Routers....again

Hi,

I was using a DGN2000 on my Sky LLU connection with no issues, but it has threw in the towel and won't power up.

Looking for a cheap wireless N router with a chipset that works well with Sky.

I'm connected using one of the ISAM's...first hop out is dr0.enlba.isp.sky.com

Which routers would work best? Was thinking bout just getting something cheap like the DGN1000


Ps yes i know i'm breaking T&Cs lol

If you can find out what chip the Exchange kit is using that will be of a great help, i have heard that they use broadcom, and also there are reports of lucent(alcatel) being used, so nothing definite there , trial &error springs to mind

You will be connected via a Lucent Stinger, and the Broadcom chipsets work very well with them

A slightly related question, but if Sky insist on you using their routers then shouldnt they issue a free replacement?

The DGN2000 was not supplied by Sky.

They do issue replacements if its their own, well inside the first year.

In reply to a post by BuckleZ:

They do issue replacements if its their own, well inside the first year.

And after the first year, you have to buy a new one from Sky.

Ah okay, thanks.

Still seems a bit wrong to me, it�s one thing to say you have to use their own router but if they won�t let you buy a replacement elsewhere they should at least replace it regardless. But anyway, I won�t go on, the worlds not fair.

In reply to a post by Finguz:

You will be connected via a Lucent Stinger, and the Broadcom chipsets work very well with them

Almost, The Stinger is only legacy data only DSLAMS where as the new alcatel lucent ISAM's are being used.

Easy way to tell

.uk.easynet.net (Stinger - Data Only)
.isp.sky.com (ISAM Voice&Data or Data only)

Broadcom chipsets are also ideal for the ISAMS Sky routers are free within 12 months, £28 afer and T&C's only stipulate SP routers only due to support and easy fix's. Bit of a unenforcable policy.

Edited by deleted (Thu 03-Feb-11 16:54:36)

Ah apologies I was just passing on what the guy I spoke to in their tech dept told me, should've known better

Broadcom is the way to go

Edit: Looks like I'm on one the the ISAM's.

Edited by Finguz (Thu 03-Feb-11 17:02:21)

In reply to a post by R0per:

Ah okay, thanks.

Still seems a bit wrong to me, it�s one thing to say you have to use their own router but if they won�t let you buy a replacement elsewhere they should at least replace it regardless. But anyway, I won�t go on, the worlds not fair.

No different to sky boxes. You can only buy them from sky and if they go wrong after the first year you have to pay for them. Just the way they work.

Various consumer acts would disagree, particularly if you pay £300 for a Sky HD box and it failed in month 13. A reconditioned box costs £65 from Sky.

On the routers a little different due to lower cost, but again, it can be contested. Alas firms will often just shrug shoulders

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Various consumer acts would disagree, particularly if you pay £300 for a Sky HD box and it failed in month 13. A reconditioned box costs £65 from Sky.

I'd probably side with the consumer acts on this one. Also interesting to see a top EU lawyer say it's perfectly legal for a UK pub to receive Premiership football from a Greek broadcaster, Sky might need all the money they can get if that opinion is ratified...

Edited by Oliver341 (Fri 04-Feb-11 10:41:53)

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Various consumer acts would disagree, particularly if you pay £300 for a Sky HD box and it failed in month 13. A reconditioned box costs £65 from Sky.

On the routers a little different due to lower cost, but again, it can be contested. Alas firms will often just shrug shoulders

But, a line has to be drawn. The post I responded to suggested that sky should replace no matter how old it is. So, if a router/sky box is 3 or 4 years old would you expect sky to replace for free under their current terms?

Each piece of equipment has an expected life period, this is set by the manufacturer on how long the equipment should last before breaking down. I think you have six years to claim anything under consumer law but I may be wrong....

My understanding was that it should last a reasonable length of time, which is what makes it more complicated. If there was a definite time period it would be rather straightforward.

In reply to a post by shaneosborne:

I think you have six years to claim anything under consumer law but I may be wrong....

If you can find this "six year rule" in consumer law I'd be absolutely amazed!

I would expect a £300 device doing the same as a £50 device to last longer, now sometimes this is reflected in the warranty.

Sky TV is a complex one, as without box you cannot receive service, which you pay for on top of the cost of any box. Similar with the routers - if provider supplied then it could be suggested that unless the fees are less after a period of time, that you are 'renting' the box.

Yes a line has to be drawn. Is a £300 or more device breaking after 13 months just weeks out of warranty to be expected? Maybe if said device was overheating, subject to moisture, but if otherwise in good condition should it not have continued to work.

Sky claims green credentials with its boxes, but the fact that so many end up breaking probably negates any power saving from the overnight standby

O2 take their loaned routers back, presumably for reuse or recycling, which is fine. The Sky model of giving out locked routers which are then useless for the customers next ISP is just creating a waste problem, and I think the EU should address this.

6 is correct to issue a claim for unsatisfactory goods.

I sued a company after 4 years for a TV that stopped working.

In reply to a post by broadband66:

6 is correct to issue a claim for unsatisfactory goods.

I sued a company after 4 years for a TV that stopped working.

So anyone whose TV breaks down within 6 years of purchase is entitled to a repair or replacement by law?

depends on the cost of the tv

Surely it coul be deemed anti competetive as well. They are a broadband supplier, you should be able to shop around for a router, especially if it breaks.

I thought it was 2 years as decreed by EU law, seem to remember a case where a customer took a tv back to Tesco after 18months and being refused a repair or replacement when they checked however there was something that guarantees electrical items for 2 years .

Just found it http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2009/may/23/tesco-co...

Found this

In reference to www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/cgi-bin/greenwich/con1item.cgi?file=*AD...:

How long do my consumer rights last for?

To claim a full refund, you need to make a claim as soon as possible; in most cases you will have only a matter of days or weeks. If you are trying for a repair, replacement or partial refund the law says that you can take action against the trader (usually through the courts) for up to six years after purchase.

Does this mean that all goods should last six years?

No. Your realistic expectations regarding the life of the object need to be taken into account. For example a 10 year old car is unlikely to last as long as a brand new one.

Make what you wish of it.

In reply to a post by cheshire_man:

Make what you wish of it.

I'm sure the courts do!

In reply to a post by R0per:

Surely it coul be deemed anti competetive as well. They are a broadband supplier, you should be able to shop around for a router, especially if it breaks.

Yeah, perhaps Sky restricting the trade of Netgear, Belkin etc if they stipulate their broadband customers must use their supplied D-Link.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved...

Sounds like a complete pigs-ear of legislation to be honest, but I guess it keeps the lawyers happy.