🚀 go-pugleaf

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
in message news:3ce306a0$0$4696$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.n-osp-am> wrote
>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote

>>> Australia's broadband penetration is not as good as Korea, HK, Taiwan,
>>> or USA.  However it is much better than NZ's.  There are lots of towns
>>> in NZ without ADSL, but virtually every Australian town has ADSL.

>>> Fact.

>>>  Paihia       Y
>>>  Whangarei    Y
>>>  Warkworth    N
>>>  Dargaville   N
>>>  Thames       N
>>>  Whitianga    N
>>>  Tauranga     some
>>>  Wanganui     some
>>>  Marton       N
>>>  Feilding     Y
>>>  Napier       Y
>>>  Nelson       Y
>>>  Motueka      N
>>>  Picton       N
>>>  Akaroa       N
>>>  Lyttelton    Y
>>>  Invercargill Y

>>>  Taree        Y
>>>  Pt Macquarie Y
>>>  Coffs Harbor Y
>>>  Lismore      Y
>>>  Nowra        Y
>>>  Bega         Y
>>>  Mt Gambier   Y
>>>  Bundaberg    Y
>>>  Rockhampton  Y
>>>  Dubbo        Y
>>>  Moree        Y
>>>  Lithgow      Y
>>>  Katoomba     Y
>>>  Murwillumbah Y
>>>  Merimbula    Y

>> Well Mike according to:

>> http://www.witsa.org/presentations/Telstra.pdf

>> "During the remainder of 2001/2002 financial year coverage
>> and capacity will continue to expand, to exceed an estimated
>> ADSL coverage of 80% of all premises by June 2002."

> How about finding the equivalent figures for NZ?

I doubt its available. Telstra is caught between a rock and a hard
place because the govt wants to flog off the rest of Telstra and so
is monstering Telstra on the adsl rollout, amoungst other things.

> If NZ is anything less than 80% then my claim is correct.

Wrong again on that terminally stupid claim
that 'virtually every Australian town has ADSL'

Even someone as stupid as you should be able to grasp
that a hell of a lot less than 20% live outside towns in Aust.

> Also, Australia's population is more concentrated than NZs

Yes.

> so it is easier to wire up 80% in Australia than in NZ.

Thats distinctly arguable when virtually everyone
has a phone service in both countrys.

> And more profitable too.

You dont know that either.

>> "Telstra uses several platforms to deliver broadband services - HFC
>> covers about 2.5m homes, DSL 7.5m homes and satellite covers all."

>> "Rural and remote customers are covered
>> by a subsidised satellite service"

>> So I need to ask the following questions:

>> 1/Precisely when did the data comes from that makes
>> up your list?  And what are the approxiamte populations
>> (to within say 100,000) of those towns you list

> From the Whitepages and Bigpond ADSL availability
> page. Search Whitepages for "Smith" in a particular
> town. Select some of those telephone numbers and
> plug  them into the ADSL availability page.

Soorree, doesnt qualify as 'virtually every
Australian town has ADSL' any time soon.

> It could be automated if you wanted
> to perform a comprehensive survey.

> I haven't looked at the population figures.

> That could easily be done if you were doing a serious
> survey. But I did record the number of Smith's that
> were found which gives a relative population measure.

God knows what this silly wank is about.

>> 2/Is it your opinion that the ADSL and Cable roll
>> out will be complete by the end of June 2002?

> No.

So your terminally stupid claim that 'virtually every Australian
town has ADSL' has blown up in your face very spectacularly
indeed. Are you seriously attempting to suggest only customers
who arent in 'virtually every Australian town' will be the only
ones who adsl becomes available for after that date ?