Do you feel sorry for people living in the sticks..

Fighting Irish

..who get crap broadband?

Cos i don't, its like living in the country and expecting to have a Tescos right next door to you

Sponge Bob

Fighting Irish wrote: »

its like living in the country and expecting to have a Tescos right next door

Its not , it is another utility like electricity or water ....if you are a knowledge economy. The cost of provisioning it universally is a small fraction of 1% of GDP, thats all.

If you are not a knowledge economy then , of course, its a luxury like a Sainsburys next door.

Tesco is for riff raff , I always feel like I need a shower after I go in there Would not like one near me at all for fear of attracting these things to my neighbourhood

thebman

Fighting Irish wrote: »

..who get crap broadband?

Cos i don't, its like living in the country and expecting to have a Tescos right next door to you

Your either trolling or ignorant TBH.

BB is essential for so many people today that to expect people to move to areas where it is available is not practical.

There are many businesses "out in the sticks" that need broadband for what they do that can't get it. Should they move their business or should the government provision it to encourage investment and the creation of jobs in these areas so the areas become more built up and commercial broadband rol out becomes viable and the area no longer needs state investment for broadband?

Or to be seen to have a world class communications network nationwide to make ourselves highly visible to the companies that the government wants to invest in our "knowledge economy"

What about schools? Children don't deserve access to the Internet I suppose if they don't live in a city :rolleyes:

As Spongebob said, the government aren't doing it because its too expensive, they are just too ignorant to realize how important it is. Most of them can't even work their email and aren't using 56k connections or viewing companies extortionate bills in this country for broadband (highest line rental cost in the world is in Ireland for some of the worst speeds).

Sponge Bob

He couldn't be ignorant, by definition, if he lives in a knowledge economy ....or could he :eek: ..Yikes !! :eek:

zugvogel

Fighting Irish wrote: »

..who get crap broadband?

Cos i don't, its like living in the country and expecting to have a Tescos right next door to you

Hmmmm lets see now... maybe you're right?
Then again lets apply the same rule to say... drinking water or disposal of waste.
I note that Dublin in particular depends on its rural county neighbours for both these utilities/services and indeed is looking to pipe drinking water across the country from the Shannon, which is a proposal that isn’t going down to well in rural communities.
In the future a lot of the electricity (30 to 40%) that urban dwellers use is likely to be generated far away from the large urban areas e.g. windfarms, westcoast wave energy, biomass.
So going by your standards rural people should say “f..k them, let them get their water from their recycled piss, dump their used Tesco rubbish in their own back gardens and use bicycles hooked up to a dynamo for electricity to power their PCs:D

See - works both ways old chap;)

Finally, the Government want people to use the Internet in their day to day dealings with the public service e.g. revenue on line, planning online, motor-tax online etc (cheaper as you need less counter staff in public offices), and as government services have to be available equally to all citizens, there really is an obligation on the Government to make a reasonable broadband service available to all.

Fighting Irish

OK guys maybe you took me up wrong, i think every should have the best possible BB but don't live out in the country and then moan about BB being so bad

smellslikeshoes

Fighting Irish wrote: »

OK guys maybe you took me up wrong, i think every should have the best possible BB but don't live out in the country and then moan about BB being so bad

Try running a business with dial up and then say that again. The problem isn't just about bad broadband its having NO broadband. Northern Ireland has something like 99.9% access to broadband. Broadband today is an essential service. Saying that people shouldn't expect to get it in the country is total rubbish. We are years behind most European countries, and if people don't start complaining and kicking a fuss over it we are going to loose our competitiveness, then you can say goodbye to this knowledge based economy they are always talking about.

Firetrap

I assume the OP is trolling. But anyway..

The argument that people who live out on the sticks shouldn't expect to have broadband makes my blood boil and I don't even live in the country myself.

I have never heard anyone out the country complaining that Tesco isn't next door. People who live out the country have either grown up there and don't mind having to drive to the nearest town to shop because that's the way things always have been. And people who've moved there have done so of their own choice and they don't want to be living in an urban area.

On the other hand, broadband has become a necessity for anyone who uses a computer. It's as vital as running water or electricity (or does the OP want country folk to go back to pre-ESB days?), especially if you're hoping to run a business or work from home. Broadband isn't just for kids who want their Bebo pages to load faster or folk who want to look at stupid videos on YouTube all day. The other evening on Prime Time, they had people "out on the sticks" who are being affected by not having broadband. There was a guy whose company manufactures kitchens in Gowran, Co Kilkenny. He needs to email images to customers abroad as part of his work. Should he close up his business, sack the locals who work with him and move into a town?

The government should be encouraging businesses to set up outside of major urban areas, people to e-work (reduce congestion) and to enable the so-called "knowledge economy" to thrive.

gn3dr

Fighting Irish wrote: »

..who get crap broadband?

Cos i don't, its like living in the country and expecting to have a Tescos right next door to you

I live in what you would call "the sticks". I have Tescos 8 miles from me but I still can't get broadband.

Let me throw you another suggestion - do you think people in the sticks feel sorry for people in the cities who can "only" get 3MB and complain they can't get 12 or 20 Meg......

By the way I don't care if you feel sorry or not. Just continue looking after yourself there why don't you.

cornbb

Firetrap wrote:

I assume the OP is trolling. But anyway..

The argument that people who live out on the sticks shouldn't expect to have broadband makes my blood boil and I don't even live in the country myself.

I have never heard anyone out the country complaining that Tesco isn't next door. People who live out the country have either grown up there and don't mind having to drive to the nearest town to shop because that's the way things always have been. And people who've moved there have done so of their own choice and they don't want to be living in an urban area.

On the other hand, broadband has become a necessity for anyone who uses a computer. It's as vital as running water or electricity (or does the OP want country folk to go back to pre-ESB days?), especially if you're hoping to run a business or work from home. Broadband isn't just for kids who want their Bebo pages to load faster or folk who want to look at stupid videos on YouTube all day. The other evening on Prime Time, they had people "out on the sticks" who are being affected by not having broadband. There was a guy whose company manufactures kitchens in Gowran, Co Kilkenny. He needs to email images to customers abroad as part of his work. Should he close up his business, sack the locals who work with him and move into a town?

The government should be encouraging businesses to set up outside of major urban areas, people to e-work (reduce congestion) and to enable the so-called "knowledge economy" to thrive.

QFT.

Ok... the OP is either a bad troll or pig ignorant of rural life, but anyway.

I work in a software development company in Connemara and we get decent broadband speeds. So do my parents who live in the middle of nowhere in Co. Cork. I'm not saying Ireland has adequate universal broadband access/speed - we have terrible broadband, my Romanian workmate laments the lack of high speed access in Ireland compared to his own country.

I don't live in the sticks, unless you consider Galway city to be the sticks. If you feel sorry for people outside Dublin... don't be. Most of them are happy to drive 20 mins through beautiful countryside to Tesco rather than walking/driving for 5 minutes through a skanger-infested urban sprawl. I do like Dublin, but it's infrastructure and services are hardly a role-model for other parts of the country to aspire to.

zugvogel

cornbb wrote: »

...rather than walking/driving for 5 minutes through a skanger-infested urban sprawl...

More like an hour sitting in traffic to travel 3 or 4 miles!
Dublin Bus says it takes 40 to 50 minutes to get from O Connell Street to Dawson Street in rush hour - a distance of about half a mile:eek:

zonEEE

Fighting Irish your a Muppet.

cornbb

I don't mean to slag off Dublin, I'm sure living there has lots of perks.

The bottom line is, if the government doesn't improve internet access and speeds in Dublin and the rest of the country to bring them in line with the rest of europe we can kiss our "knowledge economy" and all its benefits goodbye.

Blaster99

To answer the question, no, I couldn't give a toss and I don't really see why I should subsidise rural Ireland any more than I already do. But it strikes me that in Ireland there's actually a pretty level playing field as eircom pretty much sets the standard and their service is currently universal within their coverage area. In most other countries, you would find significantly faster services in urban areas. Eircom has clearly prioritised coverage over innovation in the last few years which has greatly benefited rural Ireland. It looks like eircom is changing tack with their recent upgrades and the next-gen stuff, so I guess it's moving in the right direction.

stepbar

Fighting Irish wrote: »

OK guys maybe you took me up wrong, i think every should have the best possible BB but don't live out in the country and then moan about BB being so bad

What are you spouting about? :rolleyes: I've never seen such an incoherent argument before in my life. I feel sorry for folk like you, who clearly don't know what they're talking about and thinks everything revolves around dublin. There are parts of dublin where you can't even get broadband and it's not because of disabled exchanges. It's because Eircon decided to install shared cabling instead of cabling for each household :rolleyes:

Firetrap

Blaster99 wrote: »

To answer the question, no, I couldn't give a toss and I don't really see why I should subsidise rural Ireland any more than I already do. But it strikes me that in Ireland there's actually a pretty level playing field as eircom pretty much sets the standard and their service is currently universal within their coverage area. In most other countries, you would find significantly faster services in urban areas. Eircom has clearly prioritised coverage over innovation in the last few years which has greatly benefited rural Ireland. It looks like eircom is changing tack with their recent upgrades and the next-gen stuff, so I guess it's moving in the right direction.

Erm...I wouldn't call it a level playing field. There are plenty of places (and not just in the countryside as stepbar has pointed out) where people can't get broadband because of paired lines, exchanges not broadband enabled etc. Everyone in the country should be able to get decent broadband regardless of where they live. We all pay high line rental regardless of where we live. If they can do it in so-called less developed countries, why can't they do it here?

stepbar

Blaster99 wrote: »

To answer the question, no, I couldn't give a toss and I don't really see why I should subsidise rural Ireland any more than I already do. But it strikes me that in Ireland there's actually a pretty level playing field as eircom pretty much sets the standard and their service is currently universal within their coverage area. In most other countries, you would find significantly faster services in urban areas. Eircom has clearly prioritised coverage over innovation in the last few years which has greatly benefited rural Ireland. It looks like eircom is changing tack with their recent upgrades and the next-gen stuff, so I guess it's moving in the right direction.

Thank god you're not in charge of Eircon. Do you really think you are subsidising rural Ireland? What a retarted view.

Fighting Irish

Firetrap wrote: »

I assume the OP is trolling. But anyway..

The argument that people who live out on the sticks shouldn't expect to have broadband makes my blood boil and I don't even live in the country myself.

Not trolling, and i am not talking about people with no broadband. I am talking about the people who can only use crap broadband services i.e. most of the wireless ones

Fighting Irish

stepbar wrote: »

What are you spouting about? :rolleyes: I've never seen such an incoherent argument before in my life. I feel sorry for folk like you, who clearly don't know what they're talking about and thinks everything revolves around dublin. There are parts of dublin where you can't even get broadband and it's not because of disabled exchanges. It's because Eircon decided to install shared cabling instead of cabling for each household :rolleyes:

Dublin? Who mentioned Dublin?

What is it today "make stuff up day"?

I know a few people who have moved out to the countryside and then they complain they can't get good lines at good prices.
For example, one mate pays the same price as myself, he gets 1mb and its up and down like fook, i get 3mb and its perfect 90% of the time

Then he complains, all i am saying is what does he expect?

Firetrap

Fighting Irish wrote: »

Not trolling, and i am not talking about people with no broadband. I am talking about the people who can only use crap broadband services i.e. most of the wireless ones

What about people who live in urban areas who are also using the wireless ones and are getting an equally useless service? Is it OK for them to complain then?

limerick_woody

What an ignorant attitude - i fail to see the relevance of location and bb availability. I live in a rural community and only recently did Eircom enable the local exchange, prior to that i could barely even shop online, now i can work from home. Yet i pay the same tax rate as anyone else in the country and i am unaware of any pricing structure from Eircom that reflects the lack of services available to some poor people that Eircom havn't gotten around to. Eircom should be pushed (hard) by government to roll out broadband services to all exchanges in country. I am amazed at the level of ignorance amongst some people.

Sponge Bob

Fighting Irish wrote: »

Not trolling, and i am not talking about people with no broadband. I am talking about the people who can only use crap broadband services i.e. most of the wireless ones

Jeez you are THICK

Most crap wireless services, eg Clearwire and Ripwave, are only available in URBAN areas. Most wireless services in the sticks ( if available) are OK .

All rural people want is universal 1mbit . If the government wasn't so stupid and managed to organise that much without wrecking the existing WISPs then 'the market' will take care of the rest.

Then again the government will not stop rubbish like ripwave and clearwire and 3 being sold to urban people as broadband...when its not.

By now there SHOULD have been a big gap between urban and rural people EVEN if we had universal 1mbit ...when we do not. Urban poeple in big cities should have 20 mbit+ quite commonly, today ...and don't

These are a myriad of failures , those of policy and decency and vision for starters

jor el

Fighting Irish wrote: »

Then he complains, all i am saying is what does he expect?

He should expect a decent broadband service would be available no matter where he lives, and at a decent price. Complaints about broadband in Ireland are not limited to people living outside the major cities. The worst of all the wireless services (Clearwire and Ripwave) are ONLY available in cities, and arguably the best broadband in the country is only available in Dungarvan. 100% availability, no limitations, very high speed and not overly expensive. Everyone in Ireland should expect such a service, but the majority of us have no hope of getting anywhere near it.

BostonB

Fighting Irish wrote: »

OK guys maybe you took me up wrong, i think every should have the best possible BB but don't live out in the country and then moan about BB being so bad

I'm in dublin, and can't get decent BB. So you're talking rubbish.

The issue isn't location. Its that we have have poor service providers, one of which has a monopoly and the govt won't get the finger out to sort it out. We live in a small (in area) country but with a lot of wealth. If other poorer countries of a similar size but less wealth can sort out decent broadband across the majority of the their countries there's no excuse for Ireland.

Firetrap

So the OP thinks that only urban areas (preferably where he lives) deserve to have top drawer broadband and the hicks out the country can go hang because they're only stupid boggers and it's their fault for not living in cities. He also obviously believes that it's perfectly acceptable for broadband in Ireland to be half-heartedly implemented, just as long as he has his 3meg connection. His attitude is typical of the half-hearted "shur it'll do" attitude which has plagued this country. The same thinking that decreed that the Luas lines shouldn't join up, that the M50 doesn't need all those lanes etc.

Fighting Irish

Firetrap wrote: »

So the OP thinks that only urban areas (preferably where he lives) deserve to have top drawer broadband and the hicks out the country can go hang because they're only stupid boggers and it's their fault for not living in cities. He also obviously believes that it's perfectly acceptable for broadband in Ireland to be half-heartedly implemented, just as long as he has his 3meg connection. His attitude is typical of the half-hearted "shur it'll do" attitude which has plagued this country. The same thinking that decreed that the Luas lines shouldn't join up, that the M50 doesn't need all those lanes etc.

I said i don't feel sorry for them, i'd be delighted if the whole country had 8mb lines 2moro but it ain't gonna happen.
Every word you said above has absolutely nothing to do with what i said.

Whats with boards members thinking they can just make **** up on the spot?

jor el

OK, what you're saying is that people give up the right to expect certain services based on where they live. By that regard, should people in towns and cities still expect electricity? Most of it is not generated inside towns or cities so why should they expect it? What about bin collections? There are no incinerators or land fills so I guess they should just build them. Same goes for running water.

What about people who don't choose to live in the countryside, like farmers? I guess they could move to the city centre, but it might present a bit of trouble trying to find 40 acres of grazing land.

Your argument, or what little you've put forward, is ignorant and trollish. You've yet to say anything to convince me of why people who live in the countryside shouldn't expect decent broadband. Your analogy of it being like expecting a Tesco next door is also rubbish. Most people who choose to live outside of towns and cities do so exactly because there won't be shopping centres beside them. Besides which, you can always drive to the shops, if you've no broadband then you can't exactly nip down the road to buy it.

Fallschirmjager

what i find desperately sad that in the 21 century a citizen of this republic....thinks if you are not in a city you can pretty much go **** yourself.

we have a chance here, a unique one in history to revitalise the countryside and reduce pressure on cities and infrastructure by supplying speeds in BB so we all win...and yet what do we have? the same old tired city versus countryside arguement dressed in the new clothes of internet speed....we are talking basic access to information here for every citizen, how can you think someone in a remote location is not entitled to that? And spare me the old 'sure they have dialup?' -- if you need fast speeds what make you suppose i dont ? or that i am somehow less entitled to it then you?

BB is as vital as water, electricity...with a bit for foresight we could energise a nation, but you are falling for the oldest trick in the book called divide and conquer...BB in Ireland is asking people to look inward and adopt a me, myself and I approach. What we need to do is resist that temptation...

just my tuppence worth...

thebman

Fighting Irish wrote: »

I said i don't feel sorry for them, i'd be delighted if the whole country had 8mb lines 2moro but it ain't gonna happen.
Every word you said above has absolutely nothing to do with what i said.

Whats with boards members thinking they can just make **** up on the spot?

I like how you how replied to this but ignored all the posts absolutely slamming your idiotic point of view.

Classic troll behaviour

You don't see old school trolling like this very much. Most people have moved on from it.

Blaster99

stepbar wrote: »

Thank god you're not in charge of Eircon. Do you really think you are subsidising rural Ireland? What a retarted view.

I know that I'm subsidising rural Ireland. Very few counties in Ireland contribute more in taxation than they cost to run. Eircom's universal service obligation is much the same. My line rental is subsidising the many less efficient rural installations out there so those complaining about paying line rental while not receiving broadband, are probably not getting such a rough deal after all.

In the meantime, eircom is under increasing competitive pressure from competitors that can cherry pick the most lucrative and always urban areas. It seems quite reasonable that eircom should in term target those same lucrative areas and not worry about the wireless bit players that fight for the odd rural customer.

paulm17781

It costs a lot more to bring utilities to one off houses than it does to a city. Ban one off housing (create sustainable rural development) and a lot of the excuses would disappear.

thebman

Blaster99 wrote: »

I know that I'm subsidising rural Ireland. Very few counties in Ireland contribute more in taxation than they cost to run. Eircom's universal service obligation is much the same. My line rental is subsidising the many less efficient rural installations out there so those complaining about paying line rental while not receiving broadband, are probably not getting such a rough deal after all.

In the meantime, eircom is under increasing competitive pressure from competitors that can cherry pick the most lucrative and always urban areas. It seems quite reasonable that eircom should in term target those same lucrative areas and not worry about the wireless bit players that fight for the odd rural customer.

and those workers in rural Ireland provide a lot of the services you take for granted.

Also they pay about 30 euro a month on top of the highest line rental in the world for flat rate 56K access so no your not subsidizing them. They have done more than pay for the price of a crappy 56K line in the time they've been stuck on dial up in many cases.

rav1410

Lads, The chap in an a$$hole,

He's only doing it to get a rise out of you, I wouldn't waste the energy of replying back to him

Fighting Irish

brim4brim wrote: »

I like how you how replied to this but ignored all the posts absolutely slamming your idiotic point of view.

Classic troll behaviour

You don't see old school trolling like this very much. Most people have moved on from it.

I didn't reply to all the replies because most were bashing me for stuff i didn't even say :rolleyes:

OK let me give you an example of what i'm talking about:
My friend moved from carlow town to the outskirts(the country) of wexford.
He use to get 3mb for €40 and now all he can get is 1mb for €40 and its up and down the whole time. He complains about how the whole country can't get a good 3mb for €40ish.
All i'm saying is what does he expect. It should be but its not.

I'm not saying he doesn't deserve it!
Lot of pussyhurt people around here.

jor el

Blaster99 wrote: »

I know that I'm subsidising rural Ireland. My line rental is subsidising the many less efficient rural installations out there so those complaining about paying line rental while not receiving broadband, are probably not getting such a rough deal after all.

What about all the people paying line rental for a line that does not and never will be able to support broadband? Why should they subsidise you who can receive a wider range of services on your line when they never will? Also, who's fault is it that some exchanges (on which it's thought the DSL failure rate could be 50% or more) are less efficient than others? Is it mine, yours, country dwellers, or eircom's?

jor el

Fighting Irish wrote: »

All i'm saying is what does he expect.

So you're saying he can't expect to have the same broadband he had before, because he's moved out of town, OK.

Fighting Irish wrote: »

It should be but its not.

Now you're saying he should expect it.

Fighting Irish wrote: »

I'm not saying he doesn't deserve it!

You don't seem to have a clue what you are saying. You're either a bad troll or a idiot.

paulm17781

jor el wrote: »

What about all the people paying line rental for a line that does not and never will be able to support broadband? Why should they subsidise you who can receive a wider range of services on your line when they never will? Also, who's fault is it that some exchanges (on which it's thought the DSL failure rate could be 50% or more) are less efficient than others? Is it mine, yours, country dwellers, or eircom's?

What % of these would be in one off houses? How much did it cost to extend the phone line down to that one house?

Fighting Irish

jor el wrote: »

So you're saying he can't expect to have the same broadband he had before, because he's moved out of town, OK.

He knew what he was getting himself into, and knew that for the foreseeable future it would be the same.


Now you're saying he should expect it.

I'm saying in a perfect country everyone should have the quickest internet possible, but we live in reality



You don't seem to have a clue what you are saying. You're either a bad troll or a idiot.

All i'm trying to get across is i'm not saying "fook all boggers"

.

Blaster99

jor el wrote: »

What about all the people paying line rental for a line that does not and never will be able to support broadband? Why should they subsidise you who can receive a wider range of services on your line when they never will? Also, who's fault is it that some exchanges (on which it's thought the DSL failure rate could be 50% or more) are less efficient than others? Is it mine, yours, country dwellers, or eircom's?

In what way are people who largely live far from an exchange in a rural area subsidising my phone line which is in an estate in an urban area? Trust me, if the line rental wasn't part of the USO, the former would be paying multiples of what I'm paying.

"Fault" implies that there's some God given right that a phone line should support DSL. There's not. Eircom inherited a poor network and has made the commercial decision not to fix it in many cases. Obviously because it's not economically viable to do so. This tells you something about how expensive it is to fix it, as eircom's broadband products aren't exactly cheap and diminishing numbers of people bother with a phone line if they can't get broadband on it.

Eventually eircom will run out of low hanging fruit and will start to fix lines, and perhaps that day is coming.

But never expect to get the same service or product offering as that available in urban areas. Rural areas will always lag behind. That's just the nature of the beast. Much like living in Ireland means that we'll always lag behind other countries as it appears to be extremely difficult to deliver world class infrastructure in Ireland.

jor el

paulm17781 wrote: »

What % of these would be in one off houses? How much did it cost to extend the phone line down to that one house?

I don't know, and I fail to see the relevance. Are you saying that the poor broadband availability is due to eircom spending all their money on installing lines in one off houses, or that people in these houses shouldn't expect any DSL services since they paid less than the actual cost to have the line installed in the first place?

Praetorian

Regarding dsl

It's understandable lots of people in remote areas have no broadband because the ISP would most likely be majorly subsidising their connection. I think the priority of the country should be to get decent speeds to the masses, and reasonable speeds to as many small exchanges as possible. But if you are on a tiny exchange I can't see how you can ask an ISP to spend 50k + to give maybe 20 or so houses broadband. We should be trying to cover these people with other technologies. The masses have to be the priority again some time soon, I think this years upgrades are at least 2 years late.

paulm17781

jor el wrote: »

I don't know, and I fail to see the relevance. Are you saying that the poor broadband availability is due to eircom spending all their money on installing lines in one off houses, or that people in these houses shouldn't expect any DSL services since they paid less than the actual cost to have the line installed in the first place?

Not at all. I'm saying I have a real problem with one off houses and they should be banned rather than allowing people to build wherever they want and then have companies (at high cost) have to extend all their utilities to one person insists on living in the middle of no where yet feels that while they live in the middle of no where they are entitled to everything that those of us who suffer (to an extent) living in the city get.

I would say those who live in one off houses should get BB very last. Focus on towns, give rural towns twice what Dublin get for all I care but I do not see why people who chose to live like hermits are "entitled" to everything the rest of us get - subsidized by the rest of us.

ardmacha

Oddly enough in the North they've managed to provide broadband for everyone. While places like Finland, with many remote locations, seem to make a much better stab at service than is the case here.

jor el

paulm17781 wrote: »

Not at all. I'm saying I have a real problem with one off houses and they should be banned rather than allowing people to build wherever they want and then have companies (at high cost) have to extend all their utilities to one person insists on living in the middle of no where yet feels that while they live in the middle of no where they are entitled to everything that those of us who suffer (to an extent) living in the city get.

And what about a one of house built across the road from a telephone exchange? Should they also be refused a phone line? Then you have housing estates that are miles from an exchange too, should they be given preference even though they require dozens of lines over a long distance? eircom bought into the USO from when Telecom Eireann was privatised. I don't for one minute believe the situation would be any better than it is currently if one off housing developments were banned.

Blaster99 wrote:

In what way are people who largely live far from an exchange in a rural area subsidising my phone line which is in an estate in an urban area? Trust me, if the line rental wasn't part of the USO, the former would be paying multiples of what I'm paying.

So everyone, or most people, who's line does not support DSL lives far from an exchange do they? If you're exchange has been enabled, at the cost of some €50k, where does that money come from? The line rental of course, and everyone with a line pays this, even those who can't get broadband. Therefore, they're paying €26 a month to part subsidise the cost of enabling an exchange that they're not connected to.

Eircom inherited a poor network

The people who bought eircom bought a network, knowing full well what state it was in, and the company has been sold since to others who know the state it's in.

This has gone off topic enough (if one can even go off topic in a thread that was started as a troll) so I'm not going to say any more on this.

It does cost money to enable an exchange for Broadband, and one company like eircom shouldn't have to burden the cost of upgrading an exchange that is unlikely to cover the cost. This is why the government should be investing in the networks too, and opening them to all telecoms operators.

Fighting Irish wrote:

All i'm trying to get across is i'm not saying "fook all boggers"

What exactly are you saying? To me, it seems like you're saying if you move to an area with no broadband, then when you get there you can't complain about the lack of broadband since you knew beforehand. Is this right?
You also seem to be implying that they should expect/deserve a decent service, so you seem to be contradicting your own statements. And besides which, even if you know there is no broadband in an area you're moving too, doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to complain about it when you get there. If no one complains, then nothing is going to change.

Blaster99

You have to appreciate that northern Europe is planned to some extent, not like Ireland. Countries like Finland has a low density of population like Ireland but they don't live all over the place like in Ireland. On top of poor planning, regulation is poor in Ireland also. Perhaps they go hand in hand, come to think of it.

Blaster99

jor el wrote: »

If you're exchange has been enabled, at the cost of some €50k, where does that money come from? The line rental of course, and everyone with a line pays this, even those who can't get broadband. Therefore, they're paying €26 a month to part subsidise the cost of enabling an exchange that they're not connected to.

Oh my God, that has to be the most warped argument I've seen in a long time. Let me see... eh... maybe, just maybe, the broadband subscribers on the exchange pay for the cost of providing the service?

If you think eircom loses money on most broadband connections, which appears to be the implication of your "logic", then why should they provide it to even more loss making areas?

zugvogel

Blaster99 wrote: »

If you think eircom loses money on most broadband connections, which appears to be the implication of your "logic", then why should they provide it to even more loss making areas?

A significant number of new properties don’t have an enabled land line at all. As mobile costs reduce the need for a land line for basic communications reduces. Eircom want to keep as many customers paying line rental as possible. I did the DSL upgrade calculations for my own small rural exchange based on some figures mentioned in this forum and on the face of it, it didn’t seem viable for Eircom to do the upgrade yet they did it just before Christmas! The only reason is to keep the line rental stream coming in the future. It’s guaranteed income every month regardless of sales/usage. You just can’t beat it, especially when you have more or less total control over the infrastructure and can easily frustrate the competition. In fact the radio add for Blue Face hits the nail on the head, even down to the Aussie accents!

jor el

Blaster99 wrote: »

Oh my God, that has to be the most warped argument I've seen in a long time. Let me see... eh... maybe, just maybe, the broadband subscribers on the exchange pay for the cost of providing the service?

And maybe, just maybe, the people who live "far away" from exchanges pay for the cost of laying cable with their line rental and installation charges. My argument is every bit as warped as your own. And you think they're not pumping line rental charges into the DSL equipment cost?

Sponge Bob

jor el wrote: »

And maybe, just maybe, the people who live "far away" from exchanges pay for the cost of laying cable with their line rental and installation charges.

And maybe if BB was a universal service then the urbanites would get the faster services that the laws of physics would entitle them to .

For now I get the same packages you do out here in sticksville :cool:

Fighting Irish

jor el wrote: »

And what about a one of house built across the road from a telephone exchange? Should they also be refused a phone line? Then you have housing estates that are miles from an exchange too, should they be given preference even though they require dozens of lines over a long distance? eircom bought into the USO from when Telecom Eireann was privatised. I don't for one minute believe the situation would be any better than it is currently if one off housing developments were banned.



So everyone, or most people, who's line does not support DSL lives far from an exchange do they? If you're exchange has been enabled, at the cost of some €50k, where does that money come from? The line rental of course, and everyone with a line pays this, even those who can't get broadband. Therefore, they're paying €26 a month to part subsidise the cost of enabling an exchange that they're not connected to.


The people who bought eircom bought a network, knowing full well what state it was in, and the company has been sold since to others who know the state it's in.

This has gone off topic enough (if one can even go off topic in a thread that was started as a troll) so I'm not going to say any more on this.

It does cost money to enable an exchange for Broadband, and one company like eircom shouldn't have to burden the cost of upgrading an exchange that is unlikely to cover the cost. This is why the government should be investing in the networks too, and opening them to all telecoms operators.


What exactly are you saying? To me, it seems like you're saying if you move to an area with no broadband, then when you get there you can't complain about the lack of broadband since you knew beforehand. Is this right?
You also seem to be implying that they should expect/deserve a decent service, so you seem to be contradicting your own statements. And besides which, even if you know there is no broadband in an area you're moving too, doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to complain about it when you get there. If no one complains, then nothing is going to change.

Here we go again, i'm talking about people who are getting broadband but its crap(or they think its crap) 1mb for 40squids

Firetrap

Ok. So you're saying that people who live out on the sticks and who sign up for broadband services in good faith, only to be ridden sideways by said ISPs have no right to complain because only urbanites are entitled to a decent service.

I bet if your 3meg connection deteriorated and went up and down like a yo-yo, you'd be squealing like a pig.