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.
KOR101 wrote: » -it just doesn't add up politically.
KOR101 wrote: » Just back from a visit to Kerry. I think there is one thing that we're not giving proper weight to. People in rural Kerry think Eir is an abmismal joke when it come to providing broadband. They have zero credibility. Announcing that Eir has won both contracts -it just doesn't add up politically.
legocrazy505 wrote: » I despise Eir too but who else has got a credible chance of doing this rollout properly. Sure Siro could do something but they will be starting from scratch everywhere they go. Pretty much everyone who has had ****ty broadband thanks to Eir's infrastructure for the last decade and longer dislike Eir as much as Trump supporters dislike Hillary but ultimately they are unfortunately the only people who can get this sort of job done quickly. All we need to do is hold their backsides to the fire for the 25 years of the contract and ensure they don't stand around doing nothing for people like they've done nothing for houses like mine for years.
KOR101 wrote: » http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/cliff-taylor-ballybrophy-needs-broadband-not-railway-lines-1.2873714
oscarBravo wrote: And yet, not a single prescription in the article on how they could do that - or even any real suggestion that it realistically can be done any faster.
fergus1001 wrote: » By stop wasting public money trying to get votes by keeping a defunct train station open
oscarBravo wrote: That will make the NBP happen more quickly... how?
fergus1001 wrote: » If they focused their political parish pumping on the broadband problem instead of the train station or fixing the road If they realised that if they had proper broadband infrastructure in their constituencies then FDI and small business would come in and drive the investments to achieve ''fixing the road"
legocrazy505 wrote: » ... I mean when we had that storm in February a while back, our neighbour refused to let the ESB come in and get power back up for our area. ...
ItHurtsWhenIP wrote: » Are you sure about that? I thought the ESB have an open wayleave to access any land which their network is on, especially in the case of repair work, as fallen lines are a safety hazard.
ItHurtsWhenIP wrote: Are you sure about that? I thought the ESB have an open wayleave to access any land which their network is on, especially in the case of repair work, as fallen lines are a safety hazard.
wexfordman2 wrote: » http://m.independent.ie/business/technology/national-broadband-plan-will-fail-those-in-our-country-areas-35229984.html Outrageous article in technology section of today's independent, written by an imagine director, full of holes and misleading info and with no comments section. Absolutely appalling.
godskitchen wrote: » I just hope he has as little sway with the public and decision makers as he does with understanding how technology works.
Brian O'Donohoe is the commercial director of broadband provider Imagine
/\/ollog wrote: » Someone here write a counter article.
ED E wrote: » Do the indo publish letters to the editor?
marno21 wrote: » Who the **** approved this nonsense? It's a shambles and is only further fuelling the complete ignorance related to infrastructure amongst the general public in this country. I have had no resepct for this company in the past but this is just shameless stuff.
Technology Following from the above, there is a potential conflict between two considerations that the NBP must take into account: one is the SAG requirement for technology neutrality, and the other is the requirement that the investment be future-proof and scalable. It is our view that the latter requirement clearly trumps the former. While it’s theoretically possible to deliver services over wireless platforms that comply with the 30-down/6-up requirement to meet the definition of NGA, it’s abundantly clear that such platforms can’t offer a fraction of the scalability of a true fibre-optic network. Can a wireless network deliver next-generation broadband, if the definition of such is constrained to less than what’s commercially available in urban areas even today? Maybe. Can it deliver 50% annual growth year-on-year for the duration of a 20-year intervention? Not a chance.
It may be tempting to consider wireless technologies as an "easy answer" to the "last few percent" of premises. In our experience, the most remote premises (particularly in mountainous terrain) are, if anything, more difficult to deliver wireless services to. By way of illustration, we would point out that there are a significantly higher number of premises in the country without mobile phone coverage than there are without electricity. Apart from terrain, other considerations that pose challenges to wireless coverage are trees, wind farms, and the requirement to develop new wireless high sites (often in the face of intense local opposition). Finally, wireless technologies simply won't scale. Providing a wireless service to remote premises condemns them to second-class status when fibre-based products quickly overtake anything that can realistically be provided on a wireless network.
