🚀 go-pugleaf

Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.N-OSP-AM> wrote in
message news:3ce04a84.3711491@news.caverock.net.nz...

> ISDN (integrated services digital network), DSL (digital
> subscriber lines) or some sort of wireless alternative?
> Where is the future for Australia and New Zealand?

Just like with everywhere else, a mixture of all those, and cable too.

> I read an article that says Australia is years
> behind some Asian countries (June 2001 figures:
> Aus market population penetration 1%

Completely wrong.

> vs South Korea 12%).   Does this matter?

Nope.

> The same article went on to prerdict that the main driver
> of broadband use would be  a tendency of companies to
> operate software by buying a subscription licence 'off site'.

Nope.

> My impression was that this was a fantasy,

Yep.

> but are there any companies in Australia or New Zealand doing it?

Yep.

> SNOOPY

Back on your kennel.

> Completely wrong.
>
>
> Nope.
>
>
> Nope.
>
>
> Yep.
>
>
> Yep.
>
>
> Back on your kennel.
>


You're on a roll today Rod...

Snoopy wrote:

> ISDN (integrated services digital network), DSL (digital subscriber
> lines) or some sort of wireless alternative?   Where is the future for
> Australia and New Zealand?


ADSLand cable....the future is here.

*Ultimately*???

We will have wireless Net access communicating directly with 
brain-implanted "data and communcation" aids...providing us with RAM 
storage locally and thought-access to national / global databases.

With a bit of genetic engineering, we may even be able to think fast 
enough to keep up with enhanced data flows....or offload certain thought 
processes to faster, external units. Like memories....except the sound 
and video and sensations are "filmed" by your sense rather than a video 
camera.

The bottle neck won't be the network...it will be our brains. It takes 
us far too long to learn stuff and with a very low confidence level. We 
all should have near-perfect memories.

But even this is technology.Ultimately, hopefully we will be 
energy-based....and think and travel at the speed of light..and 
effectively live forever.....perhaps in vast communities that find a way 
to functions as a collective mind.

> I read an article that says Australia is years behind some Asian
> countries (June 2001 figures:  Aus market population penetration 1% vs
> South Korea 12%).   Does this matter?


Aussie ='s BIG

S. Korea ='s SMALL.....with high population denisty. Eas to wire up the 
urban areas. One connection to each apartment building with hundreds of 
units. In OZ, one connections connects one house. Far more expensive.

 
> The same article went on to prerdict that the main driver of broadband
> use would be  a tendency of companies to operate software by buying a
> subscription licence 'off site'.  My impression was that this was a
> fantasy, but are there any companies in Australia or New Zealand doing
> it? 

E-Solutions.

.Net form Microsoft was the way of the future.....but they canned that 
yesterday.....so there will now be no future.

Uncle Bully <wakeupcall@optushome.com.au.remove> wrote
in message news:8m%D8.131$C4.27275@ozemail.com.au...

> > Completely wrong.
> >
> >
> > Nope.
> >
> >
> > Nope.
> >
> >
> > Yep.
> >
> >
> > Yep.
> >
> >
> > Back on your kennel.
> >
>
>
> You're on a roll today Rod...

On a roll every day, Unk...

Steve <steve@nospam.org.nz> wrote in message
news:3CE0821F.9070808@nospam.org.nz...
> Snoopy wrote

>> ISDN (integrated services digital network), DSL (digital
>> subscriber lines) or some sort of wireless alternative?
>> Where is the future for Australia and New Zealand?

> ADSLand cable....the future is here.

> *Ultimately*???

> We will have wireless Net access communicating directly
> with brain-implanted "data and communcation" aids...

Wotabart those wot dont ave brains ?

Could shove it up their bum I spose.

> providing us with RAM storage locally and
> thought-access to national / global databases.

That wont happen, it would cause instant meltdown
in any self respecting national / global database.

> With a bit of genetic engineering, we may even be able
> to think fast enough to keep up with enhanced data flows....

Wotabart those wot ave ear to ear dog shit ?

> or offload certain thought processes to faster, external units.
> Like memories....except the sound and video and sensations
> are "filmed" by your sense rather than a video camera.

Gone blind yet ?

> The bottle neck won't be the network...it will be our brains.

Specially for those with ear to ear dog shit.

> It takes us far too long to learn stuff and with a very low
> confidence level. We all should have near-perfect memories.

Not those with ear to ear dog shit.

> But even this is technology.Ultimately, hopefully we
> will be energy-based....and think and travel at the
> speed of light..and effectively live forever.....

Bugger that with 'people' like you.

> perhaps in vast communities that find
> a way to functions as a collective mind.

Collective pile of dog shit more likely.

>> I read an article that says Australia is years behind some
>> Asian countries (June 2001 figures:  Aus market population
>> penetration 1% vs South Korea 12%).   Does this matter?

> Aussie ='s BIG

> S. Korea ='s SMALL.....with high population denisty.

We're not all that different to Korea with the bulk of our population.

> Eas to wire up the urban areas. One connection
> to each apartment building with hundreds of units.

Cant be that easy, Optus has chosen to not wire those.

> In OZ, one connections connects
> one house. Far more expensive.

Odd that Optus has chosen to wire those.

Maybe its just another nice theory, pity about the reality...

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
message news:3ce0a706$0$4696$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.n-osp-am> wrote

>> ISDN (integrated services digital network), DSL (digital
>> subscriber lines) or some sort of wireless alternative?
>> Where is the future for Australia and New Zealand?

>> I read an article that says Australia is years behind some
>> Asian countries (June 2001 figures:  Aus market population
>> penetration 1% vs South Korea 12%).   Does this matter?

> 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.

Bullshit.

> Also the three biggest Australian cities have cable but Auckland doesn't.

> The ranking is:

> South Korea
> Hong Kong
> Taiwan
> Singapore
> USA
> France
> Sweden
> Germany
> Australia
> Norway
> NZ
> UK
> Ireland

>> The same article went on to prerdict that the main driver
>> of broadband use would be  a tendency of companies to
>> operate software by buying a subscription licence 'off site'.

> That is a load of codswallop.

>> My impression was that this was a fantasy, but are there
>> any companies in Australia or New Zealand doing it?

> Microsoft.

On Tue, 14 May 2002 12:46:50 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>
>Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.N-OSP-AM> wrote in
>message news:3ce04a84.3711491@news.caverock.net.nz...
>
>> ISDN (integrated services digital network), DSL (digital
>> subscriber lines) or some sort of wireless alternative?
>> Where is the future for Australia and New Zealand?
>
>Just like with everywhere else, a mixture of all those, and cable too.
>
>
So Rod, speaking in this thread as 'the voice of Australia' you are
happy with the options the present carriers offer you already? 

SNOOPY


-- 
Attention Spammers.   All UCE to me *will* be reported
                    http://spamcop.net
No second chances, and soon, no e-mail address for you!
-- 

On Tue, 14 May 2002 15:18:55 +1200, Steve <steve@nospam.org.nz> wrote:

>
>ADSLand cable....the future is here.
>
>
But most of the country doesn't know it.  Still stuck to the dial in
modem.   What will get them to move?  Only price?
>
>
>*Ultimately*???
>
><snipped interesting GE speculations>
>
>Aussie ='s BIG
>
>S. Korea ='s SMALL.....with high population denisty. Easy to wire up the 
>urban areas. One connection to each apartment building with hundreds of 
>units. In OZ, one connections connects one house. Far more expensive.
>
>
I though 'wireless' was meant to be the solution for 'the outback'? 
>
>
>E-Solutions.
>
>
Are e-solutions software lease packages tied to a broadband provider,
or are you free to choose?
>
>
>.Net form Microsoft was the way of the future.....but they canned that 
>yesterday.....so there will now be no future.
>
>
I think there is something comforting about having your own disc in
its own box rather than being tied to a Microsoft leash ( oops , I
mean lease ;-I )

SNOOPY



-- 
Attention Spammers.   All UCE to me *will* be reported
                    http://spamcop.net
No second chances, and soon, no e-mail address for you!
-- 

Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.N-OSP-AM> wrote in
message news:3ce0ab4e.5419960@news.caverock.net.nz...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.N-OSP-AM> wrote

>>> ISDN (integrated services digital network), DSL (digital
>>> subscriber lines) or some sort of wireless alternative?
>>> Where is the future for Australia and New Zealand?

>> Just like with everywhere else, a mixture of all those, and cable too.

> So Rod, speaking in this thread as 'the voice of Australia' you are
> happy with the options the present carriers offer you already?

Yeah, very happy indeed. adsl can be a bit cheaper
than dialup, much cheaper than what you should
compare it with, a dialup permanent connection.

Sure, it would be even better if it had completely unlimited
downloads as well, but you cant have everything.

Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.N-OSP-AM> wrote in
message news:3ce099b5.914416@news.caverock.net.nz...
> Steve <steve@nospam.org.nz> wrote

>> ADSLand cable....the future is here.

> But most of the country doesn't know
> it.  Still stuck to the dial in modem.

And that isnt likely to change very quickly.

I'm always amazed at how few of the unwashed
masses  bother with a $25/month unlimited dialup plan.

> What will get them to move?  Only price?

Yeah, basically. If they could have adsl for say $10/month total, it'd
only be those who dont use the net much at all that wouldnt have it.

>> Aussie ='s BIG

>> S. Korea ='s SMALL.....with high population denisty. Easy to wire up the
>> urban areas. One connection to each apartment building with hundreds of
>> units. In OZ, one connections connects one house. Far more expensive.

> I though 'wireless' was meant to be the solution for 'the outback'?

Nar, thats satellite, another one you didnt include in your list.

Wireless is used only in builtup areas, because the range aint that flash.

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
message news:3ce0c83e$0$4697$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
>>> Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.n-osp-am> wrote

>>>> ISDN (integrated services digital network), DSL (digital subscriber
>>>> lines) or some sort of wireless alternative? Where is the future for
>>>> Australia and New Zealand?

>>>> I read an article that says Australia is years behind some
>>>> Asian countries (June 2001 figures:  Aus market population
>>>> penetration 1% vs South Korea 12%).   Does this matter?

>>> 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.

>> Bullshit.

> Flapdoodle.

Even you should be able to bullshit your way
out of your predicament better than that.

Mike Doyle wrote:

>   Picton       N

You missed Blenheim. It's a truckload bigger than Picton, has a reasonable 
claim to being the centre of Marlborough's wine...thing.... And even claims 
to have an IT industry of sorts:

http://www.pcmedia.co.nz

But no DSL. Lots of Holden's though.

Dave

"Mike Doyle" <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:3ce0c9d9$0$4697$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> In article <abqa3s$kagko$1@ID-69072.news.dfncis.de>, "Rod Speed"
> <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:3ce0a706$0$4696$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> >> Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.n-osp-am> wrote
> >
> >>> ISDN (integrated services digital network), DSL (digital subscriber
> >>> lines) or some sort of wireless alternative? Where is the future for
> >>> Australia and New Zealand?
> >
> >>> I read an article that says Australia is years behind some Asian
> >>> countries (June 2001 figures:  Aus market population penetration 1% vs
> >>> South Korea 12%).   Does this matter?
> >


> >
> >>> The same article went on to prerdict that the main driver of broadband
> >>> use would be  a tendency of companies to operate software by buying a
> >>> subscription licence 'off site'.
> >
> >> That is a load of codswallop.
> >
> >>> My impression was that this was a fantasy, but are there any companies
> >>> in Australia or New Zealand doing it?
> >
> >> Microsoft.
The reference is to Application Service Providers, of which there are
already numerous, in Australia and New Zealand, some even doing a reasonably
good job. A search on the term should pop up some familiar names.

Ken

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
message news:3ce0c9d9$0$4697$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
>>> Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.n-osp-am> wrote

>>>> ISDN (integrated services digital network), DSL (digital
>>>> subscriber lines) or some sort of wireless alternative?
>>>> Where is the future for Australia and New Zealand?

>>>> I read an article that says Australia is years behind some
>>>> Asian countries (June 2001 figures:  Aus market population
>>>> penetration 1% vs South Korea 12%).   Does this matter?

>>> 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.

>> Bullshit.

> Fact.

Bullshit.

Rod Speed is rumoured to have typed:

> 
> Steve <steve@nospam.org.nz> wrote in message
> news:3CE0821F.9070808@nospam.org.nz...

Responses from womeone apparently afflicted with ear to ear dog shit 
removed. 
 
>>> I read an article that says Australia is years behind some
>>> Asian countries (June 2001 figures:  Aus market population
>>> penetration 1% vs South Korea 12%).   Does this matter?
> 
>> Aussie ='s BIG
> 
>> S. Korea ='s SMALL.....with high population denisty.
> 
> We're not all that different to Korea with the bulk of our population.
> 
>> Eas to wire up the urban areas. One connection
>> to each apartment building with hundreds of units.
> 
> Cant be that easy, Optus has chosen to not wire those.
> 
>> In OZ, one connections connects
>> one house. Far more expensive.
> 
> Odd that Optus has chosen to wire those.
> 
> Maybe its just another nice theory, pity about the reality...

It's cheaper to wire one building than 200 buildings. 

If Optus have reasons for wiring one and not the other, then it would 
be nice to know these reasons.....and not make assumptions that could 
well be invalid - as you appear to have done. 

Your best answer would be that you don't know. It would have been 
consistent with the lack of content in the rest of your post. 

-- 
Regards, 

Steve

On Tue, 14 May 2002 16:14:00 +1000, "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
>
>> Easy to wire up the urban areas. One connection
>> to each apartment building with hundreds of units.
>
>Cant be that easy, Optus has chosen to not wire those.
>
>> In OZ, one connections connects
>> one house. Far more expensive.
>
>Odd that Optus has chosen to wire those.
>
>Maybe its just another nice theory, pity about the reality...
>
>
So why didn't Optus do it Rod?

Bad management?   Too difficult to retrowire appartments?  Demographic
of people living in appartment blocks means they wouldn't get enough
business to justify the investment?  

SNOOPY



-- 
Attention Spammers.   All UCE to me *will* be reported
                    http://spamcop.net
No second chances, and soon, no e-mail address for you!
-- 

Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.N-OSP-AM> wrote in
message news:3ce17be1.1381790@news.caverock.net.nz...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

>>> Easy to wire up the urban areas. One connection
>>> to each apartment building with hundreds of units.

>> Cant be that easy, Optus has chosen to not wire those.

>>> In OZ, one connections connects
>>> one house. Far more expensive.

>> Odd that Optus has chosen to wire those.

>> Maybe its just another nice theory, pity about the reality...

> So why didn't Optus do it Rod?

Rather obvious really. It actually costs MORE to connect a single
unit in a block of units than it does to connect a standalone house.

> Bad management?

Nope. Good management. Their cable operation has always lost money,
to the tune of $400M in the last year, and connecting those units at a
substantially higher cost than a house would cost would increase that loss.

> Too difficult to retrowire appartments?

Its not difficult, just significantly more expensive
than to connect a standalone house.

> Demographic of people living in appartment blocks means
> they wouldn't get enough business to justify the investment?

Nar, its not that.

Mike Doyle is rumoured to have typed:


> Also the three biggest Australian cities have cable but Auckland
> doesn't.

THat's be cause too many Aucklanders moaned abuot cables on telephone 
poles spoiling views. Wellington and Christchurch just got on with 
it...... 
 
Plus, Auckland has suffered from the laissez-faire policies of the 
National Party when it came to establishing infrastructure. Since the 
last election, the situation has improved slightly....with several 
non-traditional data network providers moving to fill the gap (United 
Networks and others).....but they are focused on business - not 
consumers. 

> The ranking is:
> 
> South Korea

Small country...and government policy directed telcos providing 
incentives for infrastructural investment. .Korea's net access for home 
and business users is fast and cheap....hence the wall of spam 
emanating from Korea.

> Hong Kong

Even smaller territory than Korea.A regionalhub, showplace and focus 
for a lot of telecommunications investment.

> Taiwan

22 million people living in an area the size of the North 
Island.Government investment through local telco. 

> Singapore

3.3M people living in an area 27kms x 18kms. A regionalhub, showplace 
and focus for a lot of telecommunications investment.All the major 
global players are here. SingTel dominates the local market. Govt-owned 
(at least until VERY recently, if it isn't now) 

> USA

Vast areas not covered....but they have have all the larger cities and 
towns......most of which are bigger than all NZ cities bar 
Auckland.Major interruptions in service to vast numbers of broadband 
users as their providers fall over and they have to scramble to find a 
provider who will fill the gap....often at a much higher price - though 
still cheap by world standards.

scale,scale scale

> France

France has always been progressive. They put Mini-Tel into vast numbers 
of homes almost 25 years ago.Government investment.No private company 
would have done it - because no private company did it - anywhere,In 
the whole world. 

> Sweden

Again....government investment in infrastructure.

> Germany

Deutsche Telekom - govt-owned. 

> Australia

Telstra - govt - owned 

> Norway

Again...government decided Internet infrastructure was important. 

> NZ

Driven by visionaries such as CityLink in Wellington who created the 
most advanced and comprehensive municipal data network almost anywhere 
in the world. Drove the private companies to compete....or misss out.

The lack of a similar iniative in AK, CH and DN means those communities 
have largely missed out. 

Telecom NZ's original vision of "convergence" (TV, voice, data), 
sparked by competititn from Saturn, came unglued and the cable 
languishes in the ground - un-used. They have, however, implemented 
ADSL widely - though at a cost that is prohibitive compared to almost 
all other broadband optins.....despite being the most ubiquitous and 
deployed on existing distribution network (residential phone lines). 

> UK
> Ireland
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> The same article went on to prerdict that the main driver of
>> broadband
>> use would be  a tendency of companies to operate software by buying a
>> subscription licence 'off site'.
> 
> That is a load of codswallop.
> 
>> My impression was that this was a
>> fantasy, but are there any companies in Australia or New Zealand
>> doing it?
> 
> Microsoft.

-- 
Regards, 

Steve

Rod Speed is rumoured to have typed:

> 
> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
> message news:3ce0a706$0$4696$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>> Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.n-osp-am> wrote
> 
>>> ISDN (integrated services digital network), DSL (digital
>>> subscriber lines) or some sort of wireless alternative?
>>> Where is the future for Australia and New Zealand?
> 
>>> I read an article that says Australia is years behind some
>>> Asian countries (June 2001 figures:  Aus market population
>>> penetration 1% vs South Korea 12%).   Does this matter?
> 
>> 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.
> 
> Bullshit.

That seems to be your favourite (and almost only) response to most 
things. Try and offer more meat.. 


-- 
Regards, 

Steve

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
message news:3ce1cd27$0$4696$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
>>>>> Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.n-osp-am> wrote

>>>>>> ISDN (integrated services digital network), DSL (digital subscriber
>>>>>> lines) or some sort of wireless alternative? Where is the future for
>>>>>> Australia and New Zealand?

>>>>>> I read an article that says Australia is years behind some Asian
>>>>>> countries (June 2001 figures:  Aus market population penetration 1%
>>>>>> vs South Korea 12%).   Does this matter?

>>>>> 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.

>>>> Bullshit.

>>> Fact.

>> Bullshit.

> Why snip the facts?

Even someone as stupid as you should be able to grasp that
thats nothing like a complete list of 'every Australian town'.

And the list of sheep shagger towns is completely
and utterly irrelevant to that stupid claim you made.

>>>   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

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
message news:3ce1ec77$0$4697$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>>>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
>>>>>>> Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.n-osp-am> wrote

>>>>>>>> ISDN (integrated services digital network), DSL (digital
>>>>>>>> subscriber lines) or some sort of wireless alternative?
>>>>>>>> Where is the future for Australia and New Zealand?

>>>>>>>> I read an article that says Australia is years behind some
>>>>>>>> Asian countries (June 2001 figures:  Aus market population
>>>>>>>> penetration 1% vs South Korea 12%).   Does this matter?

>>>>>>> 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.

>>>>>> Bullshit.

>>>>> Fact.

>>>> Bullshit.

>>> Why snip the facts?

>> Even someone as stupid as you should be able to grasp that
>> thats nothing like a complete list of 'every Australian town'.

> Just because I didn't list them all doesn't make my
> statement "virtually every Australian town" wrong.

Yes, and you're just plain wrong anyway.

Thats why I flushed that pathetic list, its a tiny subset of the total
number of Aust towns and proves absolutely nothing about your
terminally stupid claim that "virtually every Australian town has ADSL"

> Look up the word "virtually" in a dictionary,
> if you know how to use one.

Even a stupid sheep shagger should be able to bullshit
its way out of its predicament MUCH better than that.

> And if you belief my statement is false why
> don't you refute it with some evidence?

YOU made that claim, YOU get to provide the evidence
to substantiate that claim. THATS how it works, child.

All the rest of your desperate attempts to bullshit your
way out of your predicament flushed where it belongs.

You might be able to fuck those sheep, child, you're fooling none on us.

"Mike Doyle" <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:3ce1f75b$0$4694$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> In article <abssgu$ko1at$1@ID-69072.news.dfncis.de>, "Rod Speed"
> <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:3ce1ec77$0$4697$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> >> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
> >>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
> >>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
> >>>>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
> >>>>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
> >>>>>>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
> >>>>>>>> Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.n-osp-am> wrote
> >
> >>>>>>>>> ISDN (integrated services digital network), DSL (digital
> >>>>>>>>> subscriber lines) or some sort of wireless alternative? Where is
> >>>>>>>>> the future for Australia and New Zealand?
> >
> >>>>>>>>> I read an article that says Australia is years behind some Asian
> >>>>>>>>> countries (June 2001 figures:  Aus market population penetration
> >>>>>>>>> 1% vs South Korea 12%).   Does this matter?
> >
> >>>>>>>> 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.
> >
> >>>>>>> Bullshit.
> >
> >>>>>> Fact.
> >
> >>>>> Bullshit.
> >
> >>>> Why snip the facts?
> >
> >>> Even someone as stupid as you should be able to grasp that thats
> >>> nothing like a complete list of 'every Australian town'.
> >
> >> Just because I didn't list them all doesn't make my statement
> >> "virtually every Australian town" wrong.
> >
> > Yes, and you're just plain wrong anyway.
>
> And just what particular point was wrong?
> Where are your facts?
>
> >
> > Thats why I flushed that pathetic list, its a tiny subset of the total
> > number of Aust towns and proves absolutely nothing about your terminally
> > stupid claim that "virtually every Australian town has ADSL"
>
> Of course it is a subset.
> I'm not going to type a complete list of every town in Australia
> or NZ.  Just a representative list.  And the list I published
> speaks for itself, doesn't it?
>
> >
> >> Look up the word "virtually" in a dictionary, if you know how to use
> >> one.
> >
> > Even a stupid sheep shagger should be able to bullshit its way out of
> > its predicament MUCH better than that.
>
> Ok, I'll admit it.  I am an Australian sheep-shagger.
> But I only do it because everyone else here does it.

Hey, don't feel bad, I don't blame you. I've seen australian women.
--
~misfit~

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
message news:3ce1f75b$0$4694$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>>>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>>>>>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
>>>>>>>>> Snoopy <tennyson@caverock.net.nz.n-osp-am> wrote

>>>>>>>>>> ISDN (integrated services digital network), DSL (digital
>>>>>>>>>> subscriber lines) or some sort of wireless alternative?
>>>>>>>>>> Where is the future for Australia and New Zealand?

>>>>>>>>>> I read an article that says Australia is years behind some
>>>>>>>>>> Asian countries (June 2001 figures:  Aus market population
>>>>>>>>>> penetration 1% vs South Korea 12%).   Does this matter?

>>>>>>>>> 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.

>>>>>>>> Bullshit.

>>>>>>> Fact.

>>>>>> Bullshit.

>>>>> Why snip the facts?

>>>> Even someone as stupid as you should be able to grasp that thats
>>>> nothing like a complete list of 'every Australian town'.

>>> Just because I didn't list them all doesn't make my
>>> statement "virtually every Australian town" wrong.

>> Yes, and you're just plain wrong anyway.

> And just what particular point was wrong?

The terminally stupid claim that 'virtually
every Australian town has ADSL', stupid.

> Where are your facts?

Even a stupid sheep shagger should be able to bullshit
its way out of its predicament MUCH better than that.

>> Thats why I flushed that pathetic list, its a tiny subset of the total
>> number of Aust towns and proves absolutely nothing about your
>> terminally stupid claim that "virtually every Australian town has ADSL"

> Of course it is a subset.

Pity its a TINY subset of 'every Australian town' and so
has no relevance what so ever to your terminally stupid
claim that "virtually every Australian town has ADSL", stupid.

> I'm not going to type a complete list of every
> town in Australia or NZ.  Just a representative list.

Pity it was nothing even remotely resembling anything like that with Aust.

Like I said, sheepshaggerland has always been and always will be,
completely and utterly irrelevant to your terminally stupid claim that
"virtually every Australian town has ADSL" which is just plain wrong.

> And the list I published speaks for itself, doesn't it?

Even a stupid sheep shagger should be able to bullshit
its way out of its predicament MUCH better than that.

>>> And if you belief my statement is false why
>>> don't you refute it with some evidence?

>> YOU made that claim, YOU get to provide the evidence
>> to substantiate that claim. THATS how it works, child.

> I already have substantiated my claims.

Like hell you ever did. Even someone as stupid as you should
be able to grasp that that pathetic list of just 15 Aust towns
doesnt qualify as "virtually every Australian town" any time soon.

All the rest of your desperate attempts to bullshit your
way out of your predicament flushed where it belongs.

Rod Speed is rumoured to have typed:
.........

> YOU made that claim, YOU get to provide the evidence
> to substantiate that claim. THATS how it works, child.
> 
> All the rest of your desperate attempts to bullshit your
> way out of your predicament flushed where it belongs.
> 
> You might be able to fuck those sheep, child, you're fooling none on
> us.

Either Redbaitor is now trolling in nz.comp, or we have a new 
troll in town. 

Greetings, Rod (troll) Speed.

Remember,people....don't feed the troll. 

-- 
Regards, 

Steve

> > So Rod, speaking in this thread as 'the voice of Australia' you are
> > happy with the options the present carriers offer you already?
>
> Yeah, very happy indeed. adsl can be a bit cheaper
> than dialup, much cheaper than what you should
> compare it with, a dialup permanent connection.
>
> Sure, it would be even better if it had completely unlimited
> downloads as well, but you cant have everything.
>
>

sigh, another sucker happy with the modicum offerings telecommunication
companies currently provide...

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
message news:3ce23f79$0$4696$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote

>>> I'm not going to type a complete list of every
>>> town in Australia or NZ. Just a representative list.

>> Pity it was nothing even remotely resembling
>> anything like that with Aust.

> It covers several habitable places.

Completely useless when attempting to substantiate that terminally
stupid claim that "virtually every Australian town has ADSL"

The ONLY way you can actually substantiate a claim like
that is to list most of the towns that dont have ADSL and
show that thats a tiny subset of the total towns in Aust.

> Like I said, I cannot be bothered iterating
> every single Australian or NZ town.

Your terminally stupid claim that "virtually every
Australian town has ADSL" is just plain wrong.

> Sampling is a valid statistical method.

Sampling is completely useless when attempting to substantiate that
terminally stupid claim that "virtually every Australian town has ADSL"

>> Like I said, sheepshaggerland has always been and always will be,
>> completely and utterly irrelevant to your terminally stupid claim that
>> "virtually every Australian town has ADSL" which is just plain wrong.

> Why don't you name some Australian towns that don't
> have ADSL? Why don't you perform a random sample of
> Australian towns and see whether they have ADSL or not?

Thats why I know your terminally stupid claim is just plain wrong.

>>> And the list I published speaks for itself, doesn't it?

>> Even a stupid sheep shagger should be able to bullshit
>> its way out of its predicament MUCH better than that.

> And even a STUPID sheep shagger should be able to
> bullshit its way out of its STUPIDITIES better than that.

Wrong again. I choose to spell it that way, stupid.

>>>>> And if you belief my statement is false why
>>>>> don't you refute it with some evidence?

>>>> YOU made that claim, YOU get to provide the evidence
>>>> to substantiate that claim. THATS how it works, child.

>>> I already have substantiated my claims.

>> Like hell you ever did. Even someone as stupid as you should
>> be able to grasp that that pathetic list of just 15 Aust towns
>> doesnt qualify as "virtually every Australian town" any time soon.

> Yes I did.

Like hell you ever did. Even someone as stupid as you should
be able to grasp that that pathetic list of just 15 Aust towns
doesnt qualify as "virtually every Australian town" any time soon.

> Until corrected by evidence to the contrary,
> virtually every Australian town has ADSL.

Pathetic really. The FACT that nothing like "virtually
every Australian town has ADSL" stands regardless.

> My random sample of 15 towns

And thats a pathetically inadequate sample of the total towns in this
country on which to base a claim about "virtually every Australian town"

> shows that all of them have ADSL.

And thats a pathetically inadequate sample of the total towns in this
country on which to base a claim about "virtually every Australian town"

> My random sample of NZ towns show that a lot of them don't have ADSL.

Like I said, sheepshaggerland has always been and always will be,
completely and utterly irrelevant to your terminally stupid claim that
"virtually every Australian town has ADSL" which is just plain wrong.

All the rest of your desperate attempts to bullshit your
way out of your predicament flushed where it belongs.

Some gutless sheep shagger desperately cowering behind
Steve <steve@nospam.org.nz> wrote in message
news:FvqE8.1339$7N.216664@news02.tsnz.net...
just what you'd expect from a gutless cowering sheep shagger.

dude there's no need to swear and get in a huph... very irrational and
unprofessional ;(

</thread>

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:abv7ac$letca$1@ID-69072.news.dfncis.de...
>
> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
> message news:3ce2f4ca$0$4693$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> > Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
> >> tim <hampsterx@paradise.net.nz> wrote
>
> >>>>> So Rod, speaking in this thread as 'the voice of Australia' you are
> >>>>> happy with the options the present carriers offer you already?
>
> >>>> Yeah, very happy indeed. adsl can be a bit cheaper than dialup, much
> >>>> cheaper than what you should compare it with, a dialup permanent
connection.
>
> >>>> Sure, it would be even better if it had completely unlimited
> >>>> downloads as well, but you cant have everything.
>
> >>> sigh, another sucker happy with the modicum offerings
> >>> telecommunication companies currently provide...
>
> >> sigh, another stupid leechchild that
> >> aint prepared to pay for its leeching.
>
> >> I can get unlimited downloads for about what
> >> I was paying for dialup unlimited downloads.
>
> > Bullshit.
>
> Fraid so.
>
> >> The only real downside with the current broadband
> >> offerings is that unlimited downloads have to be scheduled
> >> so they dont happen in peak time. Fine by me, tho it
> >> would obviously be a bit better if I didnt have to schedule.
>
> > So even you admit they are not unlimited.
>
> They aint limited in volume, stupid.
>
> > They are obviously limited because you can only download
> > during certain restricted and limited times of the day.
>
> They aint limited in volume, stupid.
>
> > Sounds like limited downloads to me!
>
> Best get your ears tested then, wanker.
>
> >> I get a real permanent line with much better speeds than
> >> are possible with dialup, for about the same cost as dialup.
>
> >> I dont plan to pay for your activitys any time soon and I'm not
> >> stupid enough to move to pomland or yankeeland or canuckland
> >> and have to put up with the shit thats inevitable in any of those
> >> places, just to get completely unlimited broadband.
>
> > Unfortunately tampaland is also populated by so many
> > bandwidth-guzzling turkeys that Telstra recently reduced
> > one of their download limits from 3GB to 300MB.
>
> Who cares ?  There are plenty of competitors to
> Telstra. You're always welcome to use one of those
> if you want more than 300MB, for a lower cost too.
>
> And what Telstra actually did was provide more choice,
> so those who arent stupid leechchildren dont have to
> subsidise stupid leechchildren and can get an adsl service
> for about what they pay for dialup if they use the net much.
>
> Great. Not interested in subsidising stupid leechchildren.
> They or their parents are welcome to pay for their activitys.
>
> > Do you really believe that Australians are somehow so different
> > from the rest of the world that they don't want to use the maximum
> > available bandwidth that they can get their sweaty little hands on?
>
> I really believe that it costs the ISP significantly more to
> provide the multiple GBs per month that some leech and
> that those doing that leeching should pay for that cost so
> those of us that arent mindless leechchildren can get a
> very decent adsl service for a lower cost than would be
> necessary if we are forced to subsidise stupid leechchildren.
>
>

tim <hampsterx@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:WMBE8.1450$7N.239413@news02.tsnz.net...

>>> So Rod, speaking in this thread as 'the voice of Australia' you are
>>> happy with the options the present carriers offer you already?

>> Yeah, very happy indeed. adsl can be a bit cheaper
>> than dialup, much cheaper than what you should
>> compare it with, a dialup permanent connection.

>> Sure, it would be even better if it had completely unlimited
>> downloads as well, but you cant have everything.

> sigh, another sucker happy with the modicum offerings
> telecommunication companies currently provide...

sigh, another stupid leechchild that aint prepared to pay for its leeching.

I can get unlimited downloads for about what I was paying for
dialup unlimited downloads. The only real downside with the
current broadband offerings is that unlimited downloads have
to be scheduled so they dont happen in peak time. Fine by me,
tho it would obviously be a bit better if I didnt have to schedule.

I get a real permanent line with much better speeds than
are possible with dialup, for about the same cost as dialup.

I dont plan to pay for your activitys any time soon and I'm
not stupid enough to move to pomland or yankeeland or
canuckland and have to put up with the shit thats inevitable in
any of those places, just to get completely unlimited broadband.

> Silly little cowering sheep shaggers get no say
> what so ever on that or anything else. Ever.

Actually I think thats being a little bit disrespectful considering this is
being posted on a New Zealand newsgroup.

On Tue, 14 May 2002 18:24:57 +1000, "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."

"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

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

3/Whp pays the subsidies on the satellite service, and who makes the
decision that the consumer receiving satellite justifies it?

SNOOPY



-- 
Attention Spammers.   All UCE to me *will* be reported
                    http://spamcop.net
No second chances, and soon, no e-mail address for you!
-- 

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
message news:3ce2f4ca$0$4693$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> tim <hampsterx@paradise.net.nz> wrote

>>>>> So Rod, speaking in this thread as 'the voice of Australia' you are
>>>>> happy with the options the present carriers offer you already?

>>>> Yeah, very happy indeed. adsl can be a bit cheaper than dialup, much
>>>> cheaper than what you should compare it with, a dialup permanent connection.

>>>> Sure, it would be even better if it had completely unlimited
>>>> downloads as well, but you cant have everything.

>>> sigh, another sucker happy with the modicum offerings
>>> telecommunication companies currently provide...

>> sigh, another stupid leechchild that
>> aint prepared to pay for its leeching.

>> I can get unlimited downloads for about what
>> I was paying for dialup unlimited downloads.

> Bullshit.

Fraid so.

>> The only real downside with the current broadband
>> offerings is that unlimited downloads have to be scheduled
>> so they dont happen in peak time. Fine by me, tho it
>> would obviously be a bit better if I didnt have to schedule.

> So even you admit they are not unlimited.

They aint limited in volume, stupid.

> They are obviously limited because you can only download
> during certain restricted and limited times of the day.

They aint limited in volume, stupid.

> Sounds like limited downloads to me!

Best get your ears tested then, wanker.

>> I get a real permanent line with much better speeds than
>> are possible with dialup, for about the same cost as dialup.

>> I dont plan to pay for your activitys any time soon and I'm not
>> stupid enough to move to pomland or yankeeland or canuckland
>> and have to put up with the shit thats inevitable in any of those
>> places, just to get completely unlimited broadband.

> Unfortunately tampaland is also populated by so many
> bandwidth-guzzling turkeys that Telstra recently reduced
> one of their download limits from 3GB to 300MB.

Who cares ?  There are plenty of competitors to
Telstra. You're always welcome to use one of those
if you want more than 300MB, for a lower cost too.

And what Telstra actually did was provide more choice,
so those who arent stupid leechchildren dont have to
subsidise stupid leechchildren and can get an adsl service
for about what they pay for dialup if they use the net much.

Great. Not interested in subsidising stupid leechchildren.
They or their parents are welcome to pay for their activitys.

> Do you really believe that Australians are somehow so different
> from the rest of the world that they don't want to use the maximum
> available bandwidth that they can get their sweaty little hands on?

I really believe that it costs the ISP significantly more to
provide the multiple GBs per month that some leech and
that those doing that leeching should pay for that cost so
those of us that arent mindless leechchildren can get a
very decent adsl service for a lower cost than would be
necessary if we are forced to subsidise stupid leechchildren.

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
message news:3ce23f79$0$4696$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...

> Why don't you name some Australian towns that don't have ADSL?

COLEAMBALLY NSW 2707
YENDA NSW 2681
JERILDERIE NSW 2716
HANWOOD NSW 2680
WHITTON NSW 2705
GOOLGOWI NSW 2652
HAY NSW 2711
HILLSTON NSW 2675

> Why don't you perform a random sample of Australian
> towns and see whether they have ADSL or not?

A random sample isnt actually the best approach,
better to check a set of towns that are all close
to each other and see which of them have adsl.
Thats what proves that your terminally stupid claim
that "virtually every Australian town has ADSL" is
just that, terminally stupid and just plain wrong.

You can wipe that egg off your silly little face now.

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 ?

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
message news:3ce330b8$0$4696$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote

>>> Why don't you name some Australian towns that don't have ADSL?

> > COLEAMBALLY NSW 2707
> pop 650
> > YENDA NSW 2681
> pop 150
> > JERILDERIE NSW 2716
> pop 900
> > HANWOOD NSW 2680
> pop 200
> > WHITTON NSW 2705
> pop 150
> > GOOLGOWI NSW 2652
> pop 300
> > HAY NSW 2711
> pop 2900
> > HILLSTON NSW 2675
> pop 1100

All still towns, wankerboy. So your terminally stupid
claim that "virtually every Australian town has ADSL"
is just that, terminally stupid and just plain wrong.

Plenty of other towns with pops over 1K dont have adsl.

>>> Why don't you perform a random sample of Australian
>>> towns and see whether they have ADSL or not?

>> A random sample isnt actually the best approach,

> A full survey is the best approach.

Pity that would just make you look even more foolish indeed.

> Or get an exchange list from Telstra.

Pity that would just make you look even more foolish indeed. Specially
when you get a list of all the RIMs that cant have adsl currently.

>> better to check a set of towns that are all close
>> to each other and see which of them have adsl.

> Rubbish.
> Population is more important.

How odd that you never said a word
about population up till now, wankerboy.

>> Thats what proves that your terminally stupid claim that
>> "virtually every Australian town has ADSL" is just that,
>> terminally stupid and just plain wrong.

> My statement is still correct.

Even you should be able to bullshit
MUCH better than that, wankerboy.

You can wipe that egg off your silly little face now.

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
message news:3ce3336a$0$4697$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote

>>>> 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.

> The government owns the majority of Telstra.

You quite sure you aint one of those rocket
scientist desperately wanking children ?

> That is why Australia has a better ADSL rollout than NZ,

Have fun explaining the very different cable rollout here and in NZ.

> where Telecom is 100% owned by US corporations.

Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed that
Optus was never govt owned, and was the reason for the
much better cable rollout here than in sheepshaggerland.

>>> 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'

> I think

Liar, all you can manage is bullshit.
Nothing even remotely resembling 'think'

> 80% falls within the ambit of "virtually".

More fool you. Thats nothing like 'virtually every', wankerboy.

>> 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.

> About 90% of Australia's population lives in towns
> with a population greater than 2000 people.

And an even bigger percentage live in towns, wankerboy.

>>> 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.

> Having a phone service is not the most important criterion.

Sure is with adsl.

> The distance from other towns,

Got absolutely NOTHING to do with the availability of adsl.

> and age of the exchange

Utterly mangled all over again with the exchanges seen in both countrys.

> and wiring is more important.

Yet another pathetic little fantasy.

>>> And more profitable too.

>> You dont know that either.

> I do know.

Like hell you do.

> The larger the population base the greater the profitability.

Wrong. As always.

> The denser the population (no pun intended) the greater the profit.

Wrong. As always. With fibre optic links between
exchanges, it really doesnt matter much to the total
costs what the distance between the towns is.

And Aust is rather worse in that respect than sheepshaggerland anyway.

>>>> "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.

> 80% is virtually every Australian town.

Wrong. As always. And 80% of Aust towns dont have adsl anyway.

>>> 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.

> Everyone knows what a relative population measure is

Pity that dont qualify, wankerboy.

All the rest of your desperate wanking flushed where it belongs.

Some silly sheep shagger desperately cowering behind
tim <hampsterx@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:bgHE8.1548$7N.248134@news02.tsnz.net...

> dude there's no need to swear

Silly little cowering sheep shaggers get no say
what so ever on that or anything else. Ever.

> and get in a huph...

No doubt some weird sheepshagger ritual...

> very irrational and unprofessional ;(

Silly little cowering sheep shaggers get no say
what so ever on that or anything else. Ever.

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
message news:3ce3446f$0$4697$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote

>>>>> Why don't you name some Australian towns that don't have ADSL?

>>>> COLEAMBALLY NSW 2707
>>> pop 650
>>>> YENDA NSW 2681
>>> pop 150
>>>> JERILDERIE NSW 2716
>>> pop 900
>>>> HANWOOD NSW 2680
>>> pop 200
>>>> WHITTON NSW 2705
>>> pop 150
>>>> GOOLGOWI NSW 2652
>>> pop 300
>>>> HAY NSW 2711
>>> pop 2900
>>>> HILLSTON NSW 2675
>>> pop 1100

>> All still towns, wankerboy. So your terminally stupid
>> claim that "virtually every Australian town has ADSL"
>> is just that, terminally stupid and just plain wrong.

> A town has a population of over 2000.

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of
your predicament MUCH better than that, wankerboy.

> Anything else is a village or hamlet.

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of
your predicament MUCH better than that, wankerboy.

>> Plenty of other towns with pops over 1K dont have adsl.

> So far you have named only one.

My choice, wankerboy.

> Therefore my statement is still correct.

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of
your predicament MUCH better than that, wankerboy.

>>>>> Why don't you perform a random sample of Australian towns and see
>>>>> whether they have ADSL or not?

>>>> A random sample isnt actually the best approach,

>>> A full survey is the best approach.

>> Pity that would just make you look even more foolish indeed.

>>> Or get an exchange list from Telstra.

>> Pity that would just make you look even more foolish indeed. Specially
>> when you get a list of all the RIMs that cant have adsl currently.

>>>> better to check a set of towns that are all close
>>>> to each other and see which of them have adsl.

>>> Rubbish.
>>> Population is more important.

>> How odd that you never said a word
>> about population up till now, wankerboy.

> You didn't ask.

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of
your predicament MUCH better than that, wankerboy.

All the rest of your pathetic wanking flushed where it belongs.

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
message news:3ce345f8$0$4696$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote

>>>>>> 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.

>>> The government owns the majority of Telstra.

>> You quite sure you aint one of those rocket
>> scientist desperately wanking children ?

>>> That is why Australia has a better ADSL rollout than NZ,

>> Have fun explaining the very different cable rollout here and in NZ.

>>> where Telecom is 100% owned by US corporations.

>> Even someone as stupid as you should have noticed that
>> Optus was never govt owned, and was the reason for the
>> much better cable rollout here than in sheepshaggerland.

>>>>> 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'

>>> I think

>> Liar, all you can manage is bullshit.
>> Nothing even remotely resembling 'think'

>>> 80% falls within the ambit of "virtually".

>> More fool you. Thats nothing like 'virtually every', wankerboy.

> Yes it is.

Even you should be able to do MUCH better than that, wankerboy.

>>>> 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.

>>> About 90% of Australia's population lives in towns
>>> with a population greater than 2000 people.

>> And an even bigger percentage live in towns, wankerboy.

> What percentage would that be?

Chase it up for yourself, wanker boy.

>>>>> 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.

>>> Having a phone service is not the most important criterion.

>> Sure is with adsl.

> No it isn't.

Fraid so, particularly with 'towns', wankerboy.

> Having a adsl-ready exchange is more important.

Wrong. As always. Its trivial to add
a dslam to an exchange, wankerboy.

Only takes minutes.

> It is relatively simple to add a phone line as required.

No phone line is 'added' with adsl, wankerboy.

>>> The distance from other towns,

>> Got absolutely NOTHING to do with the availability of adsl.

> Yes it has.

Wrong. As always.

> Because of the way the ADSL network is constructed.

Even you should be able to bullshit
MUCH better than that, wankerboy.

>>> and age of the exchange

>> Utterly mangled all over again with the exchanges seen in both countrys.

>>> and wiring is more important.

>> Yet another pathetic little fantasy.

>>>>> And more profitable too.

>>>> You dont know that either.

>>> I do know.

>> Like hell you do.

> I do too.

Like hell you do.

>>> The larger the population base the greater the profitability.

>> Wrong. As always.

> You are more wrong than me.

Even you should be able to bullshit
MUCH better than that, wankerboy.

>>> The denser the population (no pun intended) the greater the profit.

>> Wrong. As always. With fibre optic links between
>> exchanges, it really doesnt matter much to the total
>> costs what the distance between the towns is.

> Rubbish.

We'll see.

> Fibre optics costs $ per meter.
> Laying costs $ per meter.

Pity thats all there for the basic phone services, wankerboy.

> It matters a lot.

Pigs arse it does on profitablility, wankerboy.

>> And Aust is rather worse in that respect than sheepshaggerland anyway.

Funny that. Yet more egg on your pathetic little dial.

>>>>>> "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.

>>> 80% is virtually every Australian town.

>> Wrong. As always. And 80% of Aust towns dont have adsl anyway.

> Oh, so now you are saying that "... 80% of Aust towns
> don't have ADSL".  Where do you get that figure from?

Just showed you a list, wankerboy.

Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in
message news:3ce35ab4$0$4697$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote

>>>>>>> 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.

>>>>> Having a phone service is not the most important criterion.

>>>> Sure is with adsl.

>>> No it isn't.

>> Fraid so, particularly with 'towns', wankerboy.

>>> Having a adsl-ready exchange is more important.

>> Wrong. As always. Its trivial to add
>> a dslam to an exchange, wankerboy.

> But that doesn't connect an exchange to the internet!

Even sheepshaggerland has managed that bit, wankerboy.

>> Only takes minutes.

>>> It is relatively simple to add a phone line as required.

>> No phone line is 'added' with adsl, wankerboy.

> I said "as required".

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of
your  predicament MUCH better than that, wankerboy.

> If there is no telephone line to the premises

Soorree, there are fuck all 'premises' like that anymore, wankerboy.

> then it can be added as required.

And a hell of a lot more effort can be required than providing
an adsl service on an existing phone line, wankerboy.

> You said that having a telephone line was more
> important than having the exchange ADSL ready.

More of your childish lying. Never did.

>>>>> The distance from other towns,

>>>> Got absolutely NOTHING to do with the availability of adsl.

>>> Yes it has.

>> Wrong. As always.

> Oh.  So internet connectivity just appears out of nowhere?

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of
your  predicament MUCH better than that, wankerboy.

"Mike Doyle" <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:3ce330b8$0$4696$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> In article <abva92$lb9ss$1@ID-69072.news.dfncis.de>, "Rod Speed"
> <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:3ce23f79$0$4696$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> >
> >> Why don't you name some Australian towns that don't have ADSL?
> >
> > COLEAMBALLY NSW 2707
> pop 650
> > YENDA NSW 2681
> pop 150
> > JERILDERIE NSW 2716
> pop 900
> > HANWOOD NSW 2680
> pop 200
> > WHITTON NSW 2705
> pop 150
> > GOOLGOWI NSW 2652
> pop 300
> > HAY NSW 2711
> pop 2900
> > HILLSTON NSW 2675
> pop 1100
>
> Now I also have proof that you are a dickhead.
>
> >
> >> Why don't you perform a random sample of Australian towns and see
> >> whether they have ADSL or not?
> >
> > A random sample isnt actually the best approach,
>
> A full survey is the best approach.
> Or get an exchange list from Telstra.
>
> > better to check a set
> > of towns that are all close to each other and see which of them have
> > adsl.
>
> Rubbish.
> Population is more important.

pupulation MY ASS. Cobar 2835, pop ~5000; no ADSL. you shouldnt live in
rubbish, obviously some maggots have decided to migrate from the rubbish to
you head.


>
> > Thats what proves that your terminally stupid claim that
> > "virtually every Australian town has ADSL" is just that, terminally
> > stupid and just plain wrong.
>
> My statement is still correct.
>
> >
> > You can wipe that egg off your silly little face now.
>
> Keep your head down that toilet bowl - where it belongs.

"Mike Doyle" <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:3ce3446f$0$4697$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> In article <abvegr$lt5p3$1@ID-69072.news.dfncis.de>, "Rod Speed"
> <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:3ce330b8$0$4696$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> >> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
> >>> Mike Doyle <mike.doyle_RE@move_optushome.com.au> wrote
> >
> >>>> Why don't you name some Australian towns that don't have ADSL?
> >
> >> > COLEAMBALLY NSW 2707
> >> pop 650
> >> > YENDA NSW 2681
> >> pop 150
> >> > JERILDERIE NSW 2716
> >> pop 900
> >> > HANWOOD NSW 2680
> >> pop 200
> >> > WHITTON NSW 2705
> >> pop 150
> >> > GOOLGOWI NSW 2652
> >> pop 300
> >> > HAY NSW 2711
> >> pop 2900
> >> > HILLSTON NSW 2675
> >> pop 1100
> >
> > All still towns, wankerboy. So your terminally stupid claim that
> > "virtually every Australian town has ADSL" is just that, terminally
> > stupid and just plain wrong.
>
> A town has a population of over 2000.

Cobar pop ~5000

> Anything else is a village or hamlet.

TOWN you tosser

>
> >
> > Plenty of other towns with pops over 1K dont have adsl.
>
> So far you have named only one.
> Therefore my statement is still correct.
>
> >
> >>>> Why don't you perform a random sample of Australian towns and see
> >>>> whether they have ADSL or not?
> >
> >>> A random sample isnt actually the best approach,
> >
> >> A full survey is the best approach.
> >
> > Pity that would just make you look even more foolish indeed.
> >
> >> Or get an exchange list from Telstra.
> >
> > Pity that would just make you look even more foolish indeed. Specially
> > when you get a list of all the RIMs that cant have adsl currently.
> >
> >>> better to check a set of towns that are all close to each other and
> >>> see which of them have adsl.
> >
> >> Rubbish.
> >> Population is more important.
> >
> > How odd that you never said a word
> > about population up till now, wankerboy.
>
> You didn't ask.
> You are just full of cantankerous bullshit.
>
> >
> >>> Thats what proves that your terminally stupid claim that "virtually
> >>> every Australian town has ADSL" is just that, terminally stupid and
> >>> just plain wrong.
> >
> >> My statement is still correct.
> >
> > Even you should be able to bullshit
> > MUCH better than that, wankerboy.
> >
> > You can wipe that egg off your silly little face now.
> >
>
> You are still stupid.

and yes i know cobar is only one town, but im sure that there are plenty of
other TOWNS that dont have ADSL.

Some silly little sheep shagger cowering behind
tim <hampsterx@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:sxLE8.1610$7N.257856@news02.tsnz.net...

>> Silly little cowering sheep shaggers get no say
>> what so ever on that or anything else. Ever.

> Actually I think

Liar, silly little cowering sheep shaggers arent capable of thought.

> thats being a little bit disrespectful

Silly little cowering sheep shaggers get no say
what so ever on that or anything else. Ever.