Rolling Out Broadband Internet, On The Cheap

Mathamota writes "The goverment controlled telephone company in the city of Kolkata (Calcutta), India is providing a Internet access service called DIAS (Direct Internet Access System) which provides 24 hour connection at 128kbps (when the phone is being used, it drops to 64). However, the best part is that the cost of Plan I (which has a data transfer limit of 500 megs) is only Rs 825 ($ 16.50) per month, all inclusive. The technology used in this stuff is quite interesting, and there is a whitepaper available at the site of the company which developed the system." At first glance, it sounds just like plain old ISDN; but after reading the white paper, it's a bit different. Cool idea.

Comments

It is ISDN

[x0n]

It's Indian-Style Dodgy Networking.

- Oisin

hah!

[syle]

At first glance, it sounds just like plain old ISDN; but after reading the white paper, it's a bit different. Cool idea.

Nice try! But, we know that editors aren't allowed to read the articles they link to. You won't fool us so easily, Hemos...

If that is your real name.

What ifs...

[Vodak]

The expansion of Internet access in anyway way is a good thing, but you must ask what will happen when this government ran internet service provider starts cracking down on it's citizens internet usage habits. Because it's a government ran internet service provider would the government be held accountable for file sharing crap going on?

Re:What ifs...

[spRed]

Yes, it's always a good thing for american workers when 3rd world countries learn how to telecommute.

As an American worker you are garunteed your job for life. It is the government's job to protect you from competition foreign and domestic. Because we all know that moving jobs to the third world where there weren't any before is just exploitation by the capitalist pig dogs.

Is that what you meant, or just what you said?

Subsidies???

[foooo]

How much of this "low cost" is because of subsidies?

I could (but would never) roll out low cost T1s to everyone in the USA for 10 bucks a month... just have the government pick up the tab.

~foooo

This is not very Cheap for most Indians

[fozzy(pro)]

The cost of this is not inexpensive if you consider what most indians make at a yearly level. Not to mention the cost of the phone or computer. It's a step in the right direction.

Cheers to the government

Re:This is not very Cheap for most Indians

[doktor-hladnjak]

The cost of this is not inexpensive if you consider what most indians make at a yearly level. Not to mention the cost of the phone or computer. It's a step in the right direction.

Yes, this is really not cheap, even for people making good money in India. A friend of mine was telling me how a couple of years ago, he got an offer of around $750/month, right out of college for some sort of programming job. He said this was an obscene amount of money, not just by the standards of the average Indian, but also by other friends who had gotten IT-related jobs. He seemed to think it was comparable to making close to 6 figures in USD. I've had other friends say things like "multiply by 60" to get the idea of how much lower the cost of everyday items (food, clothing, etc) is.

So, the cost for this is something like 1/40 of even a well-off middle class Indian.

First reaction was "Great!" until I asked myself

[RLiegh]

What is the cost of living like in India?

If it's decent, does that mean that there's a greater chance that Open Source will spread with the easier availability of iso's and ftp installs?

Etherlinx

[ih8apple]

Have you guys heard of Etherlinx?

Apparently, they have their own way of rolling out cheap broadband. Anyone have any idea on whether their super-sized WiFi works?

Re:Looks like a good idea

[gid]

Not on a 128kbps connection you can't. :)

Nice solution for the digital divide

[Omega1045]

There are a lot of people out there that cannot afford $40+ a month for screaming fast Internet access. Many others simply won't pay. On the surface, this looks to be an excellent tool to help us bridge the digital divide. Let the "poor" kids have some decent Internet access.

Plus, true 128 is soooo much faster that 56k (which is usually 28.8 - 44ish).

Re:First reaction was "Great!" until I asked mysel

[raju1kabir]

Typical household income is about $1500/year. So that's like someone in the US paying $500/month for DSL.

128 kbps is hardly broadband

[squarooticus]

That's about twice what a good modem offers these days. It might have better latency than a modem, but bandwidth? You can't get anything better than the poor-quality video streams from the web news sites with 128 kbps, and you certainly can't reliably stream 128 kbps MP3, which itself isn't CD-quality.

I have 640/128 DSL, and while the 640 is nice and speedy and supports most of the media I want, the 128 up is terribly slow and won't even allow me to stream Oggs (192 kbps) from my home to my workplace.

"Broadband" means something different now than it did 5 years ago.

Re:128 kbps is hardly broadband

[dissy]

*sigh* and slashdot JUST had an article on this in the past week.

> 128 kbps is hardly broadband

How do you figure based on that information?

Is a blue car fast?
Is a baby that crys tall?
Is a sharp knife long?

> 128 kbps is hardly broadband

128 kbps - this is a speed, measuring a type of bandwidth.
is hardly - this is (basically) a logical 'not'.
broadband - this is the type of carrier data is sent over.

You realize if a pair of wires uses a protocol to send both IP data and any other data at all that isnt IP, it is broadband, EVEN if the IP data can only be sent at 10 bytes per second?

The article describes this as having both phone/voice service as well as IP service over it.
Unless they are actually encapsulating one form of data over the other, like true ISDN does, then it is broadband. period. nothing about the speed comes into play here.

> "Broadband" means something different now than it did 5 years ago.

No, its always meant the same thing from when the terms 'broadband' and 'baseband' were made. You are just using it incorrectly.

Re:128 kbps is hardly broadband

[dissy]

> Sorry to disappoint you, but language is not static, and "broadband" has come to
> mean "high capacity." That's just the way it is.

I don't care what it has come to mean to a few people. Those few are wrong. That's just the way it is.

If you plan to redefine a word from what its been since the word was made, atleast have the decency to say so and not expect others to magically understand.

Why even have words if the meanings are totally different and random from person to person? Thats why a language aggrees that a word means one particular thing, then its defined. That is what the dictonary is handy for.

Websters defines broadband as:

broadband

adj 1: of or relating to or being a communications network in which the bandwidth can be divided and shared by multiple simultaneous signals (as for voice or data or video) 2: responding to or operating at a wide band of frequencies; "a broadband antenna"


Other than in the marketing department of US based cable/dsl companys, and thus in their customers imaginations, where else is broadband known to mean anything other than what the dictionary defines it as?

I guess you believe everything you hear on TV or that is forced down your throat from a corporation.

Highlights issues w/ US ISPs

[drgroove]

This article really serves to highlight issues w/ US-based ISPs and the services they offer.

What are the options for a US citizen to get online right now?

1. Pay AOL || MSN || Earthlink $20> / mo. for dialup
2. Pay local Cable or Telephony Monopoly $50> / mo. for "broadband"

US ISP have some serious issues w/ their services - essentially, theres price fixing in both dialup and DSL/Cable options, which the FCC and the FTC are ignoring; despite continuous adoption of broadband, prices have yet to drop in the slightest - in fact, broadband providers regularly announce additional restrictions on bandwidth, personal site/email hosting, file upload/download, P2P file sharing, etc.

It just seems like for all of our technological advantages, the US should have the highest rate of households w/ broadband, at the lowest prices, in comparison to any other nation. Instead, you have telephony companies in India providing their customers with affordable broadband, and nations like South Korea with the highest levels per capita of broadband usage.

Re:Highlights issues w/ US ISPs

[donkiemaster]

and still Northpoint DSL went out of business and Covad is sucking wind hardcore. Doesn't seem like to me they are gouging prices...Smaller close-knit countries with uniform telecom systems have a much better chance of providing broadband to more people. In the US it's too spread out, the type of DSL and cable broadband systems vary from region to region. I have had 7 different locations dsl lines in the last 5 years and have required 6 different hardware devices because they were almost all unique systems. (even though 3 of them were verizon)

Re:Highlights issues w/ US ISPs

[dledeaux]

The problem with the US is that we are, ironically, technophobic and very profit oriented.

We are slow to adopt new technologies. We see this in the cell phone industry, where other countries have a 2 year lead on cell phone technology compared with the US.

(This must be marvelous for the cell phone manufactures since they continue to reap profits on technology that is, according to the rest of the world, obsolete.)

The other problem is nobody wants to do anything unless they are going to be assured a profit. For example, SBC is reluctant now to roll out any more "last mile" additions to their DSL infrastructure since is will merely provide an avenue for other DSL providers to make more money off of their work. So they'd rather play they "if we can't have it, nobody can game" and make the general populace suffer.

Those two reasons in my opinion are why we don't, and will not for some time, see cheap reliable broadband being delivered in a timely manner.

Re:Highlights issues w/ US ISPs

[sneakcjj]

$16.50 for 128kbps is VERY expensive when considered with broadband prices. US based broadband prices are significantly cheaper than this. To get 1.5 at the same scale would be $196. So your accusation of price fixing U.S. broadband doesn't hold water. Dialup is still pretty close since there is a transfer cap.

The government (especially in Illinois) really screwed SBC over. They LOSE money on every line that a third-party provider installs. SBC has to give it to them below their cost. That is why you don't see DSL getting rolled out in more areas. The phone company CAN do it but they WON'T do it. Would you do something if you knew for a fact you would lose money? The phone company still has to make money to pay all their people. I can get 1.5Mbps SDSL if they fired up the RT I'm connected to but since they haven't I'm stuck with 384/128.

Cable modems are also expensive to rollout but the cable company doesn't have to share (go figure). Your $50 a month is a drop in the bucket compared to what it costs to install the cable modem infrastructure (even when added up over a year or so).

Please, try being your own ISP before complaining when your ISP is restricting you at $50 a month.

For my business I pay $500 a month for a T1 with NO CAPS/RESTRICTIONS WHAT SO EVER. If you want the same get something similiar or get 'business' class.

Oh, and de glad you don't live in Australia.

Re:Ok, someone is forgetting to think

[maxbang]

Rs is how Indians write rupees. Contrary to Western beliefs, rupees are not magical multicolored gems found in various pots/jars, held in a giant's wallet, or tallied in the lower right hand corner of a television screen.

Re:First reaction was "Great!" until I asked mysel

[MeanE]

"So that's like someone in the US paying $500/month for DSL."

Soooo...your saying the prices are much better there?

825 rupees?

[BitwizeGHC]

Do you realize how many Moblins I have to kill to get 825 frickin' rupees?

Geez...

Stop the "it's not cheap for Indians" already!

[arvindn]

I see a bunch of posts here saying its not cheap for Indians, yada yada. I see this in every story about India. Stop it and think rationally please. A PC costs about Rs 30000-40000 ($600-800). Now would someone who can afford a PC find it too much to pay Rs 850 per month for a 24 hour connection? No! Especially when you consider that it almost works out cheaper the phone bills for a dialup connection. The average Indian might be very poor, but so what? Those who can buy a computer are usually well off, and can afford this.

Me, I pay only Rs. 650 for a 24 hr connection (fibre optic, last mile copper cable; and yes, I'm from India). BW sucks, 64 kbps, download cap is 300 megs a month, but it's far better than dialup and sufficient for all my needs, and it lets me run a server, so I'm quite happy with it.

So this is a really good thing. I hope lots of people will use it. Quit whining.

If you can't outcompete 3rd world workers...

[siskbc]

...you deserve your spot in the unemployment line.

Nice idea - maintain the low standard of living in India so undereducated, soft, lazy Americans can maintain their high standard of living.

It's amazing how people can believe in equal rights until it's they that have to give something up to a more talented but previously repressed foreign worker.

My advice? Start writing better code or further your education if you don't want your job given to someone willing to do a better job than you. And don't give me this outsourcing sob story - if your job can be done capably by someone who has virtually no contact with management, halfway around the world, then you're not doing a good job. If you are a good, educated programmer, you have nothing to worry about. If you have the ability to lead and manage projects, you have nothing to worry about. If not, then you're screwed, and you have no one to blame but yourself.

Re:If you can't outcompete 3rd world workers...

[Sky Lemon]

Hell I would be employee of the month each month I had 'virtually no contact with management'. :) I think what we need to do here in the U.S. to boost productivity is to use the 'virtually no contact with management' model by out sourcing managerial positions instead of technical positions. That way companies could save big on their payroll savings and since noone understands managers anyway there's no real 'language-barrier' that hasn't already been put in place.

Pricing..

[univgeek]

A lot of people seem to think that the pricing is too high. However, the target market - the middle-class/upper-class, could easily afford this. In my house the telephone bill (mostly due to net) comes to around Rs.2,500. I would jump at this opportunity, and so would almost all of my friends.

Now whether 128Kbps is broadband is a different argument, but it sure beats crappy 33.1Kbps, and there would be no per-minute charge!!

Slightly OT. The IIT (Indian Inst of Tech. ) decided a few years ago, that waiting for multi-nationals to bring in new tech that was cheap enough for use in India was pointless. The MNC's were used to at least $40 revenue per phone line per month, and that is what they were expecting in India. The IIT decided that it would go for lower-cost/lower-speed solutions using the latest in tech to drive the prices down, instead of increasing the features.

A famous anecdote that one of the Professors there likes to relate - Around the 80's , all the digital phone switches used in India were imported. Companies like Alcatel, Ericsson, etc. used to charge a hefty bundle for them. Then C-DoT (Center for Development of Telecom) stepped in and made their own digital switch for a fraction of the cost. Almost overnight, the MNC's were forced to drop their prices in order to compete. This is what Banyan Networks, and a host of other small startups, incubated at IIT, want to do in India.