The forgotten urban dweller

Mr. TTime

Hi All

Not sure where to put this post but haven't seen anyone post anything with the same situation as we find ourselves in. We bought a house in the Limerick suburbs a couple of years ago - the estate was built in the late 80's / early 90's and we are absolutely delighted with our new home.

One niggling problem though - the estate is situated over 2km from the cabinet we are connected to which was probably normal procedure back in the day. During the late 90's / early 00's a few more housing estates were built around us and each of these have at least one dedicated cabinet each.

My fibre connection means I can reach 18mb downloads (12mb in reality) as opposed to my close neighbours who get up to 80 or 100. This situation is not going to change either as openeir concentrate on rural communities and those who do not have any connection at all (quite rightly in my opinion). I requested to have our connection moved to a closer cabinet but that was predictably rejected. For now we just have to sit on our hands and hope that whenever FTTH arrives in the area (2020+?) the distance from the cabinet won't be as much of an issue - not an expert so have no idea if this will continue to affect us.

It is frustrating when everyone I know has fantastic speeds and although our connection is not fit for purpose for today's living standards I know there are people with absolutely no connection or have a seriously limited version of broadband and I empathise with them.

But I can't help feeling that there are a few urban dwellers like ourselves who are being completely forgotten about and ignored.

Any thoughts? I'm probably just moaning... :rolleyes:

Tigerandahalf

I have a similar question.

I am bit confused on FTTH (Fibre to the Home).
I hear about rural dwellers getting this direct to their house. Is this right?

As some people in towns don't have it so hard to see how one off houses would have it.

With FTTH are they talking about just fibre to a cabinet and then the normal copper cable to your premises.
As wouldn't fibre to each premises mean digging up the ground right upto the premises.

Any ideas?

LeinsterDub

Mr. TTime wrote: »

My fibre connection means I can reach 18mb downloads (12mb in reality) as

People are obsessed with speed. 12 MB is good enough for most people . What are you planning to do with 100 MB/s if you had it?

Mr. TTime

4K streaming for one. I have Sky Q and when the UHD service rolls out in August my connection won't be able to deliver one of the critical advancements in tv technology since it went HD. Netflix - won't be able to stream in 4K.

It's more the bandwidth than the speed. We are lucky to enough to have a lot of connected devices in the house and when the kids are watching netflix (or playing xbox) we find our connections are bogged down - especially if I am working in the evening. The speed itself is fine.

Plus we are paying the same mount per month as our neighbours across the road for a much reduced service. It's more an observation than a huge complaint. Typical modern day annoyance.

ED E

Is it you + a few others left in a longer loop or just you?

Mr. TTime

ED E wrote: »

Is it you + a few others left in a longer loop or just you?

As far as I am aware it is everyone in our estate (circa 35 houses)

LeinsterDub

Mr. TTime wrote: »

4K streaming for one.

You've a UHD TV I assume . In your case you've an actual need for a higher speed so.

Mr. TTime

LeinsterDub wrote: »

You've a UHD TV I assume . In your case you've an actual need for a higher speed so.

Yes got it last Christmas and would love to be able to get the most out of it

Nyum Nyum

LeinsterDub wrote: »

People are obsessed with speed. 12 MB is good enough for most people . What are you planning to do with 100 MB/s if you had it?

That kind of thinking holds everything back.

Tigerandahalf

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

I have a similar question.

I am bit confused on FTTH (Fibre to the Home).
I hear about rural dwellers getting this direct to their house. Is this right?

As some people in towns don't have it so hard to see how one off houses would have it.

With FTTH are they talking about just fibre to a cabinet and then the normal copper cable to your premises.
As wouldn't fibre to each premises mean digging up the ground right upto the premises.

Any ideas?

Sorry off topic a bit but can anyone answer this?

ED E

Mr. TTime wrote: »

As far as I am aware it is everyone in our estate (circa 35 houses)

Unfortunately that means the drops will be off their own main cable and the normal tricks to try and get an alternate path won't work.

If I were you I'd get a 4G modem (+antenna if needed) and shove your consoles on that so that the VDSL link is congested by the rest of the family if you need it. With Three you can have unlimited 4G for €20/mo.

Cuddlesworth

LeinsterDub wrote: »

People are obsessed with speed. 12 MB is good enough for most people . What are you planning to do with 100 MB/s if you had it?

Most services operate on burst transmission(including youtube and netflix) and most households these days expect more then 1 video stream at peak times alongside sensitive applications like gaming and voip services.

I would have said its around 100mbps for most households, not 12.

Johnboy1951

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

I am bit confused on FTTH (Fibre to the Home).
I hear about rural dwellers getting this direct to their house. Is this right?

Yes

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

Sorry off topic a bit but can anyone answer this?

FTTC includes telephone line for the last part of the connection
FTTH has no telephone line in the connection.

Tigerandahalf

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Yes
FTTC includes telephone line for the last part of the connection
FTTH has no telephone line in the connection.

So rural dwellers could be really lucky with this and many urban dwellers will be stuck with an out of date service.

Given the greater density in urban areas surely there is some sort of plan by the providers to improve the speeds for urban dwellers.

Do I take it that people with cable are not affected by this?

Johnboy1951

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

So rural dwellers could be really lucky with this and many urban dwellers will be stuck with an out of date service.

Given the greater density in urban areas surely there is some sort of plan by the providers to improve the speeds for urban dwellers.

Do I take it that people with cable are not affected by this?

Companies do what makes sense to them commercially, so if you have doubts about their commercial decisions it is the company you need to address about it.
The NBP will provide internet connection to rural dwellers using one or two of those companies ..... and they have decided in their own commercial interest, that FTTH is the best plan.
Cable system is another commercial means of providing TV and broadband services. Different companies operate these services.
I see no indication that anyone will be "stuck with an out of date service."

Tigerandahalf

Well with the rural ftth scheme people will get upto 1gb speeds.
People who are connected via a cabibet (fftc) are only getting upto 50mb.

That is not future proof I would think.

Is the long term solution here digging up paths and rewiring upto the house?

ED E

Some rural being faster than most urban users is a short term quirk that we'll see. Right now rural users shouldnt really have it without a huge monthly rate but the government is subsidizing that rollout. They dont need to subsidize urban areas as they're commercially viable but there isnt as much of a race effect in urban areas yet.

Some areas like Sandyford, Wexford, Cavan, Letterkenny and so on already have urban FTTH, its just not mega common yet.

Virgin can do similar speeds without jumping to FTTH for another few years so they'll be selling 500Mb and 1Gb packages soon enough.

Tigerandahalf

Ed

When you say ftth though are you talking fibre direct to the house.

As many businesses in the centre of towns don't have this unless the street has been dug up and fibre optic cable put in.

ED E

Yes, and many places do in fact have it its just not obvious.

They "blow" the fibre through existing ducts so they don't have to excavate the street.

Tigerandahalf

ED E wrote: »

Yes, and many places do in fact have it its just not obvious.

They "blow" the fibre through existing ducts so they don't have to excavate the street.

But surely this should be done in all urban areas at this stage. Why are they waiting around?

Or is it the case that Eir see more value in signing up more rural customers than improving the service for existing urban dwellers who might have an 'adequate' service.

Mr. TTime

ED E wrote: »

Some rural being faster than most urban users is a short term quirk that we'll see. Right now rural users shouldnt really have it without a huge monthly rate but the government is subsidizing that rollout. They dont need to subsidize urban areas as they're commercially viable but there isnt as much of a race effect in urban areas yet.

That is my understanding too. My only worry is that the "race effect" you mention will initially be in growth areas in city's and not in already mature residential districts similar to where I live.

Coincidentally my former rural abode which we rented for two years in a small village had good broadband connectivity (I was averaging around 20 megs) and I see now FTTH is going live in Autumn/Winter 2016 with the cable going straight past my old house :rolleyes:. It's a patience game at the moment and I try not to get too worked up about it.

Thanks for your insights

Cuddlesworth

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

But surely this should be done in all urban areas at this stage. Why are they waiting around?

Or is it the case that Eir see more value in signing up more rural customers than improving the service for existing urban dwellers who might have an 'adequate' service.

Because it makes no commercial sense, a large part of the cost of providing internet services is the cost involved in laying cables. I've seen costs by Eircom and others for the NBP and I firmly believe they are fluffing the numbers and not including the auxiliary costs only the direct costs. Most Irish government tenders go the same way, bid cheap then raise costs when its impossible to change vendors.

In most western country's there are 3 rough markets for ISP's.
Very dense(city/industrial), which can support multiple operators
Medium density(suburbs/towns) which usually end up with a single option Low density(rural) which end up with no options, since its not commercially viable.

The European broadband scheme has the possibility of leaving those in medium density markets in a gray area, where they don't qualify for subsidy but they also don't qualify for any real commercial investment.

Tigerandahalf

How are businesses operating in towns when the broadband service is so limited.

Granted many businesses might only need a 10mb connection but surely others must be caught out. A conference call would be out.

Also are new housing developments being wired with fibre or what?

ED E

Developers often do a deal with one wholesaler and exclude the other, new estates could be pre-ducted for GPON but that doesnt seem to be common at all.

Most businesses are clustered around the centre of small towns/villages where they'll get 50-100Mb. If they need more they can get a second line and load balance, its not that much of a problem.

Most big companies in cities just pay for a bespoke optical circuit, they can afford it.

ItHurtsWhenIP

OP - If you have line-of-sight to Woodcock Hill, you might be able to get Imagine's LTE service - which could get you up to 70Mbps (or more) ... but also could be less (depending on if there are tree's and stuff in the way).

Mind you if you are going UHD, their 20GB limit per day may hurt.

Mr. TTime

MMFITWGDV wrote: »

OP - If you have line-of-sight to Woodcock Hill, you might be able to get Imagine's LTE service - which could get you up to 70Mbps (or more) ... but also could be less (depending on if there are tree's and stuff in the way).

Mind you if you are going UHD, their 20GB limit per day may hurt.

Thanks for the tip - I'll look into it. Ideally I'd prefer a wired solution and the 20GB limit might get me into trouble some days (most days it would be fine though).

Nollog

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

I have a similar question.

I am bit confused on FTTH (Fibre to the Home).
I hear about rural dwellers getting this direct to their house. Is this right?

As some people in towns don't have it so hard to see how one off houses would have it.

With FTTH are they talking about just fibre to a cabinet and then the normal copper cable to your premises.
As wouldn't fibre to each premises mean digging up the ground right upto the premises.

Any ideas?

Direct to their house is right.

FTTH stands for Fibre To The Home, not being smart, but it says what it is. Fibre all the way.
FTTC is what you said, that's the "upto 100mbps" stuff.

It's hard to say urban areas won't benefit from them rolling out a cable to rural Ireland. Plenty of towns will be hit on the way to y'won's house in the Galtees'.