User comments on ISPs
  >> Wireless Broadband ISPs (not wireless ADSL routers)


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | >> (show all)   Print Thread
Standard User Yaz
(experienced) Sun 09-Oct-11 22:04:32
Print Post

October news from Vfast


[link to this post]
 
I thought I would relay the info posted on the VFast front page.

October news

I know that I have recommended a few people (some of which were unfortunately were out of LOS).

Looking forward to the capacity upgrade for Dunkirk.

vFast Ltd
Downstream ~24336.33 kbit/s - ~2970.74 KB/s
Upstream ~10224.86 kbit/s - ~1248.15 KB/s

Edited by Yaz (Mon 10-Oct-11 00:22:13)

Standard User slimj
(member) Tue 11-Oct-11 18:36:38
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: Yaz] [link to this post]
 
Great news, I like these monthly updates to see how things are going! smile

Now...

"These are very exciting times for VFast and we will update you further next month at which time we hope to be able to announce some very exciting news !"

Any speculation to what the "Very exciting news" may be? I'm guessing the 100mbit trials were not just for fun.... wink

VFast Wireless Broadband.
My Broadband Speed Test
Standard User Yaz
(experienced) Tue 11-Oct-11 19:44:20
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: slimj] [link to this post]
 
I would also hazard a guess that faster packages will be on offer.

vFast Ltd
Downstream ~24336.33 kbit/s - ~2970.74 KB/s
Upstream ~10224.86 kbit/s - ~1248.15 KB/s


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.

Standard User prlzx
(committed) Tue 11-Oct-11 20:45:50
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: slimj] [link to this post]
 
If the CPE kit is Ubiquiti (Airmax) I wonder what the APs are, as you can't reach 100Mbps downstream from an AP (you can get close but the radio links are about 150Mbps half-duplex with 100Mbps ethernet ports).

Unless each AP only has one subscriber they will be sharing 90-something Mbps and only if the shared upstream is capped at about 60Mbps.

And if you don't use Ubiquiti for the AP, you lose the benefits of Airmax.

The radios are great performers for their price and I would not knock them, but 100Mbps is only ever a headline figure in a shared bandwidth network.



prompt $P - Invalid drive specification - Abort, Retry, Fail? $G
prlzx on n e w n e t Max ADSL

Edited by prlzx (Tue 11-Oct-11 20:46:21)

Standard User wirelesspacman
(fountain of knowledge) Wed 12-Oct-11 08:55:04
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: prlzx] [link to this post]
 
take your point, although given the "up to" claims by other operators, they ought to be close enough to be allowed the 100mbps claim.

They could perhaps move to 2 antenna mimo to get a "proper" 100Mbps - although again they would need to move to 1Gbps Ethernet ports as well. There is also the issue of deploying 2 antenna mimo sector aerials at the APs, but they are now starting to become available at reasonable prices.

Peter

Loop Scorpio Ltd
Ledbury; Highnam; Newent; Painswick; Arlingham, Cranham
===============================================

Symmetric Pro
Now also offering 20 Mbps symmetric broadband!
Standard User prlzx
(committed) Wed 12-Oct-11 12:55:45
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: wirelesspacman] [link to this post]
 
Yes, indeed if Vfast did sell it as "100Mbps" broadband, small print: "subject to contention at the AP / relay", they wouldn't be saying anything different from what other operators / other types of service already get away with so I'm not meaning to single anyone out.

I just get fed up when headline figures and especially wireless "signalling data rates" being quoted as if real IP throughput, or the way that upstream throughput is generally glossed over in the interests of marketing higher downstream. Especially things sold as "Next Generation" still mimic the asymmetry of ADSL even if the newer technologies do not require it to.

On the antennas, (again a big if it's Airmax stuff), yes those sectors and omnis APs are already 2x2 MIMO, as are CPEs (apart from the AirGrid and Bullet), so good links can easily reach MCS15 (300M) but that is still not 100M symmetric on the ethernet port.

I think more throughput is possible if you are assembling your own boards with separate antennas and can go to say 3x3 MIMO or better with gigabit (and/or link aggregation) on the wired interfaces.

But my main reason for mentioning any of this was for other posters not to be too swept up by speculation that speeds can always be increased by upgrades at the centre, and that there will be inherent technical limits unless kit on a customers own roof is also replaced.



prompt $P - Invalid drive specification - Abort, Retry, Fail? $G
prlzx on n e w n e t Max ADSL
Standard User wirelesspacman
(fountain of knowledge) Wed 12-Oct-11 19:38:39
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: prlzx] [link to this post]
 
accepted.

As for ourselves, I keep our advertised speeds down so that customers can have a realistic chance of achieving them.

We do keep our offerings asymmetric though as that reflects the market needs on the whole. The wireles channel is not full duplex, so fast uploads can only come at the expense of fast downloads (on average, etc etc!). Also (commercial hat very much on), fast uploads tends to mean business requirements and hence ability/willingness to pay more. I fully appreciate that most if not all consumers might disagree with this, but life is life particularly with a wireless network.

Peter

Loop Scorpio Ltd
Ledbury; Highnam; Newent; Painswick; Arlingham, Cranham
===============================================

Symmetric Pro
Now also offering 20 Mbps symmetric broadband!
Standard User prlzx
(committed) Wed 12-Oct-11 20:57:19
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: wirelesspacman] [link to this post]
 
I agree that commercially-speaking most offerings are still asymmetric.

I wonder if that would still be the case had the UK market not come from a history of dial-up and early 500kbps ADSL while user-generated content was much lower than consumed content, so favouring downstream was the only way to deliver useful bandwidth, while SDSL was priced so much higher (because it was offering a cheaper alternative to leased line so the market would stand for it?).

So I think we are at a tipping point where even mobiles come with a 5MP+ camera, and people reasonably want to know why it's still taking so long to share their photo album on Flickr or Picasa, or why they have to make their family video clips short (or over-compressed) to put on YouTube. Or even why their Skype video call looks more blocky on their home connection.

As you say, they may well no longer agree that these activities put them into the same box as "Business class" requirements!

But I can see that it would take a brave operator to take a 10Mbps / 1Mbps type asymmetric package and offer the option to take it as 5Mbps / 5Mbps (i.e. upstream capped at half the available bandwidth) because it would be hard to sell the benefits of this choice against it sounding "slower".



prompt $P - Invalid drive specification - Abort, Retry, Fail? $G
prlzx on n e w n e t Max ADSL
Anonymous
(Unregistered)Wed 12-Oct-11 21:34:38
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: prlzx] [link to this post]
 
VFast APs are Rocket Ms
Standard User prlzx
(committed) Wed 12-Oct-11 21:45:47
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
Thanks, makes sense if they want to use Airmax throughout.



prompt $P - Invalid drive specification - Abort, Retry, Fail? $G
prlzx on n e w n e t: ADSL2+/21CN at 2.5Mbps↓↑800k
Standard User Yaz
(experienced) Thu 13-Oct-11 01:27:02
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: prlzx] [link to this post]
 
wirelesspacman + prlzx

Thanks for your input into this thread.

My current interest in all things VFast are the capacity upgrades. My current package of 25mb down / 10mb up serves our household needs at this time.

I'm not sure on the hardware that VFast use (though it appears that it's been posted in the other section of this thread) but I can obtain a photo of the mast on our roof if anybody is interested.

Either way, whatever the forth coming news from VFast may be, I hope that they continue to invest in the backhaul/capacity to sustain the growing customer base.

vFast Ltd
Downstream ~24336.33 kbit/s - ~2970.74 KB/s
Upstream ~10224.86 kbit/s - ~1248.15 KB/s
Anonymous
(Unregistered)Thu 13-Oct-11 01:58:51
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: prlzx] [link to this post]
 
Problems with Wireless still exist and I think VFast are brave to try and increase speeds. I have had a VFast service for many many years now and i've had periods where one person locally has brought every single connection to a crawl. Due to the nature of it not being full duplex and the limited backhaul capacity that the airmax products offer, I think they should concentrate on guarenteeing a level of service and lowering ping times, access times etc and slightly increasing upload speed.

It is ridiculous in this day and age that you can get a faster upload speed out of a 3g connection rather than a fixed wireless/copper/fibre solution at your home!

I can understand concerns regarding copyright infringement, business uses and such but you'll find that a lot of people just want to be able to be free to use the connection for the things they want to do for leisure.

Take myself for example, my family are scattered all over the world and we often arrange times where we play online games - unfortunately my connection has very poor latency and upload so I often run into trouble here.

Sending files takes a long time too, though it's much faster than my friends on ADSL, video conferencing and such have noticably higher latency than ADSL/cable and often suffers from packet loss.

Increasing speeds is all well and good but reliability and consistency are really important - to me it's more important than anything else that I know i'll be able to do X Y or Z at any particular time rather than hoping to high heaven that my connection isn't going to be flakey and unreliable.
Standard User darrenorbital
(learned) Thu 13-Oct-11 12:04:51
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
Sounds like you have a fault, put in a ticket and it will be fixed smile
Standard User kijoma
(member) Mon 17-Oct-11 17:37:03
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: darrenorbital] [link to this post]
 
hi,

Interesting read, As probably the first Wireless ISP to use "Airmax" in 2009 I can vouch for how well it has matured in it's firmware and product range.

We invested £20000 at the time in an unproven "wet paint" technology and it paid off , fortunately for later adopters they didn't get to ride the early adopter firmware bug nightmare smile . At the same time though they would have to agree that those pioneers and their feedback to the manufacturers were essential in the maturing process.

We still have some stock of the original product with the original firmware , ideal for any serious masochists out there! , not for the feint hearted smile

Anyway what i originally popped in to say was.. What is behind the dislike so many people have of "small companies" and Wireless technology? . It is almost as if the very word is an insult to their respective mothers or something?

Sure big companies can put small ones out of business , potentially... But what the whole BDUK fiasco is doing is throwing large sums of money, our public money, at those large companies.. Even though surely they could use their financial might to do it themselves without the need for state bottle feeding?

I tip my hat to Vfast as they are one of the rare examples of a wireless company taken seriously by a county council. Kent do appear to have a clear policy of technology neutrality when they put out tenders for provision to an under served area.

Wireless is of course very cost effective and without it the only bids they would of received would of had 6 figures minimum from the usual suspects and KCC would be somewhat out of pocket or they would of scrapped the project completely.

We have yet to see what West Sussex County Councils plan is but to date at least they have done their best to deny the existence of our service, even to the point of declaring in writing with respect to areas not profitable for BT "we do not consider the areas you cover as having a broadband service" and sure enough they put them down as "notspots". Not spots with 16. 24 and 40 Mbps services over the last 6 years smile


So many people complain about "BT" infrastructure provided services, their call centres, their stranglehold on the market in general... then as soon as money appears the same people are shouting from the roof tops "give it to BT!"..

~sigh~

rant over...

Bill Lewis - MD
Kijoma Broadband - (Division of Kijoma Solutions Ltd)
Fixed wireless ISP - ISPA/CISAS/RIPE members
http://www.kijoma.net
My Broadband Speed Test
Standard User Michael_Chare
(committed) Tue 18-Oct-11 00:30:00
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: kijoma] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by kijoma:
Anyway what i originally popped in to say was.. What is behind the dislike so many people have of "small companies" and Wireless technology? . It is almost as if the very word is an insult to their respective mothers or something?
Well my mobile phone keeps losing signal, my msf clock keeps losing sync, I can't get all the Freeview muxes, my DAB radio keeps cutting out, why would I want anything to do with another terrestrial digital wireless signal? Especially one likely to be adversely impacted by trees and hills.

Further there was a local wireless broadband operator 'Edenbridge Broadband'. Where are they now?

BT may have their problems, but my phone works, as does my rather slow broadband which uses BT equipment.

Michael Chare
Standard User wirelesspacman
(fountain of knowledge) Tue 18-Oct-11 08:02:04
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: Michael_Chare] [link to this post]
 
"...but my phone works, as does my rather slow broadband which uses BT equipment."

Unless/until some kind person(s) decides to remove a few km of very valuable copper cable, os some workmen put a digger through a cable - both of which could put you off line for days.

Hills do not tend to pop up over night and block wireless signals, they actually tend to be pretty useful for finding locations to bounce signals off.

Trees are also rarely an issue with a well designed network rollout (in the sense of them later affecting existing customers).

Peter

Loop Scorpio Ltd
Ledbury; Highnam; Newent; Painswick; Arlingham, Cranham
===============================================

Symmetric Pro
Now also offering 20 Mbps symmetric broadband!
Standard User smurf46
(member) Tue 18-Oct-11 10:08:05
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: wirelesspacman] [link to this post]
 
Is your response perhaps a bit glib? I've both landline broadband and fixed wireless (and I'm happy with both). The fixed wireless has a slightly better record of reliability - merely though because the Easynet fibre backhaul network seems to suffer from slightly less faults than BTWs. I've never experienced a cable theft or digger damage to the ADSL local loop and suggest most others haven't either. (I suspect it's actually the least common fault with ADSL). And I doubt if even the fabled wizards of the west can magic up structures or owner or statutory permissions to provide and connect up new transmitters on any old hill, or perhaps even have the will to do so for a single residential customer, but perhaps it would be interesting to know what cost you'd charge them for doing so!

A couple of genuine questions for the wireless ISPs that post here:
1. do all your transmitters have the ability to operate independently of a mains power supply (which seems more unreliable than the telephone service) and for how long?
2. how many initial queries do you receive (NOT just those you decide to "accept" as potential customers) and what percentage of them do you successfully connect from people within the telephone exchange areas you serve? (My WISP has this info).
3. bearing in mind the recent ASA ruling, and I know that everyone quotes their maximum throughput, what throughtput speeds do at least 80% of your customers actually maintain on each up to package?
4. do you wholesale your connections to other ISPs which I understand is a necessary requirement for BDUK (and future EU) funding to comply with European procurement law? (If not then surely you can't complain about the unavailability of that funding to you - it'd be unlawful).

I think this sort of info is more useful for potential customers . And yes I know it's not the whole picture, but a snapshot never is but as the ASA recognised it's a useful starting point.

EDIT: PS On a more general point, having skimmed the BDUK guidance now on DCMS website is there a change to the business model perhaps: 1. WISPs can be wholly commercial outfits and operate end to end as at present and 2. have a new prospective role as a local ISP taking a wholesale service over a local wireless link to serve all the individual customers within a local community where it is necessary/appropriate to replace the fixed local loop which is unable to supply the faster broadband required to meet the national policy objectives (and accords with the local delivery plan). In fact doesn't this open up a bright future for wireless ISPs with both vastly greater penetration to the local level of, combined with open access to, competitive wholesale backhaul fibre at lower cost; and as they constantly tell us about the superior performance of a wireless link over the copper local loop . . .

We see things not as they are, but as we are .
- Anais Nin

Edited by smurf46 (Tue 18-Oct-11 17:21:08)

Standard User darrenorbital
(learned) Tue 18-Oct-11 21:25:43
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: smurf46] [link to this post]
 
>A couple of genuine questions for the wireless ISPs that post here:
>1. do all your transmitters have the ability to operate independently of a mains >power supply (which seems more unreliable than the telephone service) and for >how long?

Yes, all have UPS which can power for 4 - 8 hours although some repeaters are powered by a Solar / Wind combination, one i can think of has been running for around 2 years with 100% uptime.

>2. how many initial queries do you receive (NOT just those you decide to "accept" >as potential customers) and what percentage of them do you successfully connect >from people within the telephone exchange areas you serve? (My WISP has this >info).

Our connection success rate from orders is around 90% although this is a constantly changing figure, not sure why you would want to know how many initial queries we get though, i would suggest that is commercially sensitive for any ISP.

>3. bearing in mind the recent ASA ruling, and I know that everyone quotes their >maximum throughput, what throughtput speeds do at least 80% of your customers >actually maintain on each up to package?

Maintain is not really the right word i feel, i would say that an average customers on say a 15mbit package will average somewhere around 14 - 15 mbit most of the time, we have to restrict people down to that speed as even with a weak signal, customers can normally exceed that speed.

The biggest issue with a speedtest, as any ISP will experience is customers take them as gospel even though there are so many factors, its fine for us to give an average speed for "on-net" traffic but when it leaves out network, we have no control over congestion. I would say around 50% of tech support calls are due to customers performing speedtests, getting say 11mbit result on a 15 or 25 mbit connection and reporting it as a fault. Customers do not take general Internet congestion on a particular site into account or perhaps how many people are testing on any given speedtest server at the same time.

If you were to purchase a sporty porche capable of 155mph and cruise into london, you would probably not phone Porche complaining when you hit traffic on the M25 and slowed down to 40mph. The internet is a similar scenario which is why this average speed to customers just does not work out.

>4. do you wholesale your connections to other ISPs which I understand is a >necessary requirement for BDUK (and future EU) funding to comply with European >procurement law? (If not then surely you can't complain about the unavailability of >hat funding to you - it'd be unlawful).

Yes we do using L2tp back to the ISP to provide a transparent service over our network.

Regards
Darren

Edited by darrenorbital (Tue 18-Oct-11 21:29:31)

Standard User smurf46
(member) Wed 19-Oct-11 00:21:25
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: darrenorbital] [link to this post]
 
Thanks Darren, I hope that gives some encouragement and confidence to prospective customers!
1. I don't know if my WISP uses the backup/alternative power options, but I'd encourage them to follow your example (but I've not noticed any power cuts at their end (unlike mine, but I have a UPS battery). But I imagine it could be more of an issue with rural transmitters.
2. Again I understand they're at well over 90% (though on favourable terrain). I suppose I asked about queries (commercially sensitive I understand) remembering when I first tried to get fixed wireless my fear was that it was something of a private club for the initiated and not for an average-joe, but I have to say the WISP did not show that attitude at all when I approached them.
3. Sorry I used "maintain" to try and get an average and so disregard non-ISP issues: on aggregate up/down my general is around 75-80% of maximum (restricted) throughput with no significant time variations (though seems to pick up a bit extra in winter/spring perhaps due to absence of leaf cover).
4. They don't as far as I am aware.
I didn't ask about latency: mine is about double that of my FTTC service (40/20) though can rise closer to 100 at peak times (though always better than my ADSL used to be).

We see things not as they are, but as we are .
- Anais Nin

Edited by smurf46 (Wed 19-Oct-11 00:36:00)

Standard User wirelesspacman
(fountain of knowledge) Wed 19-Oct-11 09:12:55
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: smurf46] [link to this post]
 
A little bit perhaps smile but why should you expect me to just sit in a corner and not defend our industry?

We are a smaller outfit than Darren's and operate on a somewhat different deployment model (we do not use towers/masts but utilise some of our customers as hopping points).

A growing number of our nodes have battery backup - generally for around 4 hours. We are steadily increasing the proportion, though for some (say only serving a couple of local customers) it does not cost in.

Where we have initial queries in a covered area (which is the wisp version of your "telephone exchange area" since that is meaningless to a WISP) then we connect up the large majority of them. Don't keep the stats on this as never seen a need to.

Yes we do wholesale connectivitiy, though not yet on the wireless part of our network only on the fully cabled part. Am a long way from being convinced that wholesaling a wisp network would be viable as the wholesale products that would be feasible are unlikely to be of interest to retail ISPs (who would want all you can eat wholesale products for peanuts).

The BDUK lot are already ignoring EU state aid rules by the way, as demonstrated by their recent announcement on "assisting" standard (2 Mbps) broadband provision by 2015. This already exists via the new satellites, so applying ANY state aid to foster terrestrial competition is illegal.

What is this "new prospective" you talk about anyway? That is and has been what WISPs have been doing for the last eight years or so - nothing new there. As to "open access to competitive wholesale backhaul fibre at lower cost" - yeah right, like that's going to happen sometime soon in rural areas!

Peter

Loop Scorpio Ltd
Ledbury; Highnam; Newent; Painswick; Arlingham, Cranham
===============================================

Symmetric Pro
Now also offering 20 Mbps symmetric broadband!
Standard User kijoma
(member) Sat 22-Oct-11 20:19:32
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: wirelesspacman] [link to this post]
 
hi Peter,

not to forget that i hear the 2 Mbps spec is symmetric too smile , kind of rules out ADSL, ADSL2 and only allows ADSL2+ if you live on the exchange. Conveniently FTTC fits, inconveniently so does wireless.

/rant on blush

BDUK have the (our) money to spend and the easiest way to spend 100's of Millions is with the Big Telco's , Value for money rarely comes into the equation it seems.

Its good to see Vfast now have representation on TB tho, something Kijoma have been requesting for 6 years+ . the problem is we need to supply post codes of all our coverage areas which i feel doesn't help as of course if there is demand in an area we do not cover that makes commercial sense then it soon becomes a covered area. So why the restriction, let people countrywide explore the options.

We added two coverage areas recently for example as we had sufficient demand from people "out of area" to warrant the relevant infrastructure.

The fixed line guys do not have the pleasure of that flexibility.

One comment we received recently when costing a service for an area was "why should you need funding?" and from that they made the incorrect assumption that the company didn't have the money to do it alone! . Meanwhile BT, a multi billion multinational goes cap in hand as soon as it sees something that is vaguely non profitable to do.

I want to know why the Broadband industry is treated unlike any other. The whole "competition" bleet baffles logic and common sense.. competition comes automatically if there is a business case to do it..

Example: Kijoma supply 16 Mbps/24 Mbps services to a particular group of villages in West Sussex and have done for over 6 years. The MP Jeremy Hunt was quoted as saying at the broadband summit in West Sussex in May that he "was concerned at the lack of competition in this area" (areas covered by Kijoma).

To follow this the now former chairman of the parish council in question stated the same thing and has been trying hard to get the disguised monopoly installed (market 1 ADSL exchange) for the last 6 years or so via public funding / pressure on BT. He also realises they are a monopoly but a preferable one it seems.

WSCC have not changed their written view (in response to questions i raised with them) that this area and others covered by a Kijoma service are to them still "notspots" and have fraudulently (in my view) duped BDUK with this view so as to maximise funding that would otherwise be reduced if it recognised that three main "notspots" in the county have not been notspots for approaching 7 years. these are three out of the four exchange areas in England without viable ADSL.

There of course is competition, as Peter stated there is satellite and there are the mobile providers (albeit only 2G round that area) etc... If these providers are failing to provide an attractive service then who is to blame?

Because there is an excellent service being provided at competitive pricing the various "public servants" are doing their best to fund competition there as if it the current service is a disease that must be cured. where does state aid law come in here?

If this was say applied to village shops and pubs then you can easily see the madness of it all. Oh there is only one pub and one shop in the area, they have a monopoly so the Gov should fund a large chain pub and a tesco express to be built so the local pub/shop have competition and the residents have "choice"..

Those businesses would otherwise not have a cost effective business model for those locations without that funding.

stupid as it sounds (to me) that is what the policy seems to be with broadband. Local providers must be replaced by the big guys at all costs. Even if it results in an inferior service.

Wholesale provision is not real competition. It means there is one main beneficiary who the rest all pay, it encourages "stack em high,sell em cheap" services that have the bare minimum of capacity. Wholesale ISP's have to pay per mbit/sec from the wholesale network as well as the costs for bandwidth their end out to the internet. So to ride the price war that results from everybody selling the same end point they will buy the minimum so as to return what little profit they can make. result is poor speeds, standstill peak times and crippling traffic shaping to try and hide the deficiency.

/rant off smile

Bill Lewis - MD
Kijoma Broadband - (Division of Kijoma Solutions Ltd)
Fixed wireless ISP - ISPA/CISAS/RIPE members
http://www.kijoma.net
My Broadband Speed Test
Anonymous
(Unregistered)Sat 22-Oct-11 22:51:40
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: kijoma] [link to this post]
 
Please stop saying that you have competition with Satellite and mobile broadband.

VFast and Kijoma are very expensive services compared to ADSL/Cable and this is due to the fact you do literally have no competition.

Satellite is far too expensive and access times, latency and upload speed are all abismal, Mobile is expensive, patchy and has other problems.

I also find it frustrating that you complain constantly about representation on TB, you're a very small outfit and unfortunately you've listed the exact reasons why you can't be listed, rather than complain in public constantly, may I suggest that you contact the administrators of the website.

Long term, fibre and other in the ground solutions will always be the best value for money as they have almost no issues once they are placed and have much higher capacity. It makes much more sense to lay thousands of miles of cabling than to use microwave or radio links.

The big telcos should be forced to lay fibre to the places that are currently forced to use wireless and satellite links, I agree that the money should go to these companies as they have the resources and capability to cover everyone, I do agree with you though that they aren't covering the outlying areas sufficiently.

I have lived in areas serviced by SoBroadband and then later VFast, as well as areas covered by good ADSL and a Virgin area. I can honestly say that compared to a decent ADSL supplier and compared to Virgin, VFast customer support is really good, but unfortunately their service is just not able to compete, the wired services are more cost effective, often come with perks and don't suffer from sporadic massive lag, low download speeds and huge latency, these problems very rarely occur on my wired services but were a daily/weekly occurance on SoBroadband/Vfast. Sorry if it sounds bad, but it's true that my experience has shown wired solutions to be better.
Anonymous
(Unregistered)Sat 22-Oct-11 22:54:21
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
Oh and I forgot that I find it INCREDIBLY frustrating that you, Kijoma, have usage limits.

I really can't see any reason why other than rampant profiteering - when I lived in Sweden it was unheard of to get a limit on your internet, even when it's a wireless service or a mobile service.

Frustrating when you are a monopoly!
Standard User darrenorbital
(learned) Sat 22-Oct-11 23:55:34
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
Hello Anonymous,

It would be great if you could identify yourself so i can look into these issues you have on a daily / weekly basis as to the best of my knowledge, we dont have a single customer with ongoing problems, in fact it makes me question if you actually are / were a customer at all.

On another note, the following comment is really not true

"VFast and Kijoma are very expensive services compared to ADSL/Cable and this is due to the fact you do literally have no competition."

Our 15mbit service is £24.99 inc vat per month, a phoneline rental from a telco is ~£14 per month making our broadband ~£11 per month in comparison for speeds far superior to what is available from others. I dont think that is really much more expensive if you really think about it. Our service can also provide a geographic telephone number or you can port your existing one so in theory, both products can be directly compared !

If you are a customer, please identify yourself so we can help you as you often post these comments but we are yet to get a call / support ticket.

Many Thanks
Darren
Administrator seb
(founder) Sun 23-Oct-11 00:36:31
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: kijoma] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by kijoma:
Its good to see Vfast now have representation on TB tho, something Kijoma have been requesting for 6 years+ . the problem is we need to supply post codes of all our coverage areas which i feel doesn't help as of course if there is demand in an area we do not cover that makes commercial sense then it soon becomes a covered area. So why the restriction, let people countrywide explore the options.


Looking at this from a user experience point of view, the vast majority of users will want a list of ISPs that they can buy services from, not a list of companies they could contact and possibly persuade to enable their area. It may be in your interest, but I don't believe it's in the average user's interest. This is why we ask for postcode information. Tracking potential demand is something we've talked to various parties about more generally, but it's a different activity from helping users who are looking for broadband now.

It's worth adding, that if we have that data, until we can filter it for users in a better way, you'd appear on the main ISP list anyway.


seb

Sebastien Lahtinen
Co-Founder,
thinkbroadband.com
[email protected]

personal blog - blog.seb.me.uk
twitter - @sebtweet
The author of the above post is a thinkbroadband staff member. It may not constitute an official statement on behalf of thinkbroadband.
Standard User smurf46
(member) Sun 23-Oct-11 08:09:30
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: seb] [link to this post]
 
We're back in la la land where it's xDSL or Fixed Wireless. No it isn't. Comprehensive superfast coverage needs both (and satellite).

It's why I asked the WISPs how many customers you cover in an exchange area, which is how nationally we classify broadband coverage over the whole country. It enables everyone to look at their area on the same basis make comparisons and for the national authorities to do so; not a different basis for each operator that makes things look most favourable for them. The simple fact is that xDSL provides (almost) national coverage; I asked to try and find out if any WISP could demonstrate that they provide coverage in a similar way to almost all customers in any exchange area. No-one claimed to do so: I wonder why?

I have a WISP service so I know how competitive, consistently good and reliable it can be for the individual customer. But the difference is marginal over a good xDSL connection of similar capacity (and in my experience unless you have an atrocious line - and most people don't - the difference is mainly due to backhaul issues where BTW have a few, with their much bigger and heavily used network).

It's the same argument that appears all over these forums: should broadband policy be directed for the benefit of the majority or the few who feel they are further left behind. It's the same as everything, democracy is about trying to spread the jam as widely as possible, and the majority are going to be served first and rightly so.

Try to imagine you are a politician, who faced by an elector is asked: "why did you waste my money giving it to that WISP who can't serve me (or costs me more than BT-based services) when if BT had improved lines to my cab I'd have got a fast service and at a cheaper price and higher allowance?" Yes, it really matters. You can't succeed as a politician, no more than as a businessman, by telling your customers/electorate they're all wrong.

Some WISP projects are grant aided:(and not just in Kent) so it isn't anti-WISP bias. Perhaps carry on reading . . .

We see things not as they are, but as we are .
- Anais Nin

Edited by smurf46 (Sun 23-Oct-11 08:19:53)

Anonymous
(Unregistered)Sun 23-Oct-11 08:53:34
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
The reason you cannot see any other reason is obviously because you don't have a clue how an ISP works ! Bandwidth is not free, it costs per mbit per month for global transit, on average I would say £10 per mbit, therefore, if you constantly use say 10mbit, that's £100 per month plust circuit costs before we even start looking at profit hence contention and the balancing act wisps perform on a daily basis to enable rural users to have fast broadband.

Perhaps that will help you understand a little better !
Standard User wirelesspacman
(fountain of knowledge) Sun 23-Oct-11 10:20:22
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: kijoma] [link to this post]
 
Hi Bill,

New one on me that the 2 Mbps spec is symmetric. Have you got a link for that by chance?

/rant on

I read through the state aid rules a few months back and it is 100% clear that the provision of state aid for "normal" broadband in areas that already have it is ILLEGAL.

Satellite is now available essentially right across Blighty at 2Mbps and above - and at reasonable costs. Yes the usage allowances are pretty low compared to terrestrial broadband, but they are still fine for surfing/emails etc - just not suitable for regular streaming with iPlayer etc.

For instance: the Tooway 6 Mbps down (1 Mbps up) service is now on offer for £19.99 per month. Having two (satellite) players up there can only help to keep the prices down, and perhaps even lower them further (and/or increase usage allowances). I refuse to accept that this is expensive (in the sense of a lot of money per month). Yes it is more than a terrestrial service but so what? State Aid is not there to simply drive down prices in a competitive market.

With "superfast", the State Aid rules are more blurred - particularly as the Aid is there to provision a service before "normal" market forces would tend to deliver it. BDUK take the view that only massive, incumbent style, operators can possibly deliver on the deal and so have deliberately skewed the procurement process to favour them. It really is old socialist style thinking at work!

The farce of the whole process is that they are taking so so so long to finally "justify" doing (aka get the courage to do) what in my view they have wanted to do all along (just hand over the whole amount to BT) that (a) they are delaying the very market forces they are supposed to be encouraging (why should BT put FTTC into rural areas on its own when it knows that by holding back it can get given a massive bung to do it later on) and (b) they are making locals wary of going for alternative solutions (that do not require state aid) in case they miss out on getting FTTC from BT later on.

/rant off

Peter

Loop Scorpio Ltd
Ledbury; Highnam; Newent; Painswick; Arlingham, Cranham
===============================================

Symmetric Pro
Now also offering 20 Mbps symmetric broadband!
Standard User New_Londoner
(member) Sun 23-Oct-11 11:02:16
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: wirelesspacman] [link to this post]
 
I read through the state aid rules a few months back and it is 100% clear that the provision of state aid for "normal" broadband in areas that already have it is ILLEGAL.

Suggest you read the text closely - IIRC it matters whether the available services have wholesale options to allow for retail competition, and also the pricing compared to the wider market. I don't believe wholesale options are available from satellite or most (all?) of the fixed wireless operators?

---

All opinions expressed by me are my own

BT Infinity
Speedtest result (excluding 2Mbps for BT Vision)
Anonymous
(Unregistered)Sun 23-Oct-11 12:41:31
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: darrenorbital] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by darrenorbital:
Hello Anonymous,

It would be great if you could identify yourself so i can look into these issues you have on a daily / weekly basis as to the best of my knowledge, we dont have a single customer with ongoing problems, in fact it makes me question if you actually are / were a customer at all.

On another note, the following comment is really not true

"VFast and Kijoma are very expensive services compared to ADSL/Cable and this is due to the fact you do literally have no competition."

Our 15mbit service is £24.99 inc vat per month, a phoneline rental from a telco is ~£14 per month making our broadband ~£11 per month in comparison for speeds far superior to what is available from others. I dont think that is really much more expensive if you really think about it. Our service can also provide a geographic telephone number or you can port your existing one so in theory, both products can be directly compared !

If you are a customer, please identify yourself so we can help you as you often post these comments but we are yet to get a call / support ticket.

Many Thanks
Darren


I have not used your service for a year now.
Anonymous
(Unregistered)Sun 23-Oct-11 12:55:15
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
I often come here to read what is going on and I always see you posting [censored] about VFast, always.

We've had a VFast service for a long time now (when they installed it they didn't have a lot of engineers so it was even Darren who installed it!) and i've had a pretty good experience, yeah there have been times where it's been [censored] but the support people have tried their best to fix the problems.

I wonder where exactly you are/were located because everyone I know who uses VFast hasn't had any massive latency, download speed or disconnection problems for a very long time...

In fact the only on-going problem i've got is that whenever my router (i've tried 4 different ones, plus using them after switches etc) is plugged in, I get a maximum speed of 4mbps, where as without the router/switches, with my pc directly connected I get 15mbps. I contacted support about this and they couldn't do anything except send an engineer, but as I can't afford to pay the callout charge i've just lived with it. As far as my research goes it might be a problem with my Ubiquiti Nanostation M being in bridge mode and being faulty - I had found a thread about it on the Ubiquiti forums.

This is the ONLY ongoing problem and I could quite easily get it fixed if I had £50 spare.

Since you claim to no longer a customer and all you seem to do is come here and slate a technology without which many people would simply not be online with, why not go and do something productive with your time?
Standard User Michael_Chare
(committed) Sun 23-Oct-11 13:00:25
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: wirelesspacman] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by wirelesspacman:
For instance: the Tooway 6 Mbps down (1 Mbps up) service is now on offer for £19.99 per month. Having two (satellite) players up there can only help to keep the prices down, and perhaps even lower them further (and/or increase usage allowances). I refuse to accept that this is expensive (in the sense of a lot of money per month). Yes it is more than a terrestrial service but so what? State Aid is not there to simply drive down prices in a competitive market.

Tooway want £89.99 per month for a 25GB data allowance. That is more than 10 times what I am paying for an ADSL connection with a data allowance more than twice that. That strikes me as expensive.

I probably would be willing to pay for a faster connection. But not to that extent.

Michael Chare
Standard User smurf46
(member) Sun 23-Oct-11 15:38:40
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: New_Londoner] [link to this post]
 
I think there is a point concerning the applicability of the de minimus rules ( http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?ur... ), up to 200K euros (£174,268) support in aggregate to a single undertaking. In my view this should cover far in excess of the amount of support required for any local WISP solution. If a WISP, or anyone else, wants to play with the big boys, then you play by the adult game rules.

Of course no government body has to take advantage of the de minimus rules, they can adopt their own local approach, that's democracy. And they still have to adopt measures to ensure VFM and it doesn't distort competition, but they have some flexibility in the approach they adopt. In my view if they have reasonable evidence that satellite and fixed broadband isn't meeting a local need, which could be affordability, availability or technology limitations then I think they may be able to reasonably conclude that competition isn't distorted: it's a practical not a theoretical exercise.

We see things not as they are, but as we are .
- Anais Nin

Edited by smurf46 (Sun 23-Oct-11 15:47:10)

Standard User kijoma
(member) Sun 23-Oct-11 21:23:50
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
Hi Anonymous..

You name me one ISP that has no limits and i will happily dig their AUP out to disprove this.

Kijoma has known limits, our customers know what they are paying for and get the service speed they pay for. A lot of fixed line openreach ISP's state "unlimited" and then apply a FUP / AUP which they then decide when to implement restriction/shaping without providing the customer any warning.

You could easily say why do roads have speed limits, why do we have traffic lights.. Limits are there to balance the capacity against the usage , without it you have the situation discussed over and over again in the other forums on TB.. peak time slow down, filtered protocols.

I can understand why the ADSL market are willing to use every trick in the book to gain customers, it is so heavily competitive as they are effectively all selling the same service level (as defined by your line/ Openreach capacity etc..)

Rampant profiteering, i find that a laughable statement. We do make a profit and have done for many years. However the difference between us and the openreach dependents you seem so keen on promoting is we OWN all our infrastructure. we have the potential of hundreds of gigabits of capacity on demand at diverse carrier fed data centres and we can purchase more as and when we need it as the networks grow.

It seems you dislike Kijoma, Vfast or any independent broadband provider based on your comments but at the same time make lame excuses for the failings of mobile providers etc..

Kijoma is not a Monopoly, nor is Vfast . We are companies that saw a market and managed to put together a viable business model. If no other existing technology provider can make such a business case then that is their failing, not ours.

The three exchanges in West Sussex i mentioned before are owned and operated by the largest telco Monopoly in this country and they have refused to provide their "competitive" multi vendored service to these exchanges. THAT is the actions of a monopoly, abusing their position to deprive people the over stated "choice" their service claims to provide.

Kijoma has invested the money and time to develop a high class service in these areas without any public funding or grants outside of a £5000 tender in 2005 for 5 villages. SInce 2005 those networks have been replaced 2-3 times as technology advances with faster and faster infrastructure, client radios and increased usage allowances and service speeds all WITHOUT a single tariff price increase in 7 years.

These are NOT the actions of a monopoly and i seriously object to the inference. We may have a monopoly on an excellent service but that is from our hard work , not back stabbing other ISP's via BDUK handouts etc..

It seems some people really hate free enterprise and at the same time they will [censored] about the poor service from the incumbent line telco's.

Like Vfast, a lot of our customers have moved to VoIP so the line rental vanishes, one business over here disposed of 8 BT lines to go to VoIP via our system, this has saved them a fortune and opened up the plethora of benefits VoIP provides at the same time.

We have an entire school in Surrey that pays less than £100 a month for 24Mbps down/10 Mbps up, where is the monopolistic element here? . they were quoted ~£40k to install a 10 meg leased line with over £1800 a month service fees from you know who ..


In reply to a post by Anonymous:
Oh and I forgot that I find it INCREDIBLY frustrating that you, Kijoma, have usage limits.

I really can't see any reason why other than rampant profiteering - when I lived in Sweden it was unheard of to get a limit on your internet, even when it's a wireless service or a mobile service.

Frustrating when you are a monopoly!


Bill Lewis - MD
Kijoma Broadband - (Division of Kijoma Solutions Ltd)
Fixed wireless ISP - ISPA/CISAS/RIPE members
http://www.kijoma.net
My Broadband Speed Test
Standard User darrenorbital
(learned) Sun 23-Oct-11 21:29:12
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
Ah ok, perhaps you was on the old skypilot network that we purchased from SoBroadband, that could explain alot. Would it be possible to perhaps email me your old username so i can have a look into why you used to have these issues, to see if it was down to something perhaps we can learn from.

I do know that some of the customers whom we inherrited from SoBroadband had very poor signals which we would not install these days, perhaps you was one of them.

Many Thanks
Darren
Standard User kijoma
(member) Sun 23-Oct-11 21:43:17
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
I have not used your service for a year now.


I am probably correct in that a year ago Vfast were not using the technology they are now. As an early adopter of that "new" tech here i can say that if this is the case then you are tarring their service based on an outdated system that probably bears no resemblence to what they have now.

This is a key point with Wireless Technology, it is advancing at a considerable rate. FTTC is just VDSL with a fibre feed and has all the same phone line problems as ADSL but with a far lower tolerance and much shorter distance limit.

Fixed Wireless is a staple diet in many countries, only in this one does it seem to receive such hostility..

Such is the mindwashing power of an incumbent national Monopoly.

Bill Lewis - MD
Kijoma Broadband - (Division of Kijoma Solutions Ltd)
Fixed wireless ISP - ISPA/CISAS/RIPE members
http://www.kijoma.net
My Broadband Speed Test
Standard User kijoma
(member) Sun 23-Oct-11 22:00:50
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: smurf46] [link to this post]
 
I agree with many elements of this, however as you state the local gov body can do whatever to ensure VFM.

Here lies the problem of course, these bodies rely on old reports on technology and hearsay. One of the most common things the county council over here have stated is "wireless is affected by the weather".

This they use as an argument that the Technology can justifiably be circumvented by a funded alternative. The truth of course is there is no reason a properly implemented wireless network should suffer in any way with the weather. Ours for example didn't bat an eyelid during last winter even when aerials had 2ft of snow on them.

Another comment is "Wireless needs line of sight" , well yes it does ideally but why does this prevent it being a suitable technology? . If you want to see some innovative solutions to LoS issues then we have many that have been runnning over 6 years without fault.

The plethora of "wifi" mesh networks implemented by incompetent outfits during the first half of the century have a lot to answer for here. They invariably received funding and didn't provide on the promise.

Thankfully most are defunkt but it has left a lasting legacy with a serious misunderstanding of Fixed Wireless capability (not WIFI).

Yes 200k would be nice and could enable a hell of a lot of customers with "super fast" Wireless or probably buy one FTTC cab.

In reply to a post by smurf46:
I think there is a point concerning the applicability of the de minimus rules ( http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?ur... ), up to 200K euros (£174,268) support in aggregate to a single undertaking. In my view this should cover far in excess of the amount of support required for any local WISP solution. If a WISP, or anyone else, wants to play with the big boys, then you play by the adult game rules.

Of course no government body has to take advantage of the de minimus rules, they can adopt their own local approach, that's democracy. And they still have to adopt measures to ensure VFM and it doesn't distort competition, but they have some flexibility in the approach they adopt. In my view if they have reasonable evidence that satellite and fixed broadband isn't meeting a local need, which could be affordability, availability or technology limitations then I think they may be able to reasonably conclude that competition isn't distorted: it's a practical not a theoretical exercise.


Bill Lewis - MD
Kijoma Broadband - (Division of Kijoma Solutions Ltd)
Fixed wireless ISP - ISPA/CISAS/RIPE members
http://www.kijoma.net
My Broadband Speed Test
Standard User darrenorbital
(learned) Sun 23-Oct-11 22:38:53
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: kijoma] [link to this post]
 
I agree with those comments, we are lucky in Kent to have an open minded county council who have seen what fixed wireless implemented properly can achieve, so much so that most of the local councils are also using our fixed wireless private networks to link sites back to their main offices.

Regards
Darren
Standard User darrenorbital
(learned) Sun 23-Oct-11 22:40:34
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: kijoma] [link to this post]
 
Exactly right, 95% of our network is now replaced.
Standard User wirelesspacman
(fountain of knowledge) Mon 24-Oct-11 16:55:28
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: New_Londoner] [link to this post]
 
Then I suggest you read the text closely!

Oh and satelllite providers do provide wholesale options as do wisps. Anyhow, I really cannot get my head around all this fuss about "do they, don't they" provide wholesale options. After all, it is not exactly rocket science to wholesale a service, just a matter of agreeing a set of tariffs for a set of service tiers.

Peter

Loop Scorpio Ltd
Ledbury; Highnam; Newent; Painswick; Arlingham, Cranham
===============================================

Symmetric Pro
Now also offering 20 Mbps symmetric broadband!
Standard User New_Londoner
(member) Mon 24-Oct-11 19:29:52
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: wirelesspacman] [link to this post]
 
@wirelesspacman
I stand corrected, however I think you missed the point of my earlier post. You had previously stated:

I read through the state aid rules a few months back and it is 100% clear that the provision of state aid for "normal" broadband in areas that already have it is ILLEGAL.

My comment was mainly to highlight that it is not as simple as your post suggested. Issues such as whether or not wholesale services are actually available certainly have a bearing on this, and I think price can come into consideration as well.

Not a big issue but not quite as black and white as stated.

---

All opinions expressed by me are my own

BT Infinity
Speedtest result (excluding 2Mbps for BT Vision)
Standard User Yaz
(experienced) Mon 24-Oct-11 22:18:24
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: darrenorbital] [link to this post]
 
Wow!

This thread has become a little busy!

And they said that this forum was dead.

vFast Ltd
Downstream ~24336.33 kbit/s - ~2970.74 KB/s
Upstream ~10224.86 kbit/s - ~1248.15 KB/s
Standard User wirelesspacman
(fountain of knowledge) Tue 25-Oct-11 08:22:37
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: New_Londoner] [link to this post]
 
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?ur...

2.3.2.2. "Black areas": no need for State intervention

43. When in a given geographical zone at least two broadband network providers are present and broadband services are provided under competitive conditions (facilities-based competition), there is no market failure. Accordingly, there is very little scope for State intervention to bring further benefits. On the contrary, State support for the funding of the construction of an additional broadband network will, in principle, lead to an unacceptable distortion of competition, and the crowding out of private investors. Accordingly, in the absence of a clearly demonstrated market failure, the Commission will view negatively measures funding the roll-out of an additional broadband infrastructure in a "black zone" [46].

Seems fairly simple to me smile

Peter

Loop Scorpio Ltd
Ledbury; Highnam; Newent; Painswick; Arlingham, Cranham
===============================================

Symmetric Pro
Now also offering 20 Mbps symmetric broadband!
Standard User smurf46
(member) Tue 25-Oct-11 10:44:36
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: wirelesspacman] [link to this post]
 
I think you also need to read:
45. Although a network operator may be present in the zone targeted by the State intervention, certain categories of users may still not be adequately served in the sense that either some broadband services requested by the users were not available to them or, in the absence of regulated wholesale access tariffs, retail prices were not affordable compared to the same services offered in other more competitive areas or regions of the country [47]. If, in addition, there are only limited prospects that third parties would build an alternative infrastructure, the funding of an alternative infrastructure could be an appropriate measure. This would remedy the absence of infrastructure competition and thus reduce the problems arising from the de facto monopoly position of the incumbent operator [48]. However, the granting of aid under these circumstances is subject to a number of conditions that would have to be met by the Member State concerned.

46. Accordingly, the Commission may declare compatible, under certain conditions, State aid measures that target areas where the provision of a broadband infrastructure is still a de facto monopoly provided that (i) no affordable or adequate services are offered to satisfy the needs of citizens or business users and that (ii) there are no less distortive measures available (including ex ante regulation) to reach the same goals. . . .

I would therefore argue that the correct approach is to look at the services in terms of both speed and limits on use that are sought by customers (not what you or I think a customer ought to be satisfied with) and the correct comparison is terms of affordability is in terms of the difference in the cheapest price for services meeting those requirements between the grey and black areas. This is why the guidance uses the term "de facto" monopoly throughout, in your interpretation those words are unnecessary and appear to add nothing. In addition it certainly seems common sense to me that the availability of broadband infrastructure in a domestic area means terrestrial infrastructure, looking at the guidance as a whole. The guidance in my view makes clear that the approach is to reduce market distortions that prejudice the consumer, and not to protect per se the niche markets of satellite or most local WISPs.

We see things not as they are, but as we are .
- Anais Nin
Standard User wirelesspacman
(fountain of knowledge) Tue 25-Oct-11 13:53:09
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: smurf46] [link to this post]
 
Nope, those paragraphs are not relevant for Black areas, only for Grey ones.

My point thus still stands.

Also, State Aid requires technology neutrality:

"(d) Technological neutrality: Given that broadband services can be delivered on a host of network infrastructures based on wireline (xDSL, cable), wireless (Wi-Fi, WiMAX), satellite and mobile technologies, Member States should not favour any particular technology or network platform unless they can show that there is an objective justification for this [56]. Bidders should be entitled to propose the provision of the required broadband services using or combining whatever technology they deem most suitable."

Peter

Loop Scorpio Ltd
Ledbury; Highnam; Newent; Painswick; Arlingham, Cranham
===============================================

Symmetric Pro
Now also offering 20 Mbps symmetric broadband!
Standard User vfast_tim
(newbie) Wed 26-Oct-11 19:14:50
Print Post

Re: October news from Vfast


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
In reply to:-
In fact the only on-going problem i've got is that whenever my router (i've tried 4 different ones, plus using them after switches etc) is plugged in, I get a maximum speed of 4mbps, where as without the router/switches, with my pc directly connected I get 15mbps. I contacted support about this and they couldn't do anything except send an engineer, but as I can't afford to pay the callout charge i've just lived with it. As far as my research goes it might be a problem with my Ubiquiti Nanostation M being in bridge mode and being faulty - I had found a thread about it on the Ubiquiti forums.

This customer phoned this week and I have been able to resolve the issue without an engineer visit being needed and at no cost to the customer. This issue was nothing to do with being in bridge mode, there was an Ethernet negotiation mismatch between the nanostation and the router. Speed tests are now showing above 10Mbps and up-to the full 15Mbps when using their router.

Tim Higgs
Vfast internet | Technical Support
0845 121 1257 - support (at) vfast.co.uk
Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | >> (show all)   Print Thread

Jump to