Author: Paul Wallbank

  • One street, five networks – the madness of rethinking the NBN

    One street, five networks – the madness of rethinking the NBN

    In Technology Spectator today I write about how Australia is risking repeating the mistakes the colonies made with railway gauges on much more grand scale with telecommunications technologies.

    With talk of re scoping the National Broadband Network project, despite being four years into a ten year undertaking, it’s important to understand just how foolish this would be an what a mess it will create.

    To illustrate this, I’ve gone for a walk along a Sydney street on the Lower North Shore. This suburb is less than 5km from the city’s central business district.

    The pillar at the end of the street

    At the end of this typical suburban street is a little gray, well guarded but battered pillar. This box is important as it contains the connections to the local telephone network and its replacement will house the distribution equipment for a fibre network regardless of what type is installed.

     

    Interestingly, just the presence of the pillar and the associated manholes nearby indicates there is already fibre in the neighbourhood, one aspect in the NBN debate that’s overlooked is that optical fibre is standard for telco backhaul and distribution networks.

    The only reason fibre hasn’t already been rolled out to homes and businesses is the sunk cost of the copper cables. When it’s necessary to replace an entire copper system as in New York after Hurricane Sandy or in South Brisbane after the local phone exchange was sold, then fibre is what telcos will install as its cheaper to maintain.

    Plain old telephone lines

    Walking down the street we find the first example are those who are going to be stuck with the old copper network under a fibre to the node solution.

    an old telephone pole shows the poor standard of Aussie comms

    What’s notable about that pole is its shocking state – in itself it illustrates just how Australia’s telecommunications networks have been allowed to run down with the underinvestment of the last twenty years.

    There’s a very chance the householders connected to those phone lines won’t be able to sustain a reliable  ADSL or FTTN connection because of the state of the wires.

    Remember, this pole isn’t in some remote part of rural Australia, should you be brave enough to climb it you’d have a wonderful view of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, North Sydney and the city. Its state illustrates that underinvestment is just as much a problem in the suburbs as it is in the bush.

    Using the Pay-TV network

    One the alternatives being touted is using the Pay TV network cables – know as Hybre Fiber Coaxial, or HFC – to carry the broadband signal.

    poor quality HFC Pay TV cable connection

    Here’s an example of the Foxtel installations and the poor work quality stands out immediately. The connection on the left is notable for its rain catching properties which doesn’t bode well for what’s happening to the coax cables in the duct lurking beneath the footpath.

    As an aside, the sort of poor quality workmanship found in the cable rollout is another risk to the NBN as it appears NBNCo is repeating Foxtel’s mistake of screwing the installation contractors into the ground on their rates. The result is really low quality work which won’t stand the test of time.

    Making HFC even less useful is the fact that most Australian properties can’t connect to it.

    In one of the best of examples of the drooling incompetence of Australia’s political ‘elite’, the 1990s Keating government managed to engineer a situation where the two cable companies rolled out their networks to the same places – 30% of the country got two networks while the rest received nothing.

    The real problem though with the HFC network is that most Australians who can get it haven’t bothered – take up rates in the areas cable is available struggle to hit 50%. So an Abbot government would actually have to pay to connect households to a service they’ve never wanted.

    Probably the cruellest part of all with the HFC proposal is the coax network itself is approaching the end of its life and most will be replaced with fibre within a decade. So we’re not saving a cent, just kicking costs down the road.

    Apartment living

    Even if you lived in that thirty percent of the country that did get pay-TV cable along their street, you were out of luck if you lived in an apartment or townhouse as few strata committees were interested in paying Foxtel install cables and Optus was never interested in MDUs – Multi Dwelling Units in telco-speak.

    townhouses-connected-to-telco

    A little way down the street from the houses photographed above are a group of town houses. Under the current NBN plans, this complex will get fibre. Under the coalition’s it will be stuck with copper.

    The worst case scenario is a “fibre to the basement” solution where the fibre is run into the building’s distribution frame and then it’s up to the owners to make the connection using the existing copper phone lines.

    In many cases it will never happen as strata managers and committees would keep putting it off, or they’d choose the lowest cost option which would exacerbate the poor work of the overworked NBN contractors.

    Tower living

    Next door to those townhouses is an eight story apartment block. These people risk being the biggest losers in the new telco environment.

    apartment-tower

    The problem for tower block dwellers is the low quality of the buildings and the lack of space for fibre telco risers. Under the fibre to the premises proposal some of these blocks are going to pose serious challenges to NBNCo.

    Should the fibre to the basement proposal go ahead, many of the notoriously penny pinching owners corporations won’t complete the installation.

    It’s highly likely that many Australian apartment dwellers are going to find themselves on wireless or LTE (mobile phone) connections for the foreseeable future as both the telco policies and poor building standards are going to deny them access to high speed fibre. This is going to have financial consequences for many landlords.

    The risk for businesses

    Most Australian businesses which occupy office buildings or industrial estates and they are going to be affected in the same way as apartment dwellers. The solution proposed by the coalition is that they should pay for their own fibre connections. Some will, many won’t and we’ll end up with another set of connections in our commercial districts.

    One street, five networks

    So just on one suburban street we could have people connecting through the old copper network, the HFC pay TV network, fibre to the basement, wireless and direct fibre for those who can afford it.

    This is madness.

    What’s even greater madness is that we’re four years into the National Broadband Network project and we’re talking about changing the scope for what’s been billed as one of the biggest infrastructure projects in Australian history.

    Praying the luck continues

    The Technology Spectator starts off with a comparison to the railway gauge madness of the 1850s. There’s an interesting parallel today.

    Two weeks ago, the Australian Financial Review reported that millions had been spent on lawyers and consultant fees on Sydney’s North Western railway yet no work has been done.

    On the same day, Business Insider published a story on the extensions to New York’s Long Island Railroad.

    Around the world governments from New York to Nairobi are getting on with building infrastructure. In the meantime Australia struggles with building tram lines.

    When we do decide to build a major project we get four years into it and decide to change our minds.

    The nation dodged a bullet despite having made bad choices with roads and railways in the nineteenth and twentieth Centuries. Australia prospered despite those poor decisions.

    If we can’t get telecommunications right then we better hope the luck continues through the 21st Century.

    Similar posts:

  • Now may not be a good time to buy Melbourne property

    Now may not be a good time to buy Melbourne property

    There’s plenty of indicators that can be used to predict the health of an economy

    While my favourite is the mini-skirt index, the most reliable is when rich folk start building huge skyscrapers.

    Whenever developers propose a hundred storey building it marks the top of the property cycle. Should they get to actually build the thing, you can be guaranteed a nasty economic downturn is about to hit.

    The Skyscraper Index’s historical record

    This track record was set with the very first megatower – the Empire State building was started just before the 1929 stock market crash and completed as the great depression tightened its hold on the United States.

    Forty years later New York’s ill-fated World Trade Center opened just in time to welcome the 1973 oil shock and subsequent recession.

    A more recent example is Dubai’s Burj Khalifa, the world’s tallest building which was topped out in time for the city’s property crash and economic rescue by neighbouring Abu Dhabi.

    In Australia, the most notable downfall was 1980s entrepreneur Alan Bond who planned to build a 140 storey tower on the World Square site opposite Sydney’s Town Hall.

    The site was excavated but Bond went broke before work started and the hole remained for over a decade until a more modest 40 storey tower was built on the site.

    Australia 108

    So the news that property developers want to build a 108 storey tower on Melbourne’s Southbank should worry the Victorian government and unsettle the state’s property owners.

    What’s always notable about these super skyscrapers is the garishness of the project. While Australia 108 won’t match the Burj for sheer Las Vegas gaudiness, it will feature the ‘Star burst’, a star-shaped Sky Lobby and hotel at the top of the tower.

    Why the Skyscraper index works

    The reason why 100 storey buildings are such a reliable economic indicator is because they illustrate there’s too much dumb money in the economy. It rarely makes sense to build such tall buildings.

    Designing and building high rise buildings is complex and expensive – the higher you go, the more construction challenges there are as this Popular Mechanics article describes.

    Skyscrapers are subject to the law of diminishing returns as the taller the building is, the more space that’s needed for services like elevators, air conditioning, water supplies and fire protection which reduces the landlord’s rentable floorspace on the lower levels.

    When a building reaches a hundred storeys, there’s little space available on the lower floors for paying tenants. So the economics don’t add up.

    Builders, property developers and financiers know this so when they start proposing projects that don’t make commercial sense it’s a fair indication the locals are gripped with irrational exuberance and Adam Smith’s invisible hand is going to deliver a short, sharp slap to the back of the economy’s head.

    Does it matter to Australia?

    And so it is in Melbourne, which is going to be interesting to watch as South East Queensland is the only Australian metropolitan area to suffer a prolonged property downturn in the last twenty years.

    Hopefully Melbourne’s woes won’t affect the rest of the Australian economy but given how much the nation has invested in property and the stratospheric debt levels to service that speculation, it may well be that the rest of the country will follow Victoria.

    Winning the next election might not be a good thing for Tony Abbot and his followers who genuinely believe a Liberal government will deliver a magic pudding to the home of every dinky-di Working Australian.

    Similar posts:

  • Will the top level domain milk cow save Melbourne IT?

    Will the top level domain milk cow save Melbourne IT?

    Beleaguered domain registration company Melbourne IT hopes the new breed of global top level domains will be its salvation after a decade of indifferent returns and a wallowing shareprice.

    When the top level domains – known by their geeky acronym of gTLDs – were proposed five years ago they smelled like a revenue grab and so it has turned out.

    To date 1930 organisations have applied for one of the top level domains, with a $135,000 evaluation fee that’s a juicy 260 million dollar pot to be shared between ICANN and the various domain registrars. No wonder Melbourne IT’s management is drooling.

    One of the assurances of ICANN when the top level domains were announced was that trademark ownership would be part of the expensive evaluation process. That Melbourne IT is now spruiking gTLDs as a defensive intellectual property tactic is a notable backflip from ICANN’s earlier position.

    The trading names aspect of the new global TLDs is going to be problematic for the registers and ICANN, a quick look at the applicant list for the new names sees domains like Tennis, Fail and Compare being applied for.

    Good luck with defending those names in court – although having a spurious claim on the global use of the word ‘tennis’ will no doubt keep an army of Tennis Australia’s well paid lawyers occupied for years.

    Even more delicious is Telstra’s claim to the domain name ‘yellowpages’. Despite being a declining business the Yellow Pages trademark is fiercely defended by various incumbent phone and directory companies around the world so it’s hard to see how that application will get passed without strong objections.

    The real tragedy in the Melbourne IT story is how the company has gone nowhere for over decade after being the darling of the stock market when it was floated in 1998.

    Melbourne IT shareprice

    When Melbourne IT floated, it attracted controversy with it’s shares being priced at 2.20 and opening at $8.80. A stag gain of 300% for the insiders who got shares.

    Despite the beliefs of those brainwashed by government privatisation campaigns in the 1990s, a staggering stag (pardon the pun) is money straight of the pocket of the listed company’s existing shareholders – Melbourne University in this case – and is evidence of either gross incompetence or malfeasance by the board and its advisors.

    Given the Victorian government’s Auditor-General cleared the Melbourne IT board of any wrongdoing, the only explanation for the company’s botched float is gross incompetence.

    The company’s share price since is clear evidence that gross incompetence remains a problem within the organisation’s leadership.

    Whether the strong demand for global Top Level Domains can drag Melbourne IT out of it’s long term mediocrity remains to be seen but with the management’s track record it’s difficult to be optimistic.

    Disclaimer: I was a director of a company that was a Melbourne IT reseller. There’s a long blog post in the poor, 1995 IT systems used by MelbourneIT and those might be related to the company’s poor performance over the last decade.

    Similar posts:

  • Would you know if you’ve been hacked?

    Would you know if you’ve been hacked?

    “I report to head office in Moscow” is a line which either means you’re in a James Bond movie or at a lunch briefing with the Russian security company Kaspersky.

    While the James Bond movie would be fun, the Kaspersky lunch was an interesting briefing on their new security product.

    A notable aspect of the discussion was the explosion in malware – there are over a hundred million malicious programs circulating on the internet with over 200,000 new threats every day.

    “We struggle to keep up,” says Kaspersky Lab ANZ Managing Director, Andrew Mamonitis.

    That a security company with 2,700 specialists struggles to keep up with the evolving threats emphasises the scale of the task facing a network administrators and IT managers.

    It’s a task beyond all but the biggest companies.

    Sometime ago I suggested every computer user should assume their computers are compromised and managers should work work on limiting what intruders can do to system.

    With staff bringing their own devices to work, those risks are multiplied as some devices will almost certainly be infected with malware.

    There are some basic things that computer users should do to make their systems harder to break however it’s almost impossible to protect against a zero-day exploit or the efforts of a sophisticated and determined hacker.

    With our homes and motor cars, we realise it’s almost impossible to keep determined thieves out, so we take precautions like alarms, immobilisers and basic security such as keeping valuables out of plain view.

    That attitude is what we now need with our computer technology, any hope of keeping your office server impregnable from outside attack is long gone.

    Similar posts:

  • Was telecommuting another broken technology promise?

    Was telecommuting another broken technology promise?

    Telecommuting promised, or still promises, to free caged office workers from their cubicles, relieve the sardine-tin conditions on our peak hour trains and reduce traffic congestion on clogged roads. But has that promise been lost like so many other predictions of the technology age?

    Banning remote workers is the latest edict from Marissa Meyer as she continues her daunting task of turning around Yahoo!.

    Meyer’s move follows Google’s Chief Financial Officer Patrick Pichette claiming telecommuting is counterproductive and discouraged at his company.

    One of the great promises of the computer age – almost up there with the paperless office – is the ability to work from home as if you were sitting in an office.

    So promising is telecommuting it’s one of the main selling points for Australia’s National Broadband Network.

    Having two of Silicon Valley’s biggest companies come out against remote working, particularly Google with its reputation for innovation and creativity, seems to damn the practice.

    This isn’t helped by Australia’s nanny state deciding that companies are liable for remote workers who manage to fall over in their own home – twice.

    Risk is the real barrier to adopting telecommuting, the risk of a compensation claim for a remote working employee falling over while rummaging in their kitchen fridge is one aspect but a more a bigger risk in the mind of a bureaucrat is that a subordinate is not under their control.

    Control is almost certainly what focuses Pichette’s mind. While Google is portrayed as a company full of original thinking, non-conformist geeks in reality only half the staff, at best, fit the stereotype while the rest are the same corporate bureaucrats you’ll find at an insurance company or a quantity surveyor’s office.

    In the case of Yahoo! a decade of mismanagement has left the company unsure of who exactly works for them, Meyer’s solution is to order everyone into the office so she can count heads.

    The fact that some Yahoo! staff will quit, others won’t be able to get to an office and some will turn out to have been long dead (with relatives gleefully cashing Yahoo!’s cheques) is a bonus for Meyer as she looks at reducing staff costs.

    In reality remote working is growing, partly because so much of the white collar workforce has been contracted out and few freelancers are interested in hanging around clients’ offices if they can avoid it.

    A bigger factor is that workplaces themselves are changing as fewer organisations need to have huge office blocks. While the cubicles themselves might not go away, they are going to be clustered where the customers and workforces are rather than locked away in modern ivory towers.

    That has some major consequences for our workforces and cities which the bureaucrats – both in the private and public sectors – have barely started to get their heads around.

    Photo of commuters at Liverpool Street Station courtesy of Genkaku aka James Farmer through SXC.hu

    Similar posts: