Broadband

broadban

is there a broadband company that gives an accurate download speed in advertising?
in cork ?
it seems that eircom nd others give awful poor readings on speed test.net ...
2.1 when they sat u should have 8Meg....
who else is out there honest service and no phone carousel that is quick to send you to sales but u wait nall day to talk to support../?????

fionny

broadban wrote: »

is there a broadband company that gives an accurate download speed in advertising?
in cork ?
it seems that eircom nd others give awful poor readings on speed test.net ...
2.1 when they sat u should have 8Meg....
who else is out there honest service and no phone carousel that is quick to send you to sales but u wait nall day to talk to support../?????

Depending on what part of Cork then UPC are pretty accurate,

I have 100meg and i get 112megs

However speedtest.net isnt the best of services I find, its servers themselves can be slow and report bad results. I find the UPC or the magnet speed tests much better.

broadban

But (i suppose i should have said) im rural any where south or west of clon ....no fibre..darklands ...twighlight zone.....
I WOULD LOVE..... U.P.C.....

fionny

broadban wrote: »

But (i suppose i should have said) im rural any where south or west of clon ....no fibre..darklands ...twighlight zone.....
I WOULD LOVE..... U.P.C.....

Ah well, you could get out magnet... but they all still use the eircom line... at the least you will probably save money.

broadban

SATELLITE IS CRUD EXPENSIVE AND WEATHER DEPENDENT...I suppose wireless is best option mmmmmmm???

fionny

broadban wrote: »

SATELLITE IS CRUD EXPENSIVE AND WEATHER DEPENDENT...I suppose wireless is best option mmmmmmm???

Ah no, wireless = ****e

Just shop around with the landline provider try this:

http://www.bonkers.ie/compare-broadband/

PogMoThoin

fionny wrote: »

Ah no, wireless = ****e

Just shop around with the landline provider try this:

http://www.bonkers.ie/compare-broadband/

Nonsense, decent fixed wireless is in most cases much better than Dsl

fionny

PogMoThoin wrote: »

Nonsense, decent fixed wireless is in most cases much better than Dsl

That would depend what you want to do... latency on wireless will never compete with wired... also data limits on wireless is generally low and costly if you exceed.

Big Lar

fionny wrote: »

That would depend what you want to do... latency on wireless will never compete with wired...

I dunno about that now.



and

fionny

Thats good, but how consistent is that, if you are gaming does it hold steady at a reasonable level.

Also that must be business service? According to the pricing on their site for HALF that you are paying over 100euro a month.

For the residential 3 package which is a laughable 3meg down / 512k up with a 20gig allowance you would pay 50euro a month... http://www.ccbisp.net/broadband.html

I pay 60euro a month, I have 100meg down / 7meg up (i actually get these speeds) and I have 250gig allowance. As well as a phone with Free evening local /national and some international calls.

EDIT;

I also see there is an installation charge of 100euro.. thats if all is nice and no mountains / trees blocking.

jor el

fionny wrote: »

That would depend what you want to do... latency on wireless will never compete with wired... also data limits on wireless is generally low and costly if you exceed.

On a proper fixed wireless system, the latency will normally beat DSL. Digiweb Metro being one such example where the ping is consistently better than DSL, and as good as cable.

Data limits do tend to be more strict, and the top speeds tend to be lower (especially if compared to cable offerings at 100Mbps), though Metro is available at 30Mbps, which beats all DSL products on the Irish market.

Big Lar

To be honest fionny, it doesn't matter what package I am on, I only shoved the ping results up there for the latency as you had the opinion that the latency on wireless was ****e. Considering that I am about 40 miles and 6 wireless hops from the Data Center in Cork where the Speed test is ran from you have to admit that its a fairly good ping.

I game most nights COD4 & COD MW3 and I end up hosting the game around 50% of the time, now in fairness it does have its moments but it is consistent enough that I can also run my phone line over it.

PogMoThoin

fionny wrote: »

That would depend what you want to do... latency on wireless will never compete with wired... also data limits on wireless is generally low and costly if you exceed.

Once again you are completely wrong. This is my the pingtimes from my mothers 2down 1up fixed wireless connection to various Irish sites at 6.30 in the evening, bet you can't beat ithem :pac:

[admin@Beano] > ping www.boards.ie
HOST SIZE TTL TIME STATUS
89.234.66.107 56 59 9ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 8ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 12ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 9ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 14ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 10ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 8ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 11ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 9ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 10ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 9ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 9ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 9ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 10ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 8ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 10ms
89.234.66.107 56 59 11ms
sent=17 received=17 packet-loss=0% min-rtt=8ms avg-rtt=9ms max-rtt=14ms

[admin@Beano] > ping www.inex.ie
HOST SIZE TTL TIME STATUS
193.242.111.147 56 59 11ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 11ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 12ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 11ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 10ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 10ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 10ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 10ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 10ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 11ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 11ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 11ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 14ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 10ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 10ms
193.242.111.147 56 59 11ms
sent=16 received=16 packet-loss=0% min-rtt=10ms avg-rtt=10ms max-rtt=14ms

[admin@Beano] > ping www.rte.ie
HOST SIZE TTL TIME STATUS
89.207.56.140 56 59 13ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 12ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 12ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 10ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 10ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 10ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 11ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 12ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 16ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 12ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 10ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 10ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 11ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 10ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 17ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 10ms
89.207.56.140 56 59 10ms
sent=17 received=17 packet-loss=0% min-rtt=10ms avg-rtt=11ms max-rtt=17ms

Big Lar

Put that in your pipe and smoke it fionny

fionny

Fair enough Ill accept im wrong on the ping times with regard to fixed wireless.

However cost wise / speed wise (for most rural providers) and data limit wise its not exactly value for money.

Big Lar

fionny wrote: »

However cost wise / speed wise (for most rural providers) and data limit wise its not exactly value for money.

Ah well thats a fair point fionny, but thats the cost of living in a rural area.

PogMoThoin

fionny wrote: »

However cost wise / speed wise (for most rural providers) and data limit wise its not exactly value for money.

Ok, what can't a couple in their late fifties do on a 2down 1up wireless connection?

I have 2 sisters in the States. The 1mbit upload is decent, (better than 8mbit dsl at it's fastest), making it very good for Skype video and Voip. The landline was replaced with a Blueface Voip phone 2 years ago, my mam just buys a tenner credit every 6 months to keep the number as she's now out of contract. The Eircom exchange in the town is 20m from their house, but it's not capable of delivering a connection any faster in the evenings to those in the town on Dsl, and the latency in the evenings is terrible, many times this wireless ping, making Dsl unsuitable for Skype video in the evenings. This connection works well.

There's even a wireless link to my brothers house 100m away, he shares this same connection he just uses it for some light browsing and poker. Along with this, there is a Dreambox working flawlessly, it needs a continuous connection to the internet to work (a packet is received every 8 seconds from the server).

And this connection is unlimited (as long as you don't pull the piss), they use about 60GB per month using Skype video without any notice from the provider (I can see their traffic on the router)

fionny

Good for them, but the OP is looking for faster broadband.

PogMoThoin

fionny wrote: »

Good for them, but the OP is looking for faster broadband.

Thats the thing, people have a bee in their bonnet about speed when it should be quality. The OP most likely does not need faster.

Most web servers cannot deliver pages any faster than 3mbit. Pages do not open much quicker with faster speeds. Lower the ping and they will respond and start opening quicker, increasing the speed does very little. Service providers and Google just about cope with the traffic they get to Youtube and Google in the evenings, having a faster connection makes little difference as there is always a bottlekneck down the line, your packets get queued on a router somewhere on the way to and the destination. You often see posts here by people with fast UPC connections complaining about Youtube buffering. Likewise, gamers don't get any advantage from faster speeds, they need lower ping and a more consistent connection.
Speed only makes a difference to someone downloading files and only if they want them now. On a slower connection you just line downloads up and let them run at night. I have 8mbit Dsl here, I'd sacrifice half my download speed for lower ping.

fionny

Well i make use of my 100meg, I get a consistent ping also (i was about 3ms slower then the one's you posted) UPC when you can get it generally offer great service and value for money, sometimes they over subscribe areas' though and it slows things down...

Big Lar

PogMoThoin is fairly on the ball there fionny, speed is nothing but something to sell package deals, If you were to work your connection flat out you would use up your 250GB allowance in approximately 5 Hours 57 Minutes 54.84 Seconds.

Now don't get me wrong speed is a nice thing to have but quality is what counts.

Its not the size that matters its the way you use it

fionny

Big Lar wrote: »

PogMoThoin is fairly on the ball there fionny, speed is nothing but something to sell package deals, If you were to work your connection flat out you would use up your 250GB allowance in approximately 5 Hours 57 Minutes 54.84 Seconds.

Now don't get me wrong speed is a nice thing to have but quality is what counts.

Its not the size that matters its the way you use it

Jesus lads im entitled to my opinions as are ye, I personally get my use out of the speed i have, pretty much EVERY day and i pay less then most people to boot. Its not a gimick if you know what your getting and use what you got.