« Telstra's bankruptcy network | Main | eSATA drives: faster data »
April 06, 2007
Sloppy work?
Let's be frank. Sometimes we fall short of perfection. We try hard to spell the names correctly, avoid splitting infinitives, check the facts and and the bona fides etc., but we're not immune to the occasional slip-up. A couple of weeks ago, for instance, when we did the latest workhorse PC specs, we managed to understate the price by roughly $200. What happened was that we used Word's column autosum feature to do the arithmetic. Unfortunately, we failed to notice that we hadn't highlighted the first item in the column - the cost of the CPU. Next time we'll get out the calculator, and double check.
Fortunately, while the occasional error gets through, our batting average is pretty good.
We were therefore momentarily mortified on Thursday night, to receive an email from a reader called Bill Purcell accusing us of numerous deficiencies in our latest column (See Below). Bill obviously enjoys a nice game of what transactional analyst Eric Berne called "Now I've Got You, You Bastard", and he piled on the sarcasm::
Sloppy work, I'm afraid, Chas. Telstra's Next G HSDPA is 14.4 mbit/s not 1.8 mbit/s. I would have hoped you, as a revered guru, would know the difference. Perhaps we can blame that on the work experience girl.
I know that numbers are not a strong point of yours, so I won't ask you to explain the current mass migration of ADSL users onto NEXT G wireless broadband services. I don't suppose your sums could be wrong?
I wonder why a fully commercially built new network, paid for by Telstra shareholders, REFUSES to accept ANY HIBIS/Broadband Connect/Broadband Guarantee Federal Government funding?
Why don't you drive the Edgemobile for a couple of hours past the end of the tram tracks and experience what those who don't have Optus or Foxtel Cable, ADSL, or are befuddled by a bevy of dodgy wireless and satellite providers have to contend with?.
I fully understand, however, that one might prefer to sit, in resplendent comfort, in Edgetropolis Central, and try and plug a fancy new mobile phone into a laptop, just to see what happens.
Ouch! The thing is, even sitting in resplendent comfort in Edgetropolis Central - actually, the Bleeding Edge cave isn't what we'd call resplendently comfortable - it's easy to check whether Next G is a 14.4Mbps network. According to Telstra, it isn't. It says so, right here:
With Next G, now you can download files and entertainment even faster on our Super G Fast plans with average speeds of 550Kbps to 1.5Mbps and a peak network downlink speed of 3.6 Mbps.There's no doubt that it will shortly become a 14.4Mbps network, and eventually, even faster. But we mentioned that in the story.
Bill's emails seems to be aimed at having a bit of mud-slinging fun at our expense, rather than discussing the point of the article, which of course, has nothing to do with the speed of the network. It’s a good network, and the story acknowledged that. The point we made in the column was that Telstra is grievously over-charging its customers. If there is a mass migration of ADSL users onto NEXT G (we'd love to know where Bill gets those figures) they must be particularly wealthy.
It seems to Bleeding Edge that what they most have to contend with is not so much "a bevy of dodgy wireless and satellite providers" as a company that has always regarded the public as a resource they can milk. Frankly, in our opinion, Telstra is a world leader in commercial avarice, and for too long it has held this country's progress hostage to its greed.
We can't help but wonder whether Bill might, just possibly, have some intimate connection with Telstra. That line of sarcasm seems awfully familiar.
Posted by cw at April 6, 2007 09:30 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://bleedingedge.com.au/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1227
Comments
Did Bill's e-mail address give him away? (Telstra/Bigpond)
It appears that if we mention the Telstra Corporation here or as is now the case of the Bleeding Edge column they are quick to correct us if we are wrong.
Posted by: Stephen ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://bleedingedge.com.au/blog/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 7, 2007 05:42 PM
It's a Big Pond address. That doesn't necessarily mean anything - it's the biggest ISP, after all - but I can't think of anyone, aside from the Telstra folks - who'd get such a burr under the saddle, throw in unverifiable "facts" such as the "current mass migration of ADSL users", and make such a fuss about "a fully commercially built new network, paid for by Telstra shareholders" REFUSING to accept ANY HIBIS/Broadband Connect/Broadband Guarantee Federal Government funding".
Does anyone else know or care about what funding they might or might not have refused, and for what reason?
And who else would bear such obvious hatred and spite for a lovable chap such as Bleeding Edge? Hmmn?
Posted by: cw at April 8, 2007 01:01 PM
True CW, a Bigpond address doesn't mean that much though for the in depth knowledge Bill has on Telstra's refusal of funding Bill can be proud of his 'Telstra Fanboi' status.
So Bill, Are you a Telstra employee?
Posted by: Stephen at April 8, 2007 11:20 PM
Perhaps Stephen's question of Bill should be expanded - Bill, are you an employee, contractor or consultant employed or engaged by Telstra or an organisation associated with Telstra? Important since we seem to be playing with words....
As we often see in the world of politics, when your argument is weak you attack the person, and don't debate the facts. If you can also discredit the person, then anything they say down the track mustn't be credible either (or the person has to prove the credibility before proving their point).
Posted by: Dave at April 9, 2007 10:56 AM
If you really wanted to make a point about data charging ripoffs, you should bring to the publics attention the cost per gigabyte of SMS text data.
1GB/160B * $0.25 = $1562500/GB.
Now that's an absolute rip off.
Posted by: pacmanj at April 12, 2007 04:33 PM