Best internet options?

spudd

Not sure if I'm in the right forum, feel free to move this thread if not!

myself and 3 others just moved into a new house, looking to get broadband. we've been told upc aren't able to supply it in our area (outskirts of limerick city) so we're looking at meteor, 3, 02 and vodafone mobile internet options. the majority of offers have a 15GB download capacity - is that alot, between 4 people, or would we need more? we'd probably be using the net in the evenings, just normal web pages, and maybe some downloading or streaming...we're not really sure what's best to go for, so any advice would be greatly appreciated!

not sure if it makes a difference, but we do have a phone line in the house!

JonathanAnon

Well I think you need to handle this case with care... It's grand when everyone says "oh, yeah that sounds like a good idea".. It's a different story getting everyone to pay for it. So it might be better to draw up a contract with everyone or just sit them down and say "if you agree to this you will owe x every month for the period of y months"... rather than treating it nonchalantly.

Maybe the best idea to do would be to buy one of those pay in advance systems like the 3Pay, so that you pay in advance for the broadband.. (i.e. and YOU dont get stuck with the bill). You dont want to end up in the situation where you have to pay for an 18 month contract by yourself.

Regarding coverage, you can check where your nearest mast is on this website. http://www.askcomreg.ie/mobile/siteviewer.273.LE.asp

If you get 3G coverage you will need a 3G router like Edimax 3G router to share the broadband wirelessly between users in the house. I have one, and they are great... just need to reboot it now and again.

jpl888

spudd wrote: »

Not sure if I'm in the right forum, feel free to move this thread if not!

myself and 3 others just moved into a new house, looking to get broadband. we've been told upc aren't able to supply it in our area (outskirts of limerick city) so we're looking at meteor, 3, 02 and vodafone mobile internet options. the majority of offers have a 15GB download capacity - is that alot, between 4 people, or would we need more? we'd probably be using the net in the evenings, just normal web pages, and maybe some downloading or streaming...we're not really sure what's best to go for, so any advice would be greatly appreciated!

not sure if it makes a difference, but we do have a phone line in the house!

So you are sure you can't get normal broadband? If you can get that because you will get a much better experience than with mobile broadband and you'll get a router with it.

3 have a 30Gb limit on their €26.24 per month plan. That should do 4 of you. When they had a 10Gb limit I went over a couple of times, but only when downloading CD images.

If you already have a wireless router you don't need to by a special 3G one you can turn your machine into a 3G router.

drunkmonkey

If you go the 3 route you can get them to 0 your credit limit so the Internet stops working when you hit the 30gb limit. It'll save any fights over a big bill.

You can get the b206a router for 49 on broadband pro if you don't already have a fast 3G router.

I'd avoid 02 because of there student offer, the contention is meant to be pretty bad in ul

JonathanAnon

jpl888 wrote: »

3 have a 30Gb limit on their €26.24 per month plan. That should do 4 of you. When they had a 10Gb limit I went over a couple of times, but only when downloading CD see-dy images.

FYP

jpl888

JonathanAnon wrote: »

FYP

v. funny, but I don't have time for porn I have 4 kids. Twould put you off if you know what I mean

PogMoThoin

spudd wrote: »

Not sure if I'm in the right forum, feel free to move this thread if not!

myself and 3 others just moved into a new house, looking to get broadband. we've been told upc aren't able to supply it in our area (outskirts of limerick city) so we're looking at meteor, 3, 02 and vodafone mobile internet options. the majority of offers have a 15GB download capacity - is that alot, between 4 people, or would we need more? we'd probably be using the net in the evenings, just normal web pages, and maybe some downloading or streaming...we're not really sure what's best to go for, so any advice would be greatly appreciated!

not sure if it makes a difference, but we do have a phone line in the house!

None of these are real broadband and 15GB per month is dire between 4 people. Mobile internet is classed as midband (somewhere in between dial up and broadband), its even got its own forum here to seperate threads like this from the real cable, dsl and wireless broadband options. Mobile internet has high latency, are very inconsistent, that is if You get connected at all in the first place, as little as 4-5 users on the sector can bring You back to dial up speeds. Its a phone network where voice gets priority over data.

Look into Digiweb Metro, its wireless and will require a receiver to be installed on Your house. Its always on, gives good consistent speeds, low latency and has a 30GB per month limit (they allow 10GB over before they throttle Your speed giving 40GB). It is real broadband unlike all mobile and is suitable for voip and gaming
http://www.digiweb.ie/home/metro/

jpl888

PogMoThoin wrote: »

None of these are real broadband and 15GB per month is dire between 4 people. Mobile internet is classed as midband (somewhere in between dial up and broadband), its even got its own forum here to seperate threads like this from the real cable, dsl and wireless broadband options. Mobile speeds have high latency, are very inconsistent, that is if You get connected at all in the first place, as little as 4-5 users on the sector can bring You back to dial up speeds.

Look into Digiweb Metro, its wireless and will require a receiver to be installed on Your house. Its always on, gives good consistent speeds, low latency and has a 30GB per month limit (they allow 10GB over before they throttle Your speed giving 40GB). It is real broadband unlike all mobile
http://www.digiweb.ie/home/metro/

Yes like I said earlier fixed line broadband is the best, mobile broadband for the rest.

TBH 2.4Ghz wireless is a bit of a waste of time although I know Digiweb Metro is 5Ghz. It is less susceptible to interference and there are less people using that spectrum but there are still quite a lot of factors outside of anyone's control as to whether it works well, line of sight being the primary.

PogMoThoin

jpl888 wrote: »

Yes like I said earlier fixed line broadband is the best, mobile broadband for the rest.

TBH 2.4Ghz wireless is a bit of a waste of time although I know Digiweb Metro is 5Ghz. It is less susceptible to interference and there are less people using that spectrum but there are still quite a lot of factors outside of anyone's control as to whether it works well, line of sight being the primary.

Metro is licenced and is 10.5Ghz. Digiweb also do other fixed wireless which uses 3.5 (licenced) and 5.8 (unlicenced), but they offer Metro in Limerick

spudd

cheers for all the advice, definitely have alot to think about now...sounds like the mobile broadband deals are a no-no so...we'd all definitely be using the net at night, don't want to be fighting about usage. we're all friends, so paying the bills isn't an issue, just want to get it sorted as soon as we can!

jpl888

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Metro is licenced and is 10.5Ghz. Digiweb also do other fixed wireless which uses 3.5 (licenced) and 5.8 (unlicenced), but they offer Metro in Limerick

Clearly I was referring to the 5.8 then. I didn't know about the licensed frequencies.

I wonder is the 10Ghz any less susceptible to line of site issues?

PogMoThoin

jpl888 wrote: »

I wonder is the 10Ghz any less susceptible to line of site issues?

Yes, even more so, all wireless needs line of sight, even 3.5Ghz wimax. Imagine are being eaten alive on here for their bad service by opting for the cheap self install dongle choice over the much more expensive fixed install with LOS that works.

bhickey

jpl888 wrote: »

I wonder is the 10Ghz any less susceptible to line of site issues?

Generally the importance of line of sight increases with frequency. So at 10GHz it would be critical to have good LOS.

jpl888

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Yes, even more so, all wireless needs line of sight, even 3.5Ghz wimax. Imagine are being eaten alive on here for their bad service by opting for the cheap self install dongle choice over the much more expensive fixed install with LOS that works.

GSM/3G doesn't, well, at least not as much, because of the lower frequencies, which brings me back to my earlier point, you're better off with mobile broadband than "wireless".

I've also seen apparent ICMP response times from WIMAX of 100ms which isn't much better than uncongested 3G at around 120ms. I don't really see what is supposed to be so much better about WIMAX. Is it just that there isn't as much jitter so it works with sensitive apps like VOIP?

PogMoThoin

jpl888 wrote: »

GSM/3G doesn't, well, at least not as much, because of the lower frequencies, which brings me back to my earlier point, you're better off with mobile broadband than "wireless".

I've also seen apparent ICMP response times from WIMAX of 100ms which isn't much better than uncongested 3G at around 120ms. I don't really see what is supposed to be so much better about WIMAX. Is it just that there isn't as much jitter so it works with sensitive apps like VOIP?

Wow, You're actually recommending mobile over Metro. Digiweb Metro is better than most dsl.

Mobile wimax (ala Imagine) will have high latency, fixed wimax is a whole different story. Imagine have a fixed receiver install they use for people further from the mast with weaker signals, but this doesn't make it fixed wimax, fixed wimax has fixed installs only.

jpl888

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Wow, You're actually recommending mobile over Metro. Digiweb Metro is better than most dsl.

Mobile wimax (ala Imagine) will have high latency, fixed wimax is a whole different story. Imagine have a fixed receiver install they use for people further from the mast with weaker signals, but this doesn't make it fixed wimax, fixed wimax has fixed installs only.

Well I expect that while it's working Metro will have better bandwidth. I've just seen quite a few problems with things like leaves on trees (outside of the cold months) that render 2.4Ghz patchy, so I don't see what will stop that happening with any of these other products.

For instance you could have a house where the treeline does't block the signal the first year but does the next having grown "x" inches.

I think a lower frequency wireless (sub 1000Mhz) that wasn't crippled by bad equipment at the provider end would be the ultimate wireless solution.

Quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiMAX

Analog TV bands (700 MHz) may become available for WiMAX usage, but await the complete roll out of digital TV, and there will be other uses suggested for that spectrum. In the USA the FCC auction for this spectrum began in January 2008 and, as a result, the biggest share of the spectrum went to Verizon Wireless and the next biggest to AT&T.[19] Both of these companies have stated their intention of supporting LTE, a technology which competes directly with WiMAX. EU commissioner Viviane Reding has suggested re-allocation of 500–800 MHz spectrum for wireless communication, including WiMAX.[2

When that happens I think WIMAX/LTE might change the game.

PogMoThoin

jpl888 wrote: »

Well I expect that while it's working Metro will have better bandwidth. I've just seen quite a few problems with things like leaves on trees (outside of the cold months) that render 2.4Ghz patchy, so I don't see what will stop that happening with any of these other products.

For instance you could have a house where the treeline does't block the signal the first year but does the next having grown "x" inches.

Course this could and does happen, You may also have perfect line of sight without ever having a problem which is why they normally install on the chimney/gable. They won't install it unless there's clear LOS and a perfect signal

jpl888 wrote: »

I think a lower frequency wireless (sub 1000Mhz) that wasn't crippled by bad equipment at the provider end would be the ultimate wireless solution.

Quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WiMAX



When that happens I think WIMAX/LTE might change the game.

LTE for a mobile solution yes, but Wimax is very successful in the fixed wireless broadband market and has a future.
Watch Comreg auction off the upcoming analogue tv frequencies to the highest bidder for them to waste without any regulation or control.

watty

LTE is only better than 3G when fully loaded, in same spectrum. In same channel with 2 to 3 users (only) on YouTube the speed is nearly the same. Any advantage in LTE is only if 6 x 20MHz channel (or more 12 x 20 ideally) RAN (shared all operators) is used not current 3 x 5MHz per Operator.

Digiweb Metro 8Mbps/1Mbps 30G cap package. Bigger & smaller available


Ping to INEX is about 15ms to 25ms, typically 10 Times better than 3G.

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

Reply from 193.1.219.57: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=59
Reply from 193.1.219.57: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=59
Reply from 193.1.219.57: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=59
Reply from 193.1.219.57: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=59

Ping statistics for 193.1.219.57:
    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
    Minimum = 18ms, Maximum = 26ms, Average = 22ms

Worst Peak time download is about 7.5Mbps.

Unlike Mobile (3G or LTE or Imagine WImax).

• Always on connection.
• Doesn't disconnect dropping sessions.
• Always real Public IP
• Only the evil SMB MS ports blocked (139 etc). Trust me, you want those blocked.
• No traffic shaping or sites blocked.
• Always zero packet loss.
• Speed is not decided by distance or signal. It's only installed if the signal has a rain margin.
• Not over contended by too many on a mast
• Not congested by too much traffic (rolling 30 Gbyte cap).
• Use any ordinary ethernet Router on Modem. No special router needed for Firewall & WiFi.
• Very like Cable Broadband, except lower max cap and lower max speed.
• No excess charge for over cap, At 120% of cap it slows to ISDN speed (x2 lowest Mobile speed) till you are at 80% of cap.
• Easy to use accurate Traffic monitor.

I'm over 12km from a Mast. In Oct/November I will have had it 5 years.

I'm blocked from mast by 30m / 60' or larger beech trees. I get signal via outdoor part mounted just above back door on side wall, viewing UNDER trees. Imagine's WiMax would be blocked by these mature trees if the Radio in house and such woods seriously weaken Mobile.

watty

spudd wrote: »

cheers for all the advice, definitely have alot to think about now...sounds like the mobile broadband deals are a no-no so...we'd all definitely be using the net at night, don't want to be fighting about usage. we're all friends, so paying the bills isn't an issue, just want to get it sorted as soon as we can!

You could not use Mobile for more than one person unless it's just simple occasional browsing and email. 4 People watching YouTube can use the entire capacity of a Mobile Sector. You want about 30G cap minimum. If you four watch much video then 60G to 80G usage is possible. Pity if you can't get UPC as I think you can get 15Mbps + 120G cap. That's ideal for four people at same time. Imagine WiMax may be better than O2, 3, Vodafone or Meteor Mobile (but still not really Broadband) as long as your signal is OK and your mast is not oversubscribed. Imagine bought IBB and the Irish Assets of Clearwire, both used to oversubscribe masts.


Phone Line
ADSL 8Mbps "NGB" can be 1Mbps to 7.5MBps depending on distance from exchange. Average would be about 3Mbps. so about 30% chance much better or worse . ADSL2+ 24Mbps eircom or resellers or LLU (Digiweb/Smart or Magnet mostly) is 1Mbps to 22Mbps depending on distance. Average may be 6Mbps to 8Mbps depending crosstalk.

jpl888

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Course this could and does happen, You may also have perfect line of sight without ever having a problem which is why they normally install on the chimney/gable. They won't install it unless there's clear LOS and a perfect signal

You'd be surprised how much the tree line get's involved even when you have the antenna on a pole several feet above the top of the chimney. Sometimes it is a close run thing which stops working when the trees grow.

PogMoThoin wrote: »

LTE for a mobile solution yes, but Wimax is very successful in the fixed wireless broadband market and has a future.
Watch Comreg auction off the upcoming analogue tv frequencies to the highest bidder for them to waste without any regulation or control.

Yes Comreg seem to be a "regulator" in the loosest sense of the word.

Kathy22

15GB download allowance is very very very low especially for 4 people, if you are going the mobile route and the download cap is 15GB I would check if they have a penalty for going over which most providers do. Digiweb's metro is available in Limerick, it will be a lot more reliable and faster than a mobile service.

Smart Telecom is now owned by digiweb (more reliable because of this if you ask me), they have a 5MB broadband package which has 170GB cap, thats an extra 165GB and between the 4 of you it would on be like €10 each.

170GB is 40,000 songs or 200 hours of video

jpl888

watty wrote: »

You could not use Mobile for more than one person unless it's just simple occasional browsing and email.

It's funny you should say that. I install mobile broadband as a temporary replacement when one of my customer's fixed broadband goes down, they might be using it for a week and it doesn't stop them getting their work done. The last one I did it for has 6 PCs.

There are times when it doesn't work well anyway and you might have to refresh the page once or twice to get it to come through but if you need to do work on it it will do the job.

watty wrote: »

Phone Line
ADSL 8Mbps "NGB" can be 1Mbps to 7.5MBps depending on distance from exchange. Average would be about 3Mbps. so about 30% chance much better or worse . ADSL2+ 24Mbps eircom or resellers or LLU (Digiweb/Smart or Magnet mostly) is 1Mbps to 22Mbps depending on distance. Average may be 6Mbps to 8Mbps depending crosstalk.

It also depends on the quality of the copper wiring, and other local factors like having a bell wire installed and the like, but if you are asking me which to rely on for a business it would be fixed line broadband every time. Too many variables effect wireless connections, if it works perfectly for you it's as much down to luck as anything.

jpl888

Kathy22 wrote: »

15GB download allowance is very very very low especially for 4 people, if you are going the mobile route and the download cap is 15GB I would check if they have a penalty for going over which most providers do. Digiweb's metro is available in Limerick, it will be a lot more reliable and faster than a mobile service.

Smart Telecom is now owned by digiweb (more reliable because of this if you ask me), they have a 5MB broadband package which has 170GB cap, thats an extra 165GB and between the 4 of you it would on be like €10 each.

170GB is 40,000 songs or 200 hours of video

Yeah but I already said go for fixed line broadband if at all possible and 3 do a "pro" package with 30GB limit. I think you're the second person to miss the 30GB cap.

Some of the guys seem to be coming out quite strongly for other wireless packages and I suppose all I'm saying is I have had and seen a lot of problems with 2.4Ghz providers and for me anyway mobile broadband worked better. Because of the previous 2.4Ghz issues I would be wary of similar technology unless it's at a relatively low frequency (like the analog TV frequency that will be available in x years).

watty

jpl888 wrote: »

It's funny you should say that. I install mobile broadband as a temporary replacement when one of my customer's fixed broadband goes down, they might be using it for a week and it doesn't stop them getting their work done. The last one I did it for has 6 PCs.

It depends what sort of usage there is. I used to install class rooms of 20 PCs on a Proxy using 2 x 64kbps ISDN. It worked fine. It very much depends on how much other activity is in the same Mobile Sector and the kind of internet activity. In an office you shouldn't have 6 people watching video all day?


I can't even get a decent TV signal on my Chimney due to the trees. That's 600MHz ish never mind 2100MHz of 3G, 2.6GHz of LTE (used by MMDS here) or 3.6GHz of Mobile WiMax.

My TV aerial also about 2m above ground to get signal UNDER the trees I'm doomed if they ever build in the field (less risk just now than 4 years ago).

2.4Ghz is not Professional Fixed Wireless.

Not all Fixed Wireless is equal.

Broadband In order of goodness
Fibre to Home
UPC Cable
Fibre to cabinet/apartment
DSL if ADSL2+ and you are less than 1.5km from Exchange with good line
Digiweb Metro Wireless
DSL generally less than 4km
Other Licensed Fixed Wireless (but not Rurtel or Wireless loop replacements, Breeze, Breeze Max), Modern FWALA solutions.
DSL more than 4lm
Modern non-WiFi Gear on Licence Free but registered 5.8GHz (WiMax, Pre-WiMax similar stuff, Breeze etc)

Not Broadband Quality:
Imagine WiMax, Clearwire, Ripwave (Nomadic, not true Fixed Wireless)
2.4GHz (too much interference risk)
Any Mobile Solution from 3 Ireland, Meteor/eircom, Vodafone, O2 no matter how fast they claim it can go.

jpl888

watty wrote: »

It depends what sort of usage there is. I used to install class rooms of 20 PCs on a Proxy using 2 x 64kbps ISDN. It worked fine. It very much depends on how much other activity is in the same Mobile Sector and the kind of internet activity. In an office you shouldn't have 6 people watching video all day?

You'd be surprised. Some of the things I've seen in their history would make your eyes water but generally they are just working. I can't understand why anyone would have nothing better to do than download video all day anyway.

watty wrote: »

I can't even get a decent TV signal on my Chimney due to the trees. That's 600MHz ish never mind 2100MHz of 3G, 2.6GHz of LTE (used by MMDS here) or 3.6GHz of Mobile WiMax.

My TV aerial also about 2m above ground to get signal UNDER the trees I'm doomed if they ever build in the field (less risk just now than 4 years ago).

2.4Ghz is not Professional Fixed Wireless.

Not all Fixed Wireless is equal.

Well yes obviously licensed frequencies will work better because of less noise/interference. I suppose the jury's still out to whether the majority of these things actually work long term. I suppose they will be abandoned or
go out of business if it's that bad.

watty wrote: »

Broadband In order of goodness
Fibre to Home
UPC Cable
Fibre to cabinet/apartment
DSL if ADSL2+ and you are less than 1.5km from Exchange with good line
Digiweb Metro Wireless
DSL generally less than 4km
Other Licensed Fixed Wireless (but not Rurtel or Wireless loop replacements, Breeze, Breeze Max), Modern FWALA solutions.
DSL more than 4lm
Modern non-WiFi Gear on Licence Free but registered 5.8GHz (WiMax, Pre-WiMax similar stuff, Breeze etc)

Not Broadband Quality:
Imagine WiMax, Clearwire, Ripwave (Nomadic, not true Fixed Wireless)
2.4GHz (too much interference risk)
Any Mobile Solution from 3 Ireland, Meteor/eircom, Vodafone, O2 no matter how fast they claim it can go.

If UPC's cable is anything like their TV I wouldn't have it at number 2.

jpl888

BTW I think mobile broadband needs to be given a bit more credit.

It has it's problems like slow response, jitter, and it will sometimes barely work at more than 300Kbps but it is the most widely available "wireless" solution and you can get broadband speeds out of it for hours at a time.

Here is a video I posted early 2009 getting 3.5Mbps http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZOKc_H0ygs

It is broadband just a bit contrary depending on where you are and local conditions

Could you also do a list of broadband in order of goodness for people outside cities? Most of those won't be available in rural towns.

watty

jpl888 wrote: »

BTW I think mobile broadband needs to be given a bit more credit.
.

No. It needs LESS credit. It would be much better for people that NEED a mobile solution if over half the users where not fixed users.

It's also sold below cost.

http://irelandoffline.org/2009/08/is-mobile-midband-in-ireland-destroying-broadband-infrastructure/

Promotion of it as a Broadband solution has seriously damaged Ireland's progress in Broadband Infrastructure.

Fixed Wireless operators have virtually stopped rollouts as a result of dishonest marketing and predatory pricing of Mobile.

It's up to 16x more waste full of spectrum when loaded, than Fixed Wireless (LTE and Mobile WiMax are about x8 more wasteful of spectrum than Fixed WiMax or Fixed Wireless).

I could make a YouTube video proving 5Mbps Mobile access with < 90ms latency. But that proves only I have a good signal and I'm on a sector that's almost unused. That's not how you measure performance of a system.

See also
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055442502

http://www.radioway.info/comparewireless/ (particularly note CDMA cell breathing that EVDO, FOMA and 3G/HSPA etc suffer badly from)

different version:
http://www.techtir.ie/comms/fixed-wireless-broadband-better

Also similar to boards FAQ, but different
http://www.techtir.ie/forums/internet-faq

Ireland needs no additional supporters of 3G Mobile Internet. 3, O2, Meteor and Vodafone doing enough aided and abetted by the despicable NBS which should have been scrapped and re-designed when it was obvious only a Mobile company that needed to do a major roll out ANYWAY (3 and eircom's Meteor) were the only final tenders offered. There will be trouble in the future over NBS.
http://irelandoffline.org/wp-content/2009/02/irelandoffline-nbs_briefing_document.pdf
http://irelandoffline.org/wp-content/2009/02/irl-analysis-of-nbs.pdf

If Mobile was sold Honestly with prices relating to real costs, not subsidised by voice (costing 150 to 300 times less for same sales revenue) and subsidised by SMS (cost is almost zero for SMS, it's horribly overpriced), then there would be potential for investment in Real Broadband outside of UPC cable areas.

jpl888

watty wrote: »

No. It needs LESS credit. It would be much better for people that NEED a mobile solution if over half the users where not fixed users.

It's also sold below cost.

http://irelandoffline.org/2009/08/is-mobile-midband-in-ireland-destroying-broadband-infrastructure/

Promotion of it as a Broadband solution has seriously damaged Ireland's progress in Broadband Infrastructure.

Fixed Wireless operators have virtually stopped rollouts as a result of dishonest marketing and predatory pricing of Mobile.

It's up to 16x more waste full of spectrum when loaded, than Fixed Wireless (LTE and Mobile WiMax are about x8 more wasteful of spectrum than Fixed WiMax or Fixed Wireless).

I could make a YouTube video proving 5Mbps Mobile access with < 90ms latency. But that proves only I have a good signal and I'm on a sector that's almost unused. That's not how you measure performance of a system.

See also
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055442502

http://www.radioway.info/comparewireless/ (particularly note CDMA cell breathing that EVDO, FOMA and 3G/HSPA etc suffer badly from)

different version:
http://www.techtir.ie/comms/fixed-wireless-broadband-better

Also similar to boards FAQ, but different
http://www.techtir.ie/forums/internet-faq

Ireland needs no additional supporters of 3G Mobile Internet. 3, O2, Meteor and Vodafone doing enough aided and abetted by the despicable NBS which should have been scrapped and re-designed when it was obvious only a Mobile company that needed to do a major roll out ANYWAY (3 and eircom's Meteor) were the only final tenders offered. There will be trouble in the future over NBS.
http://irelandoffline.org/wp-content/2009/02/irelandoffline-nbs_briefing_document.pdf
http://irelandoffline.org/wp-content/2009/02/irl-analysis-of-nbs.pdf

I understand your feelings about the way it's been implemented and the governments involvement but I don't think you understand where I am coming from.

For rural users it is sometimes the only option beyond dial-up/ISDN and at that only if using an external antenna. So simply for being the most widely available and being capable of actual broadband speeds i.e. something that is workable, it deserves some credit.

If it were left to the market these rural users would probably be left without options.

I have been able to get 7 Mbps out of it on a good day but never consistent 90ms ping, perhaps if you are next to the tower!

watty

jpl888 wrote: »

If it were left to the market these rural users would probably be left without options.

BECAUSE it has been left to the market they only have a choice of Mobile or Satellite.

The NBS has achieved almost nothing. Both 3 and Meteor where obliged to do national rollouts anyway. 3 was very likely possibly in breach of licence for over 2 years if any serious independent audit was done. I doubt that NBS has made a significant difference. Read their licences on Comreg's site (public links).

The problem is Government inaction, deliberate destruction of GBS and making it unworkable by Government, abysmal regulation, poor design and data gathering for NBS. The NBS leaves over 10% of Rural people only able to get unsubsidised satellite.

7Mbps is less likely than 5% of Rural Mobile users. You need to research what Kenya or France has done. We are going to be overtaken by the poorest countries in Europe. Because it HAS been left to the market and Mobile Operators have the money to undercut all other real ISPs in Ireland.

The Mobile operators and the Government deserve censure, not credit.

jpl888

watty wrote: »

BECAUSE it has been left to the market they only have a choice of Mobile or Satellite.

Satellite isn't a choice, it's unworkable.

It hasn't been left to the market though has it. If the NBS didn't exist there wouldn't even be Mobile for some people.

jpl888

Look you can say what you like.

The NBS subsidises mobile broadband. If they didn't the rollout wouldn't be as far along as it is and they wouldn't bother to do it in areas where it's not economical.

So the market hasn't been left to itself.

On the one hand you appear to be complaining that NBS subsidy has stifled proper broadband but on the other that the market has been left to itself. Which is it?

jay93

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Wow, You're actually recommending mobile over Metro. Digiweb Metro is better than most dsl.

Mobile wimax (ala Imagine) will have high latency, fixed wimax is a whole different story. Imagine have a fixed receiver install they use for people further from the mast with weaker signals, but this doesn't make it fixed wimax, fixed wimax has fixed installs only.

well when it comes to wimax he would be right in saying 3G and wimax are just as bad as eachother..fixed wimax is alot better than that mobile crap imagine have installed onto their masts..
metro is usually alot better than most DSL lines in the country your right there:) just the cap of 30GB aint all that great but i suppose its there for a good reason to keep heavy downloaders slowing everyone elses connections down

jpl888

And through all of this nobody seems to be able to explain at a technical level why Metro is so much better than other wireless connections.

Perhaps it is only offered in cities, where there is good backhaul and over relatively short distance from mast to user. A lot less to go wrong then?

watty

jpl888 wrote: »

Look you can say what you like.

The NBS subsidises mobile broadband. If they didn't the rollout wouldn't be as far along as it is and they wouldn't bother to do it in areas where it's not economical.

So the market hasn't been left to itself.

On the one hand you appear to be complaining that NBS subsidy has stifled proper broadband but on the other that the market has been left to itself. Which is it?

Compare cost of NBS area sub and regular Sub. They are the same.

Compare cost of a 3G mast and how many 3 had to roll out ANYWAY. With the amount of money they get from NBS per mast.

3 can afford in the end to ignore mast locations they will never make money from. Most of those masts had to be installed anyway. ALL of them are for selling phone calls.

Some EU and Government money was wasted on a very small subsidy of a Mobile phone system. Check the figures and facts. There will be political fall out. I can't say more. But do some research rather than repeating NBS propaganda. Why are IRISH RURAL LINK and many independent Telecoms experts and Ireland OffLine slating it if it's so good? Did you read the documents in the earlier links? The NBS money would have achieved far more with regional WISPs.

Actually 3 are are already got a problem as their costing assumed very cheap satellite from Avanti, which is not yet launched!

3 Ireland are actually adding less masts than they said they would several years before the NBS actually was even discussed.

But the NBS is chicken feed. A tiny fraction of the Anglo Irish Bailout would give Fibre to the home for everyone. Including every Rural person. The Metro North scheme is nearly 4x as much as would give Universal Broadband.

The fact is that the Government likes to make cheap gestures (which is what NBS is and what GBS was) and despite talk of Smart, or Knowledge Economies has shown no interest in taking advice of their own Oireacthas Committee or doing anything about Broadband.

http://broadband.oireachtas.ie/Chapter02.htm

http://broadband.oireachtas.ie/Chairmans_Preface.htm

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055987828

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055931410

See http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=60 generally.
many other reports.

3 can't even meet schedules http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055806881

I won't say you You are not a Troll, but you appear to be the only person outside of 3 and The Government supporting throwing supposed "Broadband" funding at a Mobile phone company.

jpl888

watty wrote: »

Compare cost of NBS area sub and regular Sub. They are the same.

Compare cost of a 3G mast and how many 3 had to roll out ANYWAY. With the amount of money they get from NBS per mast.

3 can afford in the end to ignore mast locations they will never make money from. Most of those masts had to be installed anyway. ALL of them are for selling phone calls.

Some EU and Government money was wasted on a very small subsidy of a Mobile phone system. Check the figures and facts. There will be political fall out. I can't say more. But do some research rather than repeating NBS propaganda. Why are IRISH RURAL LINK and many independent Telecoms experts and Ireland OffLine slating it if it's so good? Did you read the documents in the earlier links? The NBS money would have achieved far more with regional WISPs.

Actually 3 are are already got a problem as their costing assumed very cheap satellite from Avanti, which is not yet launched!

3 Ireland are actually adding less masts than they said they would several years before the NBS actually was even discussed.

But the NBS is chicken feed. A tiny fraction of the Anglo Irish Bailout would give Fibre to the home for everyone. Including every Rural person. The Metro North scheme is nearly 4x as much as would give Universal Broadband.

The fact is that the Government likes to make cheap gestures (which is what NBS is and what GBS was) and despite talk of Smart, or Knowledge Economies has shown no interest in taking advice of their own Oireacthas Committee or doing anything about Broadband.

http://broadband.oireachtas.ie/Chapter02.htm

http://broadband.oireachtas.ie/Chairmans_Preface.htm

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055987828

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055931410

See http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=60 generally.
many other reports.

3 can't even meet schedules http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055806881

I won't say you are a Troll, but you appear to be the only person outside of 3 and The Government supporting throwing supposed "Broadband" funding at a Mobile phone company.

I think you are totally misunderstanding me. I am not advocating subsidising 3 or any other mobile operator.

You are the one that said that the market has been left to itself and it hasn't.

All I was saying is that mobile broadband is the best option currently available for a lot of rural people.

I don't see why such a big fuss is being made.

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response[1] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[2] In addition to the offending poster, the noun troll can also refer to the provocative message itself, as in "that was an excellent troll you posted".

Look I'm not saying you are calling me a troll but to even put the word in there is a bit strong. We seem to be having a discussion about internet connection, albeit ye trying to beat me into submission. I don't really see how any of it was off topic and/or trying to provoke.

watty

jpl888 wrote: »

And through all of this nobody seems to be able to explain at a technical level why Metro is so much better than other wireless connections.

Perhaps it is only offered in cities, where there is good backhaul and over relatively short distance from mast to user. A lot less to go wrong then?

Metro uses Cable Broadband protocol. It's about 10% more efficient than Fixed WiMax at it's best. There are other equally good Wireless systems. But Irish Broadband was more interested in customer numbers than Infrastructure.

Metro can use up to 28MHz of spectrum per radio. A radio can be made for ANY band from 450MHz to 200,000,000MHz. All Digiweb Metro is at 10.5GHz line of site. It's been tested to 25miles / 40km. The technical limit with a larger dish is basically L.O.S. maybe 50 miles / 80km with height. The standard outdoor radio is designed to be 100% reliable in poor weather at 10km (original Comreg limit). But some exceeding this with sufficient rain margin out to the current Comreg range limit.

Digiweb has deployed leased dark fibre, bought fibre and high capacity point to point Microwave links to build the biggest infrastructure nationwide used by an ISP outside eircom. ALL NGN, unlike eircom, much of which is ATM / ISDN etc.

There are many excellent Breeze and Fixed Wimax just as reliable and good as Metro where the base station mast is connected via ESB or BT/CIE fibre. There are some excellent Regional Fixed Wireless ISP (WISP) such as WestNet.

Fixed Wimax and Metro (Euro channel DOCSIS over Wireless) both can exceed DSL if the base has good infrastructure and not oversubscribed.

Digiweb don't oversubscribe Metro. They don't pretend there is no cap or have one that's too high. The 30G byte rolling cap ensures there is not congestion. If Comreg licensed twice the spectrum, then 60Gbyte would be achievable.

For same congestion ratio the Cap on Mobile should be 2Gbyte.

Inherently a real Fixed WiMax or Metro system gives x8 the capacity in the same spectrum as LTE or Mobile WiMax (or Nomadic systems) and up to x16 capacity in same spectrum as CDMA Mobile (3G/HSPA).

Actual total continuous throughput on a 3 x sector 21Mbps 3G/HSPA mast is less than 10Mbps, assuming 2km radius. A Metro mast could have 480Mbps if all licensed channels available and 10km to 15km radius typically.

Latency of Fixed WiMax and Metro is about 4x better than best HSPA+/iHSPA on 3G and x20 better than typical 3G. In theory Metro is maybe able to be twice as good as Fixed WiMax on Latency, but in practice is about 20ms as this is more stable.

Metro has zero packet loss normally and extremely low jitter making it as good as Cable for gaming, VOIP and even Fax is possible. (Because it's really Wireless cable).

Most of the good Fixed Wireless in Ireland that isn't Fixed WiMax (Imagine's WiMax is largely Mobile WiMax with mix of Fixed, Nomadic indoor and Mobile radio, not Fixed WiMax) or DOCSIS (Metro) is similar to Fixed WiMax and was Proprietary systems on the development to WiMax (such as basic Breeze). Current BreezeMax is Fixed WiMax.

The biggest issue for outside of UPC, eircom, Digiweb and to an extent magnet is access to Infrastructure. No matter how good your wireless gear is, it's not nice to backhaul via two way satellite. eNet MANs are only rings around towns. The most important 3rd party backhaul is BT-Cie fibre BT got buying ESAT and ESB fibre. There is also Global Crossing (same owner as eircom now has).

watty

jpl888 wrote: »

I
You are the one that said that the market has been left to itself and it hasn't.

All I was saying is that mobile broadband is the best option currently available for a lot of rural people.

If you look at figures, the NBS isn't relevant. The market has been left to itself to be dominated by eircom (worlds highest line rental) and Mobile.
Mobile isn't Broadband.

jpl888

watty wrote: »

Metro uses Cable Broadband protocol. It's about 10% more efficient than Fixed WiMax at it's best. There are other equally good Wireless systems. But Irish Broadband was more interested in customer numbers than Infrastructure.

Metro can use up to 28MHz of spectrum per radio. A radio can be made for ANY band from 450MHz to 200,000,000MHz. All Digiweb Metro is at 10.5GHz line of site. It's been tested to 25miles / 40km. The technical limit with a larger dish is basically L.O.S. maybe 50 miles / 80km with height. The standard outdoor radio is designed to be 100% reliable in poor weather at 10km (original Comreg limit). But some exceeding this with sufficient rain margin out to the current Comreg range limit.

Digiweb has deployed leased dark fibre, bought fibre and high capacity point to point Microwave links to build the biggest infrastructure nationwide used by an ISP outside eircom. ALL NGN, unlike eircom, much of which is ATM / ISDN etc.

There are many excellent Breeze and Fixed Wimax just as reliable and good as Metro where the base station mast is connected via ESB or BT/CIE fibre. There are some excellent Regional Fixed Wireless ISP (WISP) such as WestNet.

Fixed Wimax and Metro (Euro channel DOCSIS over Wireless) both can exceed DSL if the base has good infrastructure and not oversubscribed.

Digiweb don't oversubscribe Metro. They don't pretend there is no cap or have one that's too high. The 30G byte rolling cap ensures there is not congestion. If Comreg licensed twice the spectrum, then 60Gbyte would be achievable.

For same congestion ratio the Cap on Mobile should be 2Gbyte.

Inherently a real Fixed WiMax or Metro system gives x8 the capacity in the same spectrum as LTE or Mobile WiMax (or Nomadic systems) and up to x16 capacity in same spectrum as CDMA Mobile (3G/HSPA).

Actual total continuous throughput on a 3 x sector 21Mbps 3G/HSPA mast is less than 10Mbps, assuming 2km radius. A Metro mast could have 480Mbps if all licensed channels available and 10km to 15km radius typically.

Latency of Fixed WiMax and Metro is about 4x better than best HSPA+/iHSPA on 3G and x20 better than typical 3G. In theory Metro is maybe able to be twice as good as Fixed WiMax on Latency, but in practice is about 20ms as this is more stable.

Metro has zero packet loss normally and extremely low jitter making it as good as Cable for gaming, VOIP and even Fax is possible. (Because it's really Wireless cable).

Most of the good Fixed Wireless in Ireland that isn't Fixed WiMax (Imagine's WiMax is largely Mobile WiMax with mix of Fixed, Nomadic indoor and Mobile radio, not Fixed WiMax) or DOCSIS (Metro) is similar to Fixed WiMax and was Proprietary systems on the development to WiMax (such as basic Breeze). Current BreezeMax is Fixed WiMax.

The biggest issue for outside of UPC, eircom, Digiweb and to an extent magnet is access to Infrastructure. No matter how good your wireless gear is, it's not nice to backhaul via two way satellite. eNet MANs are only rings around towns. The most important 3rd party backhaul is BT-Cie fibre BT got buying ESAT and ESB fibre. There is also Global Crossing (same owner as eircom now has).

So basically you are saying the equipment and infrastructure is good, it will only fall down if Digiweb are tempted to oversubscribe, which I suppose is a danger with any provider?

jpl888

watty wrote: »

If you look at figures, the NBS isn't relevant. The market has been left to itself to be dominated by eircom (worlds highest line rental) and Mobile.
Mobile isn't Broadband.

So you are telling me this is another "where's the money gone or been spent" situation and it was just paying lip-service to supporting broadband rather than doing anything meaningful?

Obviously I think it would be fantastic if you could get fibre up into the mountains, etc. for everyone but it sounds expensive at a time when we can't afford it. But then I suppose we can't afford not to have decent broadband either. Twould be interesting to see if Fine Gael have any decent proposals to sort the situation out.

Sorry I'm just using the term "mobile broadband" to be less ambiguous.

watty

It's been done and costed.
Hardly anyone actually lives in a real mountain here compared to Switzerland.

It's easier to run fibre than ESB. Just as easy to run a fibre as a phone wire.
You can run multiple fibre content cable from pole to pole.
You can do 1km a day trenched fibre with small team and machine.

It's very cheap to do urban and suburban fibre, so that can subsidize the rural customer if there is an USO.

If there is really some place that fibre can't get to, you can give them a real actual minimum 10Mbps or 20Mbps real fixed wireless with low contention (not a down to 0.05Mbps up to 7Mbps mobile). But how did they get ESB?

It's under €2B to give EVERYONE fibre. If you spent €1B and used a mix of Fixed Wireless, VDSL from fibre cabinet and only Fibre to home in city, the slowest user would still be about 5x faster than today's average Irish speed.

Then Mobile would on average be about x5 faster as it would only have mobile and no fixed customers and real Mobile users have short sessions unless it's a long journey.

BEASTERLY

watty wrote: »

It's been done and costed.
Hardly anyone actually lives in a real mountain here compared to Switzerland.

It's easier to run fibre than ESB. Just as easy to run a fibre as a phone wire.
You can run multiple fibre content cable from pole to pole.
You can do 1km a day trenched fibre with small team and machine.

It's very cheap to do urban and suburban fibre, so that can subsidize the rural customer if there is an USO.

If there is really some place that fibre can't get to, you can give them a real actual minimum 10Mbps or 20Mbps real fixed wireless with low contention (not a down to 0.05Mbps up to 7Mbps mobile). But how did they get ESB?

It's under €2B to give EVERYONE fibre. If you spent €1B and used a mix of Fixed Wireless, VDSL from fibre cabinet and only Fibre to home in city, the slowest user would still be about 5x faster than today's average Irish speed.

Then Mobile would on average be about x5 faster as it would only have mobile and no fixed customers and real Mobile users have short sessions unless it's a long journey.

Well if you think about it the esb had no problem getting power cables up to the top of mount leinster at 800m, they had to go underground but it's still possible. Fibre shouldn't be a problem.

I hear there is fibre links already up there for relays for such as shannon atc and garda digital communications, i may be wrong though.

I was tyold by an eircom sales guy last week that my line would be upgraded from a carrier to DSL by the end of the year, the upgrades on the access cables begin?

That exchange has been enabled for 2 years so why upgrade the cables now?

watty

All the main RTE sites and a lot of minor ones now either have fibre (preference) or very very good digital microwave links.

How else do you deliver over 100Mbps of digital video to the transmitters?

All the housing built over last 10 years? Almost all copper pairs installed and almost no fibre, even though marginal extra cost on new houses.

Carrier neutral ducts? A type of pigeon as far as Government regulations. Recommended as mandatory years ago.

BEASTERLY

watty wrote: »

All the main RTE sites and a lot of minor ones now either have fibre (preference) or very very good digital microwave links.

How else do you deliver over 100Mbps of digital video to the transmitters?

All the housing built over last 10 years? Almost all copper pairs installed and almost no fibre, even though marginal extra cost on new houses.

Carrier neutral ducts? A type of pigeon as far as Government regulations. Recommended as mandatory years ago.

Hmmm... How could I get one of these microwave links to my house, brilliant line of sight to mount leinster and all!:D lol

So do you think the sales guy was lying to me or is it resonable to think that eircom are actively going around removing carrier lines? I was put on a very official sounding ''expression of interest list'' and i will be contacted a soon as the upgrades take place.

jpl888

watty wrote: »

It's been done and costed.
Hardly anyone actually lives in a real mountain here compared to Switzerland.

It's easier to run fibre than ESB. Just as easy to run a fibre as a phone wire.
You can run multiple fibre content cable from pole to pole.
You can do 1km a day trenched fibre with small team and machine.

It's very cheap to do urban and suburban fibre, so that can subsidize the rural customer if there is an USO.

If there is really some place that fibre can't get to, you can give them a real actual minimum 10Mbps or 20Mbps real fixed wireless with low contention (not a down to 0.05Mbps up to 7Mbps mobile). But how did they get ESB?

It's under €2B to give EVERYONE fibre. If you spent €1B and used a mix of Fixed Wireless, VDSL from fibre cabinet and only Fibre to home in city, the slowest user would still be about 5x faster than today's average Irish speed.

Then Mobile would on average be about x5 faster as it would only have mobile and no fixed customers and real Mobile users have short sessions unless it's a long journey.

I agree with you 100% on that. It should all be fibre except for perhaps last mile access and they should stop fannying around with other technologies that aren't going to do the job properly.

watty

BEASTERLY wrote: »

resonable to think that eircom are actively going around removing carrier lines? I was put on a very official sounding ''expression of interest list'' and i will be contacted a soon as the upgrades take place.

With phone users dropping from 82% to less than 66%?
There are lots of pair gains they don't need

BEASTERLY

watty wrote: »

With phone users dropping from 82% to less than 66%?
There are lots of pair gains they don't need

I think I''l ring eircom and dangle my custom in front of them and say i'll give it to them if they remove the carrier line!

Quick question , I have two carrier lines in the house already one ending in 70 and the other in 71, 71 is not used anymore so is their anyway of making them into one line for broadband?

watty

If they are on same pair gain, then you need to give up both.
Replace one with VOIP when you get Broadband. Who knows, maybe you are the sole reason you are on a pairgain. Very likely if you are some distance from road, cabinet or roadside multi-pair cable.

BEASTERLY

watty wrote: »

If they are on same pair gain, then you need to give up both.
Replace one with VOIP when you get Broadband. Who knows, maybe you are the sole reason you are on a pairgain. Very likely if you are some distance from road, cabinet or roadside multi-pair cable.

Cheers Watty, really appreciate the info!

I'm on the side of the road, but in a rural area, i presume a cabinet is like a green box on the side of the road, if so there is none around here. My next door neighbour got IDSN about 7 years ago, i don't know if that pair is still available as when new people moved in eircom cut them off about 2 years ago.

I'm about 3.5km from exchange, is that too far? I would be very happy with a reliable 3mb connection with low latency, i.e good for voip and gaming

jpl888

@watty I've been doing some thinking and a little research.

I understand that the best case scenario for internet access in Ireland is to have fibre at least up to the last mile, but I can't see the government putting in the money and effort if there is an easier option which will work.

My previous suggestion regarding the best wireless possible using old TV analog frequencies (when analog is switched off) would seem to fit that bill, although I still understand it has its' problems to overcome, particularly identifying and avoiding other devices using the same frequencies.

Given that even a 2.4Ghz signal can be made go 50 odd miles with the right equipment and the analog TV frequencies should be able to go 3 to 4 times that, it should, at least in theory, be possible to have reliable long range wireless giving 15-20 Meg.

I understand that it's difficult for you to comment on something which is in development but I would be interested in your views as to whether this would be an acceptable solution to Ireland being offline?

watty

CAPACITY...

To Get capacity with BIG mast coverage you need massive spectrum. Number of people is SQUARE of range.

To get capacity with less spectrum you need small range, i.e. lots of masts.

If the signals are very high frequency (2.1GHz and higher) you can reuse with N=3 pattern, so 1/3rd of spectrum per area. If Signals are at low frequency they "accidently" go further even when you don't want. So you need N=9, each sector of mast gets 1/9th of the frequency.

The 21Mbps peak of HSPA+ or LTE in 5MHz, or 100Mbps peak of LTE in 20MHz is the capacity with PERFECT signal, close to mast, before you share it. So in reality the average sustained sector throughput (shared between all users) is about 1/5th of the peak speed.

Then that speed is divided between the number of users.

Efficient communication needs Duplex, transmit and receive at same or almost the same time. The most efficient way is separate downlink (downstream or download) and uplink (upstream or upload). On TCP/IP every packet needs an acknowledgement in the other direction.
So if we had 20MHz LTE channels that an AVERAGE SUSTAINED throughput of 100/5 = 20Mbps max for entire sector, not the oft quoted 100Mbps which is a peak speed. In theory. In real world with noise and interference and protocol overheads it could be 8Mbps to 10Mbps. With 20:1 contention and 10Mbps packages (a minimum for any new Broadband and tiny compared to fibre) you thus can have only 40 customers. (20Mbps/10Mbps * contention). Realisitically only 20.

To do that you need N= 9 for network @ 800MHz = 180MHz. x2 as you need to double for both directions. = 360MHz. Add 20MHz gap in middle so Duplex filters are not madly expensive and large = 380MHz. UHF band is 470MHz to 864MHz. = 390MHz. Only 10MHz left for the TV network. That would not allow two PSB mux. In fact not even one without transmitters interferring.

How many Masts? Lets say 3 sectors per mast = 40 x 3 = 120 Customers (generous, really 60).

Lets say we need about 150,000 capacity = 1250 masts (really 2,500 masts or more given terrain etc). (Everyone else mysteriously gets UPC cable! Unlikely!)

Fixed Radio is good for specific small communities. Or sporadic mobile Usage. It's not cost effective for large numbers of users as substitute for fixed fibre/copper/coax Broadband.

Conclusion
If we spent about 0.5 Billion and had over 2,000 mast sites and had NO TV on UHF, we could supply about about 150,000 with up to 10Mbps broadband by LTE.
That's over €3,000 per person.
Mobile Wireless at genuine 10Mbps is twice to four times the cost per person of Fibre.

If there are isolated people or groups more than 4km from anywhere, then Fixed Wireless (not LTE) can deliver 10Mbps to 20Mbps (real not up to) at up to 40km. But not for very many people per mast. However DOCSIS based Fixed Wireless base for UHF is about 1/3rd the price of WiMax or LTE and can give minimum 12Mbps speeds and 25ms latency max, provided the customer numbers are low. Also fixed Wireless can use even N=2 on UHF unlike LTE or WiMax if the subscribers are Exclusively Out door fixed aerials. In the case of Fixed Wireless you can have 2 x 8 MHz channels serving 60 users and a real 10Mbps speed. Install cost is €250 per user higher than WiMax or LTE because it's a fixed system, so only suits small numbers of users.

We need a plan for Fibre To Home and only High capacity Fixed Wireless for perhaps last 10,000 people totally uneconomic. These people could get 10Mbps to 20Mbps at about 10:1 to 20:1 contention depending on circumstances.

What about DSL upgrades?
Even if entire DSL was ADSL2+ 24Mbps or even VDSL2 100MBps, the average DSL speed would be under 8Mbps.
Nearly 40% of people don't have a phone line!
Between 10% to 15% of lines would still fail if all pair-gains/carriers removed.

jpl888

I think it's being talked about as a drop in replacement for 2.4Ghz wireless applications. i.e. the same only better penetration/less interference.

Why couldn't it use existing mobile/wireless masts?

Have you any figures for the % of towns which are broadband enabled now?

I understand that the current broadband penetration rate is about 21% of the population. I was naively thinking that if all the towns and cities are broadband enabled that would cover the majority of the population, but I suppose Ireland is unusual in having a lot of urban sprawl?