Not speed alone

There’s a danger that people pushing the case for fibre need to be careful about- a focus on Internet connection speed alone risks missing the rest of the picture.

Look at Brian Fallow’s “Do we even need ultra-fast broadband?” in the NZ Herald and Ernie Newman’s response “Don't fret, our broadband policy is sound”.

Brian says that the Government's plan for ultra-fast broadband (UFB) “sounds visionary. But the risk is high that it is a solution that will not work to a problem that does not really exist.” 11 pages and 99 comments later, it’s hard not to get a feeling that many people agree with him. Not quite for the reasons that Brian wants them to but nevertheless there is clearly something here for people who only talk about Mbps and Gbps.

Ernie’s response is that UFB is “... a critical element in our remaining a first world economy into the 21st century.” A build it and the value will follow approach as he says, “first we need the connectivity with sufficient critical mass for them to become viable... Economic tools like cost benefit analysis should be used in conjunction with vision and foresight, not as a substitute for them.”

Ernie’s response is in line with the common answer to Brian’s question but I don’t think it is the full answer. Neither does it seem do most of the people who commented on Brian’s article.

Ask a typical Internet user what he or she wants from the Internet and you’ll probably get a variety of answers. Whether it’s watching a video online, buying/selling something, connecting with a friend/colleague/customer, or just finding some information, people care about all the many things that together make the Internet valuable for them.

Typically, they want the Internet to be available, cheap, quick, secure, easy to use, and reliable.

Notice the word “quick”? It is only one of the things that people care about.

People want to watch YouTube videos and do all the things they want online without worrying about data caps, peering issues, and costs. Or worry about which particular content provider or online services their ISP has struck cosy deals. Or how many other people in their neighbourhood are online at the same time. Or why speed tests show they’ve got a very fast connection yet streaming video is like watching grass grow.

In fact, as several comments pointed out, some people are unable to take full advantage of the connection speed they’ve already got. So providing them with more speed alone isn’t the right answer.

Addressing availability and connection speed via the UFB and Rural Broadband for the majority of Kiwis (not all) in 5-10 years time doesn’t address the frustrations of today. Like 12 month contracts, one of my current bugbears.

This was one of the reasons that I worried about Telecom’s request for a fourth variation to its Operational Separation Undertakings slipping through unnoticed. The copper access network is going to be a mainstay of telecommunications services for Kiwis for years to come and the Undertakings are the best bet at the moment for delivering overall improvements.

The question isn’t whether we need ultra-fast broadband. We do. A more interesting question is what else do we need to do so that the higher connection speeds from fibre actually unlock the potential of the Internet for Kiwis?

Until then, a common response to UFB is going to be that all people will get for $1.5 billion is a way to reach their monthly data cap in minutes instead of days.