Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

eircom up for sale

2»

Comments

  • #32
    watty
    Registered Users Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    The Next step for mobile is 4G(LTE), that should have a pretty big impact on DSL. It should leapfrog over dsl if the networks get it right. I think the spectrum auction for it is pretty close.

    Nonsense. They would need about 9x the base station density that is envisaged and 9 x 20MHz channels in a single RAN rather than Comreg putting weak and unenforced coverage demands and insisting on having 4 Infrastructures, maybe even with 5MHz channels.

    You do know that 5MHz LTE that's lightly loaded is not much different to lightly loaded 3G. When load is such that 3G users get only 200Kbps, then LTE is much better, 400Kbps!

    So it will be nice on launch day when there are no customers, but in the longer term when economically loaded it will only be a little better.

    Also it will be expensive. You checked Vodafone Germany LTE prices? They say it's NOT a broadband replacement but complementary for Business people that already have broadband but need "on the go" connectivity.

    Mobile can't ever economically provide Broadband. That's a fact.


  • #33
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    watty wrote: »
    Nonsense. They would need about 9x the base station density that is envisaged and 9 x 20MHz channels in a single RAN rather than Comreg putting weak and unenforced coverage demands and insisting on having 4 Infrastructures, maybe even with 5MHz channels.

    You do know that 5MHz LTE that's lightly loaded is not much different to lightly loaded 3G. When load is such that 3G users get only 200Kbps, then LTE is much better, 400Kbps!

    So it will be nice on launch day when there are no customers, but in the longer term when economically loaded it will only be a little better.

    Also it will be expensive. You checked Vodafone Germany LTE prices? They say it's NOT a broadband replacement but complementary for Business people that already have broadband but need "on the go" connectivity.

    Mobile can't ever economically provide Broadband. That's a fact.

    It can stop 40 Euro a month, 1Mbps fixed wireless being the norm in many areas though :P


  • #34
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    thebman wrote: »
    It can stop 40 Euro a month, 1Mbps fixed wireless being the norm in many areas though :P
    Well, no. You'd be surprised how many people find that that's better value for money than so-called mobile broadband. For one thing, the fixed wireless providers tend to operate within the laws of physics.


  • #35
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Well, no. You'd be surprised how many people find that that's better value for money than so-called mobile broadband. For one thing, the fixed wireless providers tend to operate within the laws of physics.

    Well in many cases it isn't.

    My Uncle uses one and my parents did for a while and got much better service than any of the fixed wireless operators in the area could provide.

    It all depends on the area.


  • #36
    PogMoThoin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,874 ✭✭✭✭PogMoThoin


    thebman wrote: »
    Well in many cases it isn't.

    My Uncle uses one and my parents did for a while and got much better service than any of the fixed wireless operators in the area could provide.

    It all depends on the area.

    Use them for light browsing yes, use them for all the services the internet offers no. Light browsing on the move is what the mobile networks are built to handle, nothing else. That's why there's a pathetic download limit, in case you use them.

    Mobile isn't suitable for Voip, gaming or anything in realtime, the latency is too high (most wireless providers offer very low ping). It also isn't suitable for streaming like Netflix or Youtube because the bandwidth limit is too low (most wireless providers have many times the mobile limit, many are unlimited). And as it's not an always on connection it's undependable for vpn for business users.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    megafan
    Registered Users Posts: 410 ✭✭megafan


    Don't get me started on new labour, they offend me; particularly people like Rabbitte who have completely flipped their outlook. When all the Left have left is Sinn Fein, I feel like giving up.[/QUOTE]



    Who originally sold the phone company to private hands....? Yes the other shower of gougers FFails & certainly could not consider Sinn Fein a left wing party more a fascist right wing party likely to kneecap/murder you if your in disagreement with them... What we need is real honesty & all have to face up to the fact the country is bunched (like eircom!) & we all will have to pay a huge costs in taxes & other charges due to years of mismanagement!:mad:


  • #38
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    PogMoThoin wrote: »
    Use them for light browsing yes, use them for all the services the internet offers no. Light browsing on the move is what the mobile networks are built to handle, nothing else. That's why there's a pathetic download limit, in case you use them.

    Mobile isn't suitable for Voip, gaming or anything in realtime, the latency is too high (most wireless providers offer very low ping). It also isn't suitable for streaming like Netflix or Youtube because the bandwidth limit is too low (most wireless providers have many times the mobile limit, many are unlimited). And as it's not an always on connection it's undependable for vpn for business users.

    Yes but the over 50's aren't really looking to play the latest Halo. I never said it gets used for heavy gaming or VOIP :confused:

    I'm well aware of the limitations of the technology.

    Enough people switching even just for a year or two to save some money will force Wireless to up their game. Many of the 1Mbps fixed wireless services aren't even good enough for VOIP/gaming.

    Most people that would switch wouldn't use up the Mobile allowance as they wouldn't be heavy users of broadband.

    Seen loads do it already, don't know what stands to be gained by pretending it isn't happening.


  • #39
    PogMoThoin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,874 ✭✭✭✭PogMoThoin


    thebman wrote: »
    Yes but the over 50's aren't really looking to play the latest Halo. I never said it gets used for heavy gaming or VOIP :confused:

    I'm well aware of the limitations of the technology.

    Enough people switching even just for a year or two to save some money will force Wireless to up their game. Many of the 1Mbps fixed wireless services aren't even good enough for VOIP/gaming.

    Most people that would switch wouldn't use up the Mobile allowance as they wouldn't be heavy users of broadband.

    Seen loads do it already, don't know what stands to be gained by pretending it isn't happening.


    That's fine, supposing they get grandkids the the other side of the world and want to Skype video?

    The truth is it was completely wrong for the politicians of this country to opt for a quick fix mobile option, it does not meet the needs of the future. It's kicking the can down the yard. We need fibre and decent fixed wireless (subsidised), we need to start planing and building it now. Many of the wireless providers are struggling and get no funding. Just one million to each of them would have been a much better investment than the €250 million Three got to build the countries fourth mobile network, a network they were going to build anyway. I lost my job after nearly 4 years with a wireless provider this time last year directly because of this National Broadband Scheme, that won't be included in any figures. A great wrong is being done.


  • #40
    bealtine
    Registered Users Posts: 4,051 ✭✭✭bealtine


    PogMoThoin wrote: »
    That's fine, supposing they get grandkids the the other side of the world and want to Skype video?

    The truth is it was completely wrong for the politicians of this country to opt for a quick fix mobile option, it does not meet the needs of the future. It's kicking the can down the yard. We need fibre and decent fixed wireless (subsidised), we need to start planing and building it now. Many of the wireless providers are struggling and get no funding. Just one million to each of them would have been a much better investment than the €250 million Three got to build the countries fourth mobile network, a network they were going to build anyway. I lost my job after nearly 4 years with a wireless provider this time last year directly because of this National Broadband Scheme, that won't be included in any figures. A great wrong is being done.

    I'd have to agree with this analysis, mobile is not a solution or at best a short term solution. It might make the gov look good for the EU and they (the gov) can bs about how they are providing a basic broadband service to all in the country. Mobile midband simply doesn't deliver anything like broadband reliably, a few people extra in the cell and bang there's no service to all the consumers in that cell.
    While I've seen some shoddy fixed wireless operators, in general most FWA providers do deliver a reliable and decent service that is broadband.

    BTW the government didn't give 250 million to Three is was only €79 million or so, even so that subsidy would have been far better used if it had been spent on FWA.

    The only solution as outlined, which I agree with, is to roll out fibre in the last mile where possible and FWA to those in very hard to reach areas. LTE is not a viable alternative the way Comreg have structured it. This was a core promise in the FG and Labour manifestos.


  • #41
    PogMoThoin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,874 ✭✭✭✭PogMoThoin


    bealtine wrote: »
    BTW the government didn't give 250 million to Three is was only €79 million or so, even so that subsidy would have been far better used if it had been spent on FWA.

    Correct, the rest to make up the €250 million came from Europe. Not one person got broadband, Three got a phone network for free.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement