Caps poll

E-Hub

these to be allot of difference in opionion over this, which i hope we can gut to what exavtly people feel on the subject,
sure we would all love low cost no cap broadband but thats not going to happen, so what will we acept

hmm doesnt seem to let me post a poll?

chernobyl

you will have to accept whatever eircom offer you.

Chorus have a service out there [powernet] with the same cap, but more resonably priced.

CAP's are inevitable as lots of DSL providers are doing that.

segadreamcast

I'd accept having no caps...and that probably will have happened by April 2002 after initial performance of i-stream has been thoroughly looked into...

Outside of that should have an 18G limit and should have a 6G limit...

That's what I think anyway...but I'm baffled as to why they really put caps on it...personally I think it's to con the customers out of more money :mad: it's not as if they don't make enough money already.

chernobyl

Originally posted by NoelRock
.but I'm baffled as to why they really put caps on it...personally I think it's to con the customers out of more money :mad: it's not as if they don't make enough money already.

the caps are there to stop the normal bandwidth useage by users.

if there were no caps then eircoms DSL ratio would never work, or we would never get the speeds DSL should provice.
you would get ppl gaming non stop and leeching non stop from ftps, bringing eircoms DSL to a ugly hault.


80% of users=20% of the bandwidth
20% of users=80% of the bandwidth

segadreamcast

Yes, but why the unbelievably strict caps...?

Or why can't we take example from Canada...if you repeatedly go over say 100gigs a day, you'll be warned...or penalised from using the service for anything from 1-24 hours. After three of these warnings you'll be banned from using the service and will get a 25-75% refund.

Why couldn't Eircom adopt this or a similar line of service?

dahamsta

Outside of that should have an 18G limit and should have a 6G limit...[/B]

For £93.56 a month? No offense, but are you out of your freakin mind? I think people are tending to bow to Eircon's dictation here, and worse, Eircon are behind them. I think it's about time someone put things in perpective, so people can be crystal clear about what Eircon are "offering" us here. These details and figures are taken from the BTopenworld website, and the Eircom residential website, for equivalent products. I haven't included line rental because I'm not sure if that's part of BT's charges (it is for Eircon). All prices are in Irish punts, converted on XE.net:

British Telecom home 500

Hardware: £000.00?
Installation: £188.77
Monthly: £050.33

Eircon i-Scream Solo

Hardware: £137.04 (USB) OR £189.02 (Ethernet)
Installation: £118.13
Monthly: £093.56

Now, the installation fee for BT is higher, fair enough. But there's no mention of equipment purchase on the BT website - the equipment remains their property and they reserve the right to take it back when the contract terminates. Further, the prices quoted for the equipment by Eircon are almost certainly well above the market price.

Eircom mention "download allowances" on their website - the actual limits are still subject to much speculation, but there's no doubt they will be low - however there are no mentions of this on the BT website. Most importantly though, the monthly price for the Eircom product is almost double (1.86x to be precise) the BT price.

People need to get over this "if Eircom lose/raise the caps or lower the price" thing. Both are absolutely unacceptable. The price needs to come down drastically, and the caps need to be either raised substantially or removed altogether. These products and their pricess are absolutely disgraceful.

adam

segadreamcast

Yeah but they would be a vast improvement over the 3 and 4 Gig we're being offered now...plus, we'll never have it as good as the UK...there'll always be a far bigger and more lucrative market for telecommunications companies there.

segadreamcast

I do agree though, I want[/b[ the caps to be dropped and the price to be significantly lowered...but we hardly ever get exacly what we want from eircom...but that won't stop us fighting for it, eh? ^_^

dahamsta

[NoelRock got there before me.]

Straker

Originally posted by NoelRock
Yes, but why the unbelievably strict caps...?

Or why can't we take example from Canada...if you repeatedly go over say 100gigs a day, you'll be warned...or penalised from using the service for anything from 1-24 hours. After three of these warnings you'll be banned from using the service and will get a 25-75% refund.

Why couldn't Eircom adopt this or a similar line of service?

If I can't even get a letter from them confirmed that they sent me three bills (in error) for a service I haven't suscribed to... there's absolutely no chance in hell of €ircon adopting your suggestions.

E-Hub

Originally posted by chernobyl




the caps are there to stop the normal bandwidth useage by users.

if there were no caps then eircoms DSL ratio would never work, or we would never get the speeds DSL should provice.
you would get ppl gaming non stop and leeching non stop from ftps, bringing eircoms DSL to a ugly hault.


80% of users=20% of the bandwidth
20% of users=80% of the bandwidth

theres ways a means to prevent this, serveral infact. please less not pretend the cap is for anything else but to make money, its like saying the 56k per minute charge are to stop people going on the internet all day everyday,

infact eircom actually did claim that the reason why we need local call charges is because people would ring someone up and never hang up.

This type of logic does my head in.

NoelRock you have been brian washed, let me put it into perspective for you, on an adsl line you can download, in terroy about 200gigs a month taking slow downs into account.

so what you saying is someone should be capped at a mere 6% of capacity, it just doesnt sound right does it?

segadreamcast

6%...it doesn't sound right because, put simply, it isn't right....but Eircom will probably do worse than 18G anyway (last I heard it was going to be 4G on their multi...even worse than what I said)...:eek:

E-Hub

what we need is a united front, something we can take to eircom and say listen, dont BS us, its a money making racket. theres one hundread different ways to prevent bandwidth abuse and some are even alot better then a per mb charge.
its just the indirection of it all were all running around like headless chickens, with some pople say a higher cap is an idea without and figure for that,

alot of ifs and buts, if the cap was higher, if the price was lower, if i had a millions pounds

JANER

Ffs i am sick of these Eircom apoligists
3 gis and £100 a month is a complete and utter rip off
i am a games player who is online so much that i shudder to think what my bill will be....isdn costs me a pk as it is
get a ****ing grip and relise what a shower of cvnts eircom really are:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Whoeverthehell

Someone mentioned Kingston ADSL being capped at 700MB per day, well that's 20.51GB per month. So if you're reading Eircom, we'd settle for 20.51GB per month

Actually I'd settle for 10GB per month, but I want the highest cap I can get.

Kristok

I find the fact that the cap is so low amazing. Basically Eircom are not going to loose a penny/cent by forcing such a low cap. 3gb can easilly be downloaded on a normal phone line for around the same price as you would be paying for adsl per month. In fact because your connection will be on more it means that you will use it far more which will mean that for heavy users like myself its just not even remotly worth investing in.

If the cap where more like 1gb per day then that would stop excessive use BUT would still make it affordable to use. I cant understand why a cap is needed at all considering that countries like the Nederlands can have a none capped service for as little as 20 pounds in some cases and the internet usage in that country is massive.

The cap needs to be removed or made much higher because the way it is now it is really a slap in the face to everyone whos been waiting for adsl for as long as I have. The price is going to be high but the current price per mb is silly.

chernobyl

Originally posted by JANER

get a ****ing grip and relise what a shower of cvnts eircom really are:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

i think the magority do realise this by 80% saying no to DSL in its current offering.
i do sometimes wonder if Eircom ever do care about the customer, or just care enough to constantly pi$$ us off.
for shame eircom, for shame.

Fergus2

Any cap means a per-megabyte charged connection, and you're just arguing over how many megs you have to block-buy in advance. If eircom want to charge by the megabyte, rent the line for 20 quid a month and do that. And wholesale the line for 10 quid a month to other ISPs.

Per-megabyte charging has no basis in their supply costs, just like per-minute phone charging has no justification either. This is an out and out marketing con. The capacity argument is rubbish. One optic fibre can carry all the phone calls for Ireland and UK put together. Telecom technology has been advancing as fast or faster than PC technology over the last 30 years, yet eircom have steadfastly refused to adjust their pricing until absolutely forced to do so. Per-minute voice call charging and the joke of 'long distance' within Ireland belongs in the days of human operators and manual telephone exchanges.

Capping is an excuse for unjustified per-meg charges dressed up as a defence of the average DSL user to not have their bandwidth hogged away from them by intense users. As has been stated, this would be unusual anyway, and the offending user can be throttled/temporarily restricted as required. Also, this assumes the ISP is bandwidth starved. Maybe with a mom-and-pop ISP in the US you could believe this, but that's all garbage coming from eircom - these guys own 40% of the capacity of the global crossing backbone to the US.

chernobyl

the capping is here to stay guys.
it is pointless getting annoyed about it.
when magor DSL providers start to introduce this, everyone will follow suit.
caps are not nice, but they will stay, its tough.
if you cant accept it, then DSL is not for you.
there is tw way satellite that is not capped but obviously not for the gamers.

Whoeverthehell

If they offer 512/128 with a 10GB cap for £50 I'll take it, I imagine everyone else here would too, even if it is 5% of the potential capasity. Personally I don't need to download 6286MB a day.

Fergus2

chernobyl, you sound like you would have been telling us the SNL flat-rate was never going to happen back before it was introduced. You're talking here about a pricing policy, not an irrefutable limitation on the cost of supply. I for one do not agree with you, and I will only concede you are correct when you show me that I and everyone else is convinced of what you say.

chernobyl

Originally posted by Fergus2
chernobyl, you sound like you would have been telling us the SNL flat-rate was never going to happen back before it was introduced.

absolutely, i could have told Esat years ago that they would not have wholesale access to the Eircom network by now.

in any other country in this world which scomes first

FRIACO or DSL?

this is ireland, "we dont do" whats right, Ericom do whats right for them.

Fergus2

We must continue to expose this rip-off on both the voice and DSL fronts and make it understood to as wide an audience as possible.

I think even the half a million or so (soon-to-be-former) eircom shareholders, now that they are being forced to sell up at a disasterous loss, might even be interested in how their fleecing by this national embarrassment of a company will be continuing on a daily basis.

kamobe

"..if you cant accept it, then DSL is not for you."

I don't like that. Eircom are asses, they're bigger then we are, so we should step aside and let them walk on us? Take it like a "man"?

No way. It's like they aren't even trying to please ANYONE. Buisnesses, home users alike. Their service suits NO ONE. There's no need for a cap at all.

I refuse to keel over and accept it.

chernobyl

Originally posted by kamobe
It's like they aren't even trying to please ANYONE. Buisnesses, home users alike. Their service suits NO ONE.

how many times does it have to be said.....this is what eircoms goal is.
if no one wants DSL, then they dont need to give Esat wholesale access to the network for DSL or standard 56k.[FRIACO] as there is no demand.

Fergus2

Originally posted by chernobyl
how many times does it have to be said.....this is what eircoms goal is.
if no one wants DSL, then they dont need to give Esat wholesale access to the network for DSL or standard 56k.[FRIACO] as there is no demand.

I don't agree. There is no regulation that forced Eircom to rollout DSL, only to offer it wholesale if they do. Eircom would not spend (they say) 100 million rolling out a service so they could then withdraw it.

What they want to do like all the other cynical former-monopoly telcos is sell DSL at as high a price as the market will bear while at the same time trying to prevent any competition by charging a ridiculously high 'wholesale' price.