Is rural broadband a real issue?

lawred2 · 14-05-2016 11:08AM

The Sidewards Man wrote: »

All this jazz about rural broadband and no one seems to be complaining of lack of phone coverage. How much speed do ye want, gone of the days of a 5 speed box its 6 speed now and 7 if it were available.
Can this be explained, is it for porn or major Facebook/twitter machine updates it is needed?

Yes. It's a huge deal.

Corkblowin · 14-05-2016 11:14AM

omahaid wrote: »

You'd be tired of the culchies demanding stuff

"I want fibre to the door"
"Why doesn't this parish have a hospital?"
"We should have a special drivers licence for drink driving"
"I built my house on a flood plain, where are my flood defenses?"
"Wheres my motorway to the mart?"

If you live in the arse end of no where in a muck mansion then tough.

Its not just the rural areas - I live and work part-time in a medium sized west cork town - not only is broadband crap but I often have no mobile signal in my kitchen (esp since 3 takeover) - we can't have people peppering the countryside with one-offs, but by abandoning rural towns you're not giving the incentive to move into areas where services can be provided more efficiently.

Thelomen Toblackai · 14-05-2016 11:15AM

Eircom is the problem. Fine when they can stick up phone cables and charge extortionate amounts for line rental and sit on their arses. But when it comes to following through on even doing basic upgrades to support better connections in rural areas they just don't bother.

I can't get Eircom broadband because someone else on the same line already has it. They refuse to upgrade the line and actually offered me a dial up package.

There's wireless providers offering better speeds and better priced phone packages than them. Eircom are incompetence personified and should be dismantled for the protection of future technological advancement of the country.

The Randy Riverbeast · 14-05-2016 12:12PM

Rural broadband? It isn't an issue. There should be more work done to expand fibre to more towns but some people need to understand that you bought a house away from everyone else so you'll be the last to get this kind of thing and by the time you do it will be something else you're after.

ednwireland · 14-05-2016 12:18PM

3mb 2 miles from a town. Struggle to do IT support work. And eurosport player basically buffers all the time this year since it wa upgraded.
Mind one of the directors in Kent village only has 2mb

14-05-2016 12:55PM

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

and by the time you do it will be something else you're after.

It's the opposite actually, rural areas are going to have far superior broadband when they eventually get it as they will have fibre to the home or very close to it and have speeds well in excess of what is available now in cities. As I said earlier it's a blank canvas and rural areas will get close to state of the art when they get it, it also will be easy to upgrade as once the fibre is in you only need to upgrade at the providers end and the users end everything in the middle will be good for generations. It's very difficult to upgrade urban areas due to the amount of work involved so they will be over taken. The problem is the time it's taking to roll out these service to rural areas.

Also why shouldn't a house in the middle of nowhere be entitled to the same broadband service as a town. Pure nonsense you hear from townies.

RobertKK · 14-05-2016 12:59PM

I live in the rural north Kilkenny hills.
7 miles from Kilkenny city.

I have to use a dongle for my broadband, I get 4G, and the speed varies from 15mb/s to 27mb/s.

Big difference to the days of taking near 40 minutes to download a 8mb file on dial up.

newacc2015 · 14-05-2016 01:10PM

maudgonner wrote: »

It's not my business. The company own the building, so they're unlikely to up sticks. And we're a mile away from our biggest client.

And the countryside doesn't have to just be for cows. If we all move to the cities you'll be moaning about traffic or house prices or something else.

So the tax payer should have to pick up the tab for a company choosing to locate in the middle of nowhere? It is possible to put broadband in every home/business, but it is a massive expense to the tax payer that is not needed in most peoples opinion. That money could be better spent on education or upgrading a motorway that will benefit tens of thousands of people.

If you want 3 phase ESB or high speed broadband and you cant get it in parts of Dublin. You are told tough, move to an area with it. If you dont have broadband in the middle of nowhere in Ireland ( I serious doubt Germany or the UK would have broadband in remote areas either). That whole argument is Dublin is attacking rural Ireland or Dublin doesnt care about rural Ireland.

Why should there be a double standard for rural Ireland?

Rural Ireland doesnt have broadband, as they refuse to live in villages. Dubliners aren't expecting rural Ireland to live in mega cities. It would be better if they choose to live in clusters of 20-100 houses to provide services rather than living miles apart from each other. Rural Ireland is still building all over the place like it is the 1800's, but expecting services like its 2016. It is extremely expensive to provide ESB, roads and phone services when people live all over the place

The Sidewards Man · 14-05-2016 01:12PM

Keep the fibre for the dietary requirements.

RobertKK · 14-05-2016 01:33PM

Fibre broadband will be delivered to all in time, it is as essential as the rural electrification program was.

Discodog · 14-05-2016 02:16PM

smash wrote: »

Back up there gonzo... You can get 4G across most of the country now. A 4G dongle is perfectly capable of providing a very good internet connection. It might not be UPC 300mb but you can even stream Netflix HD on 4G

Take a look at the Three forum here. A lot of people are getting slower speeds on 4g that they were on 3g. Three had to abandon plans to charge for it.

Nailz · 15-05-2016 12:00PM

Discodog wrote: »

Take a look at the Three forum here. A lot of people are getting slower speeds on 4g that they were on 3g. Three had to abandon plans to charge for it.

Not to mention all cellular providers cap the data on their packages to wind up a post-cap premium.

Capt'n Midnight · 15-05-2016 12:28PM

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

It's not sustainable to wire every shack in the country to the good internet.

Cost of doing that was about 2 billion.
About the same ballpark as was stripped stripped out of Eircom over the years.
Just over twice what was paid for the M50 toll bridge buyout, and a small fraction of what the NRA have spent overall on 'infrastructure'. It's arguable that providing better comms might have been a better way of reducing the need for extra commuter roads.

Capt'n Midnight · 15-05-2016 12:42PM

Discodog wrote: »

Take a look at the Three forum here. A lot of people are getting slower speeds on 4g that they were on 3g. Three had to abandon plans to charge for it.

It has exactly the same problem as Fibre to the cab. Great if you are close, otherwise it's not much better than the previous tech.

It also has the time slice problem. If I'm further away and only getting a tenth the speed you are then I'll hog ten times as much time as you to download the same file because the bandwidth is shared.

Shenshen · 15-05-2016 12:55PM

Alistair Fast Quarterfinal wrote: »

Business and factories etc should be moving to the countryside not the other way around also new businesses should be heavily incentivised to set up in rural locations. It's far better for people working there to have no traffic, cheaper housing and just a more relaxing scenario. Also peope can stay living where they are from and not be forced to move to cities etc.

Won't that just massively increase traffic on a road infrastructure that in many places alreay struggles to cope, not to mention poor to non-existing public transport and other services?
I always figured that the unavailability of decent broadband is just one symptom of a generally under-developped countryside. Tackling one aspect only without also looking at the other problems is not going to solve the problem.

Shenshen · 15-05-2016 01:00PM

newacc2015 wrote: »

If you want 3 phase ESB or high speed broadband and you cant get it in parts of Dublin. You are told tough, move to an area with it. If you dont have broadband in the middle of nowhere in Ireland ( I serious doubt Germany or the UK would have broadband in remote areas either). That whole argument is Dublin is attacking rural Ireland or Dublin doesnt care about rural Ireland.

Why should there be a double standard for rural Ireland?

Rural Ireland doesnt have broadband, as they refuse to live in villages. Dubliners aren't expecting rural Ireland to live in mega cities. It would be better if they choose to live in clusters of 20-100 houses to provide services rather than living miles apart from each other. Rural Ireland is still building all over the place like it is the 1800's, but expecting services like its 2016. It is extremely expensive to provide ESB, roads and phone services when people live all over the place

Germany has hit on a good solution - if you live more than a certain distsance out from the next village and want any kind of services connected to your house (and I mean any - water, sewage, electricity, phone, broadband, cable TV, etc.) you can have that. But you will have to pay fully to have them brought out to you.
Within the village/town/city, you'll pay a reduced rate for first installations.

Ronald Wilson Reagan · 15-05-2016 01:01PM

The deregulated free market is great, good to see FG are doing everything to bring such a enlighted ideology to all sectors of Irish life. For far too long the commie unionist controlled semi states provided somewhat decent infrastructure and services.

alta stare · 15-05-2016 01:03PM

Yes rural broadband is an issue I say this as I wait patiently for the page to load fully......2mb connection. Bloody annoying.

Little CuChulainn · 15-05-2016 01:11PM

The real issue is that Eir own the national network and only expand into an area when they are ready to service it. Aside from this being uncompetitive practice, it is a travesty that our national communication network belongs to a for profit company.

15-05-2016 04:07PM

I always look at this topic with interest.

I have a fair few family members in rural areas. One is stuck with Three's 3G service, another is stuck with 6Mb fixed wireless, and my parents have 2Mb fixed wireless.

As much as I'd love to see them get faster services, I just can't see how it would be viable via a wired connection. VDSL is useless after 2km (and even at that it's 7Mb so hardly ground breaking). My parents' local exchange was never even enabled for ADSL because Eircom said it was unviable. They're even too far out for the FTTH rollout, the OpenEir map shows the fibre terminating about 800m from the house. However they do have a 4G signal from Vodafone so I might be able to do something for them.

No problems for me personally, sitting here in Dublin with a 100Mb VDSL line and previously had 360Mb Virgin Media (when it worked!). :pac:

NiallBoo · 15-05-2016 04:15PM

It baffles me how derided planning is in this country.

When people choose to build outside of towns they have to realise that there are huge costs associated with it.

Instead we ignore it, move to the middle of nowhere and expect everyone else to pick up a tab that we don't even know is being paid.

Titzon Toast · 15-05-2016 04:16PM

Pagliuca wrote: »

What an incredibly ignorant comment.

The country doesn't revolve around Dublin.

He never said that it did, but don't let that stop you having a chip on your old shoulder.

Little CuChulainn · 15-05-2016 04:35PM

NiallBoo wrote: »

It baffles me how derided planning is in this country.

When people choose to build outside of towns they have to realise that there are huge costs associated with it.

Instead we ignore it, move to the middle of nowhere and expect everyone else to pick up a tab that we don't even know is being paid.

It's not just lonely country farms that dont have access. Villages and towns across the country are on terrible service too.

NiallBoo · 15-05-2016 04:43PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

It's not just lonely country farms that dont have access. Villages and towns across the country are on terrible service too.

Very few "lonely country farms" these days. You can't drive more than a few hundred metres in even the remotest place without finding a house, the vast majority aren't farms.

If these people chose to live in towns or villages then the villages would have enough customers enough to economically justify broadband connections and there wouldn't be a problem.

Dirty Dingus McGee · 15-05-2016 06:45PM

NiallBoo wrote: »

It baffles me how derided planning is in this country.

When people choose to build outside of towns they have to realise that there are huge costs associated with it.

Instead we ignore it, move to the middle of nowhere and expect everyone else to pick up a tab that we don't even know is being paid.

I'm 3/4 of a mile from a decent sized village/town and I can't get proper broadband that I wanted from Vodafone we have too use a pay as you use dongle which is far too expensive.

The vast majority of rural dwellers don't actually live in the back of beyond they just live on the outskirts of already established village and towns.

NiallBoo · 15-05-2016 07:06PM

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

The vast majority of rural dwellers don't actually live in the back of beyond they just live on the outskirts of already established village and towns.

Houses are built anywhere and everywhere in a haphazard fashion.
While I think you're factually incorrect if your suggesting that the vast majority of rural dwellers live within 1-2 k of towns, certainly a lot do. What you're talking about is a problem caused by bad urban planning, which is the depressing standard in Ireland.

These are very closely related problems which add up to make it difficult and painfully expensive to have good infrastructure and services.

15-05-2016 08:10PM

Karsini wrote: »

They're even too far out for the FTTH rollout, the OpenEir map shows the fibre terminating about 800m from the house.

They aren't too far, Eir just aren't doing what they should be and running the fibre as far as their house.

NiallBoo wrote: »

It baffles me how derided planning is in this country.

When people choose to build outside of towns they have to realise that there are huge costs associated with it.

Instead we ignore it, move to the middle of nowhere and expect everyone else to pick up a tab that we don't even know is being paid.

People should not have to live in cities or towns to expect good services such as high speed broadband. Again you are obvious a biased townie. Not everyone wants to be living in a tight space with neighbours all around and all the noise etc that goes with it. Also farms need high speed broadband nowadays so running the fibres to farms means getting all those imbetween also. These people all pay taxes too and are entitled to be provided with the same service as anyone in a town or city.

MyPeopleDrankTheSoup · 15-05-2016 08:34PM

so this FTTH that is planned for rural houses, if i understand correctly, every copper line into a rural house has to be replaced with fibre? that will take fecking ages and a load of messing about, for every household!

but what if it's not eircom? some new company has to lay fibre in the road, dig up your driveway, drill a new hole in your house to bring in the new fibre? it all sounds very expensive and messy. the €500m the state is promising doesn't sound like it will make much of a dent

Venom · 15-05-2016 09:12PM

georgiecasey wrote: »

so this FTTH that is planned for rural houses, if i understand correctly, every copper line into a rural house has to be replaced with fibre? that will take fecking ages and a load of messing about, for every household!

but what if it's not eircom? some new company has to lay fibre in the road, dig up your driveway, drill a new hole in your house to bring in the new fibre? it all sounds very expensive and messy. the €500m the state is promising doesn't sound like it will make much of a dent

Liberty holdings/UPC/Virgin Media spent over €400m upgrading there already existing network in just in certain parts of Dublin a few years back so FTTH is not going to get much done with just €500m.

That's not even taking into account the folks who will complain the poles/wires are destroying the look of the environment and block it via legal means or the asshats who refuse to allow the lines to cross their property or demand insane money for the privilege.

NiallBoo · 15-05-2016 09:13PM

Alistair Fast Quarterfinal wrote: »

Not everyone wants to be living in a tight space with neighbours all around and all the noise etc that goes with it.

That's your decision, but you should expect to pay for it...

Alistair Fast Quarterfinal wrote: »

People should not have to live in cities or towns to expect good services such as high speed broadband.

I'm sure if people were prepared to pay the actual cost of supplying the line then it wouldn't be a problem...no?
You don't have a right to get everything just the way you want it, there has to be a compromise somewhere.

Alistair Fast Quarterfinal wrote: »

...These people all pay taxes too and are entitled to be provided with the same service as anyone in a town or city

Motorway to your front door too? If you think about it, the pothole strewn road outside you house costs more per user than a motorway. The same works for broadband. You're not being ignored and the phone company has nothing against you, it just costs a hell of a lot of money that you're not prepared to pay.

Alistair Fast Quarterfinal wrote: »

Also farms need high speed broadband nowadays so running the fibres to farms means getting all those in between also.

You mean farm dwellings or the farms?
I know this might sound odd...but farmers shouldn't live on their farms. If you take the standard family farm with spouse and kids, you'd have a lot less travel if the farmer travelled to work and family was near school/services etc. instead of the other way round. You'd also have all of the advantages of living near others.

Farms themselves, if needed (I imagine something like a video feed for calving season would be handy) can be serviced more practically with satellite broadband.

Alistair Fast Quarterfinal wrote: »

Again you are obvious a biased townie.

Am I now? News to me.
You know, it's possible to be in favour of something because it makes sense overall, not just because it suits you.

Lastly - isn't it obvious that the whole thing is pointless anyway? Before these lines are even installed they'll already be out-of-date. Think about your internet speed five, ten years ago...would that service even be able to load a page properly now, let alone use netflix?

Is rural broadband a real issue?

Comments