As neither we nor most of our readers do not have access to the thread it was posted, we like to continue the discussion here.

__________________________________________________________________

Hi people,

I come from one of the ten largest economies in the world, with nearly 200 million people, 8.5 million km2, and 5.564 municipalities, where 94% of the people do *not* have access to any form of broadband – the “B” in the famous BRIC acronym.

I am just coming out of the IGF workshop “Expanding broadband access for a global Internet economy: development dimensions”. I left the workshop a bit shocked with the concepts expressed, not by the AT&T representative (who not surprisingly said AT&T subdsidiaries countries other than the USA should be considered local companies because they employ local people), who as usual is just doing his job in defending the so-called “market”, but by other speeches which seemed to completely ignore that, in most of our contries, there is a de facto monopoly or cartel situation regarding the telco infrastructure, and that public policy ought to centrally take this into account if the aim is to universalize broadband access with quality to all families.

One of the speakers (from LIRNEasia) said that “lower prices require lower costs” and therefore one should just “phase out universal access levies and rationalize taxes”. I retorted that pricing per Mb/s of ADSL broadband in São Paulo might be 65 times higher than the same price charged by the same company in London — and therefore no amount of levies or taxes would justify such scandalous pricing difference, not to speak of the much lower QoS.

I suggested that, instead of eliminating the universal service funds (whose levies are a very small portion of price composition of broadband), we should insist on reforming policy regarding the use of these funds. The reply I heard was that it makes no sense to keep funds that are not used or are squandered (!!). Impact of the fund’s levy in Brazil is just 1% of the price of the fixed line telephone connection — its impact in the price of broadband (a separate bill even if the service is not unbundled) is zero.

There was also a recommendation that we should be “gentle on QoS” to facilitate things regarding universalization of access — fascinating. Again, examples abound in which telcos guarantee only 10% of the nominal contracted rate, and in practice this might be even less. Should we just agree with absurds like this in the name of “it is better to have something than nothing”???

And then there is the crucial question of unbundling, central to the policy debate in the developed countries as it directly impacts universalization through an effective reduction of prices for the final user. It is a major challenge for broadband public policy in developing countries, where regulators are usually in the hands of the telco cartels. The word was not mentioned (not a single time) by anyone in the panel, as if irrelevant to the development dimensions of broadband.

The speaker also mentioned that the “need” to reduce costs for the big telcos would require reduction of international bandwidth costs. One of the two big carriers in Brazil, a Brazilian conglomerate, owns redundant fiber running from Brazil to Miami in rings passing through countries in the Caribbean and Central America. They own their own international link, in summary. So do the other carrier in the de facto duopoly — a major operator from Europe. This does not make any difference in pricing for the final user, although it does contribute to their profits in Brazil being far higher than in Europe for example.

Finally, the fascination with mobile. Of course the AT&T speaker started his talk by waving a fancy iPhone to the audience — mostly natural for a commercial wireless giant. But the infoDev representative and others mentioned mobile as a “solution” for the poor, and not even bothered to separate the discussion in the two main topics here: first, the mobile phone as a connectivity device to enable the user to fully use the Internet through a friendly human-machine interface, be it a common PC or special equipment for people with disabilities; second, the phone itself as *the* alternative to the full user experience that a PC or similar might provide. It seems the agency bureaucrats are satisfied with having two castes of users: a small minority of the ones who can fully use the Internet as it evolves requiring more and more multimedia capabilities on both sides (server and client), and the ones relegated to a small device on which it is barely possible to type small messages.

In the first regional LA&C preparatory meeting for the IGF, in 2008, a representative of a major telco said we should not worry about bringing the next billion to the Internet — they have cell phones, so they are connected already, problem solved. I wonder if this executive would take the place of a carpenter looking for a job, who has to compose and send by email his CV together with images of letters of recommendation to his would-be employer, and had nothing but a cell phone (smart or not) to do it. Not to speak of comparing the executive’s thin-fingered hands of a pianist with the big callous hands of the carpenter.

fraternal regards

–c.a.

Obama stated his intention to invest in these areas during the presidential debates in September and came back to the issue in a December address that he issued as president-elect, but over the weekend he added concrete goals to the plan.

But on one aspect of the recovery plan — expanding broadband access — he offered no concrete goals and a supporting document issued by the White House doesn’t mention the word “broadband” once..

The broadband expansion is part of the infrastructure portion of the plan that will also invest in the road network, mass transit, ports and emergency communications system for law enforcement.

“It means expanding broadband access to millions of Americans, so business can compete on a level-playing field, wherever they’re located,” he said without offering any goals.

Read the full story in PC World here.

Is broadband quality a subject of interest only to urban top-of-the ladder users?

Not necessarily. With the latest developments in telecom services broadband access is increasingly becoming a reality to rural populations as well, even in developing countries. The penetration levels might not be the same but should that mean quality should be compromised for rural users?

Broadband quality is critical for telecenters where a link is usually shared.

LIRNEasia introduces its AT-Tester software application for any users to find out how far the operators keep their promises for quality broadband. This is developed using open source software by a group of researchers from IIT Madras and available freely for download from www.broadbandasia.info.

The tests can be conducted by any user, with least effort and within few minutes. No more than basic computer literacy is required. All you need is a PC running Windows XP connected to Internet. (Other operating systems will be supported in near future).

AT-Tester is different from popular broadband performance testing tools (speedtest.net, for example) because:

• It is more accurate: AT-Tester measures the throughput rates while actually downloading/uploading files. It does not calculate them using empirical formulae and ping data.

• It is more comprehensive: Unlike most other tools, AT-Tester does not confine testing to an end server. It tests the throughput to three servers, namely (a) the local ISP; (b) another server within the same country and (c) a server in US. This helps pinpointing the bandwidth bottlenecks.

• It tests more parameters namely,

i. Download speed (kbps/Mbps)
ii. Upload Speed (kbps/Mbps)
iii. RTT (milli seconds)
iv. Jitter (milli seconds)
v. Packet-Loss (%)
vi. Availability (%)

The software is developed in such a manner that minimal configuration is required by the user.

The software is already customized to be used by the telecenter operators in Sri Lanka. They can report the performance results district-wise. (For example, a telecenter operator in Panamura can report under Ratnapura, not Colombo) Our objective is to develop a more descriptive picture of broadband performance instead of depending solely on testing in major cities.

Telecenter operator in any country can use this but needs a prior customization. (We will ask you some fundamental information like your ISP, promised speeds of the package and location) Unlike incase of speedtest.net we need this information as we go deeper in our testing. It can be done with least hassle for any country on request.

For more information Please write to: chanuka [at] gmail [dot] com

On Wednesday, Big Blue announced it has signed a $9.6 million contract with International Broadband Electric Communications to bring the technology to rural America where it hopes to deliver high-speed broadband connectivity to millions of people who otherwise wouldn’t be able to get it. IBM and IBEC, which will build and manage the networks, are working with over a dozen electricity cooperatives in seven states, The Wall Street Journal reported.

For years, people have hoped broadband-over-power line technology, or BPL, would allow power companies to become the third alternative in the broadband market, competing against cable operators and telephone companies. But technical limitations and interference issues with local emergency radios and short-wave ham radios have stood in the way of mass adoption.

In recent years, new modulation techniques supported by other technological advances have helped BPL evolve. Most services today are capable of delivering between 512Kbps and 3Mbps of throughput, which is comparable to most DSL offerings.

In rural areas in particular, BPL technology could finally bring high-speed Internet access to people who otherwise couldn’t get it. Traditional phone and cable companies often find it too expensive to deploy new infrastructure to provide service to the far reaches of rural America.

Read the full story in CNET here.

In an interview with BizIT, Jaikishan Rajaraman, GSMA director of product and service development, said the number of users in Asia subscribing to HSPA will swell from 26.5 million to 53.5 million over the next 12 months. Fuelling this trend are soaring demand from both businesses and consumers, coupled with falling prices of mobile broadband services, he said. This trend is expected to be mirrored in other parts of the world, including Europe and the US.

In August, GSMA – a global trade organisation comprising more than 750 mobile phone operators around the world – reported that the number of HSPA subscribers worldwide had exceeded 50 million, from 11 million a year ago. There are 197 HSPA commercial deployments in 92 countries, with Asia currently accounting for 46 per cent of the global HSPA subscriber base, according to GSMA.

‘Mobile broadband has truly made socio-economic impact, especially in emerging markets like Indonesia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka as well as developed markets like Australia, Japan and South Korea,’ said Mr Rajaraman.

Read the full story in Asiaone Business here.

Over recent years an increasing number of consumers have started to use the Internet to find the best deals on everything from holidays and cars to household goods, entertainment, finance, services, and more. The increased Internet access that has come about as a result of more and more people getting onto broadband connections has meant that consumers have been able to scour the web to get the best deals, thus saving money on other products and services.

A recent report from the Post Office service has suggested that homes that do not have broadband access and therefore are not able to get online to look for these savings could be paying far more than they need to for many of their goods and services, with some spending more each month due to lack of savings than it would cost them to get online via broadband.

In fact the research suggests that some households without broadband could be spending around seventy pounds a month more for their goods and services than those that do have broadband and are therefore able to make the savings. Based on these figures households without broadband would be better off having broadband installed, using the Internet to get better deals, and making the savings on their goods and services.

Read the full story in the ‘Broadband Expert’ here.

The following letter by a reader to USA Today highlights similar concerns – may be in another context.

WHY SHOULD BROADBAND BE FREE?

James Lakely – Chicago

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin’s reference to the phone industry exposes the weakness of his argument to provide free broadband access in the USA.

Yes, copper phone lines were, for decades, “the main means of communication for millions of Americans.” But the government didn’t invent that technology, nor give it away for free. The market provided, and Americans paid for it via private transactions. Even if one views broadband as a public utility, why should it be free while Americans pay for basics such as water, garbage and, yes, phone service?

The FCC’s proper role is to regulate as lightly as possible so the market can develop innovative technologies while competition keeps prices affordable. Just as there is no free lunch, there is no “free” broadband.

(Open to comment)

This is what ITU’s Telecommunication/ICT Indicators Report for the Asia-Pacific region 2008 says. It was released at ITU TELECOM ASIA 2008, Bangkok, Thailand yesterday (Sept 2, 2008).

The Report finds evidence that ICTs and broadband uptake foster growth and development, but the question remains as to the optimal speed that should be targeted in view of limited resources.

The area in which the region really stands out is the uptake of advanced Internet technologies, especially broadband Internet access. The Asia-Pacific region is the world’s largest broadband market with a 39 per cent share of the world’s total at the end of 2007. In terms of broadband access, Asia-Pacific has made remarkable progress in the past few years, with subscriber numbers growing almost five-fold in five years: from 27 million at the beginning of 2003 to 133 million at the start of 2008.

In the region’s high-income economies, ubiquitous access is progressing through a competitive race to provide ever faster fixed broadband access. Operators in Hong Kong (China) and Japan have launched one-Gigabits per second (Gbps) broadband and triple-play services aimed at the residential market, featuring applications such as Internet telephony and television. The Republic of Korea leads the world in terms of the percentage of households with fixed broadband access, and no less than five economies in the top ten are from Asia-Pacific. The Republic of Korea, Hong Kong (China), and Japan also lead the world in terms of the proportion of households with fibre optic connections, essential for supporting the next generation of ultra-high speed Internet applications.

These high-income economies are also leaders in terms of third generation (3G) mobile cellular deployment. Fixed and mobile broadband technologies complement each other and users enjoy continuous high-speed Internet access. In Singapore, a ubiquitous Internet access plan combining unlimited 8 Megabits per second (Mbps) fixed broadband, 2 Mbps mobile broadband and access at some 800 Wi-Fi hotspots is available for just USD 35 per month.

At the other extreme, in most of the region’s low and lower-middle income economies, high-speed Internet access is limited to urban areas at best, typically expensive, and often not available at all. The regional broadband divide is striking, with poor economies having a close-to-zero broadband penetration, compared to that of rich economies where one in four persons is a broadband subscriber (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Fixed broadband Internet subscribers per 100 inhabitants, 2007

The gap in available broadband speeds between rich and poor countries is as wide as broadband penetration. In Japan, the Republic of Korea and Hong Kong (China), the minimum advertised broadband speed is faster than the maximum broadband speed in Cambodia, Tonga, Laos and Bangladesh.

While in low and lower-middle income economies mobile phones have become a substitute for the shortage of fixed lines, they are not yet fulfilling the potential of broadband access. By the end of 2007, only Indonesia, the Maldives, the Philippines and Sri Lanka had commercially deployed WCDMA networks. The region’s two largest mobile markets, China and India, have yet to launch mobile broadband. By the end of 2007, there were over 120 million mobile broadband subscribers in the region (Figure 2), but almost all (97 per cent) were in high income economies.

Figure 2: Mobile cellular broadband subscribers in Asia-Pacific

While the region’s high-income economies are pushing the frontier of broadband bandwidth to a point where applications have yet to catch up, many Asia-Pacific developing economies are bandwidth starved, inhibiting the development of their information societies.

The ITU Report argues that broadband uptake enables a range of socially desirable and valuable online services in areas such as government, education and health. The use of broadband technologies can help overcome many of the basic development challenges faced by poor countries. The Report provides a number of examples where broadband connectivity has acted as a catalyst for development. These include the provision of education through distance learning in the Solomon Islands, the creation of jobs through business incubators for women in China, and the supply of communication services for disaster management in Myanmar.

Read the press release here. Full report is not yet available in the public domain.

(Please click on the images for a better view)

New Zealand’s National Party leader John Key announced the ambitious plan to put broadband into every home and business through fibre cables over the next six years if his party wins the next election. Mr Key said that with the fibre network he wanted, people would be able to use the internet at lightning speed – essential if the country was to increase productivity and remain internationally competitive.

But Communications Minister David Cunliffe saw nothing but problems and trouble.

“It’s back to the future…if this extravagant subsidy is ever rolled out all the good work the Government, industry and business have done in dismantling Telecom’s monopoly position will be lost,” he said.

Read the full story here.

Nokia Siemens will deploy BSNL broadband access in 20 circles (administrative country subdivisions) in India. This will give an additional 25,000 Indian villages access to digital-age services like high-speed Internet and virtual private networks (VPNs).
 
The new network will also enable BSNL to provide connectivity to CSCs (Community Service Centres) and other e-governance locations.

India today has approximately 3.4 million broadband connections, of which 1.7 million connections are provided by BSNL.

Read the full story here.

There is clear consensus that our nation’s ability to compete in the high speed broadband world is essential to our economic future. Unfortunately, the Administration and the Federal Communications Commission continue to rely upon inadequate, highly-flawed data to assess the marketplace for high-speed Internet access. The Administration’s “mission Accomplished” rhetoric does not match reality:

* According to a September 2007 Pew Internet & American Life Project phone survey, roughly half of all Americans don’t have broadband at home. Half is far from universal.
* Fewer than 25% of New Yorkers in rural areas have access to broadband service and nearly two-thirds of people living in New York City lack access to affordable, high-speed broadband. Some New York City neighborhoods — like Sunset Park, Red Hook and Hunts Point — don’t even have affordable access beyond a dial-up connection
* Ten percent of Chicago area residents do not even have access to DSL service
* Broadband growth in the US is slowing — down 15 percent from last year’s pace
* The Administration has argued that while the U.S. may be behind in percentage of subscribers, we are the #1 in the world in total number of subscribers – thus we have won. But news from China suggests that it now has 122 million broadband users — the highest number in the world.

When the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) first collected data on broadband penetration in 2001, the US ranked 4th among the 30 nations surveyed. In June 2004, President Bush noted that America then ranked 10th amongst the industrialized world in per capita broadband penetration. “That’s not good enough,” he said at the US Department of Commerce. “We don’t like to be ranked 10th in anything. The goal is to be ranked 1st when it comes to per capita use of broadband technology. It’s in our nation’s interest. It’s good for our economy.” According to OECD June 2007 data, After several years of steady decline in the rankings, the US ranked 15th among industrialized nationals in broadband subscriptions per 100 inhabitants..

Powered by ScribeFire.

The $650 million project covers more than 15,000 kilometres to link South Africa to India and France through Mozambique, Madagascar, Kenya and Tanzania. It is expected to provide first broadband access to countries in East Africa, which are currently using satellite connections.  

In a similar project, NEPAD e-Africa Commission signed a deal with an American firm 5-P Holdings in November 2007 for the construction of an undersea submarine cable to link every country in Africa with the outside world.  

This is a joint project between African investors and US telecommunications development company Herakles Telecom. The cable will be ready to serve southern and eastern
Africa from 2009 onwards. Read more.

Click here to see Alcatel-Lucent’s animations of laying and repairing of submarine cable.

The rest of the countries need to develop their own benchmarks.

BBC NEWS | Technology | Global broadband prices revealed

According to the report, broadband prices for DSL connections across the 30 countries have fallen by 19% and increased in speed by 29% in the year to October 2006. Cable prices and speeds followed a similar trend.The least expensive monthly subscription for always-on broadband was in Sweden, where $10.79 (£5.40) per month bought a 256kbps connection. The country with the most expensive entry point for broadband access was Mexico, where it cost $52.36 (£26.18) per month for 1mbps.

Powered by ScribeFire.