CNET: Broadband now tops EU's Internet agenda

dahamsta

Broadband now tops EU's Internet agenda

By Reuters
February 12, 2002, 7:25 AM PT

BRUSSELS, Belgium--The European Commission said Tuesday that it was putting high-speed Internet access at the top of its strategy to boost e-commerce and turn the European Union into the world's most competitive economy by 2010.

By promoting broadband, the European Union's executive is choosing to focus on a product already available to businesses and consumers and putting on the back burner its strategy for 3G (third-generation) mobile phones, whose commercial launch may not come until 2005.

Although competition was driving Internet connection costs down, European Information Society Commissioner Erkki Liikanen said broadband remained generally expensive in the European Union, where fast Internet penetration is only 6 percent.

"To be connected to the Internet is not enough, we have to look at the quality of the connection," Liikanen told a news conference as he presented an assessment on EU progress in information technology and e-commerce. "From now on, broadband will be the key issue," he said.

Broadband gives people access to the Internet at speeds roughly 25 times faster than a standard phone line, allowing people to quickly download big data files.

Data released by GartnerG2 in February showed broadband penetration in EU households was only around 2 percent to 3 percent, compared with 13 percent in the United States.

The Commission will present its Internet strategy at a two-day EU summit in Barcelona, Spain, beginning March 13. Other priorities include improving security for communication networks, fostering the retail end of e-commerce and asking governments to perform more administrative tasks online.

Europe's efforts to increase broadband Internet access to bridge the gap with the United States have so far focused on liberalizing the last mile of telecom networks, a process that started in January 2001 but which has proved slow.

Liikanen said the Commission would support increasing competition between different communication platforms--such as cable, digital TV, satellites and mobile telephony--as a way to drive down costs and boost high-speed Internet access.

He said a recently approved EU package of telecom law would favor competition removing distinctions between technologies as long as they performed the same function. The package needs to be transposed into law by EU member states by spring 2003.

The Commission's decision to step up support to broadband signals a shift in the Commission's perception of short-term priorities to boost the New Economy.

Only a year ago, the Commission had asked member states to support 3G mobile phone technology, an industry the EU hopes to lead one day. But references to 3G mobile telephony have recently dropped from EU documents.

Liikanen admitted that the 15-nation European Union had been too optimistic about 3G mobile phones and did not put sufficient emphasis on the services to be offered.

"The real problem is that we had huge optimism about the technology while the discussion on the content was too weak," Liikanen said. "We must learn from our mistakes."

Story Copyright © 2002 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.

c0y0te

ENN Article today:-

The Irish Times carries a Reuters story on a decision by the European Commission to put high-speed Internet access at the top of its strategy to increase the take-up of e-commerce. European Information Society Commissioner Erkki Liikanen said that broadband is still generally expensive in the EU, with broadband penetration of just six percent. "To be connected to the Internet is not enough, we have to look at the quality of the connection," Liikanen told a news conference. "From now on, broadband will be the key issue." Reuters says that the Commission will present its strategy for adoption at an EU summit in Barcelona on 13 March to 14 March.

c0y0te

c0y0te

I hate the way that happens...

I post an article, then find it's dissappeared and replaced by the same article by someone else, and it's then subsumed into the thread.

Not bothered about who posts or when.. just get's confusing when I go looking for a response and realise it's vanished into some other thread:D

c0y0te

Xian

If anyone cares to read the gartnerg2 report, they will find that the same statistics are used to draw completely opposing conclusions. I've learnt my lesson, though: long-winded posts don't get much airplay. So, in the spirit of the sig, I'll be blunt.

Calls from governments and the eu for high-speed internet access risk turning the internet into The Internet(TM). When industry talks about broadband, they are thinking of e-commerce (boo.com), home entertainment (excite@home). This is not what the internet is about, nor is it the reason people use the internet. The internet has always been and will continue to be about communication and access to information. This is why the most popular and successful application to harness the power of the internet in its 30 year history, the "killer app", has been the humble e-mail. The internet community as a whole will continue to be nonplussed by broadband, no matter what whizz-bang applications are developed for it.

National terrestrial television channels are seen as a necessity and have therefore been actively regulated to ensure affordable flat-rate access. This is true primarily because they disseminate information necessary to keep the community informed. 56k dial-up internet access is another such necessity, keeping us informed.

There is a market for cable and satellite television but it is seen as a luxury, something people pay extra for if they have the disposable income to do so, certainly not something governments would fund or promote. Broadband is just such luxury.

There are too many necessities to be addressed to justify the promotion of a luxury. If governments think they are in a position to promote broadband, they should concentrate their efforts on the likes of health and education - it would be a far better use of their time and resources.

Dustaz

Originally posted by Xian

Calls from governments and the eu for high-speed internet access risk turning the internet into The Internet(TM). When industry talks about broadband, they are thinking of e-commerce (boo.com), home entertainment (excite@home). This is not what the internet is about, nor is it the reason people use the internet. The internet has always been and will continue to be about communication and access to information. This is why the most popular and successful application to harness the power of the internet in its 30 year history, the "killer app", has been the humble e-mail. The internet community as a whole will continue to be nonplussed by broadband, no matter what whizz-bang applications are developed for it.

Couldnt disagree with you more there Xian. If you look at somewhere like an urban US City where broadband is available readily, the 'internet community' as a whole will not only be plussed but will HAVE broadband.
Post as many reports from as many bean counters as you like, but i know this to be true from experience. Out of five personal friends i have in New York, 4 have broadband. These people are not hardcore gamers, nor 'netphiles' by any sense of the word, They just take advantage of a cheap and readily available service. The whizz-bang applications are there already and guess what, they are being used by people with broadband.

Xian

I stand corrected. Any statistic I quote cannot counter the fact that a whopping 80% of Dustaz's New York mates use broadband.

Dustaz, you seem like the right person to ask. I'm thinking of tabling a motion at the next IrelandOffline AGM for the addition of "Universal access to LCD for all users" to their list of objectives and I need someone to second the motion. Interested? That way we can all trade in our dusty old CRT monitors for 22" flat-screens. Think of the desktop space that would save! All we need to do then is to have X-box games made a tax-deductible expense and we'll really be able to give those yanks a run for their money in the tech-advancement status, eh?

Yoda

Dustaz conveniently omits the fact that his New York buddies had unmetered internet access long before they ever had access to broadband.

Dustaz also conveniently overlooks the evidence that Xian provided: most UK users who have access to flat-rate dialup and broadband are satisfied with the former.

Dustaz: flat-rate must be IrelandOffline's primary goal. Your interests will be met, by the market, subsequently.

Do not damage our cause by an attachment to wishful thinking. The ODTR has already characterized your position as such.

Think.

Dustaz

Originally posted by Yoda
Dustaz conveniently omits the fact that his New York buddies had unmetered internet access long before they ever had access to broadband.

Dustaz also conveniently overlooks the evidence that Xian provided: most UK users who have access to flat-rate dialup and broadband are satisfied with the former.

Both these communities had access to unmetered internet access before broadband was rolled out. Whats the difference? Theres other market forces at work. Just like theres other market forces here.

Dustaz: flat-rate must be IrelandOffline's primary goal. Your interests will be met, by the market, subsequently.

Fine, Primary goal is grand. Its funny how the market hasnt reacted to my previous interest - Flat Rate - in 12 years tho.

Do not damage our cause by an attachment to wishful thinking. The ODTR has already characterized your position as such.
[/B]

Yoda,

Please read what Dahamasta posted re: The Committes decision to retain the third objective

Finally, to address the concerns of members who are primarily concerned with broadband issues - please note the use of the word "prioritise". IrelandOffline's "mission" remains to encourage the rollout of any and all Internet services that will cut costs for the average user. We are not saying we will stop commenting on broadband issues, just that we will try to highlight FRIACO issues more intensely. IrelandOffline wants what's best for IrelandOffline members, and the community and the country as a whole.

I would really appreciate it if you would stop demonising the need for broadband at every turn.

Think.

Dont try to patronise. thanks.

chernobyl

Broadband is for dublin and the likes, bigish urban centres where cash invested by someone like NTL will be returned but no amount of pressure will speed it up, as ireland has not got the population for the most part to make it financially viable.

FRIACO...what a dream it would be to have it, that more in line with reality yet broadband existed before FRIACO, so i dont ever see it happening, your just climbing a glass wall with €ircon.

Dustaz

Xian, lets not descend into childishness here. Im not against FRIACO. I suport it wholeheartadly as i have done for the last 8 years, since i first became aware of the general concept. In the last year or so ive come to realise that we are now almost as far behind in terms of broadband as we are in terms of friaco - we still have neither, most other countries have both.

You can quote figures out the wazoo that there is no takeup of broadband in country x, y or z. The fact remains that it is availble and the services have not been cancelled due to lack of interest.

We need BOTH in this country. not one or the other. I fully accept that broadband will be priced in the luxury range, and that takeup will be slow. That does not change the fact that we need access to it.

Yoda

Originally posted by Dustaz
Both these communities had access to unmetered internet access before broadband was rolled out. Whats the difference? Theres other market forces at work. Just like theres other market forces here.

There aren't really, considering that the market has its hands tied because of the monopoly's unfair and uncompetitive pricing structure.

Fine, Primary goal is grand. Its funny how the market hasnt reacted to my previous interest - Flat Rate - in 12 years tho.

But we had flat-rate (10p per call or so) until 1990 when the monopoly introduced metered billing for phone calls.

My point, Dustaz, is that I want to see these boards talking about FRIACO and what we can actually do about it. An enormous proportion of discussion on these boards is totally focussed on the broadband issue. I see the three objectives -- and the committee has apparently agreed with the position -- as stepping stones to decent service in Ireland, and what I don't get is why everyone likes to talk about the third stone along when we haven't managed to get onto the first.

I'm not demonizing broadband. I'd like to have a 24-hour cable connection like my friend in Los Angeles has. Then I could save money on web hosting by running my own server. But jeez my phone bill came yesterday. The service I have is burden enough!

If broadband were introduced while metered access is the norm, what good will it do anyone? I surely won't be able to consider it, and I doubt most of the homes and small businesses in Ireland will either.

To all: what can we do to get unmetered access?

Moriarty

Originally posted by Yoda
To all: what can we do to get unmetered access?

Nothing. We cant do anything to actually introduce unmetered access. All we can do is lobby for it, as ioffl has been doing for the past ~10 months - we have pushed telcos & the odtr to hurry up with sorting out the mess. Thats all we can do.

We are all just going to have to wait until some business decides to take the plunge and get into serious negotiations with eircom about using those 1892/1893 numbers.

Dustaz

Originally posted by Yoda


But we had flat-rate (10p per call or so) until 1990 when the monopoly introduced metered billing for phone calls.

Do you actually read my posts?:)
I know, thats why i said 12 years. (actually, was it 1989 that it was stopped? not sure)

My point, Dustaz, is that I want to see these boards talking about FRIACO and what we can actually do about it. An enormous proportion of discussion on these boards is totally focussed on the broadband issue. I see the three objectives -- and the committee has apparently agreed with the position -- as stepping stones to decent service in Ireland, and what I don't get is why everyone likes to talk about the third stone along when we haven't managed to get onto the first.

Couple of things here. This forum is used by (mostly) heavy internet users. These are the people that broadband is aimed at. Ergo, they want to discuss it.

Secondly, I dont think the objectives are numbered. It doesnt have to be a case of 1 then 2 then 3. Its not logical, Objective 2 is the furthest along and it has a huge bearing on the other two.

If broadband were introduced while metered access is the norm, what good will it do anyone? I surely won't be able to consider it, and I doubt most of the homes and small businesses in Ireland will either.

What does flatrate access have to do with broadband?
Broadband is flatrate (Dont let download caps confuse the issue, i would argue that they are a seperate issue).
Why are you not able to consider it while flat rate is not the norm? Either you need/can afford it or not, irregardless of FRIACO.

Apologies if i appear to be nitpicking, i just dont understand what your geting at.

Xian

Originally posted by Dustaz
Xian, lets not descend into childishness here.

As a moderator, Dustaz, and therefore no doubt bound to expect the worst from newbies until you know them better, I'll let that pass.

Im not against FRIACO.

Neither am I, for the record, against broadband. I will say that if I had access to broadband, I would give it serious consideration as I am, like yourself, a "heavy" internet user. I am, however, against campaigning for a service that will benefit a small minority. Unless those who feel it is worth campaigning for give valid arguments to show that its introduction, and the form of its introduction, is going to improve access for the general internet using community in Ireland, I will continue to be against campaigning for it. If I considered myself to have enough time to campaign for broadband given the arguments to date, I'd decide to dedicate more time to my business, to Amnesty International, to the SVP, whatever.

There are too many necessities to be addressed to justify the promotion of a luxury.

That goes for me as well.

Dustaz

Originally posted by Xian

As a moderator, Dustaz, and therefore no doubt bound to expect the worst from newbies until you know them better, I'll let that pass.

Dont hide behind your post count, your no newbie. Your registered here since september and you are obviously an intelligent person. I respect the amount of work you put into your article, but just because im a moderator on another forum doesnt mean im going to keep my mouth shut if you take a shot.


Your reasons for not wanting to campain for broadband are fair enough, thats the way you feel. I dont happen to agree with them for various other reasons, and i know that im certainly not alone in this.
So how about we agree to disagree, yes?

Dustaz

There are too many necessities to be addressed to justify the promotion of a luxury.

This was quoted as an argument not to adress the broadband issue. Its funny but this exact same argument was used around 7 years ago by my employers when i suggested getting a company website and company e-mail in. I would guess that this same argument would have been used to argue against flat rate as opposed to free dialup accounts at around the same time.

In another 7 years, will we be using the same argument to concentrate on broadband when all around is using wideband?

Weve been looking for flate rate for 12 years. Since broadband is on the agenda at the moment, we have a chance to lobby for issues that would mean in 12 years time, we arent in the same situation as we are now with FRIACO.

Stonemason

I would use the same arguement against flatrate(im not against it by the way) but simply put most casual users would not bother to pay €20/€30 a month for a service they hardly use.If on the other hand they could get all sorts of goodies from the net ie demos music films even they would be more inclined to make net access more apart of their lives which 56k wont do.Also not having the missus or oldfella ect bitching at them for hogging the line i think alot more people would happily pay say €40/€50 a month.Secondly im not intrested in Eircom as soon as people realise that Eircom is a distraction rather than a viable soloution to the countrys needs the better.The truth is simple Eircom doesnt want flatrate so we will not have flaterate.People like to make comparisons with other countrys well thats all well and good if you want to follow fashion no matter how outdated this is your perogative personal id rather skip what will only be as someone else so aptly put it the futlie exersive of trying to climing a glass wall that is eircom in the vain hope they will fianly give in.Flatrate broadband based on an airborne system is prObably more acheivable and certainly more attractive as a standard than flaterate land line from eircom with everyone getting dropped not being able to connect hell the list gos on and on.So you decide who will benefit more from flatrate from eircom certainly not occasional users mainly heavy users who no dout would get hobbled by eircom in some fashion (ala SNL) and tell me this if you could download what you wanted in an hour rather than leaving you connection on all night and clogging up the networks for 9 hours longer making life more difficult for those actualy at their computers rather than tucked up in bed like yourself what would you say to them sod you im ok jack.



Stone

Yoda

Stonemason,

(A little, or indeed a lot of, attention to spelling and punctuation would enable your readers to figure out just what it is you are on about. My eyes hurt. The same goes for a lot of people posting on these boards, I am not just picking on you.)

Having said that, it seems to me that you are making the following claim:

1. Casual users would not pay flatrate €20-€30 a month for 56K, but the magic of broadband would transform them into superusers happy to pay twice that amount and just so they could violate copyright laws and download music and films (which is of course what the net is all about).

In my view, this claim is entirely unsubstantiated. If people use the service casually it is because they don't need to use it more. Most people are happy to check their e-mail, and occasionally surf for a bit of information, or to book a hotel or buy something online. Or, like many people I know, they have a rule not to go on line till after dinner, because otherwise the costs are too high. Small business like mine, we have no choice but to use the net when we have to, throughout the day, and so we suffer from unpredictable phone bills.

Flatrate broadband based on an airborne system is prObably more acheivable and certainly more attractive as a standard than flaterate land line from eircom with everyone getting dropped not being able to connect hell the list gos on and on.

You have got to be kidding. And how long will it take for that technology to be implemented? And who will own it? And what will it cost? Why is it "probably more achievable"? Ach, it's just more pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking, isn't it?

We have a telecoms infrastructure in this country. What we need is for it to be regulated properly and priced fairly, so that more people can take advantage of the service which presently exists. There's no reason in principle that the ODTR couldn't be given the power to hit the monopoly where it hurts -- if the government chose to stand up for the people.

In any case, I don't suggest that there isn't room in the world for metered billing. For very casual users, pay-per-minute might be just the right thing for them. In fact, that's what you get in the US and I think in pre-1990 Ireland. Most people pay a flat rate per month and get as many local calls as they like for free. But pensioners and so on, who may use the phone much more rarely, can choose metered payment which often saves them 80¢ on the euro. It's like having cable TV. You can either pay (rather too hugely) every month for the movie channel, or you can pay-per-view.

Stonemason

Belittle the person you disagree with. Your punctuation maybe good but your manners leave a lot to be desired and im not saying this personally but for all us illiterate thickys who can’t spell or punctuate correctly. Now we have that little matter out of the way.......The reason I say it is probably more achievable is simple I have absolutely no faith in eircom either to be able to or willing to provide flat rate I also do not believe this government is going to move one inch in any way shape or form that will actually affect eircoms position. I don’t know how else to say it sorry BUT IT WILL NOT HAPPEN WITH THIS GOVERMENT AND EIRCOM. Eircom own the lines this means that no other operator will be able to bring this service in either because it is going to have to go through eircom first. So far we have seen one company east get into count them two exchanges which may sound like cause for rejoicing but what price will they charge? Probably no better than eircom and probably more and also highly restricted to the cherry location cities. As all indications point to the government showing an interest in broadband mainly for two reasons 1- people it sees as worthwhile I.E business 2-to bring even more business into the country. Think of it this way flat rate is hardly going to wow possible foreign companies looking for a European base so why would the government be interested we are stuck with it. What im driving at is if you can give the government a chance to kill two birds with one stone and come out looking like the good guys then you stand more of a chance of getting things done. The theory is this ESB has the a high Tec fiber optic loop has the masts all that is needed now is for a company to show an interest and the government coffers would open more readily. This is all theory yes but I believe it to be more realistic than waiting for flat rate to appear. There are a lot of points missing here but after an 18 hour shift im to knackered to spell it out word for word. Final word is the copper wire service is getting worse the cost of maintained is to prohibitive its time to modernize Irelands phone and net access as someone already pointed out eircom would do well to scrap their antiquated system and go for a more cost effective low maintenance more resilient system such as the one ive suguested.The only reason the dinosaur that is eircom is still alive is because it is being protected by the government unfortunately we the home users of Ireland rate about as much on the food chain as plankton unpleasant to know but their you go.

Stone

PS Of course yoda youve never downloaded a mp3!!! and whats wrong with downloading a demo of a game you maybe thinking of buying ?.