|
|
|
Loose lips may sink ships - Be smart - Don't post internal/commercially sensitive or confidential information!
Screeb:cokemaster: Again, look at Japan... how many people live in 10 square kilometers? Compare that to NZ...
The reality is that while underinvestment may have played some part, its not the end all when it comes to this topic. Look at Austrialia, look at the US... many places only have the option of DSL, some get DSL2+, some are more luckier.
From memory the new cabinets that are being rolled out are fiber fed... isn't that FTTN?
As I said in my first post, population density has been shown to have little impact on broadband (why? I don't know, but there you go).
Screeb:
Yes, the new cabinets are FTTC, but it's (far) too little (far) too late.
Screeb:
... more population also = more people to serve. More people does not mean more money to invest in infrastructure per person, which is the relevant part. So now you might say, well, they have a higher population density - true - but statistics about broadband penetration/cost/speed show that density matters squat all (sorry, don't have the figures or charts on hand).
(Hint: the reason Japan's internet is where it is today is due to ... drum roll please! ... Huge government investment!)
Taking into account our population density, total population, national wealth and georgraphical location, our internet is not actually that bad.
Japan and Europe have high internet speeds because they have most of that: They are rich, relatively huge population density and not much space to cover with the internet infrastructure.
cokemaster: Where is your source?
Because population density does make a lot of difference... when considering technologies with limited range for instance. You wouldn't deploy DSL kits in the middle of nowhere if only one person was there - it wouldn't make economical sense.
wh0beme
There you go, you dont even know what your talking about.
Fixed.
munchkin:
Funnily enough, though, having more people to serve in a smaller area (ie, Tokyo) also means that there is less cost serving the outer extremities of that area when compared with somewhere like NZ, and that there will be a larger ROI per square kilometre as there are more people to pay for the service, too. So...having more people does actually drive down the cost.
munchkin:
Also, to reiterate what others have been saying in a different way, most of Japan's content comes from...believe it or not, Japan!
Loose lips may sink ships - Be smart - Don't post internal/commercially sensitive or confidential information!
Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.
cokemaster: You keep talking about 'facts'. Please reference them, else call them your opinion.
CYaBro: TelstraClear are going to be offering 200Mbps here in Whangarei by the end of the year apparently
The NorthPower fibre is going to be going right past our house so we will have access to it.
THe pricing might be a big put off though.
THe pricing might be a big put off though.
Ray Taylor
There is no place like localhost
Spreadsheet for Comparing Electricity Plans Here
Screeb: Alrighty, found some sources: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/21/60/39574903.xls
As you can see down the bottom there, they have put the correlation coefficient for population density: a whopping 0.23. Those of you who know your statistics will know that this means roughly "diddly squat" in English.
Here is a good summary of various factors (also from OECD): http://www.websiteoptimization.com/bw/0611/About half way down the page, it says "Broadband penetration appears to have a stronger correlation with GDP per capita (see Figure 5) than with population density. Broadband penetration had a correlation of 0.629 with GDP per capita and a correlation of 0.245 with population density (see Figure 6)."
As you say, there are many factors that make a difference in the penetration - e.g. government investment in countries like Japan and Korea, which help keep the prices down.
But you must agree that all else being equal, a higher population density means a lower cost per home passed which allows lower prices which will lead to higher penetration.
Thus, in NZ, noone will be able to afford high speed broadband because of the high cost of deployment. Not until our GDP per capita is high enough that the high cost seems low. Or we have significant public investment.
Screeb: Alrighty, found some sources: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/21/60/39574903.xls
As you can see down the bottom there, they have put the correlation coefficient for population density: a whopping 0.23. Those of you who know your statistics will know that this means roughly "diddly squat" in English.
Here is a good summary of various factors (also from OECD): http://www.websiteoptimization.com/bw/0611/
About half way down the page, it says "Broadband penetration appears to have a stronger correlation with GDP per capita (see Figure 5) than with population density. Broadband penetration had a correlation of 0.629 with GDP per capita and a correlation of 0.245 with population density (see Figure 6)."
|
|
|