Paul Wallbank – Brilliant Communications

Category: Internet

  • Super connecting cities

    Super connecting cities

    I’m chairing a panel this week in Newcastle for the New Lunaticks on How Cities can Become Super Connected where we’ll look at how a city can develop its broadband infrastructure and how the local economy can grow in a global, connected marketplace.

    The challenge for a city like Newcastle is great as in many ways the city’s economy is a microcosm of Australia’s – a massive restructure of the local economy over the last forty years has left the region with a consumer driven suburban society and the massive coal resources of the region have made the city the biggest coal exporting port on the planet.

    Much of the wealth flowing out of the port to India and China isn’t being distributed into the city and the Newcastle central business district is suffering from years of underinvestment and neglect by the business community and governments of all levels.

    So the rollout of the National Broadband Network offers an opportunity for the city and the local economy to reposition itself. The question on the panel is how?

    Waiting for Godot

    The first aspect is that waiting for a government agency or telephone company to come to town is risky; recent history shows Newcastle gets no favours from state or Federal governments so expecting the region to be a priority for the National Broadband Network is unrealistic.

    Indeed this has proved the case so far with no planned rollout locations for the NBN announced in the Hunter region to date.

    At present higher speed Internet access comes through ADSL over the telephone lines and Telstra’s 4G mobile network in the downtown part of the city.

    So it’s up to the community to create the conditions and demand for faster broadband.

    Building the infrastructure

    One way to make Newcastle more attractive to the providers of high speed internet is to make the supporting infrastructure easy to access. The local council can work on this by making streets, building and underground services like conduits accessible and available.

    Part of encouraging investment in the local telecoms infrastructure includes an attitude from council that doesn’t put unnecessary barriers in the way of developments.

    This isn’t to say local residents’ views should be over-ridden; if a city is going to be successful then it need the support of the residents.

    Who funds the network?

    While the city waits for the NBN or expanded 4G services to arrive, what happens in the interim? Should local and state governments build a temporary Wi-Fi network to cover the Central Business District?

    If so, why just the CBD? Why not key industrial, commercial and shopping centres in the suburbs? Over the last forty years, Newcastle residents have shown they prefer to work and shop outside the city centre.

    Of course the biggest question is who is going to pay for such an interim network. Putting the load on already stretched local governments guarantees the project will be strapped for capital.

    Open data, open processes

    An area where local governments can encourage growth is by being open and innovative themselves.

    By making data available they encourage local developer communities and attract entrepreneurs who see a welcoming environment.

    More importantly, having open procurement and recruitment processes that encourage local business to apply for government work and suggest innovative ways to work is one way industries in the region can be encouraged.

    Connecting communities

    Even with the best infrastructure you’re not going to build a vibrant economy without the community working together.

    If we look at successful industry clusters such as Silicon Valley or the Pearl River Delta today, or historical successes like Birmingham in the 18th Century, we see industries built around a small core of determined entrepreneurs utilising local resources.

    For Birmingham this was access to coal, iron ore, skilled labour and waterways to ship the products out. Silicon Valley’s role developed because of its access to high technology defense spending, good quality education facilities, a highly educated workforce and a free wheeling capital market.

    Cities like Newcastle have to identify what the local economy’s strengths are and how these can built upon. It needs government, business and educational groups to be co-operating.

    A liveable city

    The key to all successful cities is making them attractive to entrepreneurial, skilled and younger workers. In some respects Newcastle has aspects that can attract these groups.

    For Newcastle, and other centres, the challenge is to use their advantages to attract the human talent that will build the networks that matter.

    Similar posts:

  • The high stakes of Lumia

    The high stakes of Lumia

    Yesterday Nokia and Microsoft gave a preview of their upcoming Lumia 710 and 800 phones for the Australian market. It’s make or break time for both companies in the mobile space.

    The phone itself is quite nice – Windows Phone 7.5 runs quite fast with some nice features such as integrated messaging and coupled with good hardware it’s a nice experience. Those I know who use Windows Phones are quite happy with them (I’m an iPhone user myself).

    Whether its enough to displace the iPhone and the dozens of Android based handsets on a market where both Nokia and Microsoft have missed opportunities remains to be seen.

    The battle is going to be on a number of fronts – at the telco level, in the retail stores and, most importantly, with the perceptions of customers.

    Probably the biggest barrier with consumers is the perceived lack of apps, to overcome this Nokia have bundled in their Maps and Drive applications while Microsoft include their Mixed Radio streaming features along with Microsoft Office and XBox integration.

    As well the built in services, both parties are playing up their application partners with services like Pizza Hut, Fox Sports and cab service GoCatch. Although all of these are available on the other platforms.

    While application matter, the real battle for Nokia and Microsoft is going to be in the retail stores where the challenge shouldn’t be underestimated.

    Apple dominate the upper end of the smart phone market and Android is swamping the mid to low end. How Windows Phone devices fit remains to be seen.

    In Australia, if they going to find salvation it will be at the tender hands of the telco companies.

    The iPhone is constant source of irritation for the telcos as not only do Apple grab most of the profit, but they also “own” the customer.

    On the other hand, Android devices are irritating customers who are bewildered by the range of choices and frustrated by inconsistent updates that can leave them stranded with an outdated system.

    So the Windows Phone does have an opportunity in the marketplace although one suspects commissions and rebates will be the big driver in getting sales people at the retail coal face to recommend the Microsoft and Nokia alternatives.

    Overall though, it’s good to see a viable alternative on the market. For both Microsoft and Nokia the stakes are high with the Lumia range – it could be Nokia’s last shot – so they have plenty of incentives to get the product right.

    Microsoft has consistently missed the boat on mobile computing since Windows CE was launched in 1996 while Nokia were blind-sided by the launch of the iPhone in 2007 and have never really recovered.

    To make things worse for Nokia, the market for basic mobile phones where they still dominate is under threat from cheap Android based devices. So even the low margin, high volume market isn’t safe.

    For both, the Lumia range is critical. 2012 is going to be an interesting year in mobile.

    Similar posts:

  • Paying the piper – the cost of the internet’s walled gardens

    Paying the piper – the cost of the internet’s walled gardens

    With the web increasingly dominated by four major, and many minor, fiefdoms the cost of being part of those groups is gradually becoming clear.

    As part of Facebook filings in advance of their public float they published the key agreements with their developer partners including that with games provider Zygna, technology journalist Tom Foremski has a disturbing look at Facebook’s conditions that illustrate the costs and risks.

    In terms of the costs, Tom identifies Clause 2.1 of Facebook’s “Statement of Rights and Responsibilities” – shown as Annex 1 in the Developers  as probably the biggest price for all content creators;

    … you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (“IP License”). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it.

    So by sharing something on Facebook, you grant Facebook the right to do what they like with what you’ve created. That’s something worth thinking about.

    For anybody trying to make a living off Facebook, it’s important to consider they also retain the right to throw you off the service at any time. From clause 4.10 of the Statement Of Rights Annex;

    If you select a username for your account we reserve the right to remove or reclaim it if we believe appropriate (such as when a trademark owner complains about a username that does not closely relate to a user’s actual name).

    So get into a trademark dispute with a big corporation – and often their lawyers cast a very wide net on potential similar spellings – and your account is shut down.

    There’s also the specifics of the Zynga agreement that should concern anyone investing in the games company. Right at the beginning of the agreement we see this clause;

    The parties further acknowledge that Zynga is making a significant commitment to the Facebook Platform (i.e., using Facebook as the exclusive Social Platform on the Zynga Properties and granting FB certain title exclusivities to Zynga games on the Facebook Platform). In exchange for such commitment, [*] the parties have committed to set certain growth targets for monthly unique users of Covered Zynga Games.

    So Zynga is closely tied into the fortunes of Facebook, we knew that on a business level but now we know just how deep and binding the agreements are.

    We should be clear, all the major social media and online services have similar clauses on intellectual property and copyright infringements; there’s no shortage of businesses who’ve been caught out by eBay or Paypal and plenty of people found their Google accounts shut down by their obsession with real names.

    For all businesses the message is clear – be careful before committing totally to one online platform or another. Should you end up in a dispute, or find you’ve backed the wrong service, it may be a very costly process to get your company off that platform.

    Similar posts:

  • ABC Nightlife: Explaining the National Broadband Network

    ABC Nightlife: Explaining the National Broadband Network

    For the February 2012 Nightlife technology spot Tony and Paul looked at Australia’s National Broadband Network, exploring the pros and cons of the project designed to connect all Australians to high speed broadband.

    So what is the NBN and what does it do? Here’s some of the points we discussed along with some of the answers to listeners’ questions.

    What is the NBN?

    The National Broadband Network is intended replace the existing copper wire telephone network that was rolled out across the nation over the Twentieth century.

    Eventually the network will provide fast data access across the country replacing the older network that was designed for telephone calls rather than computer communications.

    Most of the country will be connected to fibre optic cables and areas where this is too expensive then wireless or satellite services will be used.

    Why do we need a government run national network?

    The NBN is the culmination of three decades of bad policy out of Canberra. We should remember that the Howard government struggled with how to provide high speed broadband access to the bush.

    For coalition things became particularly bad once they privatised Telstra and no longer had any power over the company’s policies.

    We’ve had a mix of ideological beliefs and rubbery figures from both sides of politics which have left Australia in the situation where the core telecoms network has had to be re-nationalised.

    What are these different ways of connecting up?

    The biggest part of the network will be fibre optic cable where the connection will run along the street like the existing telephone wires and will connect to a box outside your home or office.

    This box – know as an NTD (Network Terminating Device) is then connected into either the existing household telephone system or into a computer network.

    In areas receiving wireless and satellite subscribers will get dishes or receivers that plug into their existing home telephone or computer network.

    There are different types of wireless

    The different types of wireless networks cause confusion. The NBN is going to use 4G or LTE telephone wireless, which is what Telstra have started to roll out and Optus will be starting in the Hunter Valley around Easter 2012.

    Most of us are using 3G networks on our phones which is what the bulk of the mobile phone networks are.

    Another type of wireless is the Wireless Local Area Network. These are what we connect our home or office computers to. These plug into the existing services like the existing ADSL internet connections or the NBN’s fibre network.

    We shouldn’t confuse Wireless LANs with the mobile phone technologies being used by the NBN or phone companies.

    Who is running the NBN?

    The organisation set up to build the NBN is NBNCo. They are setting the standards, negotiating access to existing infrastructure and building the network. Their head office is in North Sydney but major operations are also based in Melbourne.

    In turn they are hiring contractors around the country to build the network, run the cables and connect buildings to the new services. Most of us will deal with those contractors and the companies selling NBNCo’s services.

    How is National Broadband Network going to work?

    We won’t talk to NBNCo directly, instead companies like Telstra, Optus, Vodafone and iiNet will buy services from them and then onsell them to us.

    Telstra are playing an interesting game on competing. They are already offering 4G services in regional areas where NBNCo hasn’t announced rollouts and they are planning to upgrade their cable TV network to the DOCSIS 3.0 standard that can sometimes deliver speeds similar to the NBNs proposed service.

    What happens if you don’t let them connect you

    If you don’t let NBNCo’s contractors connect you to the new network then you’ll have a problem a year or so later.

    The copper telephone network is going to be turned off in areas where fibre optic cables are installed so if you aren’t connected to the new system, you won’t have access.

    Anyone who’s done some building or landscaping work knows it isn’t cheap and that’s what building owners who don’t allow access will have to pay for access later.

    In Tasmania a few property owners who were just outside the NBN area asked about getting connected up and apparently the costs were prohibitive.

    One of the things to watch out for is uncooperative building managers preventing NBN contractors from accessing their premises leaving all the residents disconnected when the phone network is turned off.

    Will it really cost $14,000 to wire up your house?

    No but there will be a cost to connect the building’s existing phone lines and power supply to the NBN’s Network Terminal Device (NTD) that will be bolted to the outside of the building.

    The NTDs are designed to plug into existing phone systems and data networks so it shouldn’t be necessary to spend a fortune on connections or upgrades.

    One area where there might be problems is in buildings that have substandard wiring. Licensed electricians and cablers will refuse to work on systems that don’t comply with standards so building owners may find they are faced with big bills to bring their systems up to standard.

    Does the system work if the power goes out?

    Yes, the basic cabling doesn’t need power, although the repeaters and local exchanges will – just like the phone network. Where the system does need power is at the NTDs which will come with a battery providing two to three hours power.

    If the NBN gets hit by lightning, does it stop working?

    Lightning is an incredibly powerful force. It doesn’t matter whether we’re talking about telephones, power or fibre optic networks – anything that is hit by lightning is going to be damaged.

    We should keep in mind that the wireless alternative to fibre is more prone to lightening strikes as base stations are at high points.

    Electrical storms, and other natural forces, are a fact of life that we have to work around. The existing systems are just as prone to interruptions.

    Is it running behind schedule?

    Yes, as of the beginning of 2012 the project seems to be about six months behind. With only 4,000 connections at the end of last year instead of the 30,000 expected by the middle of last year.

    NBNCo are putting this down to delays in finalising negotiations with Telstra and other existing fibre providers.

    How much is it really going to cost?

    There’s still the $43 billion dollar number on the table, which comes from a KPMG study in 2010 although the government claims their investment is going to $27 billion.

    Of that 27 billion, the government expects to recoup it by 2034 based on a 7% return.

    In contrast the opposition are claiming the real cost is $50 billion as they are including the cost of buying Telstra’s infrastructure back.

    The real number is anyone’s guess. The track record of both political parties and Canberra’s bureaucrats on estimating costs on projects like this is less than impressive.

    Is it really worth the money?

    We should keep in mind a lot of this money was going to be spent by Telstra or the other providers anyway over the next two decades as the copper telephone reached the end of its life.

    The risk was we would see something like the cable TV rollout where the big players fought over the most lucrative parts of the country and ignored the rest. The NBN avoids that.

    There are real concerns though as the NBN is running behind schedule, the procurement processes – particularly the construction contracts – appear to have been poorly handled and there has been little discussion about the technology options.

    Overall though, this is an opportunity to get the 21st Century infrastructure right. Where Australia failed with the roads in the 20th Century and the trains in the 19th, we can get this one right.

    Similar posts:

  • Is it time for Microsoft to make a clean break?

    Is it time for Microsoft to make a clean break?

    Over the weekend Christina Bonnington in Wired magazine looked at how Microsoft is struggling to decide whether to have separate operating systems for their tablet and desktop products – as Apple have – or design one that works on both.

    Creating another version of Windows risks further confusing the marketplace given Microsoft already has between its four different versions of Windows and six flavours of Office.

    Although Apple haven’t suffered at all by having different operating systems. Mac OSX is more popular than ever and iOS dominates its markets.

    Perhaps its time for Microsoft to copy something else Apple did and have a clean break – rework all the Windows code and build a new system.

    Apple did this when they introduced OSX in 2001. Among other things it didn’t support floppy disks, the Apple Device Bus, floppy disks or the networking standards used by the older systems. At the time there were howls of protest from long suffering Apple true believers who had invested a lot into the earlier versions of Mac OS.

    Despite the protests and early hiccups – we sometimes forget that the first version of OSX, named Cheetah, was terrible – Apple’s clean break with the past was a great success.

    Microsoft’s selling point has been backward compatibility; software designed for one version of Windows is expected to work on the next version.

    Backward compatibility is the reason for the spyware epidemic of the early 2000s as Microsoft ignored Windows XP’s security features so that they wouldn’t have to ditch older code in other products like Office.

    Similarly, the contradiction of redesigning the Windows operating system while minimizing disruption to existing users was one of the reasons why Microsoft Vista was such a disaster.

    Perhaps it’s time for Microsoft to bite the bullet and bring Windows into the 21st Century.

    Whatever they decide to do, they better hurry as Apple and Google are carving out dominant positions; waiting until 2013 or 14 for the next version of Windows and Windows Phone may be too late in a market where Microsoft is quickly becoming irrelevant.

    Similar posts: