text:
Great articles on other sites
Great articles on other sites
- iiNet founder Michael Malone finally backs TPG Telecom takeover
- How and why the public sector must make friends with artificial intelligence
- Second anniversary of IT pricing report approaches - Computerworld
- Doctors spend 15 mins opening Fiona Stanley Hospital software
- What to expect from Abbott's national cyber security strategy
- ISPs need more time for data retention compliance
- TPG iiNet bid: major shareholders complain
- Qld emergency services payroll replacement on the rocks
- Victoria to wait another eight months for public IT dashboard
- Superloop CEO slams Australian govt tech policies
Renai's other site: Sci-fi + fantasy book news and reviews
Renai LeMay
- Kim Stanley Robinson's new book Aurora is due in July
- What's the future of "Grimdark" fantasy?
- An epic rant from Richard Morgan about nuance in writing
- Brandon Sanderson's Firefight: Review
- Get into Jeff VanderMeer's head as he writes the Southern Reach trilogy
- George R. R. Martin's next book The Winds of Winter won't arrive in 2015
- Alastair Reynolds' Poseidon's Wake launches 16 April
- Ann Leckie's Ancillary Sword: Review
- Ann Leckie finishes Ancillary Mercy
- Hannu Rajaniemi's The Fractal Prince: Review
Opinion, Telecommunications - Written by Renai LeMay on Tuesday, February 26, 2013 9:06 - 131 Comments
The FTTN truth the Coalition does not want known
opinion ABC Technology & Games editor Nick Ross is the only journalist in Australia so far to have gone into the appropriate level of detail in analysing the Coalition's rival NBN policy. And the Coalition should be very afraid of this fact indeed: Because his most recent NBN opus reflects a knockout blow for its disastrously flawed fibre to the node plans.
One of the little ironies about journalism is that while many, perhaps most, journalists get into this game in an effort to help change the world, few end up truly doing so. It's not because the opportunity isn't there; it certainly is. No, it's because it's all to easy just to follow the herd. As Scott Adams, best known for creating Dilbert, wrote about journalism:
"Reporters are faced with the daily choice of painstakingly researching stories or writing whatever people tell them. Both approaches pay the same."
Most people have never been journalists, although they may have dabbled in it through modern mediums such as blogging and Twitter. So they don't know the endless grinding tedium of it. To most people, journalism is a highly mysterious business: Glamorous because of the close access to those in power; rewarding because of the travel and dining-related perks of the job; hard to get into and highly competitive. How, many people wonder, do all the thousands of words which appear in the newspapers and online every day get put together? How do you get into journalism, to start with? How do you gain access to the elite? How do you climb the rung to get your name out there?
But the truth is that when it comes down to it, the daily task of doing journalism is usually much more humdrum.
Journalists usually get invited to prestigious events simply by virtue of working for a publication which has always been invited to certain events, not because of who they are personally. They need no special skills to record the words of a high-profile member of society; they need merely accept the task their editor has assigned them and show up. Take a few notes, recycle the sensational bits into an article, and bob's your uncle — you're a journalist.
In today's PR-saturated environment, the task is even easier: Just sit at your desk and re-write what people send you. I'm not kidding. At times I've literally been on the receiving end of hundreds of press releases per day. It's less than a simple task to sift through and re-write the best two or three into humdrum articles. In fact, it's the sort of task which any old high school graduate could do; a little industry truth is that up until the 2000's, many of the best young Australian journalists never graduated from university at all. They went straight from school to re-hashing press releases with style. They thought they were journalists.
In this context, to become a journalist who pursues investigative stories, who pursues lines of inquiry not force-fed to you, to go out there and find the disturbing truth, becomes a constant struggle against authority and the forces of peer pressure.
Why, after all, as Scott Adams implied, would a journalist work harder to investigate a lead which may not turn out to be a story, when they won't get paid any more for doing so? Why would they fight back against their editors to get free time to pursue such stories, when they can instead churn out re-written press releases at a rate of five per day? Why would they want to write articles that go against the grain of the coverage, and risk the censure of their peers, many of whom they will eventually end up working with, at one stage or another?
And yet there are some few journalists who will do this.
Every once in a while a journalist comes along who has the willingness to set aside their daily press release quota and chase more interesting stories, risking the displeasure of their editors and their colleagues to do so. These are the journalists who are not afraid to challenge authority; to bring up new ideas to hold against old ones, to spend days poring through thousands of dusty records or go to the wrong side of the tracks to find the truth.
They don't do it for money (journalists don't get paid much), but there are other reasons for doing it. The need to bolster an ego is one, but there are also nobler reasons: Pursuing the ideal of truth, informing a democracy, holding those in power to account, or even simple curiousity. If you've watched the film All the President's Men, the story of how two Washington Post journalists brought down a corrupt presidency, you'll have a feel for what I'm talking about.
Now, when it comes to coverage of the National Broadband Network project in Australia, we don't quite have a Woodward or a Bernstein on the case. It's not surprising. For starters there's no real need: The NBN project and debate just doesn't have the same level of scandal that a Watergate does. Plus, journalism in Australia has been on the decline for some time now, so it's hard to find these kinds of figures any more.
But we do have a journalist who has refused to follow the crowd on the NBN issue and has struck out boldly on his own path. I speak, of course, of ABC Technology + Games Editor Nick Ross.
While much of the rest of Australia's technology media has been engrossed in the incredibly fascinating issues of how much the National Broadband Network Company is paying for its coffee (16 cents a cup), whether "lasers" will make its fibre model irrelevant (they won't) and, of course, whether its wireless towers cause radiation sickness (they don't), Ross has been quietly getting to the bottom of more important things.
Unlike most of the rest of the media, Ross has locked onto one core fact about the NBN with all the tenacity of a British bulldog: The fact that the Coalition's rival NBN policy may be about to seriously derail this incredibly important, decade-long, $37 billion national infrastructure project in a hugely negative way.
While the rest of the media (including yours truly, on occasion) has been examining the current NBN rollout in obsessive micro-detail, Ross has been deeply investigating whether the Coalition's alternative fibre to the node model actually reflects good policy — and how it stacks up against the current Labor fibre to the premise model.
And what he has found is simply remarkable.
Of course, Ross has published a number of articles on the subject, but his masterwork was this piece last week, entitled The vast differences between the NBN and the Coalition's alternative. I won't go into all of the detail in his report (that would be impossible, given its length), but let it suffice to say that I have never, in a decade of technology journalism, read such a lengthy and detailed examination of one particular issue.
The key thing to understand here is that Ross' NBN opus is not only long (it's 11,000 words; a length unprecedented in Australian technology journalism); it's impeccably well-researched.
In the ongoing National Broadband Network debate, which has been raging in Australia since at least 2005, when then-Telstra chief executive Sol Trujillo first proposed the idea, it has become common for the various players to quote from research reports, economic analyses or international deployment examples to make their case for one side or another. Ross does this too. But where another journalist might quote from one or two such reports or examples, perhaps half a dozen in the best case, Ross quotes from and links to hundreds.
Where another journalist might examine the impact various broadband technologies might have on a specific field, such as overall productivity, e-health or entertainment, Ross considers them all; exhaustively; in the same article. Where other journalists have contracted points down for brevity, Ross has expanded them into a level of detail which considers all views simultaneously.
And the conclusion Ross comes to after examining this monumental amount of data is staggering. These first few paragraphs are perhaps the best way the article can be summarised:
"The Coalition's NBN alternative is different by almost every measure. It uses different technologies to connect the bulk of the country; it has different uses and applications; it affects Australia's health service differently; it provides different levels of support in emergencies and natural disasters; it requires a different amount of power to operate; the cost of maintenance is different; the overall cost, the return on investment and the re-sale value are different; the management, ownership, governance, competition and monopoly factors will be different; it has a different life-span and upgradability issues; the effect on businesses (of all sizes) and GDP is different; the effects on television are different; the effect on Senior Citizens is different; the viability and potential for cost blowouts is different; the costs of buying broadband will be different; the reliability is different; the effect on property prices will be different; the timescale is different; the legacy is different. Ultimately, it has completely different aims."
"In just about every case the Coalition's alternative compares unfavourably to the current plans – and usually in dramatic fashion. That's based upon the facts and the information currently available in the public domain."
For most of the past decade, Australia has debated the benefits of fibre to the node-style broadband (where parts of Telstra's copper network are re-used), as compared to the NBN's current fibre to the premise style of rollout, where it will be entirely replaced with fibre. And, doubtless, that very issue will be debated right up to the September 14 Federal Election, which will decide the NBN's fate.
Ross's article represents nothing less than a gargantuan attempt to finish that debate once and for all, and forestall the next six months of it. Ross's article is a final, knockout blow for the Coalition's FTTN approach; a mammoth statement that cannot easily be refuted or ignored, if it can be at all. It's like an octopus with a thousand tentacles; any attempt by any party to address part of it will only be met by a hundred other segments.
And here's the rub: This stuff actually matters.
It really does matter whether the NBN continues under its current model, or is drastically altered under the Coalition's very different vision. We're not talking about building a house here, or even a suburb of houses. With the NBN, we're talking about the biggest infrastructure project in Australia's history; an initiative which will touch every Australian and shape the entire next 50-100 years of business, government and personal technology use.
If you want to radically reshape a project of that nature, you had better have a good reason. What Ross's ridiculously detailed article shows us conclusively is that the Coalition does not. The NBN project represents good policy; and the Coalition's vision is currently inferior.
Of course, such a collossal undertaking already has its detractors. Communications Day publisher Grahame Lynch was so incensed by Ross's sheer audacity that he published his own massive article attempting to rebut Ross's opus almost line by line, at the same time attempting to undercut his position at the ABC by accusing him him of unacceptable editorial standards. Classy.
It was a good try, but as I read through Lynch's piece, I couldn't help but feel that it came across as a little silly, really. Many of Lynch's points don't directly rebut Ross's points but sidle around them glancing edgeways, and it feels like Lynch often, unfortunately, avoids the main point which Ross hammers home so hard, on so many levels; that what the Coalition is proposing is inferior to the plan we already have. This isn't a rebuttal so much as it is a lengthy whinge.
Then there have been bloggers such as infectious diseases physician Trent Yarwood, who has repeatedly criticised Ross in the past and who did so again after the publication of Ross's latest NBN article. Yarwood has a particular bone to pick with Ross about his claims with regard to the NBN's likely impact on telehealth. He writes:
"I don't give a toss about allegations of ABC bias, but your articles fail to meet what I would consider to be even a basic standard of health-care journalism. Stating your feelpinions over and over and over again, louder and louder and in longer and longer articles does not make them true. Refusing to admit there might be any other points of view make you look like your mind is very firmly closed (which I think it is), but bollocking Malcolm for the same thing while doing it yourself makes you an outrageous hypocrite."
I don't have the health credentials to pick a fight with Yarwood on most of his points, but it is important to address his claims about the perception that Ross's articles are biased towards the National Broadband Network policy as it stands.
Let's be brutally honest about this. When it comes to the ABC, Ross's articles stand out in a huge way. They are far longer than most ABC articles. They are far more opinionated. They refer directly to commercial products in a way that the ABC usually avoids. They do not hesitate to critically examine, rather than merely report, statements which senior politicians have made, and by publishing a series of articles on a theme, Ross has indeed left himself open to claims of bias which we have no doubt have attracted the attention of some of the senior figures at Aunty.
But let's also be very clear: This is why Ross's audience loves his coverage, a fact which can easily be gleaned from the thousands of comments left under his highly popular articles.
Virtually alone, out of all of Australia's technology journalists, Ross has had the courage and the conviction to seriously and in detail investigate the often dubious claims which the Coalition has made about the potential of fibre to the node technology in the NBN rollout. To do this, he has gone against the grain of the rest of the media, he has butted heads with a politician as well-regarded as Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull, and he has even gone against the grain of his own media outlet.
Sure, there are doubtless some minor errors in Ross's articles. They are too lengthy, hard to read and at times he could do more to maintain the perception of journalistic objectivity. As an editor myself, I would suggest that he probably needs more eyes to look at his work before it's published. But these are minor criticisms and don't much detract from the titanic accomplishment that Ross delivered last week.
Consider this, for a second. Wouldn't it be nice, in fact wouldn't it be amazing, if the ABC was able to examine every national policy debate with the same veracity and detail which Ross has applied to the NBN issue?
With his articles, Ross has singlehandedly provided an incredibly detailed examination of the NBN policy divide which represents fantastic value for the ABC's audience. No interview or feature segment on the ABC's flagship 7:30 program, no matter how long, could possibly go into as much depth on the NBN as Ross has with his articles. Not even Radio National's famed Background Briefing program, being audio in nature, could deliver the same wealth of material and references which Ross has included and linked to.
One of Ross's self-professed aims with his NBN article last week was for it to act as a reference for the rest of the ABC community, and this in itself is enough to justify the article's publication. In the context of the shockingly incompetent journalism we have often seen in the national NBN debate, where it is common for local TV stations in remote locations to give those literally wearing protective garb and complaining about radiation sickness the same amount of air time as professional engineers from NBN Co and the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency, there is a huge need for journalists in every location to be better informed about the basic facts. And often, in those remote locations, the ABC is one of only a couple of media outlets in town.
I will leave you with a prediction and a quote. Firstly, I will predict that the Coalition will not even pretend to try to address many of the issues with its NBN policy which Ross raised in his articles. Ross has too many points and they are too detailed and exhaustively referenced for Shadow Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull and his team to try. Instead, if asked, the Turnbull camp will merely accuse Ross, as it has in the past, of generating pro-NBN "propaganda". It's a nice sound-bite which doesn't, unfortunately, stack up well against an 11,000 word article.
The quote comes from that bastion of fearless journalism, Hunter S. Thompson. I commend it to you:
"If I'd written all the truth I knew for the past ten years, about 600 people – including me – would be rotting in prison cells from Rio to Seattle today. Absolute truth is a very rare and dangerous commodity in the context of professional journalism."
In the context of the fraught and highly politicised debate about the National Broadband Network — where even the attempts of NBN Co's chief executive to fairly debate the alternatives are met with accusations of a "cheap stunt" — absolute truth is indeed a very hard to find. However, right now, when it comes to the Coalition's FTTN-based NBN policy, Nick Ross's slightly flawed, occasionally rambling but still brilliant forays into the field are as close as we are going to get. And I suspect, due among other reasons to the sharp interest commentators like Andrew Bolt are suddenly showing in Ross's articles, that the arguments he has laid out have last week become very dangerous indeed.
Image credit: Still of Woodward and Bernstein as portrayed in the film All the President's Men
131 Comments
"it's 11,000 words; a length unprecedented in Australian technology journalism"
BREAKING: Renai LeMay makes reasonable effort to compete on length… :o)
The one thing I hate is that minor errors, like saying AVC instead of CVC can give people like Lynch enough wriggle room to provide a rebuttal that can be taken seriously. (I won't quote the article directly because I hope Delimiter readers have the patience to read both Ross' and Lynch's articles, despite stacking in at around 20,000 words.)
It's the nature of the beast through. I personally have experienced such arguments when talking about the NBN and they are draining. To have someone completely misrepresent your position, sometimes even deliberately misquoting you, and trying to defend against such behaviour is frustrating.
I can only imagine it's ten fold worse when you're a journalist because your career is trying to deliver the truth.
Good article Renai, Im glad you also saw Lynch's tripe for what it is! he used to engae on WP but his arguments for the "the Liberal approach" (aka hands off, let market take care of it or just give handouts to ISP's and Telstra) never stood up to scrutiny and he got sick of being shown to be wrong and left the WP forums.
The truth? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!
Top effort from all involved, and Lynch's 'whinge' as you put it is another reason why I never bother reading CommsDay anymore apart from referenced stories like mentioned above.
And the spin by the gaggle of zealot tech journalists making mistakes and frankly stupid arguments continues unabated. When we say we will complete the NBN sooner, cheaper and faster, we mean it, in a technologically agnostic way. For instance, Nick Ross used the analogy of the Sydney Harbour Bridge. Everybody knows that the Sydney Harbour Bridge was a white elephant that wasn't needed and is outdated – just look at how a tunnel needed to be built because it wasn't big enough for the next century!
With the benefit of hindsight, the Sydney Harbour Bridge was a waste of taxpayer money because if we would have used boats for a few more years, hovercraft technology could have come along and cut the time of a journey to just two minutes and made building it completely redundant! Even commuter trains could have been loaded onto hovercraft. All that was needed was some finance into building prototypes and upgrading already existing facilities – it's really just an upgrade of the wharf and boat facilities already in place. All this could have been a reality at less than a tenth of the cost of the Sydney Harbour Bridge! Less than a tenth! And as for a timeframe, instead of a construction period of ten years, hovercraft could be ordered, built and arrive within a year or two – 90% faster and 90% cheaper for a much more flexible network that provides the same performance!
And with hovercraft, if you needed more capacity you'd just be able to add more hovercraft! There was no need for this massive capital expenditure because boats were a proven technology in successful use at the time and hovercraft were just a natural evolution of those. The coalition, if it had been in charge of the harbour crossing project, would have completed the project cheaper, sooner and more affordably!
Personally, I'm not so sure that this is actually a "fake" Malcolm Turnbull…
The choice was simple. Either this irresponsible government would give up economic rationality and the free market and drive all the providers of boats, barges and ferries out of business as the government ultimately did. The day this white elephant went into service was a day that wiped out economic freedom in this city.
Furthermore, and this was a point overlooked at the time, water has much less friction than a road surface does and is thus far more unsuitable to the task, essentially the wrong medium and substantially more expensive. Worst of all, it was paid for with money from taxpayers who didn't want it built and the tolls are far too high!
It's all fair enough when it's not your own money being used, but there was no rationale for this bridge at all and that's why we should sell it to the people who are running some ferries in the Sydney area to other places at a cost recovery price and buy more hovercraft so that we're not leaving those behind who are needing more hovercraft!
To pick up on that 'either'… either that or it would have conducted a cost benefit analysis that would have looked at the risks and the massive capital expenditure involved that would have found that there was no need for such a bridge. It's not like Sydney is a rapidly growing city – it is growing at less than 5% a year. Surely with a service life of hovercrafts of 20 years, it is more cost effective to put aside an annual fee for capital expenditure for the renewal of the fleet, rather than construct a white elephant. For starters, they didn't even consider whether there would be advances in bridge technology that will make this an outdated useless fixed investment when they knew that the world at large was going mobile!
No, what happened instead is that to this day the government has to pay an interest for the project without repayment from tolls and it is needing to charge a toll so high to pay the government back the money it splurged with enormous interest charging its users a price far too high.
FMT, I really, really wish you would repost this bridge and hovercraft argument over at Whirlpool NBN section, or allow me to do so.
The ideologically-driven keyboard warriors are unlikely to be convinced by the rational arguments that show hovercraft would have been the substantially better investment. You're welcome by all means, but have no illusion that these bridgeists will be convinced by reasoned discourse.
There is also no evidence that the people of Sydney needed the faster speeds, such as that as provided by the bridge. Our plan delivers faster speeds with hovecraft.
You see, you say that, and you still sound like the genuine MT…
I almost exploded with this, then I saw "Fake Malcolm Turnbull". Poe's Law, well done good sir.
I will say this, I would like to see a swarm of hover-boats under the Sydney harbor bridge. Boat derby anyone?
Remember the Lake Illawarra! NO boat races under the bridge!
Unless they have those really cool rubber bumpers. Then I think it's okay.
Nick should not aim to "finish" debate, as you say. He should be informing debate.
If Nick wants to inform debate, he should remove assertion from his analysis. This is the weakness of his writing. Belies his emotion and opens him to easy, diversionary rebuttal.
With respect, that's a terrible idea. If he was the remove all assertion from his article it would make for a dry read with no conclusion. He would be ripped up even more because his readers will feel they wasted their time reading some 10,000 words.
Journalists are not fact presenters, they are fact finders. They do all of the critical analysis and "assertion" as you put it for the reader so the reader doesn't have to.
What Nick has done is reduced Lynch and others to arguing semantics and trivial errors by asserting a conclusion. If however hadn't done that Lynch would have been able to draw a conclusion from all of Nick's well researched data, and Nick would have to provide a counter dismissing Lynch's conclusions as invalid.
Instead we have Lynch trying to do that to Nick only to have his counter arguments fail to hold water.
What Nick should have done is provided an airtight case, only such a thing is not possible, so he created the strongest case he could and Lynch is failing to respond.
Assertion (when relating to the use of, or having the nature of, a declaration) is fine when it's backed up with facts (citation of research, reports, etc).
Assertion, when it's opinion dressed up as fact, is the problem as in the Commsday piece:
""National emergencies, whether fire or flooding, are becoming a part of Australian life. Consequently, the benefits of a fibre-based NBN are becoming increasingly important" – Despite Nick's belief that fibre is water proof, the NBN didn't hold up too well in the recent Queensland floods. Like other tech platforms, it is a touch vulnerable itself to natural disaster. As always, wireless techs prove best in these situations. http://www.zdnet.com/au/nbn-co-telcos-continue-to-combat-qld-flood-outages-7000010466/"
Having been in the area during the flooding mentioned, Telstra services went down for two days (mobile phones and land lines, even 000 was effected, as well as most ATM's). If you read the article Mr Lynch quoted, the NBN went down up there due to Telstra loosing it's back haul link, it wasn't due to any problem with the NBN or fibre it's self.
To me, this is a huge problem, and very sloppy thinking. An assertion thats flawed and without a factual basis leads to incorrect assumptions (A statement that is assumed to be true and from which a conclusion can be drawn), which leads to false/flawed outcomes.
>> "It was a good try, but as I read through Lynch's piece, I couldn't help but feel that it came across as a little silly, really. Many of Lynch's points don't directly rebut Ross's points but sidle around them glancing edgeways, and it feels like Lynch often, unfortunately, avoids the main point which Ross hammers home so hard, on so many levels; that what the Coalition is proposing is inferior to the plan we already have. This isn't a rebuttal so much as it is a lengthy whinge."
Agree Renai
It was a very poor response
Well said Renai.
While Nick's article wasn't perfect, it was a damn sight better than anything I've ever seen researched by those against the NBN.
Lynch's refusal to continue to engage on the points he made in his rebuttal was an indication that the rebuttal was no more than an attempt to dilute Nick's points with white noise because many of Lynch's points weren't actually researched, just thrown from the hip (such as his assertion that 50% of Australians would get an automatic speed boost from VDSL in Exchanges).
It's a shame when journalists simply do what they've always done, rather than seriously considering the merits of other's arguments…as you yourself have done on occasion.
It's time to start our own political party. The Australian NBN Party. We need to convert the community support for the NBN into senate seats and use those seats, in the absence of a pro NBN Labor government, to make life hell for these ideologically blinded right wing extremists who would doom this country to decades of darkness and telecommunications hell.
It'll be a party with a short life span but a very focused goal. And one that's crucial to Australia's future to achieve.
"to make life hell for these ideologically blinded right wing extremists"
If you really want to irritate those cave dwelling types you don't need to make a new party just join the Wikileaks party :-)
Excellent analysis, Renai – not just of the facts, but of the meta-narrative as well. You've put your finger squarely on several buttons.
Spot on analysys of the MSM (murdoch generally) in this current environment.
I find it amazing that one topic (NBN reporting that is) can contain examples of the most lofty heights of journalistic integrity alongside the deepest lows of partisan hackery.
Equally amazing that so many members of the public are still so utterly ignorant of the nuances of the argument, and have little real prospect of reliably telling the difference.
No doubt in my mind though – Nick Ross has set the bar to a level that lazy news consumers like myself will now routinely expect from specialist technical journalism.
"If Nick wants to inform debate, he should remove assertion from his analysis."
Not sure if you've read older journalists work, from say a decade ago? A good journalist informs, breaks down the story, makes their point and attempts to allow the reader draw their own conclusions.
Assertion isn't bias. Neither is having a passion for what you're writing (if there's no love for the job, why bother?).
Ross' only weakness here, is that he's presented so many facts, that it offers hundreds of avenues where rebuttal can be formed from technicalities of either the way technology has been understood, or presented.
Lynch, by comparison has become obsessed (in my humble opinion) by minutia and long since lost track of the bigger picture.
This is the thing; we are all still free to draw our own conclusions from Ross' work. The same cannot be said for a lot of MSM where facts are jettisoned in favour of expedient sound-bites; the latter is often opinion, or innuendo presented as fact.
When all the cards are on the table, and even if the dealer has his own views, we the reader are still informed enough to make our own call. When the dealer stacks the deck? Whole different situation.
It's refreshing to see determination to inform, from the Aunty whom is so often required to provide a 'balanced' view, regardless of factual input.
Nick Ross's brilliant 11000 word analysis shows FTTN to be the dud we always knew it was.
Sure beats Turnbull's 2 meaningless sound bite words of cheaper and faster.
Personally, I can't wait for the highly-respected, non-partisan and Independent Productivity Commission to finally release a proper cost benefit on the NBN as promised by Malcolm.
The report, unlike heavily-biased, uninformed feelpinion articles written by tech journalists, will be based on commercial reality and will inevitably endorse Malcolm Turnbull, Tony Brown and Grahame Lynch's long-standing criticisms of Labor's expensive FTTP approach.
What excites me isn't the actual report itself, but the future response of tech bloggers to it. Bashing politicians and playing to popular prejudices that "politicians tell lies" is easy. Trying to attack the Productivity Commission as an institution will be preposterous. But, having spent the past few years deliberately rejecting every rational argument in the NBN debate, I don't expect NBN supporters to shirk from this one bit.
Here's my preview of future attacks on the Productivity Commission:
1) The Productivity Commission economists do not understand technology;
2) The cost benefit analysis on the NBN should be performed by network engineers, not economists;
3) The Productivity Commission is a haven of radical, right-wing, free market economists with strong ideological bias against government intervention in industry;
4) The Productivity Commission is beholden to Murdoch, News Corp, Telstra, Alan Jones, Andrew Bolt, etc;
5) The Productivity Commission is incompetent at what it does;
6) The Productivity Commission is run by Howard appointees and staffed by the Liberal faithful;
7) The Productivity Commission has been infiltrated by "neo-cons";
8) Economics is not really a "science" so all reports written by Productivity Commission economists should be ignored;
9) The Productivity Commission has no revenue and is funded by "government subsidies" like the Liberal's alternative NBN vision and should be abolished because "direct subsidies are bad";
10) The Productivity Commission report's conclusions are invalid because they draw on international comparisons to countries that are simply irrelevant to Australia because we're just "different";
11) There is no consideration paid in the Productivity Commission's report to the benefits and importance of "leading the world" and "being the first-mover innovator";
10) There is no need for the Productivity Commission to perform a cost benefit analysis because Nick Ross' 11,000 word essay has conclusively refuted all anti-NBN arguments in a comprehensive fashion without any remaining shred of doubt for all eternity — the PC's report is factually invalid.
To all tech bloggers, feel free to use these points in future articles. I'll post more when I think of any new ones. Anyone who can think of other lines of attack on the Productivity Commission, please post in reply to this and help grow the list.
…heavily-biased, uninformed feelpinion articles written by tech journalists…
@ HuapCaltNcro We dont need a CBA, a panel of experts report canned FTTN as being a good idea and that is why we have an FTTH NBN – try doing some reading before sprouting this sort of tripe!
The expert panel decision was not the same as CBA conducted by the Productivity Commission.
The expert panel was convened on the back of the failed Labor RFP which was intended to be a Government/Partnership rollout, unfortunately it coincided in the midst of the GFC where it was decided that many of the private proposals would have difficulty sourcing their quite substantial funding.
I understand the technical outcome was FTTH but a CBA conducted post September 2013 might have a different view on a Government/Private partnership rollout and the mitigation of risk and the cost benefits a mix of infrastructure technologies might bring.
September 2013? That hasn't arrived yet?
Are you suggesting the report to inform the NBN deployment, that's already operational for a bunch of folks, shouldn't exist yet?
A CBA would inform if there's a benefit to ubiquitous access that exceeds the costs. What period of time would you place on the CBA? 5 years? 10 years?
The opposition called for a CBA because the short term numbers would likely indicate there's no immediate benefit. I think that's a pretty safe call. There won't be.
Malcolm isn't an idiot; he'll happily point at the short term section and tout it as proving his point.
Long term, however, it is a very different picture. We have an existing example of a profitable state enterprise (later to be sold off) that ran a very large communications network.
It became Telstra.
Also, welcome back?
@Alain, it's completely irrelevant, experts where brought in to asses proposals from local and international corporations and where found to be poor value for money when an FTTH solution could be rolled out for roughly the same money and actually provide an infrastructure platform for the next 60+ years!
I understand the outcome completely, but you must also acknowledge the political and financial environment under which that decision was made at that point in time has changed completely.
Any further NBN analysis whether it be a Productivity Commission CBA or another Coalition appointed expert panel process may not necessarily reach the same conclusion that was made in 2008, they also have the added benefit that a review of the NBN rollout so far can bring to help that decision.
Impressive list, except you forget a point…
11) The Treasury department sets the scope of a cost-benefit analysis. If treasurer Mr. The-Future-is-4G Joe Hockey tells the productivity commission "find me the way we can roll out faster broadband cheapest over a ten year time frame and any value of sooner, estimate the benefits therefrom before 2021 where by benefits I mean and also do a risk assessment that keeps in mind us already have paused new contracts and rollout for the NBN and thus threatening the business model" then it's quite possible that the answer will be FTTN.
Simply combining the facts that fibre is cheaper to maintain and that choice reduced to Telstra cable or Telstra phone is a bad thing and hugely expensive to fix, there's already a case for the NBN at some point in time there. But a Productivity Commission running off could just be told that a Telstra monopoly is to be considered a free market.
I have no doubt the productivity commission is good at what it does. It is the treasury that controls the terms under which such an analysis would be conducted that's of concern. And… a CBA is not legally binding by any means. Even if the coalition sees that a CBA showing that FTTH is more cost effective in a time frame past 2025, then they could still just say 'screw it' and lock us into FTTN.
@Hurry up a proper CBA and let the NBN circus roll on
Actually, the name says it….I can't really be bothered arguing with someone who posts under a "name" like that.
You keep thinking:
1- You'll get a fair terms CBA and
2- That it'll show the NBN is an utter waste of money.
And I'll keep laughing from the sidelines as I watch Australia's communications networks get torn to shreds. Then move to Hong Kong.
"Personally, I can't wait for the highly-respected, non-partisan and Independent Productivity Commission to finally release a proper cost benefit on the NBN as promised by Malcolm."
Which will be ignored, or labelled as a biased Industry mouthpiece should it not entirely reflect the Member for Wentworth's policies. Such as every other factual report generated recently has been.
So much so, Malcolm has to head offshore to find views similar to his own.
So, how will you argue if:
1) The CBA uses decent terms of reference. (FTTH wins)
2) Gets experts with an understanding of the tech (FTTH wins)
3) Is considered over a period of more than 10 years (FTTH wins)
What FUD do you have ready for that. You can't be sure they will do the short term, imbalanced, view required for you precious Coalition to have it's FTTN plan endorsed. Noticed I said Coalition first? I don't think you really care about the broadband, but are just an Abbott fanboi.
@Hurry up a proper CBA and let the NBN circus roll on
Bit early for April Fools fluff isn't mate :o)
Tech Journalists will not attack the productivity commission the problem will be the Terms of Reference basically they will be chosen to skew the results the time frame will be very short which will favor FttN and it will not include the cost of buying the CAN from Telstra.
These exclusions will make it incorrect not your list.
If the terms are cost over 30 years and include all costs then the PC will find FttH the best option.
The terms of reference for the LNP will be 5 years and won't include the cost of the copper.
Let's hope they can count to 12 better than you can.
Well we know why Labor don't want a Productivity Commission CBA and why the Coalition does.
'Although there seems little hope of the government rethinking the national broadband network, recent criticisms by Productivity Commission chairman Gary Banks serve as another reminder of the serious shortcomings of the high cost project.
In a speech last week, Mr Banks lamented the multiple anti-competitive aspects of this pet project of Communications Minister Stephen Conroy, a major piece of government infrastructure which is being built regardless of the lack of proper analysis of its costs and benefits. '
Good to see you haven't lost your penchant for irrelevant trolling!
alain, are you trolling again?
A CBA will tell us only what we already know — short term analysis will show little advantage or value, long term will reverse that trend considerably. A bunch of reviews and reports already exist to support the massive advantages of a fibre network analysis.
Quigley is prepared to see a review occur, and has stated they'd be open to changes. IMHO he is calling Turnbull's bluff.
Both of you are very very selective on what you consider trolling, if you look at the discussion flow I didn't start the discussion on the Productivity Commission I only added a link to a comment the Productivity Commission said about the NBN only last year, which is entirely and utterly relevant to the subject matter
Both you preferring me not to bring up relevant facts like that is not the same as trolling.
I'd like a CBA on the effectiveness of a CBA on the NBN!!
At the end of the day, a CBA is only as good/useful as it's reference guidelines, and what should those be for national infrastructure that should last for the next century?
Or should a CBA be restricted to the next 10-20 years?
Either way they'll have different outcomes, and still actually "prove" nothing, because most arguments for/against the NBN come down to ideologies and opinions, those that want to see modern, up-to-date infrastructure versus those that want to see old resources reused/repurposed to get a bit more life from them.
So when Aunty drops him, can we expect an additional Delimiter staffer? :-)
A prime catch for The Guardian
Excellent article Renai. You might give Nick a run for his money one day…actually, if you back-to-back all yours, you probably have already ;o)
Meh, this one is just under 3000 words…Renai's a lightweight in comparison… ;)
I'm waiting for the book.
It is obvious that the one thing driving demand for FTTH at this point are Nick Ross' extensive and misleading treatises about needing FTTH.
The more bandwidth he uses, the more we need it. Clever guy, he is.
Yes, and the more roads we have the more traffic, thus the need for more roads.
Investment in infrastructure drives growth. Surprised? Look what the 1956 highway infrastructure project did to the economy of the USA. Say what you will, investment in roads drove the USA's growth, as investment in ships drove growth in England in the 19th Century.
Interrupting the last 50 metres of cable between the street and the premises with an entirely unnecessary road-wart of a "Node" and the desire to preserve a bit of rotting metal in the road, is a strategy that must have been invented by someone who, not to put too fine a point on it, was a bit thick. The cost to run the cable that extra few metres is negligible. The cost to add warts and keep up a rotting copper infrastructure is immense.
Beyond providing a political opposition to a purely technical issue, what in the heck is Mr. Turnbull trying to accomplish?
The cost to run the cable that extra few metres is negligible.
That's not really true. The Nodes would be between 800m and 1km from premises maximum. Those nearest, say within 200m, the cost would indeed be negligible. But those progressively further away would cost progressively more per premises.
I's estimated the Labour makes up something like 75% of the NBN FTTH build. Removing 1/2 the labour therefore would remove some 30-40% of the cost. That's not to say I agree with doing FTTN is this case. The argument runs that FTN is cheaper and faster to deploy….yes, but that ISN'T the point of the NBN. The NBN is national communications infrastructure REPLACEMENT. You do not REPLACE something by noticeably improving on it. You REPLACE it. That's the point. Therefore, FTTN is not the correct technology. FTTN is a perfectly good technology, but it was designed for Incumbent COMMERCIAL operators to extend the life of their asset (the copper network). It was not designed as a replacement technology for data services for the coming decades. FTTH is.
I will wait till the Movie
"But where another journalist might quote from one or two such reports or examples, perhaps half a dozen in the best case, Ross quotes from and links to hundreds."
Renai this is incorrect. Of the 95 external links on the first page only 1 links to a report. The rest link to overwhelmingly his own articles, articles he has edited, or opinion articles from other tech blogs.
Ross has not backed up a single one of his opinions with reports, mostly because they don't exist. All he does is falsely link the benefits of broadband to the benefits of ftth. Telehealth etc are all great things, and none of them require FTTH. The ONLY proven application for FTTH is very high definition video streaming, something that the government does not need to subsidize/enable.
HI Michael,
The reason I link to my other articles is because this article would be many times longer than it already is otherwise.
This is a pitiful excuse. Your articles have been described as being the closest thing we are ever going to get to the "absolute truth". Ignoring this obvious hyperbole, a proper and ethical journalist would have linked to primary sources not to their own work when making hotly contested statements.
I would also add that a journalist actually does interviews. So, had you bothered to interview those working in health instead of lazy linking to random webpages then you wouldn't have gotten the savage beatdown from Trent Yarwood that you did.
Presenting your google research as an essay is not journalism.
"I would also add that a journalist actually does interviews. "
Could have fooled me, 99% of them only seem to rehash other ppl's press releases these days – Renai and Nick are rare exceptions!
The concept of FTTN when a few metres of fibre would bypass the rather questionable node-plus-copper interfacing rather deeply offends me as an engineer.
My 44 years in the systems and technology industry says fibre directly to the premises is a better, more reliable option than trying to interface with a corroded and corroding copper infrastructure. The extra node would add an untenable amount of noise to the signal. It adds complexity for a net negative gain.
That 44 years includes experience in a public utility, private organisations, and a stint at NASA's Deep Space Network. I am not affiliated with NBN, Telstra or either political party, my opinion is based entirely on the technical merits.
FTTN as a response to the current NBN plan is wrong, wrong, wrong. It's ugly and it needs to die.
Hi Michael, still hung up on current perceived needs, the very reason we have black spots, rim hells and poor service areas. Provisioned to the current perceived needs of the day. Don't fall for the same trap
We should be looking at where we want to be in 20-70 years from now and fibre, love it or hate it, is the only current tech that fits the bill (long life, hasn't hit upgradeable limits, is very cost effective given the two previous reasons).
FTTH isn't just about download speed. It is about reliability, upload speed, ubiquity and scalability.
You want telehealth? Reliability, ubiquity and even upload speed will be important. There is no way I would think about providing any sort of e-service from my home connection, as it is on copper that simply is not reliable. That won't change much by going to FTTN and xDSL.
Plus there are current uses for broadband that you might not be aware of, such as microtrading. This needs low latency and high reliability. Assuming you know all of the current uses for broadband and how they can be serviced is not only foolishly presumptuous, but plain wrong.
Then of course you are ignoring the importance of scalability. Copper will not meet the needs of the future.
Telehealth is available NOW, it's not waiting for the NBN.
… and a practical example of it in action.
A nuetered version of telehealth, subject to the same problems of reliability endemic to the copper network. Expensive to set up, not ubiquitous.
All you are showing is that the need is there. The fact that people are using unsuitable equipment to try to meet that need is not a good thing.
Your link was about a prospective telehealth project, and the costs associated were huge. It isn't, as you claimed, an 'example in action'.
Wasn't it this kind of nonsense that got you banned?
I simply post a link of a example of Australian Telehealth program in action and your response is to go all personal and you want me banned?
BTW Telehealth is not JUST about video conferencing, from the last link I supplied.
'Depending on the types of services being offered in the region, the COH expects to use a range of techniques including video conferencing and web-based clinical support, he said.
"Some approaches may be better suited to lower cost communication methods such as email, as is the case with dermatology and wound care where valuable advice may be provided by a specialist with access to a good quality digital photograph and relevant case history.'
I didn't get personal. I said you were posting nonsense. That is talking about the content of the post, not the poster.
You got called out for saying that it was an example in action, when it clearly isn't. Accept the correction and move on.
You lastly have now talked about how telehealth is trying to wedge their services into the limited technology available. That does nothing to counter my own points, and does nothing to further your own.
If you can't post without FUD then I won't be sorry to see you go again.
Lynch's association with CommsDay makes him exactly the sort of imbecile that Renai rightly points out is the usual journalism candidate.
/ie an obvious mouthpiece for vested interests.
As Elvis Costello noted; we're 'easily led but much too scared to follow…':
Just FYI peeps
I've been having a discussion with Grahame over at Comms Day and he's pointed out 2 things I need to address:
1- Nick noted in his article that perhaps 50% would get an upgrade with 50 000 nodes. However, Grahame noted some Australians, perhaps as much as 40% (Grahame and I disagree on the exact number…see comments over there for details) could have higher speeds by simply upgrading the DSLAMs in those 40% of exchanges with VDSL- no nodes required. These people would see an upgrade in speed because they have line lengths less than 2km. What speed that would be and how reliable is anyone's guess, or how many DSLAMs would be required (because not all those on short lengths would be on the same DSLAMs), but the fact remains, some would receive a speed upgrade.
I wanted to clarify this as I think it was unfair of how I treated Grahame's argument compared to Nick's. Nick was over-exaggerating that point and that needs to be pointed out, because that's not what we want or SHOULD be doing to try and make our point. I don't agree we SHOULD do it this way, but the fact remains it's possible nonetheless. Grahame still seems convinced the Telstra Tophats upgrade shortened enough lines to make it 45%, but clearly that's incorrect, as, even if all that 5% (some 600 000) WERE on RIMs with no fibre feed and got upgraded, that's 3 TIMES more than Telstra themselves said would be affected (some 200 000 premises). And most of the Rims were simply "tophatted' (hence the upgrade name) so they already HAD ADSL and fibre and no serious average line length shortening would've been made at all. In fact, this ZDNET article makes it clear, only some 100 000 didn't have access to ADSL before:
So clearly, it's MUCH closer to 40%, if not well below that, because of various other facts
2- I'd also like to note, Grahame HAS been interacting with me. Which is a great deal more than many less-than-positive-on-the-nbn commentators do (Andrew Bolt, et al). I would like to thank him publicly for this because he's one of the only ones and I think that deserves credit.
Seriously people THIS is the debate we need. Not political, PRACTICAL.
My biggest beef with Lynch and the other Liberal party sycophants is simply how blatantly short sighted they are being – sure $40Billion is a big chunk of change to spend over 10 years on fibre but we spend that EVERY year on defense!
FTTP will give this countries businesses and consumers such a massive leg-up in the years to come over countries like the US and UK that folks will look back and wonder how ppl like MT and GL could have been so short-sighted and frankly stupid!
And another FYI peeps:
I've had another "trade" of comments with Mr Lynch which was considerably less….amicable. It is relatively long and in the bottom 30 or so comments (you have to keep saying "view more comments") but I'd genuinely like to hear from people if I was being unfair in my final assessment:
The comment anchor unfortunately doesn't work because it isn't infinite scroll. But if you search for the words: "You are wrong." you will get to the beginning of Grahame's most recent comment and mine following.
There's a good 10 000 words between us….but I would genuinely like some feedback if people have time.
Him trying to discredit you was definitely out of place.
Lynch simply isnt worth arguing with, frankly he's got no respect within the vast majority of ISP/telco employees I know, from my time in the industry, due to his inability to think for himself!
Thanks guys.
I'm not out for a witch hunt, I literally just want to know if I was somehow….disregarding or condescending in my analysis of his comments? If I was, I may owe him an apology. I don't THINK I am, but when you get in heated struggles like that you can loose objectivity.
Lose even….
Heh, has Commsday been "Delimited"? I skimmed the article and comments then closed the tab, now clicking on your link and it just times out. They don't want the NBN because it means more people will DDOS them? :)
More drivel – I wonder if Stan Beer is included in Malcolm's zealot list
I raise my glass in toast to Nick Ross and Renai LeMay…
You both are to be congratulated and thanked IMHO. Your efforts are every bit as important (or more so) as the NBN is to this country. If we are ever to reestablish a "Fourth Estate" of journalistic integrity, it will be through the efforts of people like yourselves…again, many thanks!!
+eleventy billion!
Sad thing is I have put several people onto Nick Ross's article, particularly people who asked about my opinion on the NBN and therefore started in an interested position. Not one of them could be bothered to finish reading it. Too long. The spin masters will always win because the public's attention span is woeful.
It is so sad that even a perfect 100% truth artical can carry as little (or less) weight to an average reader as a simple multiple word lie (eg: an accusation "of generating pro-NBN "propaganda".)
Study Finds That We Still Believe Untruths Even After Instant Online Corrections:
*Typo: artical=article
I've read the ABC report in full. Nick Ross is to be commended; I agree with a good 95% of what he said about the subject.
As a systems engineer of one stripe or the other for 44 years encompassing software, hardware, networking, systems management and team management, development, support as well as governance, my opinion is firmly in the fibre-to-the-premises solution.
Fibre-to-the-node reminds me of old software that insisted on 80-column records long after the punch card was rendered obsolete. It makes sense only to someone who can't adapt to technical change.
Fibre optic cabling to the home is better than copper for data, full stop. Anyone who thinks otherwise is simply mis-informed.
Malcolm Turnbull wants an alternative to the NBN for political reasons, and he simply hasn't found one in FTTN.
Technically FTTH/P is the superior product but the success of its implementation is a political one.
How National Party and regional Liberal members can go back to their constituents, whose need for the NBN to go forward is a premium requirement even pleading for it to be installed, whilst at the same time voting to stop it, and look them in the eyes is beyond me. Their local offices should be under siege every day.
The outcomes of NO local monthly telephone line rentals, used to be $16 per month for me, no long distance call charges, they will be the same price as local calls, even cheaper overseas calls are all no brainers.
National interest takes a back seat when jumping on the government gravy train is in your sights.
I visited many blogs but the audio feature for audio songs present
at this web page is truly superb.
Quality aгticles is the ѕecret to be a focuѕ for the
viewers to pay a quick visit the web site, that's what this site is providing.
My page … movers Everett WA
Might I just say that after finding The FTTN truth the Coalition
does not want known | Delimiter on Joomla, what a delight to uncover someone
who seriously knows what they're writing about on the web. You certainly grasp how to bring a problem to light and make it crucial. Many more people have got to have a look at this and understand this perspective. It's surprising you're not more popular, as you most really possess the gift.
Blog, Policy + Politics - Jul 31, 2015 12:43 - 0 Comments
Google ploughs $1m into Australian tech education
More In Policy + Politics
- Four months later, data retention funding model still incomplete
- Less talk, more action: Entrepreneur tells 'Labor for Innovation'
- Bronny Copter is here to save us from Bishop's Choppergate
- 7:30 exposes Aussie Hacking Team industry
- Hypocrisy? Fletcher pushs tech exports to China while TSSR bill looms
Blog, Enterprise IT - Jul 31, 2015 14:16 - 1 Comment
Legacy health software lands SA Govt in court
More In Enterprise IT
- Microsoft wants to win you back with Windows 10
- Qld Govt Depts have no disaster recovery plan
- ASD releases Windows 8 hardening guide
- ASG picks up $35m CIMIC IT services deal
- Datacom completes mammoth Health ICT takeover
Industry, News - Jul 28, 2015 12:37 - 0 Comments
ICAC to investigate NSW TAFE ICT manager
More In Industry
- iiNet shareholders vote 'yes' for TPG buyout
- iiNet chairman "proud" as TPG sell-out looms
- Kotaku alleges abuse, gross staff neglect at retailer EB Games
- Aussie software firm Marketplacer grabs $10m
- Expert360 pulls in $4.1m for consultancy 2.0
Consumer Tech, News - Jul 29, 2015 17:14 - 11 Comments
Telstra integrates Netflix, Stan, Presto into re-badged Roku box
More In Consumer Tech
- Older Australians embracing video games
- Gasp … Qld will fuel electric vehicle charging stations with solar
- Oops … Tesla enthusiast charges car on Qld windfarm
- Netflix Australia: Review
- RAC builds electric vehicle highway in WA


text:
Jazzy, fizzy and often quite fun, Baz Luhrmann's "Pretty Good Gatsby" takes F. Scott Fizgerald's Great American Novel out for a sometimes dazzling, always irreverent spin.
Movie review
4 (out of five stars)Director: Baz LuhrmannCast: Leonardo DiCaprio, Carey Mulligan, Tobey Maguire, Joel Edgerton, Isla FisherRated: PG-13 for some violent images, sexual content, smoking, partying and brief languageRunning time: 2 hours, 23 minutes
The gauzy picture-postcard 3-D production design and superb leading players breathe life into the Jazz Age novel. But the "Moulin Rouge!" director's barely contained determination to Australianize, if not outright cheapen, "The Great Gatsby" is constantly at war with a book and a cast that scream "classic." And Luhrmann isn't having that.
Gatbsy's orgiastic parties are set to hip-hop music. A clumsy sanitarium-set framing device gives Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire) a tad too much Fitzgerald autobiography and too little Nick, the shrewd but passive observer. And some of the supporting player choices take you right out of the movie.Seriously, what Luhrmann and "colorblind casting" do to the "gambler" and gangster Meyer Wolfsheim is so far removed from Jewish caricature or stereotype as to be laughable.
But Maguire is close to perfect as Nick, the struggling bond salesman, would-be writer and teller of the tale of his neighbor, the mysterious, "richer than God" Jay Gatsby, and of inbred aristocracy that Nick's cousin, Daisy, was born into and married into. Carey Mulligan makes for a cannier Daisy than the hapless ditz Mia Farrow turned her into back when Robert Redford played Gatsby in 1974.
Joel Edgerton ("Animal Kingdom") makes the brawny, bigoted Tom Buchanan an understandable, if not remotely sympathetic, guardian of his polo-playing "ruling class."
And Leonardo DiCaprio brings depth, neediness and focus to Jay Gatsby, who has copied the manners, affectations and dress of America's not-noble nobility, all in pursuit of his feminine ideal: Daisy.
Photographed right, there's a Wellesian larger-than-life aura about DiCaprio, and Luhrmann introduces him as the character in a grand moment that includes confetti, fireworks and Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue," a tune composed two years after this film is set (1922), but close enough to be perfect.
Nick rents a rundown bungalow next door to Gatsby's Disneyland-size mansion. He finds himself the go-between in the mysterious millionaire's obsession, a way for Gatsby to see the woman he loved but who lived totally outside of his income years before. All that's he earned, all that he's made of himself in Prohibition-era America, he did for her.
Daisy's unhappily married to a bullying philanderer. Tom Buchanan and Nick may have gone to Yale together, and Daisy may be Nick's cousin. But with her pal, the rich sportswoman Jordan Baker (Elizabeth Debicki, whose athletic pursuits seem limited to catwalks), Nick conspires to get Gatsby in a room alone with Daisy. Which isn't where the trouble starts, but where the tale takes its fateful turn toward the fatal.
Tom cheats with Myrtle (Isla Fisher) and uses Nick just as Gatsby would, as a "beard," an alibi and co-conspirator. Poor Nick is trapped in a daze of booze and sex, mannered courtship and "appearances."
Luhrmann stages stunningly choreographed parties that suggest a high-class rave with an unlimited budget set to a furious hip-hop beat. Long shots are painterly fantasy landscapes, the hazy bright-colored impressionism of memory. Manhattan is a garishly colorized sea of neon and noise.
But this movie hangs utterly on performance, and DiCaprio's Gatsby is mesmerizing. His studied use of the term "old sport," awkward attempts at poses and occasional lapses — dropping the Jay Gatsby facade — are exactly right, even if they go beyond the novel's dense texture of mystery.
The beating heart of the book, its aspirational "Great Expectations" ethos, coveting wealth to re-create an imagined past and idealized future, shines through in this performance. The emptiness of those pursuits — money, partying, marrying for status — seems more modern than ever.
But it is DiCaprio's lovelorn, hopeful, grasping and nostalgic Gatsby that stands out, a man who earns Nick's finest compliment, one of the greatest lines in all of literature:
"They're a rotten crowd. You're worth the whole damn bunch of them put together."
Notice about comments:
The Post and Courier is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point.
We do not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click the X that appears in the upper right corner when you hover over a comment. This will send the comment to Facebook for review. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Read our full terms and conditions.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
CouponsWe've saved consumers over $2 billion dollars
Slickdeals Exclusives
15% Off Orders Over $100 + Free Shipping Get Code 16923 Redemptions - Last used 7m Ago Click to copy code The More Everything Plan Starting at $30/Month Get Deal 10488 Redemptions - Last used 1h Ago Click to copy code $15 Off Orders $75 or More + Free Shipping Get Code 3817 Redemptions - Last used 10m Ago Click to copy code 20% Off Regular-Priced Small Kitchen Appliance, Floo... Get Code 1487 Redemptions - Last used 32m Ago Click to copy code
Search for Coupon Codes & Printable CouponsEnter a store (i.e. Amazon), keyword (i.e. dog food), or brand (i.e.Pampers)
Browse coupons by store: # - A - B - C - D - E - F - G - H - I - J - K - L - M - N - O - P - Q - R - S - T - U - V - W - X - Y - Z
Sign up for our Newsletter!
Today's Top Coupons
$35 Off Orders $300 or More + Free Shipping at Sears Some restrictions may apply. Enter coupon code at checkout.
48,659 Redemptions 100% Success Rate
SEARS35OFF300 Get Code Discount Click to Copy Code
$30 Off Orders $99+ at Straight Talk Enter code at checkout. Limited time offer. Some restrictions apply.
17,229 Redemptions 100% Success Rate
MINT30 Get Code Discount Click to Copy Code
20% Off Online Outlet at Swarovski Discount prices as marked.
7,516 Redemptions 100% Success Rate
Extra 20% Off Sitewide + Free Shipping at Macys Enter code at checkout. Select departments may only qualify for 10% or 15% off. Free shipping is valid on orders $99 or more.
348 Redemptions 100% Success Rate
REDHOT Get Code Discount Click to Copy Code
$250 Reward Card with U-verse TV + Internet - $59/Month at AT&T U-verse Save $53 off for 12 months. DVR included.
810 Redemptions 100% Success Rate
Anniversary Sale Up to 40% Off + Free Shipping at Nordstrom For men, women and children. Prices as marked.
322 Redemptions 100% Success Rate
40% Off Vape Kits at NJOY
2,140 Redemptions 100% Success Rate
Expires Today
SDKIT40 Get Code Exclusive Click to Copy Code
15% Off Sitewide at LivingSocial Enter code at checkout. Some restrictions apply.
307 Redemptions 100% Success Rate
15offls Get Code Discount Click to Copy Code
$48 Off Smartphones and Tablets for Students and Staff at T-Mobile Must be a college student or college/K-12 staff in the U.S. Web only. Qualifying plan required. Exclusions apply.
2,299 Redemptions 100% Success Rate
15% Off Sitewide + Free Shipping at Kohls Plus, get free shipping on orders $75 or More. Enter code at checkout. Some restrictions apply.
4,756 Redemptions 100% Success Rate
PYDAY15 Get Code Discount Click to Copy Code
20% Off Sitewide for New Customers at Gilt City Save up to $25 maximum. Use promo code at checkout.
5,770 Redemptions 100% Success Rate
WELCOME20 Get Code Discount Click to Copy Code
Up to Extra 70% Off Clearance Items at Barneys Warehouse While supplies last. Discount applied in cart.
101 Redemptions 100% Success Rate
Browse Coupons by Category


text:
Maui Onion Mustard
Made with the World-Famous Maui Sweet Onion.
This Made-on-Maui Gourmet Mustard is a Proven Pleaser...
- $33.50
Includes S&H
Mustard Info
Click Here for Mustard, Jam, Jelly, Chutney, More.
To Order Yours:
Use Our Secure Server: Click HERE
Onion Links:
Fresh Maui Sweet Onions
Sweet Maui Onion Seeds
Maui Onion Dressing
Maui Onion Salsa
Maui Onion Cook Book
Maui Babe Browning Lotion
Click Here
Copyright 1997-2008 Maui-Info.com
All Rights Reserved
Also See MauiDirect.com and Maui4You.com


text:
"Dear Bruce," writes an automotive executive from the suburbs of Chicago, "My wife wants one of those Lexus Lexus hybrids, my son wants to go to the nation's second most expensive college, and my dog needs knee surgery. How do I get a raise, FAST?"
Well, Racing to the Poor House, I can't promise you a fast raise or a quick promotion, but I am able to reveal 20 rules that, when followed closely, will vastly increase your long-term compensation:
Rule 1: You actually have to do stuff. Companies pay employees based on what they accomplish, not on how many cars they would like to pack into their garage. Don't spend your time plotting for a raise when you should be actually accomplishing something.
Rule 2: Avoid threats and taunts. Yelling at, threatening, or begging your boss seldom results in more than a Pity Raise, and Pity Raises are nearly always followed in the coming months by Pity Terminations, as in, "We think it is our duty to help you get on the right path in your career," which loosely translates to: work anywhere but here.
Rule 3: Never bluff your boss. Do your research. If you don't know the actual to a question, try saying, "I don't know, but I will find out immediately."
Rule 4: Only talk numbers to numbers people. (Your boss may be ego-driven, not numbers- driven.) One of the biggest mistakes people make with their boss is that they fail to understand their mindset. If someone is ego-driven, appeal to their ego. Numbers-driven? Give 'em numbers. But if you flood an ego-driven boss with numbers, your numbers will never add up the way you want.
The Definitive Careers Guide From Forbes encompasses every aspect of the job hunt, from interview to promotion. Written by some of Forbes' best careers and leadership writers, it is available now for download.
Rule 5: Talking louder is seldom an effective persuasion strategy. No raise? Perhaps your boss didn't hear you when you asked those last nine times. Nah. Try smarter, not louder.
Rule 6: Never inflate results. Trust is more important than short-term wins. So you had a bad month? Admit it, and at the very least you will build trust. If you BS your boss instead, your boss will mentally place a scarlet letter "L" on your forehead, for liar.
Rule 7: Don't obsess over whether you are treated fairly. Obsess over results. Your job is to deliver superb results, even if all you do is greet people at the door. Instead of focusing on "what's in it for me," focus on "how can I help others?"
Rule 8: No surprises. Ever. Every time you surprise your boss in an unpleasant way, it's like saying, "Here, take the keys to my new car."
Rule 9: Look like the salary you want to earn. Don't dress for the job you have. Dress for the job you want. People have no imagination, and they don't believe you will get a makeover the day they pay you more money.
Rule 10: Don't overcommit. Take on more than you can handle at work, and you'll start to get a reputation that resembles Homer Simpson's. Overcommitting is like buying a billboard that says: I suck worse than I know.
Rule 11: If you screw up, admit it. Then fix it. Apologies are nice, but not enough. If you break a window, replace it. If you lose a customer, find a better customer. Never leave a mess that your boss has to clean up.
Rule 12: Be yourself. Life is too long to fake a role. Famous last words… "I can do it, I'll change." No you won't. You can be a better version of yourself, but if you try to be someone else, at best you will be a pale, sickly version of them.
Rule 13: Relax. There is no Rule 13.
- Page 1 / 2
- Continue


text:
1.0-7167 for Linux x86 released
View Single Post
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 8
Re: 1.0-7167 for Linux x86 released
Okay, Not too sure here what to say so ill try and get all this right,
I am running slackware 10.1 (current) on a Dell Inspiron 2650 laptop
Everything compiles fine as far as i can tell, it installs fine, etc.. looking at my links and such everything is in the right directorys as far as i can tell in the right spots.
When I go to start kde it basicly hangs the system completly I see no "EE" or "WW"'s in my xorg logs anywhere that I look that could give me a hint of some sort as to what is going on, I cant even shell in remotly its hung so badly, its that infamous black screen that ive read about a few times.
The most up to date combination of driver and kernel i can get this to work on is 18.104.22.168 and 6111, I cant seem to move to either a newer driver on the 18.104.22.168 or a newer kernel with the older drivers.
Since ive tried various combinations up to and including 184.108.40.206 for the kernel and this 7167 version of the driver, I am starting to wonder if I accidently checked something in my kernel i shouldnt of, any idea's here for me what to look for that might be screwing this up?
One thing i have not tried that I seem a bit lost on, is using NVagp to use this do i compile a new kernel with out a module for agpgart? and change the line in the config file to force it to use it for xorg? Or do i leave it running with the nvidia module also loaded from boot? I guess ill play with that today and see what happens.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by kanu


text:
|Page: 1 of 1
|Sort By:
The company offers all Rome transfer, cheap but elegant. From/to Fiumicino and Ciampino airport, from/to Civitavecchia port. Tours of Rome. All your needs for your holidays, businees and more.
Rome's leading sedan, taxi cab and shuttle transportation at your service. Safe, Fast, & Reliable - 24/7 Connections to and from main airports: Rome to any city in Italy, and the greater Europe. Tours, Shared Transfer - Affordable Price!!
Rome, Italy Vacations - Travel guide to Rome, Italy accommodations and vacation packages. Visit Rome, Italy for getaways and adventure travel. Plan your Rome, Italy vacation today.


text:
Tigers shut out Jags; get No. 2 seed
Even though the Los Lunas Tigers and Valencia Jaguars were both at Willie Chavez Field on Friday, it almost didn't seem like they were playing each other.
The Tigers, who ended up shut out the Jaguars, 46-0, were playing for an undefeated regular season, their first district championship in 20 years, and a first-round playoff bye.
The Jaguars, who had slim playoff hopes if they could have pulled off the upset, were playing for pride, and trying to outrun the demons of inexperience and a roller-coaster season.
"We talked about (winning district) as one of our goals," said LLHS coach Jeremy Newton. "We're senior-led, but this is a collective effort. Guys have done a good job keeping their heads on straight, and staying humble."
The Tigers clinched their first district title since 1992 with the same formula that has worked all year: a stifling, alert defense that fights off blocks, and one of the most explosive offenses in the state. Los Lunas completed the regular season 10-0, including a 5-0 mark in District 6-4A, while Valencia finishes 3-7, 3-2.
LLHS received the No. 2 seed in the Class 4A playoffs from the seeding committee, which made Goddard No. 1. The Tigers will play at home Friday or Saturday, Nov. 23 or 24, against the winner of Friday's first-round game between No. 10 St. Pius and No. 7 Piedra Vista in Farmington.
Belen placed second in District 6-4A, earning the No. 4 seed and a first-round bye. The Eagles will host either Deming or Roswell High in the second round.
The Tigers, who lost to a veteran Jaguar team 13-7 at VHS last year, dominated Friday's game. The Tigers rushed for 327 yards and held the Jaguars to 56 yards of total offense.
Tiger tailback Jalen Chavez rushed for 193 yards on only nine carries, including an electrifying 88-yard touchdown run in the first quarter. He really ran about 140 yards on the play, as he switched his field.
Quarterback Chris Wisneski threw touchdown passes to Ruger Rodriguez, Isaac Parra and Chris Sanchez, and Darron Gallegos and Sasha Gallegos had rushing touchdowns.
Los Lunas, which led 33-0 at the half, held Valencia to 33 rushing yards and only three first downs in the contest, which had a running clock through much of the second half per a mercy rule.
The Tigers also had zero turnovers to the Jaguars' five.
VHS coach Kevin Jolley said even in the humbling loss to the closest rival, he saw some bright spots. The Jaguar defense gave up a big play on the Tigers' first drive, but then stopped Los Lunas on downs inside the Valencia 15-yard line.
"We're young, but look at how the defensive line played on that first series," said Jolley, the Jags' first-year coach. "That was a huge victory against a team like Los Lunas. But we didn't move the ball that well tonight."
Jolley has tried several players at quarterback this season. Joe Heneghan started Friday's game, with D.J. Heybourne coming in later. Both are juniors.
Heneghan threw one pass, which was incomplete, and had two carries for seven yards. Heybourne had 14 rushing yards and completed 3-of-7 passes with two interceptions. Jaguar tailback Josh Burbank had five carries for two yards.
"We'll hit the weight room, and we'll get stronger and faster," said Jolley. "Our junior varsity did well this year. We expect a big future."
The Tigers' next opponent will be either Piedra Vista, the District 1-4A champion, or the St. Pius team they beat 41-7 in September in Albuquerque. Piedra Vista lost to St. Pius at home in October; PV's signature win is probably its emotional 24-21 win over local rival Aztec on Nov. 2.
If the Tigers are to go deeper in the playoffs than their quarterfinal runs in 2010 and 2011, many LLHS units need to continue their high level of play. One of those units is the offensive line.
"We know that if we don't block well, we can't do anything," said Dakota Wood, the Tigers' starting center. "A lineman has to be physical, and be nasty. The bye week will give us extra time to prepare. We're clicking better as an offensive unit than ever before. We even practice better."
-- Email the author at email@example.com.


text:
Get the inside scoop on deals, promotions, and savings for your heating and cooling needs.
With another hot and humid summer approaching, Hollaway-Meyers can help you stay cool. Hollaway-Meyers has been serving the Chicagoland and Northwest Indiana area since 1927, so you can trust our expert, friendly staff to properly repair any air conditioning unit. With an award winning service department available 24/7, you can count on Hollaway-Meyers with any emergency situation. We are proud to offer professional, EPA certified technicians that are dedicated to quality and total customer satisfaction. No matter how big or small the repair, let Hollaway-Meyers properly install, service and repair your indoor air quality system. We also offer new air conditioning units that are affordable for any home or business owner. Let Hollaway-Meyers keep you cool this summer with professional service or repair that you can count on, we guarantee it.
Hollaway-Meyers is committed to offering quality expert advice and service. We offer many different types of GeoThermal and environmentally clean solutions including solar, wind, and more.
Stay cool this summer with clean-efficient-natural GeoThermal cooling units and save big Illinois! A GeoThermal Cooling unit will take the heat from your home and transfer it deep into the ground and return cool air in the same looped process. Hollaway-Meyers Inc., installs and services GeoThermal Heating and Cooling Units in Illinois, Indiana, and the surrounding regions. Call today for details, or read more below about some of our local services.
Whether your furnace needs maintenance, parts, or simply replaced Hollaway-Meyers has you covered. We stock parts for all major furnace manufactures including Lennox®. Our team has the expertise to repair your furnace/heating unit in Northwest Indiana and Northeast Illinois.
Home owners and businesses can save thousands of dollars and help the environment by using GeoThermal unit to heat and cool their property. Call today to see how we can save you money with GeoThermal Heating and Cooling in Indiana
Hollaway-Meyers installs and repairs air conditioners of all makes and models. We have the parts you need to stay cool all summer long. We offer maintenance plans, emergency air conditioning repair services, and more.
Hollaway-Meyers Inc. is proud to offer residents and commercial property owners in Illinois professional air conditioning service from sales, maintenance and repair. We have been providing the Chicagoland area with trusted service for over 85 years. We are dedicated to total customer satisfaction and we guarantee all of our work.
Hollaway-Meyers has provided Chicago's heating and cooling needs since 1927. We proudly offer WaterFurnace Geothermal systems, and our commitment to quality is never an option. We design, manufacture, and install our system components for maximum efficiency and comfort. Call us at Hollaway-Meyers Inc. today. We are ready to bring you into the WaterFurnace Chicago geothermal family.
Copyright 2012 Hollaway-Meyers Inc. | All Rights Reserved All content copyrighted by WaterFurnace and Hollaway-Meyers Inc.
Home | Our Services | SiteMap | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Powered By: Page Pop


text:
Please enter the email address associated with your account and we will send you a link to reset your password.
Your password reset link is on its way. If you have problems accessing your account, please contact us at 888-757-4774 and we'll help you out.
I'm sorry, your email address was not found in our system.
If you think this is a mistake, please contact Customer Service at 888-757-4774 or email us.
Location: 185 Price Parkway, Farmingdale, NY 11735
Hours: 8:00AM - 7:00PM, Mon - Fri.
This product does not comply with the "Safe Drinking Water Act,"
which requires that products used in any system providing water for human
consumption (drinking or cooking) to meet low-lead standards.
Please check the box below to confirm you are aware of that this item is for non-potable water applications only.
This product will NOT be used in the installation or repair of a potable water (human consumption) application.
You must agree to this statement in order to purchase this product.
Do not use this item for any installation or repair of potable water applications.
This product does not comply with the "Safe Drinking Water Act,"
which requires that products meet low-lead standards in order to be used in systems providing water for human consumption (drinking or cooking).
This item is for non-potable (non-human consumption) water applications only.
Brand: Slant/Fin
We accept returns of any unused and unopened merchandise within 5 days of receipt and accept returns of defective merchandise within 14 days of receipt. All returns must be accompanied by a Return Goods Authorization, which may be obtained by contacting a customer service representative either by phone or by e-mail. All manufacturer warranties are honored and claims should be made through SupplyHouse.com.
See full Return Policy.
Add this item to your cart to calculate shipping cost.
The entire staff at SupplyHouse is committed to doing everything we can to ship your order out accurately and as quickly as possible. Most orders ship within 24-48 hours and expedited orders go out the same day when placed before 3:00pm EST. If an item is back ordered for any reason, you will be notified via e-mail. Please note in the special instructions at checkout if you need receive your order by a specific date.
See full Shipping Policy.
SupplyHouse.com is committed to providing you with the highest quality products at the lowest prices available. We are committed to competitive prices and will honor our Low Price Guarantee if you find an identical item at a lower price.
For complete information on our low price guarantee, go here.
There is a Minimum Advertised Price (MAP) allowed by the manufacturer on this product. Add item to cart for lowest price.
We are dedicated to protecting your order information. Because of this, all personal data that is transmitted through our site is encrypted using SSL or "Secure Socket Layer" technology which encrypts your order information to avoid the decoding of your information by anyone other than SupplyHouse.
At SupplyHouse.com, we are committed to protecting your privacy. This means that we will not distribute, sell or rent your name or personal information about you to any third party without your permission.
For complete safe shopping information, go here.
Your privacy is of great concern to SupplyHouse. We use the information you provide to process your order and to ensure that your experience on our site is as enjoyable and efficient as possible. Our primary focus and greatest concern is you, our customer. We respect your privacy and therefore do not sell, rent or loan any of your personal information to any third party.
We are committed to protecting your privacy. We use the information that we collect about you to process your orders and to provide a personalized shopping environment. When you purchase products from SupplyHouse.com or register for any SupplyHouse.com services, we automatically place you on our list to receive e-mail updates about special offers, new products, and new services.
For our complete privacy policy information, go here.
A credit card Identification Number is an added safeguard for your credit card purchases. Depending on the type of credit card you use, it is the 3- or 4-digit number printed on the back or front of your credit card. For most online credit card purchases from us, the Identification Number is required information.
MasterCard: Your identification number is the 3-digit number found on the back of your credit card near the signature panel.
Visa: Your identification number is the 3-digit number found on the back of your credit card near the signature panel.
American Express: Your identification number is the 4-digit number found on the far right on the front of your credit card.
Baseboard Heater Calculator
Install Instructions
Submittal Drawing
BTU Capacity Chart
Warranty Info
Long acclaimed by contractors for its construction quality and ease of installation, Fine/Line 30 baseboard is America's premier baseboard. Providing deluxe heating comfort in millions of homes, Fine/Line 30 provides gentle full room convection heating that blocks chilling drafts at the outside walls. For decades, Fine/Line 30 baseboard has been leading the industry with high quality baseboard heating.Fine/Line 30 baseboard is ideal for high quality installations in homes, apartments and many light commercial applications. With its high performance heating element, super strong galvanized steel enclosure that resists rust and the industry's finest accessories, Fine/Line 30 will provide a quality installation that performs superbly and looks good for years.Fine/Line 30A features 610 btuh, 7-7/8" height, 2-11/16" depth, 3/4" element, Nu-white baked enamel finish.Package: With Heating Element
(based on 28 reviews)
Ratings Distribution
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Stars
of respondents would recommend this to a friend.
Best Uses
Most Liked Positive Review
slant fin 30A
Slant Fin has always been the best in the industry. With Pex Supply being the dealer, you can't miss. I originally ordered this product from our local supply house (it is a nationwide...Read complete review
Slant Fin has always been the best in the industry. With Pex Supply being the dealer, you can't miss. I originally ordered this product from our local supply house (it is a nationwide supply house) and after 4 months of excuses and still no product, I went online and found Pex Supply. I had my product in 4 working days. [...] Top shelf product.
Most Liked Negative Review
Longer they are more damage thier is
2 , 3 & 4'baseboards were shipped in good condition, 6' lot of damage to fins. need to improve shipping for longer baseboards. Would recommend 2 to 4' baseboards
Reviewed by 28 customers
Sort by
Displaying reviews 1-10
Back to top
Previous | Next »
nice looking heat runs
By stretch
from michigan
Comments about 7 ft. 30A Fine/Line Baseboard:
easy to install and looks great
Bottom Line Yes, I would recommend this to a friend
Was this review helpful? Yes / No
- You may also flag this review
By jake the plumber
from west milford nj
Comments about 6 ft. 30A Fine/Line Baseboard:
Nice product
By JD
from Ohio
I replaced a big commercial style radiator with this compact baseboard one. I was impressed by the quality of the packaging but it did arrive with some bent fins. I spent about 20 minutes with needlenose pliers straightening them out. They are very fragile and sharp so don't grab them with your bare hands.
Fin tube
By ml
the fins are foil! but when they came in damaged I wrote supplyhouse with photos and without another question they replaced, i see this type of cust. serv. way to seldom these days. Recommendation more based on vendor than the manufacturer.
I would buy again
By Josh bilow
from Deshler, ohio
Comments about 8 ft. 30A Fine/Line Baseboard:
Greasy product will use again
Good product/poor packaging
By Trever
from Michigan
The baseboards themselves are good. Nothing extremely great, but they work just fine. Everyone I seem to get has a dent/ding in it and not all the fins are straight. The damage is generally on the back where it doesn't affect the end result which is why I never got a replacement and why it doesn't deserve lower stars. If they had come flawless it would be a 5 star product.
Exactly what I expected
By beesbud1
from Rising Sun, MD
Comments about 4 ft. 30A Fine/Line Baseboard:
Remodeled my bathroom and installed all new baseboards. Product was easy to install and looks great.
Images shared by beesbud1
bent fins on arrival but work great
By jsgoti
from Richmond, VA
I ordered 3 7' sections of this item. It arrived late due to weather. Each section had bent fins here and there along their length (nothing that couldn't be straightened out by hand) but were in otherwise good working order. I called Pex Supply about the issue and they promptly offered a partial refund. I kept the items ordered, installed them, and they work as planned. Thanks Pex!
Good Value, Low Profile
By aerolark
from Southold, NY
Used several of these to add a zone to my basement. Compact and produce more heat than the 2000 line, so I could use fewer. Four Stars because they got banged up in shipping (mostly crushed fins) - not PEX supply fault(excellent packaging) - but sloppy packaging by Slant Fin (the units can bang around a lot in the factory boxes)
Boiler and Radiation Refit
By T-Man
from Milford ,Ct
The job worked out great used all new Pex and Sharkbite fittings for the radiation refit made the entire job a breeze,also for the first time I pre purchased all my other fittings and valves which were all top notch and the pricing was way below anybody here.So for the breakdown Installed new Weil Mc lain gold oil fired boiler replacing a 34 year old steel New Yorker added some new Slant Fin radiation replaced some old radiation with more new Slant Fin and added a new Weil 45 indirect water heater now my old house is warmer then toast!. P.S I have ordered from Pex Supply many times and never been disappointed.
Do you have questions about this product?
Get answers from real customers and in-house experts with AnswerBox.
Know the answer? Answer this question
1 answer
3 answers
2 answers
4 answers
Do you have a question about this product?
Page 0 of 6
Page 0 of 1
Subscribe to our Channel
Like Us on Facebook
Visit Our Blog
At SupplyHouse.com, our goal is to bring you the highest quality plumbing, heating and HVAC supplies at competitive prices. Our product catalog includes PEX Plumbing Supplies, Radiant Heat Supplies, VisionPro Honeywell Thermostats, Taco pumps and mini-split air conditioners. If there are items you are looking for but can't find on our website, please contact our Customer Service Representatives & we will do our best to find what you need.
© 2015 SupplyHouse.com


text:
Photos: Kevin Wilson
EZ 7.3L Turbo Upgrade
Improve Performance and Reduce EGTs with ATS' Aurora Turbocharger Kit
OK, you've done nearly everything economically possible to your 7.3L Super Duty or Excursion. You've upgraded the intake and exhaust, added a programmer, and possibly even upsized the injectors. Sure the truck runs better, but you've noticed that the EGTs are starting to climb into the danger zone at wide-open throttle or when towing a heavy trailer up a grade. The missing element in your power recipe is more air. While the stock Garrett turbo functions well on a stock truck, it can't keep up with the added heat that more fuel creates.
When it comes to picking an upgraded turbo for your truck, where do you start? Usually word of mouth has been part of the typical selection pathway, but there has to be a more scientific way to get the best bang for your turbo buck. Mostly, that requires serious knowledge of turbo mapping, and then trying to figure out which turbo will fit your needs. And then there's the issue of how to get your selection in the truck in an efficient manner without a lot of custom plumbing work. Your best bet is to choose a complete kit that's been engineering to fit your truck and will give you what you want, more power and reduced EGTs without breaking the bank with a bunch of custom fabrication to make it work.
One of the nicest and most complete bolt-on turbo upgrade kits for the 7.3L on the market today is a fairly new one from the folks at ATS in Aurora, Colorado. Since ATS stands for Advance Turbo Systems, you would expect none the less from folks at ATS. Their latest Aurora Turbo System for the 7.3L Power Stroke was years in the making, which is why the kit is such a complete bolt-on system that delivers on so many levels.
Available for the 1999 1/2-'03 Power Strokes, the kit is offered with ATS Aurora 3000, 4000, 5000 or even 6000 turbo configurations. The most popular choice is the Aurora 3000 which supports power levels from 350-500 rear-wheel horsepower and dramatically reduces EGT with a 30-percent increase in airflow over stock. With a wide compressor map, the turbo not only controls the extreme EGTs from added fuel, it also provides quicker throttle response, improved midrange and top end power, according to ATS.
Using state-of-the-art CAD cam design, the folks at ATS came up with a trick turbo pedestal that is designed to work with clockwise rotation turbos. The switch over from the stock counter-clockwise setup allows for a larger turbo selection as the pedestal can be used with any T3 or T4 flange configuration. Another plus to the kit is that ATS replaces the donut-style seal factory up pipes and replaces then with the upgraded bellows-style units that use a stamped steel gasket to eliminate leaks and provide the most drive pressure to the turbo as possible.
The kit also uses a newly designed intake manifold to accommodate the clockwise rotation turbo. The turbo also features a larger inlet than stock, with a built-in inducer ring that eliminates turbo flutter or compressor surge. The ported inlet provides a alternative path for the airflow to go so it doesn't damage the turbo. Speaking of the turbo, ATS claims its Aurora 3000 has a better bearing cartridge system than the stock turbo and features a high-temp coating.
We enlisted the air of our old friends at Strictly Diesel in Scottsdale, Arizona, to bolt on ATS' new Aurora Turbo System on Project Box Hauler, our 2001, high-mile dually we have brought back to life. The upgraded turbo was the missing part of the power equation, since the truck was outfitted with 50hp DDP injectors and EGTs were on the rise during towing.
The truck also smoked quite a bit, and Strictly Diesel owner Nate Brekken said the best fix for both problems was a turbo upgrade. With 200,000 miles on the stock turbo, and visibly worn turbo blades, installing the new ATS system was a no brainer, especially since the stock turbo could barely muster 16 pounds of boost.
The installation took the greater part of the day, but according to Nate, since the kit was so well designed and thought out, the install took less time than he had planned. We had the old turbo off and new setup on in less than eight hours. One of the hardest parts of the install was trimming the new 4-inch downpipe the kit comes with and mating it to our 4-inch Hushpower exhaust system. The ATS kit does come with a coupler to mate the pipes, but some cutting and fitting is required to keep the larger down-pipe off the body.
If you have a 7.3L Power Stroke, especially if it has a few miles on it or the EGTs are climbing higher than is safe, check out the new Aurora Turbo System for the 7.3L. It offers plenty of flexibility for street driven trucks all the way up to high-horsepower competition rigs, is easy to install, and best of all, works great at lowering EGTs and adding plenty of power.
Driving Impressions
With the new ATS Aurora Turbo System install on Project Box Hauler, complete with the Aurora 3000 turbo, it was time for a test drive. We also hooked up a Ford diagnostic scan tool to get real time data.
What was obvious from the get go was the truck produced a lot less smoke, about 2/3 less than it did before the install, and had a ton of newfound throttle response. Building rpms with the six-speed manual was too easy, requiring a lot of fast shifting to keep up with the power band. Power was very linear with improvements all the way from the bottom to the top. According to the Auto Meter boost gauge, the new turbo setup produced 25 pounds of boost at wide-open throttle, much better than the 16 the stock turbo barely produced.
Probably what impressed us the most was the smile on Nate's face as he drove the Power Stroke. As a life-long Power Stroke master mechanic, he had nothing but praise for the new ATS kit, from the fit and finish, to the easy of installation, and of course, the end results.
As we wrap up Project Box Hauler, the big dually will be headed to the dyno to see just what our power combination produces. Best of all, there's now electronic tuner on the truck, all the fuel and boost is added mechanically for improved reliability.
Strictly Diesel
Tags: ats, aurora 3000, Ford Power Stroke, low buck, Power Stroke, project box hauler, super duty, turbo upgrade