UPC or stay with Smart Telecom.

Gadfly

I am currently with ST. I am on their 6Mb package for 45 euro per month.
However, I see from the UPC website that they offer 20Mb for 48 euro. I am very happy with ST but compared to UPC I don't feel I'm getting value for money anymore. I'm seriously thinking of changing over to UPC but I don't know what they are like as a service provider. Any advice or experience?

brianc27

i have 20meg UPC broadband, been with their broadband service for over 2 years, find it great, very little issues with it, only problems i ever had with them was when i moved house recently and they came out to install the net and set it up wrong, took a week of them telling us a technician would be arriving one day but him arriving another, so we ended up missing 2 call outs, moral of the story aslong as you have no technical issues then the sevice is great.

Gadfly

brianc27 wrote: »

i have 20meg UPC broadband, been with their broadband service for over 2 years, find it great, very little issues with it, only problems i ever had with them was when i moved house recently and they came out to install the net and set it up wrong, took a week of them telling us a technician would be arriving one day but him arriving another, so we ended up missing 2 call outs, moral of the story aslong as you have no technical issues then the sevice is great.

Thank you for response. I'm going to seriously consider it.

I meant to ask, is there a contention ratio?

paulm17781

I would say UPC too. It's cheaper and in my experience rarely has problems. While their customer care leaves a lot to be desired, Smart have numbers on their website that don't even get answered.

Marlow

Smart is known to be a lot more solid. If you have the choice between the two, I'd always go with Smart.

Broadband is not all about speed, it's also about quality (latency, consistancy, support etc.) and honestly on that end UPC does not have the best reputation. They might be good in some areas, but they are complete rubbish in others. It's like hit and miss.

Smart is in my opinion better value for money than UPC. No matter what package you are on.

/Martin

brianc27

Gadfly wrote: »

Thank you for response. I'm going to seriously consider it.

I meant to ask, is there a contention ratio?

yea there is last place i lived (kimmage) id be lucky to get 10-15 megs on a 20meg line, new place i seem to be always getting 17+ (drimnagh), have only checked it in my new place a couple of times.

paddyb125

I'd choose UPC too they seem much more reliable

jor el

paddyb125 wrote: »

I'd choose UPC too they seem much more reliable

In what way are they more reliable than Smart? Smart Telecom have only once had a major issue, but UPC/NTL seem to have lots of problems, all the time.

Problems with UPC, just on the last few pages of this forum
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055484124
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055483345
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055483090
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055373635
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055481822

Problems with Smart on the last few pages
...

UPC is contended, Smart is not.
UPC fair use seems to be 250GB, Smart's has never been found.
UPC has 20Mbps, Smart do up to 24Mbps, though you're not likely to get that, 10-14Mbps is more likely the real max.
UPC is cheaper, and more widely available than Smart
UPC's customer service has historically been completely dire, Smart have issues in this area too, though I've never heard of their service being as poor as UPC. Smart do have a support forum, which is quite good.

Cork Multichannel - Irish Multichannel - Chorus - UPC. Anyone who has ever had any dealings with UPC's first three names, would never again want to touch them, even with a long and pointy stick. I certainly wouldn't.

To be honest, I'd stick with Smart. You might save a tenner a month, you might also end up with a shit service that doesn't come close to what you had before.

Hank Scorpio

agree with ^

I would definately stick with smart, speed isnt everything

cahirhennessy

I moved from smart to upc about 6 months ago. Big mistake. So unreliable. 20 meg my arse.

mp3guy

jor el wrote: »

UPC has 20Mbps, Smart do up to 24Mbps, though you're not likely to get that, 10-14Mbps is more likely the real max.

Nothing to do with the ISP, Heanet gives you over 20mbps no problem, foreign servers don't, end of.

crawler

cahirhennessy wrote: »

I moved from smart to upc about 6 months ago. Big mistake. So unreliable. 20 meg my arse.

< opens arms and smiles - "come back, we miss you!!"

bk

Another poster recently had both Smart 4mb and UPC 20mb at the same time and he came to the inclusion that the Smart was better.

He was getting better speeds from torrents on Smart 4mb then UPC 20mb!!!
Probably due to throttling by UPC.

Of course if he used binary newsgroups he would probably get much better performance with UPC then Smart.

But what hurt most was the latency with UPC, here is what he posted:

C:\Documents and Settings\HAL>ping www.heanet.ie

Pinging samhain.heanet.ie [193.1.219.57] with 32 bytes of data

Reply from 193.1.219.57: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=56
Reply from 193.1.219.57: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=56
Reply from 193.1.219.57: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=56
Reply from 193.1.219.57: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=56

Ping statistics for 193.1.219.57:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 21ms, Maximum = 28ms, Average = 24ms

C:\Documents and Settings\HAL>ping google.ie

Pinging google.ie [64.233.161.104] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 64.233.161.104: bytes=32 time=137ms TTL=238
Reply from 64.233.161.104: bytes=32 time=144ms TTL=238
Reply from 64.233.161.104: bytes=32 time=133ms TTL=238
Reply from 64.233.161.104: bytes=32 time=133ms TTL=238

Ping statistics for 64.233.161.104:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 133ms, Maximum = 144ms, Average = 136ms

C:\Documents and Settings\HAL>ping boards.ie

Pinging boards.ie [89.234.66.107] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 89.234.66.107: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=59
Reply from 89.234.66.107: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=59
Reply from 89.234.66.107: bytes=32 time=887ms TTL=59
Reply from 89.234.66.107: bytes=32 time=1459ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 89.234.66.107:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 14ms, Maximum = 1459ms, Average = 594ms

C:\Documents and Settings\HAL>ping google.com

Pinging google.com [74.125.67.100] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 74.125.67.100: bytes=32 time=146ms TTL=238
Reply from 74.125.67.100: bytes=32 time=140ms TTL=238
Reply from 74.125.67.100: bytes=32 time=163ms TTL=238
Reply from 74.125.67.100: bytes=32 time=141ms TTL=238

Ping statistics for 74.125.67.100:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 140ms, Maximum = 163ms, Average = 147ms

C:\Documents and Settings\HAL>ping clarity.jolt.co.uk

Pinging clarity.jolt.co.uk [195.149.21.11] with 32 bytes of da

Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=55
Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=55
Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=55
Reply from 195.149.21.11: bytes=32 time=38ms TTL=55

Ping statistics for 195.149.21.11:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 26ms, Maximum = 42ms, Average = 33ms

C:\Documents and Settings\HAL>ping lanparty.ie

Pinging lanparty.ie [193.120.123.149] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 193.120.123.149: bytes=32 time=3375ms TTL=57
Reply from 193.120.123.149: bytes=32 time=362ms TTL=57
Reply from 193.120.123.149: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=57
Reply from 193.120.123.149: bytes=32 time=449ms TTL=57

Ping statistics for 193.120.123.149:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 15ms, Maximum = 3375ms, Average = 1050ms

C:\Documents and Settings\HAL>ping gamespy.com

Pinging gamespy.com [216.35.123.102] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 216.35.123.102: bytes=32 time=190ms TTL=232
Reply from 216.35.123.102: bytes=32 time=188ms TTL=232
Reply from 216.35.123.102: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=232
Reply from 216.35.123.102: bytes=32 time=180ms TTL=232

Ping statistics for 216.35.123.102:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 180ms, Maximum = 190ms, Average = 184ms

C:\Documents and Settings\HAL>ping bbc.co.uk

Pinging bbc.co.uk [212.58.224.138] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=118
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=118
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=37ms TTL=118
Reply from 212.58.224.138: bytes=32 time=30ms TTL=118

Ping statistics for 212.58.224.138:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 30ms, Maximum = 43ms, Average = 37ms

C:\Documents and Settings\HAL>

As you can see, while some of the pings are very good, some are absolutely dreadful, UPC can suffer from very bad spikes and they still don't seem to be peering with everyone through INEX and they still seem to be going through Amsterdam for lots of connections.

I'll post up my Smart pings later.

However I do think Smart is still a little pricey versus Magnet and UPC, in particular I wish they'd get rid of the €10 charge for 1mb upload speed, it should be free for the higher products. Smart need to drop their prices or they will end up losing customers to UPC and Magnet.

jor el

mp3guy wrote: »

Nothing to do with the ISP, Heanet gives you over 20mbps no problem, foreign servers don't, end of.

What? Of course the speed is due to the ISP, and/or line quality. Heanet has nothing to do with the speeds you can get on Smart or UPC. If your line is only capable of 8Mbps, then nothing will improve that. Similarly, if the contention in your area is such that you're only getting 5Mbps, then that's all you're going to get, regardless of the server you're downloading from.

Whether the server is in Ireland or outside, is also meaningless. I have a 100Mbps connection at work, and I can download at full speed from servers anywhere in the world. Of course, not all servers are capable of supplying at that speed, but it's not dependent on the country it's based in.

mp3guy

jor el wrote: »

What? Of course the speed is due to the ISP, and/or line quality. Heanet has nothing to do with the speeds you can get on Smart or UPC. If your line is only capable of 8Mbps, then nothing will improve that. Similarly, if the contention in your area is such that you're only getting 5Mbps, then that's all you're going to get, regardless of the server you're downloading from.

Whether the server is in Ireland or outside, is also meaningless. I have a 100Mbps connection at work, and I can download at full speed from servers anywhere in the world. Of course, not all servers are capable of supplying at that speed, but it's not dependent on the country it's based in.

It all depends on the server.

I get 2MB/s straight from heanet with UPC, but pretty much every other site only gives about 600KB/s, sometimes 1.2MB/s. And the majority of those other sites have servers based abroad, they can't supply the 2MB/s.

Onikage

mp3guy wrote: »

It all depends on the server.

I get 2MB/s straight from heanet with UPC, but pretty much every other site only gives about 600KB/s, sometimes 1.2MB/s. And the majority of those other sites have servers based abroad, they can't supply the 2MB/s.

He was talking about Smart, and the limitations of DSL. If the first hop to your ISP is not capable of carrying 2MB/s because you are too far from the exchange, how do you expect to get 2MB/s from a server a thousand miles away?

jim o doom

When UPC is working well, I know for a fact it's good for using stuff like rapidshare (mate has it and it's deadly) - but he doesn't game at all..

so when it's working fine with no issues; is it any good for gaming? my phone lines have something wrong so the service I get from esat bt aint great.

Actually on another note.. if I wanted someone to come to my gaff and look at the phone lines to see what's wrong with them - who in the name of god should I get on to?

Onikage

jim o doom wrote: »

Actually on another note.. if I wanted someone to come to my gaff and look at the phone lines to see what's wrong with them - who in the name of god should I get on to?

Go to your ISP. If it is UPC, Digiweb (wireless), Irish Broadband, Smart etc, they fix it. If it is eircom or other DSL, eircom fix it. But ALWAYS get on to your ISP, trying to take a shortcut does not work.

mp3guy

Just so you know, UPC don't throttle torrents, and I can provide screenshots to prove.

chopperbyrne

Smart is a "slower" connection but is far more reliable.

I have been on UPCs 20MB package for a few months and 15MB is the highest my download speed has ever reached.

They are also actively blocking P2P traffic between 17:00 and 00:00. (Confirmed in an email I received from UPC which I have posted in the P2P thread.)

I had Smart in my last flat and if I could get it here I would.

Smart also has very good international call rates which is handy if you have any friends in the US, UK or Australia.

cahirhennessy

crawler wrote: »

< opens arms and smiles - "come back, we miss you!!"

I'm a comin' mama!!!!

vibe666

can also confirm that smarts top speed package is much better (for torrenting at least) than NTL's and the cap thing too.

I got a letter from NTL for breaching 250gb (combined up/down) FUP in January on my 20mbps unlimited service but a mate who's on the smart 24mbps is just about to pass the 1tb (download only) mark since december and not a peep out of them so far.

i'm also getting a higher upload than download speed on a well seeded torrent right now even though they were breezing along earlier today.

Gadfly

Thanks again for all comments.

The general feeling I'm getting is to stick with Smart. Like I said earlier, I'm very happy with them but was 'attracted' to the higher speeds for less money. But I'd rather have good service as well which I've always enjoyed with Smart from day one.

I think I should sit tight a while longer.