NTR to Dump IBB

Sponge Bob

twas in the Times business section today, they will totally offload it next year ( once the network has been fixed ) and will get out of the BB market.

dub45

Well it certainly ties in with its new focus on 'waste disposal':rolleyes:

Couch Potato

dub45 wrote:

Well it certainly ties in with its new focus on 'waste disposal':rolleyes:

Recycling all the radio masts from people's homes

watty

I had heard rumours that National Troll Roads was unhappy.

The major problem is Ripwave and lack of Infrastructure. It is a fixable ISP. Maybe if we clubbed together here we could buy it and fix it offereing some more competition to encourge Eircom to do more for ADSL

Capt'n Midnight

I don't think we could afford it

But what would worry me is the likes of Eircom buying it , or is there a limit to the RF licenses they can own ?
One reason they might be interested is because otherwise some IBB customers might cancel the line rental.

dub45

watty wrote:

I had heard rumours that National Troll Roads was unhappy.

The major problem is Ripwave and lack of Infrastructure. It is a fixable ISP. Maybe if we clubbed together here we could buy it and fix it offereing some more competition to encourge Eircom to do more for ADSL

They do not seem too worried about foisting Ripwave onto as many unsuspecting punters as they can possibly can - it seems to be on sale everywhere at the moment:eek:

Everytime I see it in a shop I feel like lecturing the poor staff behind the counter.

SeaSide

watty wrote:

Maybe if we clubbed together here we could buy it and fix it offereing some more competition to encourge Eircom to do more for ADSL

I'll take if off your hands for a fiver

TimTim

SeaSide wrote:

I'll take if off your hands for a fiver

I'll give you 5.50!

The Real B-man

TimTim wrote:

I'll give you 5.50!

€157.34

watty

€27.00 per subscriber. I 'll pay for it by splitting the Base Stations/ subscriber from the main network, selling the main network, selling Call centre (only online support afterward by students given free wireless BB instead of pay), charging a 8 Euro per month line rental and issuing more shares.

Overlander

So does this mean that Ripwave doesn't work? Is wireless an acceptable means of internet access? Are most users getting acceptable (1-2MB) access consistently or is this just a stopgap technology?

oscarBravo

Overlander wrote:

So does this mean that Ripwave doesn't work?

Not consistently or reliably.

Overlander wrote:

Is wireless an acceptable means of internet access?

Yes.

Overlander wrote:

Are most users getting acceptable (1-2MB) access consistently or is this just a stopgap technology?

Wireless != Ripwave. Damn you, IBB. :mad:

cgarvey

That should be wireless != IBB. They've given an awful bad name to wireless companies. Mind you, most wireless companies in Dublin seem to have had their fair share of problems. However, there's no denying that IBB are clearly the worst wireless ISP in Ireland.

jesus_thats_gre

cgarvey wrote:

That should be wireless != IBB. They've given an awful bad name to wireless companies. Mind you, most wireless companies in Dublin seem to have had their fair share of problems. However, there's no denying that IBB are clearly the worst wireless ISP in Ireland.

I still feel compelled to defend em.. Moved house 3 weeks ago and on a different sector on 3Rock.. The service is even better than it was in my previous place and it was perfect in my other place..

Constant 200+ KB/sec and ping times to die for if you are a gamer:

C:\Documents and Settings\ping www.boards.ie

Pinging www.boards.ie [82.195.136.250] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 82.195.136.250: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=56
Reply from 82.195.136.250: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=56
Reply from 82.195.136.250: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=56
Reply from 82.195.136.250: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=56

Ping statistics for 82.195.136.250:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 6ms, Maximum = 7ms, Average = 6ms

C:\Documents and Settings\ping www.jolt.co.uk

Pinging www.jolt.co.uk [82.133.85.65] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 82.133.85.65: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=54
Reply from 82.133.85.65: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=54
Reply from 82.133.85.65: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=54
Reply from 82.133.85.65: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=54

Ping statistics for 82.133.85.65:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 17ms, Maximum = 18ms, Average = 17ms

egan007

Queue "IT's another IBB rant thread"

Overlander

Thanks folks... This has been helpful, (and I will take the "Damn You" comment to be spoken in a facetious way).

I take it then that if constant 200kBps is acceptable, then wireless may be for you, if it is available.
And that if you want something more serious, say 1-2 MB, it probably is a waste of time (even if you live under the mast.)

And if all this is a reasonable assumption, why buy a futureless technology company?

Hal1

Boards broadband? subscribe now, free line rental to first 10,000 subscribers....no cap

Sponge Bob

Overlander wrote:

I take it then that if constant 200kBps is acceptable, then wireless may be for you, if it is available.

or a constant 6Mbits , available thru wireless but not from most DSL exchanges .

And that if you want something more serious, say 1-2 MB, it probably is a waste of time (even if you live under the mast.)

Huh, with IBB maybe but IBB are not THE wireless technology sector on their own. Stop confusing them please .....unless you are a DSL or Cable operator who just signed up in which case the 'confusion' is quite understandable /

Also dont confuse the risible sub 100k Ripwave service with the more serious gear that IBB have installed for the likes of JTG who posted further up , a happy camper who is a customer of theirs but not on Ripwave .

bk

Overlander wrote:

I take it then that if constant 200kBps is acceptable, then wireless may be for you, if it is available.
And that if you want something more serious, say 1-2 MB, it probably is a waste of time (even if you live under the mast.)

It is important to point out that he is talking about IBB's Breeze product, not Ripwave. Breeze requires you to put an aerial on the roof and have Line Of Sight with their transmitter.

Ripwave is an awful product that won't give you anywhere near these speeds and in fact would be more comparable to dialup.

BTW 200kBps is a 1.6mbps service (200 x 8) so it is very acceptable, however it is important to point out that even with Breeze it is pot luck, some people get Lucky and get great speeds like Jesus, but most people get awful speeds even on Breeze.

watty

Overlander wrote:

So does this mean that Ripwave doesn't work? Is wireless an acceptable means of internet access? Are most users getting acceptable (1-2MB) access consistently or is this just a stopgap technology?

I get a 3Mbps down and 512k up and service about as good as comparable contention ADSL on copper.

Digiweb Metro wireless. It also includes a connection for a real phone and an real local number. So, yes Wireless is a feasible technology.

cgarvey

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

I still feel compelled to defend em.. Moved house 3 weeks ago and on a different sector on 3Rock.. The service is even better than it was in my previous place and it was perfect in my other place..

If IBB were any good, everyone would have that level of service. They don't, unfortunately. Both Breeze and Ripwave products are a complete planning mess, and IBB don't have any resources (CS/Tech) to back that up. They've got it wrong on nearly all levels.

IBB happily provide service in areas other than cities, and by most accounts the service is perfectly acceptable in those areas. Sure, there's the odd backhaul issue, but every ISP has those.

IBB just got greedy and bit off way more than they could chew, and now have a complete mess as a result. So, I'm happy to accept there are many, many happy IBB customers out there, but there is also a disproportionate number of deeply unhappy customers out there. It's not rocket science, and they're not the first to do what they're doing. They just did it badly.

So, while I accept you're one of many happy IBB customers, I'll stand by my claim that they are the worst wireless ISP in the country, and that they give wirelsss a bad name, because of that.

.cg

nadir

We should buy it, there is plenty of skill here to make that run properly. Problem of course is capital, Im just into my second year working, and have no money
It's a good oppertunity though. I wonder how much it would cost.

Overlander

Thanks Watty... just to confirm that--- is the phone line as good a quality as a fixed line operator. (That is, is there any interference or delay?)
PS I'm not out to damage anybody's reputation, but I am interested in understanding what the limitations of wireless are.)

watty

Not interference or delay, but they have had some install teething problems that affect the sound quality on one direction on my line. It ought to be similar quality as NTL phone on Cable. On the voice in it is identical to fixed line and on voice out similar to GSM mobile at the moment, but that is supposed to improve.

watty

nadir wrote:

We should buy it, there is plenty of skill here to make that run properly. Problem of course is capital, Im just into my second year working, and have no money
It's a good oppertunity though. I wonder how much it would cost.

You take out a loan that is repaid by stripping assets and selling more shares afterward. At least that is how Eircom is normally bought.

Blaster99

Overlander wrote:

PS I'm not out to damage anybody's reputation, but I am interested in understanding what the limitations of wireless are.)

There are lots of limitations which is why wireless is not really used anywhere where there are decent alternatives. Wireless exists in Ireland primarily because eircom's availability has been poor and eircom's line rental creates a nice price threshold that competitors can use to improve the commercial viability of the service.

The limitations are limited sector bandwidth, LOS, cost of customer equipment, truck roll required to install the stuff plus significant work at customer site, signal noise and interference environment which makes support painful.

Overlander

Much obliged folks!

dub45

watty wrote:

You take out a loan that is repaid by stripping assets and selling more shares afterward. At least that is how Eircom is normally bought.

That happened once.

jesus_thats_gre

bk wrote:

It is important to point out that he is talking about IBB's Breeze product, not Ripwave. Breeze requires you to put an aerial on the roof and have Line Of Sight with their transmitter.

Ripwave is an awful product that won't give you anywhere near these speeds and in fact would be more comparable to dialup.

BTW 200kBps is a 1.6mbps service (200 x 8) so it is very acceptable,

200+ !!!!!! And yes, is Breeze..

Also, the reason I feel the need to defend them is that this is my 3rd connection with them (3 different addresses, 3 different sectors, 3 sets of equipment) in just over a year and all have been perfect..

Capt'n Midnight

dub45 wrote:

That happened once.

It's happened at least once. And a third time is possible/likely in the foreseeable future.

dub45

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

It's happened at least once. And a third time is possible/likely in the foreseeable future.

It has happened once that way and if it were to happen again that would make it a second time no?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eircom

watty

We should bring that article up to date. I'm not accurate enough on facts to do it.