ADSL is not 'THAT' expensive!

SkepticOne

Man walks into a bar to by a pint of lager.

Man: "I'll have a pint of Lager. How much is it?"
Barman: "£8"
Man: "That seems a bit steep."
Barman: "Well, you see this is 'business' lager. At some unspecified future time we may introduce a 'residential' version.
Man: "Since you are the only pub in town and I'm thirsty, I'll get it."
Barman: "Here you are. That'll be £9.60 please."
Man: "What? I thought it was £8"
Barman: "I said it was 'business' lager. It is normal to quote prices ex VAT when selling business products."
Man: "Why didn't you say 'ex VAT' when you were quoting the price?"
Barman: "Do you want it or not?"

It's funny because it's true.

kamobe

"ADSL is not 'THAT' expensive! "

Yes it is.

Pugsley

Im on 08002go and i pay £9:99 p/m and £40 p/m for my ISDN.
And when ADSL comes out here (June or sumit) it will cost £150 installation and £40 p/m and no call charges...so after i pay the installation im SAVING money by geting ADSL, but i live in the north so i guess that doesnt really count,but thats what its like up here compared to what eircom are ripping you of with.

flamegrill

All we can hope/wish for is for the role out of ADSL to go ahead and that other isps come in and out bid eircom (not likey) and then we can all go home happy.

http://eircom.dahomelands.net , no more excuses eircom!

Carnate

That has to be the best frontpage for a site i have seen, and the song..arrgh my arse is so sore from laughing(and trying to sing the lyrics to the "i will survive")


Yah just made my morning..

ps i agree.. but what can we do?

tHE vAGGABOND

3gb would last me about two nights if I was on an unmetered service

CT - no ISP wants custom like that..

They dont want 5% of thier customers taking up all their bandwith..

Just like Esat did not want that and therefore kicked of all the heavy users

Balfa

Originally posted by tHE vAGGABOND

(ISDN) Rental is just under £60 per month.uses the net.

I think you're forgetting something. You don't get monthly phonebills, you get a phonebill every two months. ISDN is £30 per month, and you can cut all your phonebills in half and THEN you have the monthly charge. In which case, you're actually CHEAPER with ISDN. Which, i'd say, would put you in the light user bracket :P

Boston

Originally posted by tHE vAGGABOND
CT - no ISP wants custom like that..

They dont want 5% of thier customers taking up all their bandwith..

Just like Esat did not want that and therefore kicked of all the heavy users

Now your on to some think else, your saying a cap is to protect the customers, to maintain a high QoS, if eircom wanted that then they wouldn’t split a 1mb pipe up 24 ways, you turely are brainwashed.

Allso its impostable for 5% of the user to take all the bandwidth, you would need at least 20% of them to do that, and that’s if you fill all 24 places on each pipe, at £90 a month, that’s just over 27 thousand a a year , so I think they are well covered for bandwidth costs, and then another per/mb charge.

Urban Weigl

Originally posted by tHE vAGGABOND
CT - no ISP wants custom like that..

They dont want 5% of thier customers taking up all their bandwith..

Just like Esat did not want that and therefore kicked of all the heavy users

The reason why Esat cut off the heaviest users of their service is not because of bandwidth usage, it's because they had to pay Eircom BY THE SECOND interconnect rates. Furthermore, when buying bandwidth in bulk, each gigabyte costs just pennies. So the fact is that a big ISP could not care less whether a user uses 1 or 10 gigabytes per month. If it were any different, ADSL in other countries such as Germany and the US would all be capped. They're not.

R. Daneel Olivaw

Originally posted by Urban Weigl


The reason why Esat cut off the heaviest users of their service is not because of bandwidth usage, it's because they had to pay Eircom BY THE SECOND interconnect rates. Furthermore, when buying bandwidth in bulk, each gigabyte costs just pennies. So the fact is that a big ISP could not care less whether a user uses 1 or 10 gigabytes per month. If it were any different, ADSL in other countries such as Germany and the US would all be capped. They're not.

NTL charge a flat £50/month for their cable internet service, and I see their Irish website is updated and says it is available in certain areas of West Dublin. There is no extra cost or cap, so I presume if they can pay for the bandwidth for the 30,000 homes that can get it at £50 a month, so can Eircom, given that NTL spent far less upgrading only a part of the network, and Eircom have been fudging around for years now. That's a big reason why the cap is ridiculous, given that another Irish-based company can avoid it.

Also, the Waterford-based Cablesurf doesn't have a cap either, or else I just can't find any mention of it.

Does anyone have an idea about how much bandwidth does a typical month on broadband use?

ando

Originally posted by R. Daneel Olivaw
Does anyone have an idea about how much bandwidth does a typical month on broadband use?

I have a program counting the bandwidth going through my 56k. Now most of my time online is playing games, which is like downloading at 4KBps. After 6 hours, 71MBs have passed through the modem (UP and DOWN stream).

I guess with adsl, at around 15 times the speed.... 71*15=1065 MB

So for 6hours on adsl, you get 1065 MB. ****, that means with the 3GB limit, I only get less than 18Hrs a month downloading with adsl... My god, i didnt realise till now how $hit the 3GB limit is...
If I'm right, that means, i am limited to using the service for 1.6hrs a day ?

My question is, does the 3GB limit include Upstream ?

Carnate

NTL charge a flat £50/month for their cable internet service, and I see their Irish website is updated and says it is available in certain areas of West Dublin.

ok Only Tallaght got the NTL service, and thats all that is going to get it, i rang ntl and enquired and got a long line of bull**** from the person on the other end.. basicly what happened is this "we got shafted by users staying on 24/7 so we are now waiting for the digital service to come on stream"

Looking thru the company crap its like this, they gave Tallaght 24/7 access as a test area,it was taken by those users that they really ment 24/7.. and the system went tits up and they realised 2 late that they were losing money,with the usage and the upgrading of lines and digging up the roads to lay pipes and cables they found their profit was going down the drain.

If yah want to find out the company line ring NTL a few times and see how many different stories you will get..

Bottom line here is GREED!
Nothing more nothing less!
Nuff Said!

Boston

Originally posted by Carnate


ok Only Tallaght got the NTL service, and thats all that is going to get it, i rang ntl and enquired and got a long line of bull**** from the person on the other end.. basicly what happened is this "we got shafted by users staying on 24/7 so we are now waiting for the digital service to come on stream"

Looking thru the company crap its like this, they gave Tallaght 24/7 access as a test area,it was taken by those users that they really ment 24/7.. and the system went tits up and they realised 2 late that they were losing money,with the usage and the upgrading of lines and digging up the roads to lay pipes and cables they found their profit was going down the drain.

If yah want to find out the company line ring NTL a few times and see how many different stories you will get..

Bottom line here is GREED!
Nothing more nothing less!
Nuff Said!

That’s not what happened, and I wouldn’t listen to Ntl sales staff,
What happened was, they releasted in a low demand area, it never took off, it cost them millions more then they thought because the old cablelink network was worse then they imagined, it was taken far to long to roll out both services, to protect their licence they stopped broadband, the odtr didn’t make broadband a condition and the arse fell out of the telecoms sector. Don’t dare blame the customer for this mess,

SkepticOne

Originally posted by «Bo§ton»
That?s not what happened, and I wouldn?t listen to Ntl sales staff,
What happened was, they releasted in a low demand area, it never took off, it cost them millions more then they thought because the old cablelink network was worse then they imagined, it was taken far to long to roll out both services, to protect their licence they stopped broadband, the odtr didn?t make broadband a condition and the arse fell out of the telecoms sector. Don?t dare blame the customer for this mess,

In addition to the financial pressure which caused them to slow down their upgrading to two-way services, they still had the requirement to provide "digital services" (digital TV) to 110,000 homes. The way they chose to do this was run a basic digital TV service over those bits of the one-way network that could handle it. A lot of the network is very old and this is being left to a later stage.

They still have to provide digital TV to the whole of their franchise areas eventually and the hope is that they will go the whole hog and upgrade to two-way thus providing competition to Eircom. In the UK they have been able to take away about 40% of business from BT in the areas where they operate.

While they were rolling two-way cable in Tallaght, they never launched a digital TV service. This is only being done now possibly to comply with licence requirements. This would indicate to me that digital TV was never really a priority with NTL, but rather that they wanted a piece of the telecommunications market.

Boston

they only rolled it out to protect their analog service,

Btw i havent met anybody with this new go digital service, the day it was meant to be launched they were around testing out my area. This has allso gone very off topic so we probably should stop talking about NTL.

disConnected

Originally posted by tHE vAGGABOND
nope - god gifted us all with free will

Well, and some of us with a stack-load of disposable cash (to throw at monopolistic companies)...

gintyc

Re: ADSL is not 'THAT' expensive!

quote:

---

Originally posted by tHE vAGGABOND

Connection fee - £100, £78 per month

---

Wrong.
]

No Your wrong, he was nearly it is 99.00 Euros or 77.97 for "i-stream solo"

gintyc

"If ADSL is to be a success it needs to be cheaper to appeal to more casual users who want the speed." - Kevin

Eircom says it will "appeal to more casual users". But first it will "appeal" to Business and hardcore internet.

popinfresh

gintyc, I hope you're right, but does that not seem a bit bítchy on Eircoms part...
Thet are using adsl as aramdsom to get our money

SkepticOne

Originally posted by gintyc
No Your wrong, he was nearly it is 99.00 Euros or 77.97 for "i-stream solo"

Plus VAT @ 20% = £93.56

neverhappen

From the register...


http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/22/21870.html


a snippet....

---

E-minister calls for lower broadband prices
By Tim Richardson
Posted: 25/09/2001 at 15:56 GMT

The elusive E-Commerce Minister Douglas Alexander today called on the telecoms and Internet industry to cut prices and help stimulate demand for broadband.

In particular, he singled out BT to "exploit (its broadband) investment more aggressively" in a bid to get Broadband Britain on track.

He said that BT should follow the cable companies' lead and set "fair prices" for broadband.

---

So government in the UK are still pushing BT to lower their prices, both retail and wholesale. Why is the government of the 'e-hub of Europe' so disinterested in broadband here ?

dahamsta

Actually, there were two facts in that story that struck me as much more interesting, even maddening:

1) (Quoting Douglas Alexander) "60 per cent of all households, some 13 million homes, are now connected to a BT ADSL enabled exchange"

That's 13 million *homes* now, not 13 million people. 60% coverage. What have we got? A dozen exchanges in Dublin, a few in Ennis, and maybe another couple scattered around the country. 13 million people. That's ~3.5 times the population of Ireland.

2) (Quoting Tim Richardson) "so that the 180 resellers of BT's ADSL services can help drive the market."

One Hundred And Eighty resellers of BT's ADSL service they've got. And we don't even have pricing.

M'lud, the defense rests.

adam

tHE vAGGABOND

they have been doing it for a bit longer than we have tho. Blame that on the government or whoever..

its not like Eircom and BT started on the same day, and now Eircom are gazillions of people behind.

Plus, Douglas Alexander is no man to take as gospel. The man is only just computer litterate and has the job as he is a buddy of Gordon Brown.

dahamsta

they have been doing it for a bit longer than we have tho. Blame that on the government or whoever.. its not like Eircom and BT started on the same day, and now Eircom are gazillions of people behind.

How far back into history do we have to go? Eircom started "trialling" DSL four years ago. Ennis has had DSL for that long, and so have many, many Eircom employees and other people in the telecommunications industry. Ultimately, BT and Eircom could have started on the same day, but Eircom just /didn't want to/. Simple as that.

Plus, Douglas Alexander is no man to take as gospel. The man is only just computer litterate and has the job as he is a buddy of Gordon Brown.

True, I'll agree with you there. This is the Reg we're talking about here though - if he'd gotten the numbers wrong, they would have torn him apart and laughed their asses off.

adam

neverhappen

How far back into history do we have to go? Eircom started "trialling" DSL four years ago. Ennis has had DSL for that long, and so have many, many Eircom employees and other people in the telecommunications industry. Ultimately, BT and Eircom could have started on the same day, but Eircom just /didn't want to/. Simple as that.


Both BT and Eircom, being the incumbents, are going to drag their feet as much as they can. Not ethical, but understandable. The difference is that in the UK, the government have looked to the future and felt the need to cajole/force/scare BT into getting "broadband britain" to happen. This has not occured here. Yes, there is a regulator, but with limited scope in terms of sanctions, and feet-dragging going on with the updated legislation. Where is the government interest in this? Why do the UK consider the issue so important that they give someone a portfolio on the subject, whereas, in the ehub of europe, theres just an awkward silence.....

logic1

Also, the Waterford-based Cablesurf doesn't have a cap either, or else I just can't find any mention of it.

I'm afraid it does actually. I think it's around the 2 gig mark. I actually personally know one of the guys who started the cablesurf service in Dungarvan as it's my old home town and the speeds are lower than a 28k modem at most times and the cap is 2 gig - per meg charge for anything over that.

All in all I don't think the Dungarvan cable project has been terribly succesful.

.logic.

R. Daneel Olivaw

Originally posted by neverhappen

Where is the government interest in this? Why do the UK consider the issue so important that they give someone a portfolio on the subject, whereas, in the ehub of europe, theres just an awkward silence.....

Eircom has been out from the government for a relatively short time. However, at the same time as the company was being made public, etc., the tech/dot-com boom was occurring, so a load of companies were interested in Ireland, as it is
a) English speaking
b) in the EU and forthcoming EMU
c) Dirt cheap corporation tax

The last part especially, as it made Ireland very attractive for US companies interested in EU bases, hence why Intel, Gateway, etc., all came here. There are loads more if you do a bit of checking.

So while the money coming from Telecom Eireann was gone, they were getting way MORE money from the new tech company and new tech economy. Car sales were through the roof, and so on.

However, now that
a) the tech economy is collapsing
b) there are other EU companies trying to get Irelands low corporation tax investigated

So Ireland's brief spotlight period will end....the big companies will pull back, and so low taxes from low amounts of companies = low revenue. So the government will have to increase the taxes inline with other EU countries just to keep the economy up. Hence Ireland is more unattractive, and also....

Irish people have no access to broadband communications as the UK does because it:
a) Has a stable economy that did not overtly depend on the US companies
b) Is an EU country, speaks English, but doesn't have to anticipate EMU funkiness
c) Has cheap access to broadband comms for consumers/residential customers and corporations

The result is that the UK anticipated to some degree that to remain competitive for the tech economy, they would need a good DSL/broadband infrastructure, etc., . Hence consumers will spend more online, buy more goods, keep money flowing, etc., .

Here, the Irish government got caught up in some magical land that new ocmpanies endlessly want to come here to set up ops, but it was really only for cheap corpo tax. Now they are pulling out, the taxes aren't enough......and it will only get worse. And all that money coming in was balancing up the absence of Telecom Eireann.

So basically it's up to Eircom to keep Ireland internationally competitive. Currently, they are not (given the absence of consumer broadband, and the delay in leased lines (e.g., 2005!!)). The "ehub" crap-speak, again, was Irish goverment policy set by people who don't understand the tech industry. This includes people like Eircom (they also do not understand the tech industry). It all looked good, Ireland had cheap tax, English, highly educated, etc., . But then p00f, companies are cutting back, and the already low corpo tax is so low that any lower would prob cause a recession here.....

Lack of foresight and ignorance.......and for a brief period, again, ignorance was bliss. Eircom could do whatever they wanted because oohoooo all these companies want to setup in Ireland and there was more money after TE left anyway. In about a year, the government will start to see the problems of blind-eye-a-turning when you depend on international economies (i.e., you have to think internationally and not about whether a tribunal about something no-one cares about is worth 120 million).

That's my take on it anyway. Totally off-topic though.

dahamsta

Not entirely off-topic, and well put. I don't agree with all of it, but good post.

adam

R. Daneel Olivaw

Originally posted by dahamsta
Not entirely off-topic, and well put. I don't agree with all of it, but good post.

adam

Which bits do you not agree with? I admit it's a little generalised (OK, very generalised) but if you have anything to add I'm all ears......er....eyes. Basically I think Ireland's small-fish in a big-pond problem with Eircom is a bad thing.

dahamsta

Originally posted by R. Daneel Olivaw
Which bits do you not agree with? I admit it's a little generalised (OK, very generalised) but if you have anything to add I'm all ears......er....eyes. Basically I think Ireland's small-fish in a big-pond problem with Eircom is a bad thing.

Well, I don't really disagree with what you're saying per se, I just have a different outlook on Ireland, and the Celtic Tiger, and multinationals, and the collapse of the tech economy, and the recession, etc, etc. It's more philosophy, or economic philosophy if that term is appropriate. I realise the importance of the multinationals to Ireland, but I think their importance is overstated, and more, that that overstatement is actually what causes reliance on them. The same goes for the tech economy collapse, and the worldwide recession we all hear about every day.

There's no doubt that recessions happen, I can't argue with that, because life and people and the world in general go in cycles and it can't be avoided. And I can't deny that the tech sector is in trouble, it's blatantly obvious what with Gateway and all the profit warnings, etc. But I'm not entirely sure that we are in fact heading into a recession right now. I've had the impending recession rammed down my throat for the past five years, and every year, suddenly, nothing happens.

Things are in crisis right now, but people, and again the world in general, have a propensity to right themselves, to pick themselves up and dust themselves off and get on with the job, particularly in times of crisis - the WTC is proof positive of this. I want to say that I think people and the world are growing up, but that's exactly the kind of overstatement I don't want to make. I'm just not convinced, and I don't think I will be until I'm in rags.

This attitude mostly stems from reading dozens of tech news articles every day on Wired, and The Reg, and C|Net, etc. Yes, the media are telling us horrible things are going to happen, but the media has an atrociously short-term view, they very very rarely get anything long-term right. So when they start talking long-term, I tend to think the opposite. Maybe it's the wrong approach to cause and effect, but hell, there you go, I've always had weird attitudes. And I've been wrong. Quite often in fact.

So you see, like I said above, I'm not disagreeing with facts or figures, but just in a general way. The "tech downturn" hasn't touched me yet, and I live and work in tech every day. I just hope it'll continue that way. I dunno, maybe I'm just being annoyingly upbeat.

adam