Internet Speeds And Costs Around The World.

[Bob Larter]

The Old Bloke wrote:

"Don McKenzie" <5V@2.5A> wrote in message
news:7kriifF3aiia0U1@mid.individual.net...

Internet Speeds And Costs Around The World, Shown Visually:
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/10/internet-speeds-and-costs-around-the-world-shown-visually/#more-362769


Be sure to click the above image to see it in its full glory.

Yes, Australia if 5th from the right hand end of the graph.

Cheers Don...

I wonder how they determine that our cost for 1mbps is $1 - $5 per
month. Even if that is per each 1mbps, it seems far too low.

Yeah, I'd call it more like $10-$20/mbps/month.


--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

 

[me here]

Rod Speed wrote:

Fred wrote
me here <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com> wrote
son of a bitch wrote

But After Ruddy installs a super fast highway that
only the government will be able to afford, we're still going
to be in the same boat.

Do you really think this is going to happen?

I think it will happen but it won't be overnight. Projects like
these take years. Probably ten years until near completion.

It remains to be seen if it will even make it thru the senate.

It's all just spin - to cover their piss poor ability to meet
their election promises regarding the internet.

There is a lot of spin but it's more to do with putting pressure on
Telstra to stop obfuscating and start cooperating.

Yes, but it remains to be seen if that 'pressure' makes it thru the
senate.

The Government and Telstra are in negotiations about price of
Telstra assets.

But its very unlikely that Telstra is prepared to accept what the
govt is prepared to pay for those assets, particularly if the
'pressure' doesnt make it thru the senate.

I can only agree. The govt valuation is ludicrously low.

IMHO the govt has just raised this whole scheme as a matter to squash
criticism of their inaction (and lampoon the previous govt for theirs).

They know full well that it will take years to pass legislation, find
corporate partners, fund, and implement. They will be long gone from
office before anything meaningful is done.

In the meantime the telcos will carry on rolling out fibre links on an
as required basis.

No wonder the rest of the world is supposedly watching this with great
interest, and probably wondering if fairy tales really do come true.

To top if off, my understandiing is that about 50% of broadband users
currently chose speeds no greater than 256, so how do they expect
different takeup rates with the ovekill speeds of the new system?

It's a joke.

Rob

--

 

[Mr.T]

"me here" <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4aeb9389@dnews.tpgi.com.au...

To top if off, my understandiing is that about 50% of broadband users
currently chose speeds no greater than 256, so how do they expect
different takeup rates with the ovekill speeds of the new system?
It's a joke.

It's a joke to think users are happy with what they currently pay for 256k.
And a bigger joke to think that most don't really want more speed and higher
download limits for less money, like most of the developed world.

MrT.

 

[me here]

Mr.T wrote:

"me here" <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4aeb9389@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
To top if off, my understandiing is that about 50% of broadband
users currently chose speeds no greater than 256, so how do they
expect different takeup rates with the ovekill speeds of the new
system? It's a joke.

It's a joke to think users are happy with what they currently pay for
256k. And a bigger joke to think that most don't really want more
speed and higher download limits for less money, like most of the
developed world.

MrT.

Of course we all want more for less.

But do you recon the proposed plan will deliver that? Fat chance.

As for our costs, the following comparison is interesting.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WLo5aw5Tn7s/SgEzrj9HQLI/AAAAAAAAAQg/XNdZGGMi0Q
0/s1600-h/Broadband+Stats.jpg

Rob

--

 

[Mr.T]

"me here" <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4aeba274@dnews.tpgi.com.au...

To top if off, my understandiing is that about 50% of broadband
users currently chose speeds no greater than 256, so how do they
expect different takeup rates with the ovekill speeds of the new
system? It's a joke.

It's a joke to think users are happy with what they currently pay for
256k. And a bigger joke to think that most don't really want more
speed and higher download limits for less money, like most of the
developed world.

Of course we all want more for less.

But do you recon the proposed plan will deliver that? Fat chance.

No, never even suggested it would.

As for our costs, the following comparison is interesting.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WLo5aw5Tn7s/SgEzrj9HQLI/AAAAAAAAAQg/XNdZGGMi0Q
0/s1600-h/Broadband+Stats.jpg

So we're behind Canada despite fairly similar population/density, no
surprise there.

MrT.

 

[me here]

Mr.T wrote:

"me here" <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4aeba274@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
To top if off, my understandiing is that about 50% of broadband
users currently chose speeds no greater than 256, so how do they
expect different takeup rates with the ovekill speeds of the new
system? It's a joke.

It's a joke to think users are happy with what they currently pay
for 256k. And a bigger joke to think that most don't really want
more speed and higher download limits for less money, like most
of the developed world.

Of course we all want more for less.

But do you recon the proposed plan will deliver that? Fat chance.

No, never even suggested it would.


As for our costs, the following comparison is interesting.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WLo5aw5Tn7s/SgEzrj9HQLI/AAAAAAAAAQg/XNdZGG
Mi0Q 0/s1600-h/Broadband+Stats.jpg


So we're behind Canada despite fairly similar population/density, no
surprise there.

MrT.

I was surprised how close the pricing was in comparative perspective.

Rob

--

 

[Rod Speed]

me here wrote

Rod Speed wrote
Fred wrote
me here <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com> wrote
son of a bitch wrote

But After Ruddy installs a super fast highway
that only the government will be able to afford,
we're still going to be in the same boat.

Do you really think this is going to happen?

I think it will happen but it won't be overnight. Projects like
these take years. Probably ten years until near completion.

It remains to be seen if it will even make it thru the senate.

It's all just spin - to cover their piss poor ability to
meet their election promises regarding the internet.

There is a lot of spin but it's more to do with putting pressure
on Telstra to stop obfuscating and start cooperating.

Yes, but it remains to be seen if that 'pressure' makes it thru the senate.

The Government and Telstra are in negotiations about price of Telstra assets.

But its very unlikely that Telstra is prepared to accept
what the govt is prepared to pay for those assets,
particularly if the 'pressure' doesnt make it thru the senate.

I can only agree. The govt valuation is ludicrously low.

IMHO the govt has just raised this whole scheme as a matter to squash
criticism of their inaction (and lampoon the previous govt for theirs).

I think its more that they were so stupid/pig ignorant that they
made the election promise and then discovered that it wasnt
going to be possible to deliver that they promised, so the dud
was actually stupid enough to turn that into FTTP and was so
stupid that he didnt realise that that wasnt deliverable.

Not for the first time either, he hasnt been able to deliver
on his election promise on hospitals or 'the homeless' either
or on a host of other stuff like new houses etc etc etc.

They know full well that it will take years to pass legislation,
find corporate partners, fund, and implement.

I doubt they did when they were stupid enough to turn the election promise into FTTP.

They will be long gone from office before anything meaningful is done.

Very likely, but I doubt that was deliberate.

In the meantime the telcos will carry on rolling
out fibre links on an as required basis.

Be interesting to see if they do much of that anymore.

No wonder the rest of the world is supposedly watching this with great interest,

Bet they dont even know what the dud is proposing.

and probably wondering if fairy tales really do come true.

To top if off, my understandiing is that about 50% of broadband users
currently chose speeds no greater than 256, so how do they expect
different takeup rates with the ovekill speeds of the new system?

Correct, tho they presumably would be happy to sign up for FTTP if
say the govt spent the $43B from the Future Fund on it and offered
them FTTP for the same price as they are currently paying for 256.

Corse its very arguable whether that $43B wouldnt be much better spent on hospitals etc instead.

It's a joke.

It is indeed. Nothing new with politicians tho.

 

[Mr.T]

"me here" <gloaming_agnet@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4aebbeb3@dnews.tpgi.com.au...

I was surprised how close the pricing was in comparative perspective.

Not from what I see on a GB/month basis.

MrT.

 

[Jeßus]

In article <w25Gm.50628$ze1.13801@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
replytonewsgrouponly@aussient.com.au said...
:
:"Clocky" <notgonn@happen.com> wrote in message
:news:00724ac7$0$26885$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
:>
:> "Doug Jewell" <ask@and.maybe.ill.tell.you> wrote in message
:> news:K7ydnfYzaINfOnXXnZ2dnUVZ_vudnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
:>> Don McKenzie wrote:
:>>>
:>>> Internet Speeds And Costs Around The World, Shown Visually:
:>>> http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/10/internet-speeds-and-costs-around-the-world-shown-visually/#more-362769
:>>> Be sure to click the above image to see it in its full glory.
:>>>
:>>> Yes, Australia if 5th from the right hand end of the graph.
:>>>
:>>> Cheers Don...
:>>>
:>>>
:>>>
:>> One thing you will notice about the countries with very high speed
:>> internet - they are all small with high population. Much easier and
:>> cheaper to provide high speed broadband to a reasonable slab of the
:>> population in those circumstances. I wonder what level of access people
:>> in say rural France have though. At least in Australia, most people in
:>> major cities have access to 8MBps (although very few opt for faster than
:>> 512K), and most people in rural towns have access to 1.5MBps. Thanks to
:>> the government assistance, people on farms etc have access to 256-512kBps
:>> via satellite which is a damned site better than what they could get
:>> through phone lines. We still have some way to go, but personally I'd
:>> prefer to make 1.5MBps available to anyone who wants it, rather than
:>> having some people in some cities with 60M and regional areas / people
:>> with pair gain etc with 14-33K.
:>>
:>
:> Fuck that, why should my internet experience be limited because of the
:> tiny percentage of the populus who choose to live in the middle of
:> nowhere?
:I've never been to Perth or Hobart and only visit Adelaide roughly once a
:year. Correct me if I'm wrong, but from memory none of the Capital cities
:have Uranium/Gold/Iron/Coal etc mines in the middle of them and I believe
:that most of the food growing areas are outside the cities. That being the
:case it's hard to see what the Capital cities do other than consume our
roducts, produce copious pollution and provide services to support the
roductive regions of Australia that keep people like you in a comfortable
:lifestyle.
:
:Somewhere in the world there is a village short of its idiot, please feel
:free to take up the vacancy.

Very well said Phil.