Telecom on FairGo tonight

Forums › New Zealand Broadband › Telecom on FairGo tonight

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

3539 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#490562 7-Jul-2011 12:59

The paucity of information coming from Chorus/Telecom Wholesale back via ISPs is a real problem at times.

A month or so back, I discovered that Telecom had installed broadband equipment in a roadside cabinet about 2.5km from our property. I suspected that we were connected to a more distant roadside cabinet about 6.5km away, but thought it worth trying my favourite ISP to see if we could get a connection.

I have tried twice, and both enquiries went nowhere because they "couldn't find our address in their system". This in spite of telling them the previous phone number, our RAPID number, and the distance in km to both roadside cabinets to the nearest 100 metres! I would have thought that was sufficient information, but no. Both enquiries yielded no response at all, and when I phoned up after the first one to check on what had happened, my ISP said that Telecom Wholesale had not responded to the request, but nobody thought to phone me back and explain what had happened.

The only person who helped me to make any sense out of this was the local Chorus tech. who confirmed what I suspected i.e. that we are connected to the more distant roadside cabinet, being the last property on that multi-pair cable. Unfortunately, there is no copper running past our gate in the other direction, although there is a Telecom Fibre, but of course, we cannot connect to that :(

The short answer is that unless I am prepared to run a 500 metre cable over a mangrove swamp to a neighbour's house, there is no way I can get ADSL, even though both my neighbours can. We are in a black hole in the middle. I had thought of running a wireless link to my neighbour's house, but that relies on:

a) Power being maintained
b) The gear not being stolen

both of which are pretty uncertain given the household circumstances...

So it looks like I will be stuck on Kordia wireless until such time as Vodafone get off their corporate butts and release the RBI-funded fixed wireless plans. God only knows how long that will be...

Tradepub

Free professional, reference and technical white papers (affiliate link).

networkn

Networkn
32182 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#490565 7-Jul-2011 13:08

Handle, I am sorry but I don't agree. If something is IMPORTANT to you, then you should take a greater interest and make sure you understand it more. I believe this is the responsibility of the person themselves. I believe that the vendors responsibility is to provide clear information where appropriate that is accurate where possible and if this isn't possible, to relay that so the end user can make appropriate decisions as to what they do after that.

These comments are not related to the OP as obviously something else has gone on their situation which is unfortunate. I am talking about the other comments made about buying a house based on information a CSR at Telecom might provide about internet access.

People on GZ have an interest or find technology important so they take the time to learn more about it. Some people come here to learn.

Jaxar

383 posts

Ultimate Geek

#490667 7-Jul-2011 16:15

Ignoring the heart of the matter which I feel has already been thoroughly discussed here there were a three small things that bugged me.

People look to programs like Fair Go for accurate information and their reporting is misleading in places.

Firstly the 240Kb being slower than dialup. Sure I don't expect the guy who made the comment to have a clue. Am I naive tto think Fair Go has a responsibility to clarify that 240Kb is roughly 4x faster than dialup?

Secondly the question put forward that why was the phone number still showing up on the availability checker. This was a pretty obvious dig to suggest TCNZ is incompetent when really the ignorance is in the person asking the question.

Finally there was not one mention that the problem of distance form the exchange is not a TCNZ problem but a technical limitation of the technology. This scenario could have conceivably played out for any provider in the world.

Please note: I have a professional bias towards Vodafone.

Beccara

1469 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#490675 7-Jul-2011 16:30

Jaxar:
Firstly the 240Kb being slower than dialup. Sure I don't expect the guy who made the comment to have a clue. Am I naive tto think Fair Go has a responsibility to clarify that 240Kb is roughly 4x faster than dialup?

From a technical perspective yes but Fair Go viewers are hardly the type, These days trying to surf even at a basic level and a 256k connection will feel slower than dialup connection because the size of content on even the most basic news page is huge compared to what it was back when dialup your only choice so from a "User Experience" POV I believe the statement to be correct

Most problems are the result of previous solutions...

All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated

BlakJak

1243 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#490678 7-Jul-2011 16:42

Beccara:
Jaxar:
Firstly the 240Kb being slower than dialup. Sure I don't expect the guy who made the comment to have a clue. Am I naive tto think Fair Go has a responsibility to clarify that 240Kb is roughly 4x faster than dialup?

From a technical perspective yes but Fair Go viewers are hardly the type, These days trying to surf even at a basic level and a 256k connection will feel slower than dialup connection because the size of content on even the most basic news page is huge compared to what it was back when dialup your only choice so from a "User Experience" POV I believe the statement to be correct

Is this based on experience?

There's still plenty of folks surfing the web on dialup, and unless you're one of them I think it'd be better to stick with facts, not hyperbole.

No signature to see here, move along...

BlakJak

1243 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#490679 7-Jul-2011 16:43

Jaxar said...

Finally there was not one mention that the problem of distance form the exchange is not a TCNZ problem but a technical limitation of the technology. This scenario could have conceivably played out for any provider in the world.

There was a specific mention of 6km being the longest distance that broadband can be serviced on. That to me meant the same thing.

Agree with your other points tho, except that the system should be smart enough to know that if a feasibility-check has been done on a phone number and the answer is no then it should be able to report accurately that's the case, even if it has to say 'last checked: x months ago'. The reason it's reporting incorrectly is because (I think) it's not granular to that level.

No signature to see here, move along...

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek

#490702 7-Jul-2011 17:27

BlakJak:
Agree with your other points tho, except that the system should be smart enough to know that if a feasibility-check has been done on a phone number and the answer is no then it should be able to report accurately that's the case, even if it has to say 'last checked: x months ago'. The reason it's reporting incorrectly is because (I think) it's not granular to that level.

Ok... enough... this is getting silly...

Perspective people.

When Telecom come to do work on the network, they're currently working with drawings that are scanned into the computer as images that are 50 to 60 years old.

The pairs in my area are all 'multipuled' (cyril7 if you're about, you can explain what that means if people don't know ;) ).

What I'm saying, is that what BlakJak is suggesting, is just getting silly.

The basic infrastructure, to give you anything that makes any sense, just doesn't exist.

The cost for Telecom to put that infrastructure in place for their entire network would be so high that it's silly to even suggest it, in my view, based on what I've seen of what systems they currently have in place.

You could drive something off the current line testing gear, but I suggest that it won't tell you much of anything that's even vaguely useful in areas with multipules sitting on the copper.

In my view the key here simply has to be a commitment from Telecom with respect to the resource they will put in to the market.

Rolloston, for example, currently has 36 customers waiting on DSL ports. Telecom should simply be forced to state when those ports will be delivered. Deliver those by that date and not before.

This is no different to any product supply issue. The Warehouse, for example, can't say/advertise "Yes, we'll stock 21" CTV's in Christchurch" and then not supply any stock to Christchurch because of demand in Auckland.

They also can't say "yes they'll be there in 7 days..." and then not supply them.

We can't expect Telecom to provide services for 100% of the population and then also complain that they are a monopoly.

Telecom must only install infrastructure for a limited percentage of the population - not 100%

Telecom shareholders must not be expected to pay for 100% resources and then only sell 75% of that resource.

Telecom customers must not be expected to pay service fees based on the requirement to pay for resources that the company has no expectation of using.

In the case of this customer, they should be clearly told "Sorry, we won't provided you with service in that area, you will need to find a niche market provider to help you."

Promote New Zealand - Get yourself a .kiwi.nz domain name!!!

Check out mine - i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz - don@i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz

old3eyes

9110 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#490763 7-Jul-2011 19:57

The other issue I feel is that Fair Go has lost it's original goals and is now trying to emulate that crappy consumer program in 3 called Target. If it's all about a sensationalist story then it's got to sell. I removed Fair Go of my season pass some weeks ago after that "expos?" of Subway using the same knife to cut two consecutive sandwiches..

Regards,

Old3eyes

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#490766 7-Jul-2011 20:08

DonGould: Rolloston, for example, currently has 36 customers waiting on DSL ports. Telecom should simply be forced to state when those ports will be delivered. Deliver those by that date and not before.

The Telecom Wholesale site clearly mentions this - 9 new cabinets being installed between September and December 2011.

There are around 500 cabinets to be installed in the next 6 months which will then mark the completion of the cabinetisation project.

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek

#490799 7-Jul-2011 21:06

sbiddle:
DonGould: Rolloston, for example, currently has 36 customers waiting on DSL ports. Telecom should simply be forced to state when those ports will be delivered. Deliver those by that date and not before.

The Telecom Wholesale site clearly mentions this - 9 new cabinets being installed between September and December 2011.

There are around 500 cabinets to be installed in the next 6 months which will then mark the completion of the cabinetisation project.

Thanks Steve, :)

I told the person that they should look for a wireless provider and stop moaning about what Telecom isn't doing for them.

Promote New Zealand - Get yourself a .kiwi.nz domain name!!!

Check out mine - i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz - don@i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz

mattwnz

20022 posts

Uber Geek

#490829 7-Jul-2011 22:14

old3eyes: The other issue I feel is that Fair Go has lost it's original goals and is now trying to emulate that crappy consumer program in 3 called Target. If it's all about a sensationalist story then it's got to sell. I removed Fair Go of my season pass some weeks ago after that "expos?" of Subway using the same knife to cut two consecutive sandwiches..

FTA TV these days just caters for the lowest common denominator, and is solely about ratings and advertising.

wreck90

780 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#490833 7-Jul-2011 22:20

mattwnz:
old3eyes: The other issue I feel is that Fair Go has lost it's original goals and is now trying to emulate that crappy consumer program in 3 called Target. If it's all about a sensationalist story then it's got to sell. I removed Fair Go of my season pass some weeks ago after that "expos?" of Subway using the same knife to cut two consecutive sandwiches..

FTA TV these days just caters for the lowest common denominator, and is solely about ratings and advertising.

Thank goodness I am not the only one to think this too.

They have the odd good story, but really, some of the stuff they go on about now is rubbish.

mattwnz

20022 posts

Uber Geek

#490837 7-Jul-2011 22:27

wreck90:
mattwnz:
old3eyes: The other issue I feel is that Fair Go has lost it's original goals and is now trying to emulate that crappy consumer program in 3 called Target. If it's all about a sensationalist story then it's got to sell. I removed Fair Go of my season pass some weeks ago after that "expos?" of Subway using the same knife to cut two consecutive sandwiches..

FTA TV these days just caters for the lowest common denominator, and is solely about ratings and advertising.

Thank goodness I am not the only one to think this too.

They have the odd good story, but really, some of the stuff they go on about now is rubbish.

The best stuff is usually not in prime time. This is where the tivo is good. TVNZ7 and maori also has some good stuff, but I guess they are both public broadcast channels, and we are set to lose TVNZ7. They however would never be able to close maori tv, and I suspect it will be become the public broadcast channel.

networkn

Networkn
32182 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#490877 8-Jul-2011 01:37

Jaxar: Ignoring the heart of the matter which I feel has already been thoroughly discussed here there were a three small things that bugged me.

People look to programs like Fair Go for accurate information and their reporting is misleading in places.

Firstly the 240Kb being slower than dialup. Sure I don't expect the guy who made the comment to have a clue. Am I naive tto think Fair Go has a responsibility to clarify that 240Kb is roughly 4x faster than dialup?

Secondly the question put forward that why was the phone number still showing up on the availability checker. This was a pretty obvious dig to suggest TCNZ is incompetent when really the ignorance is in the person asking the question.

Finally there was not one mention that the problem of distance form the exchange is not a TCNZ problem but a technical limitation of the technology. This scenario could have conceivably played out for any provider in the world.

I agree with your points.

Beccara

1469 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#490882 8-Jul-2011 02:48

BlakJak:
Beccara:
Jaxar:
Firstly the 240Kb being slower than dialup. Sure I don't expect the guy who made the comment to have a clue. Am I naive tto think Fair Go has a responsibility to clarify that 240Kb is roughly 4x faster than dialup?

From a technical perspective yes but Fair Go viewers are hardly the type, These days trying to surf even at a basic level and a 256k connection will feel slower than dialup connection because the size of content on even the most basic news page is huge compared to what it was back when dialup your only choice so from a "User Experience" POV I believe the statement to be correct

Is this based on experience?

There's still plenty of folks surfing the web on dialup, and unless you're one of them I think it'd be better to stick with facts, not hyperbole.

Ever tried browsing the net on a capped 64k connection? Yes I'm aware that the various queuing methods degrade the connection more but it's still painful, more painful than dialup was. And yes it's based on experience, Trademe for example, the front page is a 14-20 second load time on dial up which it wasn't back in the day when dial up was the common access method but enough of the derail :)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6