NBP: National Broadband Plan Announced

ED E

They've published!

The government has published a new map outlining in detail 700,000 rural homes and businesses which will be connected to state-subsidised broadband of at least 30 megabits per second (Mbs) from 2016.

http://www.independent.ie/business/technology/news/revealed-700000-homes-and-businesses-to-get-subsidised-fast-broadband-in-new-plan-30769126.html

Edit: Video

MajesticDonkey

Is there any list or detailed map to view?

EDIT: here: http://www.broadband.gov.ie/

Jakey Rolling

Searchable map at http://www.broadband.gov.ie/

As expected, my house is not on it as it's only been there for 3 years :-(


This is a massive step in the right direction, an acceptance that government intervention is necessary to bring a decent level of service to all. Yes it could cost taxpayers €1billion, but the benefits to the economy should be orders of magnitude relative to this cost.

Here's hoping that the European Commission see sense on this one wrt state aid regulations.

Praetorian

ED E wrote: »

They've published!



http://www.independent.ie/business/technology/news/revealed-700000-homes-and-businesses-to-get-subsidised-fast-broadband-in-new-plan-30769126.html

I am very sceptical due to past experience with regard to government announcements. Fibre everywhere is what we should be aiming at.

Wireless AND 4G is what will end up with, with far less than 100% coverage.

MajesticDonkey

Let's hope this plan actually goes somewhere and isn't a complete shambles and/or disappears into thin air like previous plans.

I don't expect to see anything from this (for NBP areas) before 2018 at the earliest.

Bummer1234

When this comes around to "2016", How is it been implemented...is it fibre in all the locations in blue?

Edit: Seen on the indo it mentions "new state-funded fibre broadband network".

Villain

The devil will be in the detail but the plan is a great target

bk

Praetorian wrote: »

Wireless AND 4G is what will end up with, with far less than 100% coverage.

I'm not so sure this time around. The government got burned by Three with 3G on the last National Broadband Plan. In their submissions to the government, all the heavy hitters (Eircom, ESB, Vodafone, etc.) stressed that FTTH was the only solution for rural broadband. Eircoms submission was particularly impressive. I see little wiggle room for the government to push 4G instead.

MBSnr

bk wrote: »

I'm not so sure this time around. The government got burned by Three with 3G on the last National Broadband Plan. In their submissions to the government, all the heavy hitters (Eircom, ESB, Vodafone, etc.) stressed that FTTH was the only solution for rural broadband. Eircoms submission was particularly impressive. I see little wiggle room for the government to push 4G instead.

I wonder why they haven't marked all the villages on the map that they mentioned here.
Seems they just coloured the entire country in amber.... which surely means wireless to a large percentage outside of the those villages....

shortys94

Do you think solutions such as FTW could be incorporated, similar to Westnet in the western regions. I know they're speeds are limited to under 4 Mbps but I have family who use their services and have a very low latency due to the contention ratio I suppose in those rural areas.

Does anyone have any ideas on what kind of solutions they could possibly provide for a minimum of 30 Mbps with consistent connection, not prone to drops of 3G etc...

MajesticDonkey

bk wrote: »

I'm not so sure this time around. The government got burned by Three with 3G on the last National Broadband Plan. In their submissions to the government, all the heavy hitters (Eircom, ESB, Vodafone, etc.) stressed that FTTH was the only solution for rural broadband. Eircoms submission was particularly impressive. I see little wiggle room for the government to push 4G instead.

Hey, maybe we'll become another South Korea and start developing 6G!

(5G already in development...around 800Mb/s theoretical download in lab tests)

Villain

MBSnr wrote: »

I wonder why they haven't marked all the villages on the map that they mentioned here.
Seems they just coloured the entire country in amber.... which surely means wireless to a large percentage outside of the those villages....

There are some odd blue circles that I'm not sure of, i.e. what is going to deliver 30mbps by 2016 e.g. east of Shillelagh in Wicklow.

pajor

Praetorian wrote: »

I am very sceptical due to past experience with regard to government announcements. Fibre everywhere is what we should be aiming at.

Wireless AND 4G is what will end up with, with far less than 100% coverage.

I'd be very skeptical (and a bit cynical too) about it all. I'll believe it when I see it.

I saw the blue and amber map just there. My jaw dropped a little realising how much of this country needs government intervention to supply fixed broadband. Must be so crippling for rural business.

bk

shortys94 wrote: »

Do you think solutions such as FTW could be incorporated, similar to Westnet in the western regions. I know they're speeds are limited to under 4 Mbps but I have family who use their services and have a very low latency due to the contention ratio I suppose in those rural areas.

Does anyone have any ideas on what kind of solutions they could possibly provide for a minimum of 30 Mbps with consistent connection, not prone to drops of 3G etc...

No, FTW shouldn't be included with perhaps the exception of the most extreme of extreme case (one off house on the top of a mountain, island off the coast, etc.)

In their submissions to the NBP, Eircom, ESB and Vodafone made it clear that FTTH was the only technology that could bring reliable high speed broadband to rural Ireland.

Eircoms submission was particularly impressive and detailed. They said if the requirement was a steady, stable, minimum 30mb/s connection that:

- 4G would actually cost more then FTTH to reach that level of performance!
- They could use VDSL mini-dslams, FTTdp, etc. to achieve those speeds, but again it would lead to much higher maintenance cost then just doing FTTH.

Ronan|Raven

I feel like we have been here before..

bk

pajor wrote: »

I saw the blue and amber map just there. My jaw dropped a little realising how much of this country needs government intervention to supply fixed broadband. Must be so crippling for rural business.

It is good for people to finally realise how low density and rural Ireland actually is outside of Dublin, Cork, etc. and how difficult and expensive a problem it is.

ED E

pajor wrote: »

I'd be very skeptical (and a bit cynical too) about it all. I'll believe it when I see it.

I saw the blue and amber map just there. My jaw dropped a little realising how much of this country needs government intervention to supply fixed broadband. Must be so crippling for rural business.

Its important to note a lot of that are has ADSL2+ at the moment, more often than not on NGN(uncongested backhaul). Its just the outliers are down at 1-5mb that's the crux of the issue.

bk

From the quick look at the map I'm quietly impressed so far.

The Blue areas mostly are just the areas that Eircom is covering with VDSL cabs. I assume UPC and ESB FTTH are just a subset of these areas.

What the cynic in me thought was going to happen, is that any area with an Eircom VDSL cab would be blue out to 2km from the cab, which would thus cover people who could get VDSL, but might only be getting as little as 7mb/s from VDSL due to the distance.

But no, they only seem to be indicating circles of 500 meters from each VDSL cab! People within areas of 500 meters should easily get minimum 30mb/s and likely more like 50mb/s. This means more people will be eligible for the NBP and is great news.

Also from what I can see, it would seem that FWA and 3G and 4G coverage are excluded from the map and rightfully so.

So this map plus the strong submissions from Eircom, ESB, etc. lead me to believe that things might (mind you, just might) be different this time around.

bk

ED E wrote: »

Its important to note a lot of that are has ADSL2+ at the moment, more often than not on NGN(uncongested backhaul). Its just the outliers are down at 1-5mb that's the crux of the issue.

From what I can tell, the map only includes people connected to VDSL out to 500 meters, plus ESB FTTH and UPC coax.

My sister who is on a 12mb/s ADSL2+ connection is in an amber area!

From what I tell this map honestly represents in Blue, people who can or will be able to get a minimum of 30mb/s quality broadband by 2016.

Amber is anyone who gets less then 30mb/s, even if they are on VDSL and getting say a nice stable 15mb/s connection at the moment.

This is very good news as it means more people will be able to avail of the NBP scheme.

shortys94

bk wrote: »

It is good for people to finally realise how low density and rural Ireland actually is outside of Dublin, Cork, etc. and how difficult and expensive a problem it is.

Yes but I think people who don't realise this may also not realise the long term financial benefits of providing such infrastructure. I think the availability of such a resource plays a part in how people choose their location for residence. A consistent, high quality connection may see more businesses and residences being set up in more rural districts.

bk

shortys94 wrote: »

Yes but I think people who don't realise this may also not realise the long term financial benefits of providing such infrastructure. I think the availability of such a resource plays a part in how people choose their location for residence. A consistent, high quality connection may see more businesses and residences being set up in more rural districts.

At the very best it will reduce the flow to urban areas, but it certainly won't reverse it.

Just look at rural Norway and Sweden, despite them having FTTH to almost every rural home for many years now, it hasn't stop the mass migration of people in rural areas to towns and cities.

If anything I think the internet has actually sped up this migration, the young people see all the cool events and socialising that they are missing out on in the cities and want to move there.

They see their facebook feeds full of posts about cool parties, night outs, sporting events, etc. in the city and they want to experience the same and leave their rural home for the big city life as quickly as possible.

pajor

ED E wrote: »

Its important to note a lot of that are has ADSL2+ at the moment, more often than not on NGN(uncongested backhaul). Its just the outliers are down at 1-5mb that's the crux of the issue.

No doubt you're right.

But from a personal view, where I am in Co Waterford a lot of the time there's nothing (apart from wireless). Have enquired with eircom, vodafone and UPC recently and nada. In 2014, €35 p.m for 2mb just isn't on.

ED E

bk wrote: »

From what I can tell, the map only includes people connected to VDSL out to 500 meters, plus ESB FTTH and UPC coax.

My sister who is on a 12mb/s ADSL2+ connection is in an amber area!

From what I tell this map honestly represents in Blue, people who can or will be able to get a minimum of 30mb/s quality broadband by 2016.

Amber is anyone who gets less then 30mb/s, even if they are on VDSL and getting say a nice stable 15mb/s connection at the moment.

This is very good news as it means more people will be able to avail of the NBP scheme.

I totally follow you there, was just posting that as Pajor's post could be construed to indicate fixed line isnt available at all in the amber zones.

bk

ED E wrote: »

I totally follow you there, was just posting that as Pajor's post could be construed to indicate fixed line isnt available at all in the amber zones.

Yup, the map and the FAQ aren't very clear, but from looking at a number of areas that I know myself and comparing it to the IrelandOffLine map, my understanding (and I'm totally open to be corrected here) is that the map indicates:

- Blue areas: Areas that have or will have by 2016 a minimum of 30mb/s delivered by VDSL2, UPC cable or ESB FTTH.

- Amber areas: Anything below the above standard, but may currently include pretty decent ADSL2+, FWA and even VDSL connections that deliver anything up to 30mb/s

I have to say, so far given what I've seen here, I'm very happy with this map and hope that it is a good sign as to what the NBP will deliver. Obviously the devil will be in the detail of the plan and we need to campaign for a high quality solution, but so far the signs are looking good.

PeadarB

The devil will be in the detail. 3 took the money and ran last time out. "Commercially sensitive" info will be kept secret until the final plan is set out. As ESB Networks, a semi-state utility, practically covers most premises in the country as it is with their power infrastructure, would it not be prudent to keep this massive undertaking under their wing.

Machinehead

"Under EU competition rules, the State can only fund services or infrastructure where there is clear evidence that the commercial sector has not and will not invest." (dcenr.gov.ie)
Will this then be the CIE of broadband, they must go where the private operators have no desire to go for whatever reasons. What will these services/ infrastructure be? ESB/Vodafone/ Wireless or 4G, or some combination of them all? I partly guessed that the private operators weren't going to venture much beyond their existing comfort zones to extend their coverage be it due to economic or infrastructural reasons. Does the 2016 mean the whole thing doesn't even get going for 12 months, I my qualify for OAP discounts if it goes on much longer than a few years after that.

Machinehead

[QUOTE=(5G already in development...around 800Mb/s theoretical download in lab tests)[/QUOTE]
Saw on BBC Click that Japan expect to have 5G broadband & 8K TV up & running for the 2020 olympics.

bk

PeadarB wrote: »

As ESB Networks, a semi-state utility, practically covers most premises in the country as it is with their power infrastructure, would it not be prudent to keep this massive undertaking under their wing.

Well that would probably be against EU state funding rules, it will need to be opened up to tender.

However I expect the ESB will be very heavily involved, specially if their current FTTH rollout goes well. They will gain a great deal of experience from that.

I expect it will mostly be split between ESB/Vodafone and Eircom.

bk

Machinehead wrote: »

Saw on BBC Click that Japan expect to have 5G broadband & 8K TV up & running for the 2020 olympics.

You can call it X1000G if you like, it won't make a difference. wireless is simply unsuited to delivering large amounts of high quality bandwidth in a stable and reliable manner.

Only wired broadband can do that, specifically Fibre.

It is simple physics, their simply isn't enough bandwidth available at the required frequencies to make wireless in any way a replacement for good quality wired connection.

pajor

ED E wrote: »

I totally follow you there, was just posting that as Pajor's post could be construed to indicate fixed line isnt available at all in the amber zones.

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that at all.

nilhg

bk wrote: »

Yup, the map and the FAQ aren't very clear, but from looking at a number of areas that I know myself and comparing it to the IrelandOffLine map, my understanding (and I'm totally open to be corrected here) is that the map indicates:

- Blue areas: Areas that have or will have by 2016 a minimum of 30mb/s delivered by VDSL2, UPC cable or ESB FTTH.

- Amber areas: Anything below the above standard, but may currently include pretty decent ADSL2+, FWA and even VDSL connections that deliver anything up to 30mb/s

I have to say, so far given what I've seen here, I'm very happy with this map and hope that it is a good sign as to what the NBP will deliver. Obviously the devil will be in the detail of the plan and we need to campaign for a high quality solution, but so far the signs are looking good.

I'm about 200m outside a blue area and am currently synced at 39884/8589, actually just looking now there are only 8 inhabited houses inside the blue area for our Cab.

Like some others here I'm a bit more optimistic about this plan on a very quick first inspection, there does seem to be more thought gone into it and less ovbious bloat around it.

Gonzo

I am in an amber area close to Dunshaughlin, I notice however that there seems to be 2 shades of amber, certain areas are highlighted in a slightly darker shade of amber with a thin brown outline showing these slightly darker area borders. Does anyone know if that indicates 2 different types of fibre which looks like it's dividing up rural areas with multiple housing vs rural areas with one off housing?

e.g. if you zoom in on dunshaughlin, I live in Lagore Big just to the right (east) of the town. my area is indicated by the darker shade of amber while beyond that where there are mainly just fields have a lighter shade.

nilhg

Gonzo wrote: »

I am in an amber area close to Dunshaughlin, I notice however that there seems to be 2 shades of amber, certain areas are highlighted in a slightly darker shade of amber with a thin brown outline showing these slightly darker area borders. Does anyone know if that indicates 2 different types of fibre which looks like it's dividing up rural areas with multiple housing vs rural areas with one off housing?

e.g. if you zoom in on dunshaughlin, I live in Lagore Big just to the right (east) of the town. my area is indicated by the darker shade of amber while beyond that where there are mainly just fields have a lighter shade.

Contour lines coming through from the underlying map?

Gonzo

nilhg wrote: »

Contour lines coming through from the underlying map?

im not sure where they are coming from, but I don't think the contour lines indicate land height or anything like that. They seems to follow rural areas that have more housing compared to areas with 1 off housing and fields. There has to be a reason why these areas are shaded slightly darker.

nilhg

Gonzo wrote: »

im not sure where they are coming from, but I don't think the contour lines indicate land height or anything like that. They seems to follow rural areas that have more housing compared to areas with 1 off housing and fields. There has to be a reason why these areas are shaded slightly darker.

http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V1,696639,752144,4,10

irishfeen

High Speed Broadband enabled by the State
Townland: Bally*****
County: Cork


100% premises within the NBP Area

0% premises covered by Operators by 2016

I wonder will we all be around to see this happen... to many false dawns for me to believe anything, we are waiting about 12 years to move away from Dial Up with no luck.

PixelTrawler

bk wrote: »

From what I can tell, the map only includes people connected to VDSL out to 500 meters, plus ESB FTTH and UPC coax.

My sister who is on a 12mb/s ADSL2+ connection is in an amber area!

From what I tell this map honestly represents in Blue, people who can or will be able to get a minimum of 30mb/s quality broadband by 2016.

Amber is anyone who gets less then 30mb/s, even if they are on VDSL and getting say a nice stable 15mb/s connection at the moment.

This is very good news as it means more people will be able to avail of the NBP scheme.

Friends of mine in rural Galway have 10 or 12 meg Adsl and i just checked and they too are in an amber area.

Praetorian

The 30m/bit figure sounds highly suspicious to me and highly indicative of 4g (for at least some of this rollout). Also, by 2020 30m/bit minimum wouldn't be considered "fast".

Upc's network is mostly complete, Eircom's is making great progress and Esb / Voda's will be good in the urban areas. These companies cover 68%. The relatively easy 68%. Surely it would cost billions to do the remaining 32%. What are they going to get for €355m - €512m? This is somewhere between €507 and €731 per home / business. That's before they spend a sizeable chunk of it on setup costs, bonus schemes and another sizeable chunk to "experts" for "consultancy". Esb / voda are planning to spend €455m to hit 500,000 addresses, but these are in towns and cities. The numbers don't add up.

I think they should be aiming for FTTH all the way with the home users / businesses paying for at least part of the installations. If I was lucky enough to live out in a big house in the country I'd certainly be happy to get FTTH, but I wouldn't expect to get it installed for free.

Dear Government, I'm happy to consult for half the normal fee so I can point ye in the right direction.

Villain

Praetorian wrote: »

The 30m/bit figure sounds highly suspicious to me and highly indicative of 4g (for at least some of this rollout). Also, by 2020 30m/bit minimum wouldn't be considered "fast".

Upc's network is mostly complete, Eircom's is making great progress and Esb / Voda's will be good in the urban areas. These companies cover 68%. The relatively easy 68%. Surely it would cost billions to do the remaining 32%. What are they going to get for €355m - €512m? This is somewhere between €507 and €731 per home / business. That's before they spend a sizeable chunk of it on setup costs, bonus schemes and another sizeable chunk to "experts" for "consultancy". Esb / voda are planning to spend €455m to hit 500,000 addresses, but these are in towns and cities. The numbers don't add up.

I think they should be aiming for FTTH all the way with the home users / businesses paying for at least part of the installations. If I was lucky enough to live out in a big house in the country I'd certainly be happy to get FTTH, but I wouldn't expect to get it installed for free.

Dear Government, I'm happy to consult for half the normal fee so I can point ye in the right direction.

If you read the submissions you would see that 4G or Fixed wireless will not be how this will move forward.

dalta5billion

Villain wrote: »

If you read the submissions you would see that 4G or Fixed wireless will not be how this will move forward.

Surely the submissions don't prevent DCENR from going ahead anyways if they believe it to be the "best" solution?

That said, I would hope that they respect the fact that wireless solutions aren't long term solutions for NGA for rural areas.

bk

Praetorian wrote: »

The 30m/bit figure sounds highly suspicious to me and highly indicative of 4g (for at least some of this rollout). Also, by 2020 30m/bit minimum wouldn't be considered "fast".

The 30mb/s by 2020 figure is actually based on an EU wide goal and directive.

Though you are correct, it depends on what the definition of 30mb/s.

If it is 30mb/s consistent connection even at peak time, then 4G is a no go, otherwise you are correct and 4G could sneak in there.

But from what I've read so far from the questions given by the Department of Comms and by the submissions from the industry, it is clear that at least they are currently setting the goal to be 30mb/s even at peak times and working hard to exclude 4G from the running.

Even Three's submission was pretty half hearted. I think they and everyone else knows that they burned their bridges with the last broadband plan and it is going to be a fixed wired solution this time around.

Of course, that could change and the government could back track, but that is where we need to campaign to make sure it is a quality solution.

Praetorian wrote: »

Surely it would cost billions to do the remaining 32%. What are they going to get for €355m - €512m? This is somewhere between €507 and €731 per home / business. That's before they spend a sizeable chunk of it on setup costs, bonus schemes and another sizeable chunk to "experts" for "consultancy". Esb / voda are planning to spend €455m to hit 500,000 addresses, but these are in towns and cities. The numbers don't add up.

Well lets say that the ESB agree to match the government investment, with another €550 million for the remaining 600,000 premises, that would now be 916 + 731 which would give you €1,647 per home.

That would go a long way to covering many rural homes, specially where they can already use the ESB's high quality electricity distribution network and right of way (poles, ducts, sub-stations, etc.).

In fact thinking about it the ESB might even be willing to invest more per premises in these rural areas, then their initial urban rollout, as they will have pretty much a monopoly in these rural areas, versus competing with Eircom VDSL in their urban, areas.

I could see them maybe even be willing to double it up to €1,800 per home, with a government subsidy of 731 would give you €2,500 per home.

Perhaps they will cap it at €2,500 and say any house that is more then that has to pay the rest of the install cost themselves. Perhaps they could even arrange for a loan and have it paid off over a few years as part of the bill.

Suddenly it all looks doable with these sort of numbers.

Praetorian wrote: »

I think they should be aiming for FTTH all the way with the home users / businesses paying for at least part of the installations. If I was lucky enough to live out in a big house in the country I'd certainly be happy to get FTTH, but I wouldn't expect to get it installed for free.

Exactly, people in rural Ireland often lower property costs, so a few thousand for a high quality broadband connection shouldn't be an issue.

The ESB already charge significantly higher for a rural electrical install then a urban one and then also charge a higher rural rate on the monthly bill to fairly reflect the higher cost of rural connections.

I could easily see the same happening with this project.

dalta5billion wrote: »

Surely the submissions don't prevent DCENR from going ahead anyways if they believe it to be the "best" solution?

No it doesn't, but it would be politically and EU level very embarrassing to do so.

If you have every single heavy hitter in the industry saying wireless isn't good enough and only FTTH will do, then it would be very problematic if they decided to go wireless, specially if it was challenged at an EU level and specially as they will likely be looking for the EU to help fund this.

MajesticDonkey

bk wrote: »

Exactly, people in rural Ireland often lower property costs, so a few thousand for a high quality broadband connection shouldn't be an issue.

Of course it would, to be fair. It mightn't be an issue to people building new houses, because, as you said before, it'd be just like getting your electricity connected. But do you really think the majority of existing households around the country, many of which can barely afford to get by every month, would WANT to spend a few thousand on getting a fibre connection?

This comes back again to the fact that only a very small percentage of households actually NEED a fibre connection - the word "need" implying that they would be willing to spend thousands on getting it.

I personally would absolutely love a fibre connection, and I'd probably save up €4-500 to get it. But if the NBP comes down to households being given the option of getting fibre, but it costing them thousands to do so, I don't think this will go anywhere at all, because most of them simply will not or could not pay for it.

bk

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

Of course it would, to be fair. It mightn't be an issue to people building new houses, because, as you said before, it'd be just like getting your electricity connected. But do you really think the majority of existing households around the country, many of which can barely afford to get by every month, would WANT to spend a few thousand on getting a fibre connection?

At 1,500 to 2,500 per home from Government +ESB/Eircom many if not most rural homes at least those with say 4km of a village can probably be done.

That just leaves the minority of more extreme examples, say 10km from a village.

Now lets look at the extreme example, lets say it cost €7500 - €2500 from the government + ESB/Eircom, that leaves €5,000 for the owner to pay.

But now lets say the government, agrees to give you a low interest loan over 20 years that you pay on your bill. Including interest that is just an extra €25 per month.

So while someone in Dublin pays €40 per month, a truly rural person ends up paying €65 per month for a fantastic 1Gb/s FTTH connection!

Are you really saying €25 per month extra would be too much to ask!

This wouldn't be much different to the higher standing charge paid by rural dwellers for electricity.

MajesticDonkey

bk wrote: »

So while someone in Dublin pays €40 per month, a truly rural person ends up paying €65 per month for a fantastic 1Gb/s FTTH connection!

Are you really saying €25 per month extra would be too much to ask!

No, I'm absolutely not saying that. A loan-scheme of some kind would be great! I personally wouldn't have a problem paying €65/month.

I feel that many people would have a problem with this - because again, they simply don't want or need a 1Gb connection, so they just won't see the need to pay for it.

bk

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

I feel that many people would have a problem with this - because again, they simply don't want or need a 1Gb connection, so they just won't see the need to pay for it.

As their ADSL connections won't be updated at all and as the speed demands of the internet increase, people will increasing find their 1 to 4mb/s ADSL connections inadequate and pretty much forced to upgrade.

Also Eircom has been asking Comreg to allow it to charge higher rates for even basic ADSL in rural areas. Even crappy ADSL could well end up costing €60 per month if Comreg agree and thus little reason not to get FTTH.

Gonzo

I really hope they don't end up leaving us with wireless/4G, thats not broadband, imagine downloading big game updates/patchs such as World Of Warcraft/PS4/Xbox 1 games on a 4g connection with their limited download allowance.

Its Only Ray Parlour

Gonzo wrote: »

imagine downloading big game updates/patchs such as World Of Warcraft

Can't imagine myself doing that anytime soon.

grbear

The map they provided gives me some hope that this won't turn out to be another false dawn for those of us with subpar internet connections. Compared to Eircoms own efibre map it really is striking just how small an area is covered by that service.

BeerWolf

Seeing a lot of yellow on the map, nonetheless my house is within it --- even though I can get 45mbps download speeds with 4G in my area.

Would the NBP be for fixed line broadband ?

I'd be happy to get any form of "unlimited" broadband compared to my current restrictive 20/60GB packages I got with Vodafone and THREE.

bk

BeerWolf wrote: »

Seeing a lot of yellow on the map, nonetheless my house is within it --- even though I can get 45mbps download speeds with 4G in my area.

The problem with 3/4G is that it is shared.

So it might look like you are getting 45mbs at the moment, but as more of your neighbours upgrade their devices to 4G, you will see that speed drop greatly, in particular at peak times.

This is already been seen here in Dublin, with 4G speeds on some operators more then halving from what people originally saw.

So no, 3/4G aren't really suitable for real broadband, the NBP will hopefully be only wired broadband, preferably FTTH.

KOR101

Praetorian wrote: »

The 30m/bit figure sounds highly suspicious to me and highly indicative of 4g (for at least some of this rollout). Also, by 2020 30m/bit minimum wouldn't be considered "fast".

Yes, if the Government had taken on board the 'surprise' endorsement of FTTH in the submissions, then they wouldn't be talking about minimum speeds of 30m/bit. I actually think the Government is asleep at the wheels. Why else would they have nothing else ready to replace the old scheme when it ran out.

Let's say Eircom are forced to respond strongly to ESB's FTTH, then by 2018 you could have 800k premises/households with FTTH and 800k with FTTC. If I'm used to 1 gibit speeds in Dublin, the 30mbit speeds in some rural locations is going to feel very slow.

I'm thinking of products like Google Drive and the way the prices of it have fallen. Synching a 2TB drive for $20/month makes a lot of sense, but you need the speed. I actually have about 30-40TB including all my collections.