Eir rural FTTH thread III

cnocbui

KOR101 wrote: »

Would be nice to hear what Airwire's plans are.

I raised the idea that perhaps Airwire ought to drop the 150 and upgrade people to 500 if the wholesale pricing is the same, but was shot down. Apparently it wasn't a reasonable notion as there was an idea Airwire would have to spend on their infrastructure, which given the outages and possible speed delivery issues, mightn't be a bad thing.

I know for my own situation that I don't hammer 150 24/7, and that wouldn't change if it was 500, and I suspect that would be the case for the majority of customers. There's always a few bandwidth hogs, but I really doubt they would be enough of a problem to make upgrading 150 people to 500 an economic or infrastructure issue for the company.

Airwire: MartinL

KOR101 wrote: »

A colleague has just signed up for Airwire's 150/30 product.

I thought this product was being slowly eased out of the market, and 500/50 was going to be the new minimum product. Is this in train?

In all honesty, why would it ?

First of all, the majority of customers don't even need 150/30. NGA standards call for a minimum of 30 Mbit/s at the moment and 100 Mbit/s going forward.

Secondly, for those providers who are retiring the 150/30 plan, all it means, that the minimum product (500/50) will cost you more ... on a monthly basis.

What most people actually want is an affordable product.

Have a look at the pricing, once the discounts dry up and see where you end up compared to, what you pay for our 150/30 Mbit/s package. Certainly not sub 50 EUR.

It's the same with VDSL/FTTC. We are probably the only provider, that offers a cheaper offering, when you only can achieve 50 Mbit/s or less anyhow.

Why would you pay more per year for a higher headline speed, when you don't need it ? Just because every other provider guns for that target and hence their lowest package is ending up more expensive in the end doesn't mean, that we have to jump on the same train.

Airwire: MartinL

cnocbui wrote: »

I raised the idea that perhaps Airwire ought to drop the 150 and upgrade people to 500 if the wholesale pricing is the same, but was shot down.

The wholesale price (which now does not differ) is only the same on the last mile ... for the line rental.

This does not include:
- OpenEIR traffic charges
- infrastructure from inter-connect to our core network
- cost of bandwidth upstream

The wholesale cost of the actual last mile connection is only a fraction of the picture. And the prices that OpenEIR announced in their press release were actually completely taken out of picture, because they were VUA prices. Those prices only apply if a provider has infrastructure to each and every single NGA exchange, that OpenEIR has in the country. Imagine the cost of that.

KOR101

Airwire: MartinL wrote: »

In all honesty, why would it ?

First of all, the majority of customers don't even need 150/30. NGA standards call for a minimum of 30 Mbit/s at the moment and 100 Mbit/s going forward.

This is true of my colleague. Doesn't even need 150 let alone 500.

Airwire: MartinL wrote: »

The wholesale price (which now does not differ) is only the same on the last mile ... for the line rental.

This does not include:
- OpenEIR traffic charges
- infrastructure from inter-connect to our core network
- cost of bandwidth upstream

My colleague, and I think many users, would download and upload the same amount of data regardless of whether they were on 150 or 500. Although, I guess your point would be that there would be a minority that really would add costs to Airwire.

Thanks for answering.

AirBiscuit

Airwire: MartinL wrote: »

In all honesty, why would it ?

First of all, the majority of customers don't even need 150/30. NGA standards call for a minimum of 30 Mbit/s at the moment and 100 Mbit/s going forward.

Secondly, for those providers who are retiring the 150/30 plan, all it means, that the minimum product (500/50) will cost you more ... on a monthly basis.

What most people actually want is an affordable product.

Have a look at the pricing, once the discounts dry up and see where you end up compared to, what you pay for our 150/30 Mbit/s package. Certainly not sub 50 EUR.

It's the same with VDSL/FTTC. We are probably the only provider, that offers a cheaper offering, when you only can achieve 50 Mbit/s or less anyhow.

Why would you pay more per year for a higher headline speed, when you don't need it ? Just because every other provider guns for that target and hence their lowest package is ending up more expensive in the end doesn't mean, that we have to jump on the same train.

Westnet have done exactly that. Probably the most similar ISP to yourselves, no?
150/30 used to cost €45, customers on it are being moved (I think) to 500/50 with no price change.

limnam

AirBiscuit wrote: »

Westnet have done exactly that. Probably the most similar ISP to yourselves, no?
150/30 used to cost €45, customers on it are being moved (I think) to 500/50 with no price change.

I like the "no lag opening web pages" :pac:

KOR101

Okay, so my colleague is experiencing one big problem. He lives in an old stone house with two feet deep walls and is having problems getting wifi throughout the house.

This guy is not IT literate.

Is there a simple extender or repeater that would work well for him? Really simplicity is the key thing.

limnam

KOR101 wrote: »

Okay, so my colleague is experiencing one big problem. He lives in an old stone house with two feet deep walls and is having problems getting wifi throughout the house.

This guy is not IT literate.

Is there a simple extender or repeater that would work well for him? Really simplicity is the key thing.

If he can run a bit of cable I'd go for ubiquiti AP.

Airwire: MartinL

AirBiscuit wrote: »

Westnet have done exactly that. Probably the most similar ISP to yourselves, no?

No, you are actually entirely wrong there.

When it comes to OpenEIR based FTTH, very few providers are similar to Westnet.

Westnets pricing is based on the fact, that they only offer service in Mayo and bordering areas and that they are making a loss the first year. This has been discussed in this thread before and was confirmed by Paul.

Their model builds on customer loyality. They only break even in the second year of the subscription. And their model is not sustainable for a medium sized ISP on a national level.

Hence to anyone outside of Mayo or boundaries, they are not even an option.

We also offer our lowest SIRO offering at 45 EUR. No problem there.

We did not take the step to upgrade our 150 Mbit/s packages to 500 Mbit/s, because we don't see it as sustainable for the margin, that we get in return for the service.

KOR101

limnam wrote: »

If he can run a bit of cable I'd go for ubiquiti AP.

Fails the simplicity test.

limnam

KOR101 wrote: »

Fails the simplicity test.

Then TP-link powerline job.

KOR101

limnam wrote: »

Then TP-link powerline job.

Cheers, that looks simple enough for him.

slade_x

Fibre is now available a few kilometres outside of Tipperary Town now but still not available in parts of the town. Girlfriends family just had 150Mbit FTTH installed today.

Brand_New

slade_x wrote: »

Fibre is now available a few kilometres outside of Tipperary Town now but still not available in parts of the town. Girlfriends family just had 150Mbit FTTH installed today.

Yes that's how it is in the majority of the country. It makes perfect sense when you look into the motivation for the Eir rural FTTH rollout.

micksey1969

My contract is up with Digiweb at €40 a month, sky are now doing broadband for €30 a month for 12 months, i'm in the process of moving house and i've checked the new address and its saying 1000mbps is available from Eir. If i was to sign up with sky now can i get Eirs 1000mbps through sky? Ive checked open Eirs website Where to buy - FTTH and i dont see sky on the list.

cnocbui

slade_x wrote: »

Fibre is now available a few kilometres outside of Tipperary Town now but still not available in parts of the town. Girlfriends family just had 150Mbit FTTH installed today.

The rural FTTH scheme was about first upgrading the speed and experience for people who had years of poor speeds and no prospect of improvement with distance limited ADSL, not improving the speeds for people in towns who already had decent speeds.

Brand_New

cnocbui wrote: »

The rural FTTH scheme was about first upgrading the speed and experience for people who had years of poor speeds and no prospect of improvement with distance limited ADSL, not improving the speeds for people in towns who already had decent speeds.

It was about causing disruption to the NBP and capturing the low hanging fruit.

This is why many rural areas have access to FTTH while urban areas near by do not.

slade_x

cnocbui wrote: »

The rural FTTH scheme was about first upgrading the speed and experience for people who had years of poor speeds and no prospect of improvement with distance limited ADSL, not improving the speeds for people in towns who already had decent speeds.

The scheme was about providing those who didn't have broadband access previously without having to resort to wireless. Its not about speed its about connectivity. And im sure a lot of people around here would consider themselves among those "people who had years of poor speeds and no prospect of improvement" unless your on mainstreet where the fibre was originally ran years ago

Why invest (waste) massively more finances rolling out ADSL with rural dslams to those sparse areas when you could just rollout a fibre run for a fraction of the cost. It would cost exponentially more to try to extend ADSL into rural areas than what you could ever re claim from their subscriptions fees in their lifetimes

Their family has had to use three's wireless network which they have gotten a 15Mbit connection from over the last few years. which has a sync speed higher than my 10Mbit. they did get double my ping latency though.

For what I have to pay I could be on 1Gbit connection. Which is why it makes sense for the ISP who to prioritise. They would make less from the 500-1000 of us here giving us a superior connection for less than what we already pay for ADSL.

Anyone around me who wants broadband likely already has it by now, they have our subscription fees already. they didn't potentially have the 3 houses of which my girlfriends family's home is one and then a further kilometre up the road there's another 2 houses they can tap for a subscription with a few more small groupings of houses a further few kilometres apart. Cha-Ching

EletricMan

Hi guy's,

Recently got ftth, had the 150mbps installed. Long story short we had alot of drops and slow speed. So rang eir and they upgraded us to 500 Mbps and sent out a modem ( same as the one I already had).

Anyway now on the 5g network I am getting 300+ on my phone but back to my TVs that are wired directly I'm only getting 80ish. Surely I should be getting more than that for wired connections?

Johnboy1951

EletricMan wrote: »

Hi guy's,

Recently got ftth, had the 150mbps installed. Long story short we had alot of drops and slow speed. So rang eir and they upgraded us to 500 Mbps and sent out a modem ( same as the one I already had).

Anyway now on the 5g network I am getting 300+ on my phone but back to my TVs that are wired directly I'm only getting 80ish. Surely I should be getting more than that for wired connections?

Not if the TV has a theoretical max of 100 which seems likely.

EletricMan

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Not if the TV has a theoretical max of 100 which seems likely.

Thanks for that, just checked off the laptop wired connection and I'm getting 200. Didn't expect the TV have restrictions with speed as it's a brand new oled TV and it wasn't cheap.

Gunner3629

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Not if the TV has a theoretical max of 100 which seems likely.

Yeah, even my Amazon fire stick 4k is 100mpbs wired. Most companies go for the cheaper option - as opposed to 1Gbps - and arguably they're right cause no one really needs more than that to stream anything.

EletricMan

Gunner3629 wrote: »

Yeah, even my Amazon fire stick 4k is 100mpbs wired. Most companies go for the cheaper option - as opposed to 1Gbps - and arguably they're right cause no one really needs more than that to stream anything.

Just checked my firestick it's also wired but not the 4k one and it's only getting 28.

Gunner3629

EletricMan wrote: »

Just checked my firestick it's also wired but not the 4k one and it's only getting 28.

That's pretty low but still sufficient for most streaming tasks.

dam099

EletricMan wrote: »

Just checked my firestick it's also wired but not the 4k one and it's only getting 28.

How are you measuring? I have found a lot of the apps in the Firestick App Store are very inconsistent for measuring speeds.

KOR101

EletricMan wrote: »

Thanks for that, just checked off the laptop wired connection and I'm getting 200. Didn't expect the TV have restrictions with speed as it's a brand new oled TV and it wasn't cheap.

I may be way off on this but aren't most Blurays less than 40 mbps and 4K disks less than 80mbps.

cnocbui

EletricMan wrote: »

Hi guy's,

Recently got ftth, had the 150mbps installed. Long story short we had alot of drops and slow speed. So rang eir and they upgraded us to 500 Mbps and sent out a modem ( same as the one I already had).

Anyway now on the 5g network I am getting 300+ on my phone but back to my TVs that are wired directly I'm only getting 80ish. Surely I should be getting more than that for wired connections?

Perhaps it's the wiring. A US IT company tested a large number of CAT6 cables of various brands and found most didn't even meet the specs for CAT5.

dam099

KOR101 wrote: »

I may be way off on this but aren't most Blurays less than 40 mbps and 4K disks less than 80mbps.

I think the 4K discs can go to 144 Mbps but that would be over the HDMI interface (unless you are looking at 1:1 rips of a disc on a NAS or suchlike).

Best bitrates on streaming services which are more relevant to Ethernet throughput though are probably well within a 100Mbps port, Netflix is 15 Mbps, Apple & Amazon less clear but not thought to above 30-40Mbps

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/flatforums/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=12779

limnam

dam099 wrote: »

I think the 4K discs can go to 144 Mbps but that would be over the HDMI interface (unless you are looking at 1:1 rips of a disc on a NAS or suchlike).

Best bitrates on streaming services which are more relevant to Ethernet throughput though are probably well within a 100Mbps port, Netflix is 15 Mbps, Apple & Amazon less clear but not thought to above 30-40Mbps

https://www.flatpanelshd.com/flatforums/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=12779

Highest I've noticed is disney+ Their 4k stuff looks amazing and it averages about 30Mbps

antseanoifig

Currently with BBNet on a 150mb €50 p/m plan as I stuck with them once I moved from wireless to FTTH because I was always happy with service and responsiveness to any queries.

Contract is now up though. Sky offering 500mb at €30 p/m seems very tempting. Any known downsides to the Sky hub vs FritzBox. I've seen reports Sky hub only has two extra ports, which I could overcome with a switch but seems quite dated?

Secondly if one was using a Mag box for certain sports streaming services how likely are Sky as your ISP to block this?