on price and purchase low level of CVC. Most suppliers who offer unlimited plans have issues as the CVC is expensive to meet that and also those plans encourage heavy users or misuse. If your neighbour is downloading Game of Thrones in 4k 24 hours a day it will be hard for you to get good speeds, the same way it will be hard not get caught in traffic if your neighbour gets 60 vehicles visiting every hour. TPG do a fantastic service on their own fibre - the subsidary is Wonder something - it is offered mainly in Syd/Melb and in Sydney is predominantly to high density areas like Pyrmont.
HFC is on stop sell for 6 months and while it is not a great technology, it isn't bad and should supply a better experience than ADSL2. There are a lot worse technologies on the NBN.
Ps Residential services have never offered a guarantee beyond the USO - Universal Service Obligation - and neither have most business services. Most people wont pay what is required for a business grade service witha genuine Service Level Agreement, think $300 to $400 per month for 10mb up/10mb down.
Simple line testing (the figures most Telcos will never release) would tell you what the maximum possible speed is for your line. In the 4 houses down here the BEST one of the 4 is only capable of 37MBits/sec. My own place can only do 21MBits/sec. My previous ADSL2+ with iinet did 19.141 to 19.143 for over 10 years, so there is a slight drop from that "theoretical figure" when using a quality router (expected). Now iinet is part of TPG (IMO merely asset strippers... YMMV) they insisted / wanted me to pay for the top 100MBit/sec speed tier "because I am an IT company". The minor fact that there was no way I could even approach that speed was not their issue... so I went with a "minor ISP" for less money / month and more features. I am moderately happy with the end result - rare minimal buffering and few periods of downtime. My own house: still all 1Gb fibre still waiting for a decent connection to the outside world...
Unfortunately latency is a lot worse under the NBN (lowest tender multiplexers & VSLAM's at their end? Probably). Oh, and the ping rates quoted above only measure the latency to the "nearest port of call" not the main backbone - about as relevant as a fart in a cyclone.
It is sad to think that S Korea had completed their "fibre to everywhere" by 1992 or 1993 (depending on whom you believe) whilst the Oz rollout was largely halted back then by political myopics so copper pillar boxes of corroded junk held together with plastic bags and wireties is still our S.O.P.. Lucky fella my country...
Its one thing to advertise an average speed but when you don't achieve it all the excuses come out and usually start with the end user being blamed. Legally there seems to be no recourse other than dropping the ISP and finding another with all the associated inconvenience. Businesses have gone bust through these sort of NBN issues.
I went through something similar with TPG and ADSL2+ when we first connected. We are inside 1.5km from the exchange and initially had 18MBs speeds for the first couple of months. The speed then decreased over time to the current average 12MBs (Upper limit of ADSL2 and Minimum for ADSL2+). Our equipment, house wiring and everything else was blamed despite nothing having changed. These were all checked by a tech and no problem found. Bottom line TPG had a certain capacity with their equipment at the exchange and were over-subscribing for this capacity creating bottlenecks. Profits above equipment upgrade cost and delivering fair speeds. Their own DSLAM diagrams showed 17.425MBs average speeds for our street which coincides with our initial speeds. Another tech I spoke to candidly explained the truth of the matter.
Sorry to hear your issues with TPG CafeLotta, they are well known for this and as your use mentioned business related I would spend the extra $10 or so a monthfor a more reputable company. It is not just the speed you lost, my sympathy is for you wasting time chasing your tail due to their faults
We were with TPG on ADSL for several years.. (not perfect but excellent tech support ?) ..on their $60 unlimited plan.
We got the NBN "notice to switch" letter and pondered the options as you are.
An enquiry to TPG ..and a little negotiation.... resulted in an offer to switch to NBN with TPG (for no costs) on the 25Mb speed via the HFC already installed by Foxtel....no contract, no strings, quit after a month of i dont like it.
A new Modem and Router were supplied and installed at no cost.
So far is been good (only domestic use, some Netflix video streaming no problem) with only an odd loss of service as the NBN guys continue to mess around in the area.
BUT, i have now been told by Foxtel that ALL Fox cable customers will be transferred to Satelite service ASAP as the HFC cable is no longer available to Foxtel....
presumeable that is to help improve the NBN HFC service ?...we will see ?
Finally, the best advice i have heard for NBN, is not to sign up on any contracts that do not allow you to quit if you are not happy with the service.
Go with a supplier on a monthly plan to enable you to "try before you buy"
I've never found TPG tech support to be anything but frustrating with someone in the Philippines reading off a screen and trying to communicate in broken English over a usually terrible quality phone line. Always come away with a Migraine, having lost a fair chunk of time also. I think next time I may search for an ISP with local on-shore tech support if such a thing exists anymore.
Try Aussie Broadband. They have a 12month double data offer going too. Aussie call centre.
I would second bookfreaks recommendation for ABB. Month to month plan with no sign up costs and tech and sales support from a team in regional Victoria, absolutely recommend them. I was reminded how easy they were to deal with when just organising a new mobile with Telstra (for their coverage ), 3 hours of calls to the Philippines, 1 hour to Perth and 2 shop visits. No individuals fault, and seamless switching between offshore and local staff, but a lot of effort to give a company money.
Also, your personal information is collectedso that we, our related bodies and our dealers can promote and market services to you (including by way of direct mail, telemarketing, email, SMS and MMS messages).This is to keep you informed of products, services and special offers and may continue after you cease acquiring services from us. If you do not wish us, our related bodies or our dealers to contact you to promote and market products, services and special offers to you, please call xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
That was one of the primary reasons i switched to Gmail when it became available, so that i could ditch Telstra Bigpond and try other SPs.
The flexibility of Gmail etc is the pure convenience of picking up mail anywhere , on any device easily and quickly, on a well developed interface.
I doubt they are any less private than most other email hosts..Google in particular being one of the more security concious platforms.
I am one of those ones who would agree with not having a tied email. No point being held hostage when your internet has been down a week and their call centre in the Philippines has blocked your calls If you don't like gmail or similar register a domain name (say family name or business name) and get cheap hosting for email only, probably a couple of dollars a month. Then put a redirection on your present emails now and notify friends and colleagues of the new one. Then in a year or two when the s### hits the fan you have freedom to do what you want. Today's best fit for your telecommunications may not be tomorrows.
FWIW most decent providers will let you switch to "email only" for a relatively cheap monthly fee these days.
Any of my clients without their own domain (i.e. running *.com, *.net or whatever service) have always been on one of the many free email providers - usually "myway" (better privacy) or "yahoo" (needed a lot of filtering to remove spam back then) historically. The only issue I have ever had was when myway shut down with one month or so advance warning. It was one hell of a busy time for my company... After nearly 20 years with iinet, not having a "locked in email" also stood me personally in good stead when TPG took them over / trashed the brand. Moving ISP was trivial - as it should be.
NBN: I am now with "mate telecomm" as are a number of my clients. Cheap, cheerful, Oz call centre and no contracts. As yet they have not pissed any of us off, so it has been over a year with no complaints for any of us. Mind you, we are mostly using top quality routers (Netcomm) which they provided at a fair cost. I still tend to use Netgear routers to replace "no router / cheap Chinese piece of crap routers", however the Netcomms have been good so far. At up to 50MBits/sec they are rock solid - no way for me to test beyond that at any site here thanks to the politically inspired nuking of the NBN throughput. Not one of my client sites in W.A. can do better than 75MBits/sec actual line speed. "Fraudband".
Oh, and for those who think the current mess is a cheaper way to do it than the original plan - wrong, wrong, wrong. The major cost is actually digging all the holes in the ground, which should be a one off exercise. The current mess (particularly the HFC - even worse than FTTN in lieu of FTTP) will cost oceans in maintenance. If I were not semi retired, I would be making squillions on every breakdown and fixing them all properly with FTTP anyway... which a number of NBN techs are actually doing "under the radar" right now (quite a few of them in the west are guys I trained and some I even employed). "Do it once, do it right" is always the cheapest long term option.
Mind you - if the 1990 rollout of "replacement of faults with fibre" plus "all new rollouts will be fibre" had continued, we would all have a real broadband by early 2000's at negligible extra cost. Such are the clueless idiots in Canberra (both major parties) and their "policies". To quote despair.com on government: "If you think the problems we create are bad, just wait until you see our solutions".
Im no expert myself , but i cannot help thinking that this whole wasted investment in "holes and wires" is going to be made redundant by some even faster wireless/satelite based system in the not to distant future.
The current nbn MTM is hamstrung by relying on the old copper access network (CAN) and HFC. Technology has just about wrung every available bit of bandwidth out of copper, especially the CAN. HFC still has potential as the DOCSIS standard is developed (currently up to ver3.1) but the coaxial part of the network still requires maintenance.
We are better off investing in fibre; proper FTTP.For example, a lot has been said recently about meeting the infrastructure demands of a growing population. Providing a proper fibre only network could help solve that by people working from home both in metropolitan and regional areas, thus reducing pressure on roads and transport.
flynn "former telco employee" aus
Sure, but The key word there was "future"..!
I have no idea what that technology might be, but i have total faith in the ingenuity of the human mind.
its not that long ago since the first telephone call was made, now we are all constantly contactable by cell technology, not just voice but full data , video , gps, etc.
in that context , copper cable, and fibre, just seem a little.... "Dated" !
The other issue in Oz is the maximum distance between fibre transceivers. Another Oz political giveaway was the development of special fibre cable which massively reduced the total internal reflections to near zero. End result: distance between transceivers could be around 200Kms if I recall correctly. The early "across the Nulla" fibre cable had roughly 10Kms between transceivers. Quite a difference in costs when rolling out over long distances.
Add both of those tech's together and the need for cables as thick as your wrist disappears, as does the tyranny of distance.
Unlike copper, another of fibres strengths is that you cannot detect the signal and / or cable with metal detectors or any such toy. No hostile entity (not that the world has any of those these days...) could detect where the main communication links are buried or do any "wiretapping" (monitoring) with cheap gear. Splicing into large scale fibre cables is tricky, expensive and easily detected. Of course the downside is that any pleb with a digger can nuke an underground cable without realising it. One such idiot took out the entire SW of WA for a few days a while back, completely ignoring the numerous signs on the surface warning of underground cable nearby. Sigh. A certain Telco starting with "T" could not see the point of using a spiderweb layout instead of a straight line with no redundancy. Hopefully NBN learnt that lesson.
The amount of sheer garbage being broadcast via wireless these days is actually affecting a lot of sensitive gear, resulting in things like the square kilometer array telescope finding it difficult to find "RF quiet" areas to operate across the whole planet. Add to that the immense power hunger (due to inefficiency) of wireless (energy crisis, what crisis?) and fibre looks increasingly attractive.
Newer technologies may make all that redundant however the development of the motor car did not remove the need for roads...