Malaysian fixed broadband sector has no competition except for very limited areas where Time and Jaring operates. The other mobile telcos were never serious in offering fixed broadband for desktop use because they are too caught up and confused in the traditional voice and texts lucrative markets.

Many of them only want the public to think that mobile internet is only confined to smartphones, iPads and tablets since they consume very little volume while they can continue milking the users like cows.

Fact is once you start using the modem on a desktop PC, the consumption of data becomes leapfolds from that of your mobile devices. There is high tendency that you would want to start streaming HD videos on your wide screen monitors and downloading big files/updates into your terabyte capacity HDD, don't you think so?

The mobile telcos don't understand this and none of them I can say is serious or even try to penetrate this sector. All I can say is that TM monopolizes this fixed broadband sector close to 100% except for very limited areas served by Time and Jaring. They really enjoy the comfortable position of not even having a single competitor that could offer an alternative.

They can safely bet with you that if you don't accept their monopolized unlimited DSL or Unifi packages, you can prepare yourself to pay through your nose with volume quota based wireless internet plans.

If we continue on getting those stingy quotas, how are we going to do cloud storage, IPTV, Netflix-like subscription and heavy videogame consoles/net apps updates?

I can assure you that the even the DC-HSPA+ providers in the middle east such as in Qatar and Arabia performs more consistently than Malaysia telcos. Even Thailand's where the market is HUGEly flooded by tourists and a much denser populated areas.

Why can they achieve that?

The answer is that they have better traffic off-loading solutions such as very good coverage of fibre optic node fixed lines, less stringent phone pole regulations to run cables(although it can be very messy), and widespread WiFi hotspots to spread the usage out.

Bolehland however has to deal with cartel linked spectrum awards, costs cuts in building less base stations but want to maximise coverage as much as possible and bandwidth leaks by offering so many "hidden" unofficial packages out there that escapes quota.

Don't you think that the Altel deal sounds like a waste? It was awarded one of the biggest slice of the spectrum but it ended up becoming a shared MVNO of Celcom and now that their price is unveiled, it is so similar priced with other players.

If like that what's the use of having different brands when all of the telcos are just clone of one another?

Plain waste of resources and effort. Might was well merge all of them, save the costs of overlap staffs,use the money towards improving overall service and come out clean/straight to the public that we have a 1 Monopoly telco.

The fixed broadband market in Malaysia is a bit complicating to start with. Differentiating both mobile internet and fixed broadband sounds like simple approach but in reality Malaysian telcos seems to have complex marketing for them.

Why?

1) TM enjoys almost 100% comfortable monopoly of the entire fixed broadband market
-Over 90% of Malaysians who wants fixed broadband with unlimited quota for proper use on their desktop have no other choice but to choose TM's owned HSBB or Streamyx ADSL networks. Only a small percentage of limited lucky ones get to choose for Time Broadband or Jaring own fixed line networks.

2) Malaysian Mobile Telcos Confuses Consumers With Luring Them Into Thinking Mobile Internet Experience Is As Good As Fixed Broadband
-Just look at packages/plans offered by Celcom, DiGi and Maxis...
DiGi claims to offer Prepaid Internet For Tablets and PCs with exhorbitant prices - RM10 for just 200MB, RM100 for 4.5GB?
SKMM Packs sell for RM25 with just 1GB monthly quotas?

How not uninformed consumers are lured into this hideous trap? So does SKMM wants computer illiterate users to use smartphones or netbooks/PCs? The smartphone adoption drive is just nonsense towards and IT literate society.
We want youths that learn to write codes and use real PC apps.Not messaging FBing and tweeting rubbish all day long.

3) The Introduction of MiFi Devices That Distorts The Definition of Both Mobile Internet and Fixed Broadband Further
Coming from P1 Networks and Yes 4G which were both supposed to be pure data players offering fixed broadband, mini mobile routers and MiFi devices offered by them are now replacing traditional expensive dataplans offered by celcos.

Even if P1 or Yes starts offering MiFi devices with unlimited quota but slower speeds averaging between 1-2mbps, people are going to start ditching their expensive mobile dataplans for their smartphones and start using wifi connections from their MiFi devices. The threat is strong and those traditional celcos are fighting for their lives to keep this idea from getting realized. There won't be any need for mobile connectivity(3G/LTE) for smartphones or tablets any more. People will start buying (WiFi-Only) devices and have them connected to MiFi routers.

That is why the traditional mobile telcos model which handles both traditional circuit based services and data is getting obsoleted.

Our early WiMAX operators such as P1 and AMAX(ended) both started to offer fixed broadband services, how could they end up adopting mobile internet plans today? Their networks were built new from scratch for pure data why did they end up in a mess adopting price structures similar to mobile telcos?

Live could have been made easier if they have just concentrated in pure dataplay because there is NO traditional circuit services transitions to be made.

It is not entirely true to say fixed broadband should not be associated with wireless models.

4-5years back both Time Broadband and Jaring had reached a certain level of success by offering the Webbit and SOMA Networks CDMA solutions that offered UNLIMITED fixed wireless broadband packages to users in cities upto 2mbps. It was until faster TM Streamyx and UniFi packages were introduced which caused their decline of use in urban areas.

Moreso moving forward from Rel. 8 Specs, early LTE has already been designed to incorporate simplification and adopt full data only services.

I'll share some important information to you about wireless resources base on rigorous studies made recently by telco vendor labs(vendor name witheld). Those who eager to know why Digi's 3G network and the other mobile telcos seem to have very frequent drop calls here's the answer:

It was discovered that data utilization which shared the same resources as fixed networks were not the cause of congestion in mobile telco networks but it was the high consumption of consistent L3 signalling(RRC signalling) that bogged their networks down

But rest assured the LTE specs beyond Rel. 8 has already made great improvements to improvise on this since it'll be optimized to handle pure data-play services including IP based VoLTE.

UMTS 3G networks used to have 5 RRC signalling states but with LTE onwards now they've simplified it to ONLY 2 for much greater efficiency - RRC_idle and RRC_Connected.

How inefficient UMTS for data compared to LTE?

Here are 3 scenarios:

With normal voice continuous calls - it only takes up 50 RRC signalling messages
Skype on idle in the background(using Android OS phone) 1 hr period - ~1400 RRC signalling messages
Use of Android MMO game for just 1/2hr period - 3000+ signalling messages

But this is no excuse for pure data WiMAX networks that was actually meant to provide fixed broadband services from the very start. Why did they end up getting confused and mixed up with package plans similar to UMTS/HSPA+ players?

If TM kills every competitor, don't expect any price reduction anytime soon and the era of limited quota ruling will be fully implemented.

When P1 first launched their company, they were so agressive that TM had to go all out to compete with so many attractive bundles such as PC/Notebook deals, student deals and Streamyx in a box deals.

Now since they're already enjoying a full monopoly with fixed lines, you can see how lazy they're already getting.

Regarding the news you quoted, actually the reporter was testing the understanding of TM's own directors knowledge on what clearly differentiates between a fixed line broadband and mobile broadband.

He tries to avoid answering it directly or he's just too greedy to keep pleasing his shareholders.

The true difference between a fixed broadband network and mobile broadband plan is actually the UNLIMITED QUOTA use. With mobile broadband, you should only stick your SIM inside your phone/tablet all the time thus the use of volume quota to limit your usage to prevent abuse.

Actually we've already been discussing this topic in regards to the differentiation between fixed broadband and mobile internet a few pages back.

I'm guessing a The Star reporter is following this topic closely and picking this question for their Q&A with TM.