Hello,
we are currently building a house and have reached the topic of telephone, internet, and TV.
In our current rental apartment, we have a 1GB cable connection from Vodafone, with which we are overall very satisfied.
However, I feel like I would be locked into one provider forever if we now only install the cable connection.
Is it possible to have a cable connection installed, for example through Vodafone, and simultaneously have a DSL connection through Telekom? Or would that be a waste of money?
We could then watch TV via cable or via the satellite dish, right?
Thank you very much for your help and best regards,
Andreas
we are currently building a house and have reached the topic of telephone, internet, and TV.
In our current rental apartment, we have a 1GB cable connection from Vodafone, with which we are overall very satisfied.
However, I feel like I would be locked into one provider forever if we now only install the cable connection.
Is it possible to have a cable connection installed, for example through Vodafone, and simultaneously have a DSL connection through Telekom? Or would that be a waste of money?
We could then watch TV via cable or via the satellite dish, right?
Thank you very much for your help and best regards,
Andreas
H
hampshire16 Sep 2021 08:30K1300S schrieb:
No matter what, if I pay for 1 Gbit/s and only get about 40 Mbit/s during peak times, that’s a pretty severe oversubscription, and that’s what I was getting at. You’re right. I’ve been out of the telecommunications world for quite a while – but remembering how much COLT invested in fiber optic networks around the turn of the millennium, I can understand the economic necessity. Unfortunately, the products sold are quite opaque; the phrase “up to x bandwidth” is written in very small print and is completely unclear in its meaning.
In practice, very few people are left stranded with only 40 Mbit/s. With other last-mile technologies, speeds can drop to just a few Mbit/s; then videos buffer, online games lag (which is very frustrating for some), and data transfers take unusually long – that was my point.
hampshire schrieb:
The statement "up to x bandwidth" is written very small and is completely unclear in meaning. It's true that this is sometimes written quite small, but the Federal Network Agency (BNetzA) has already regulated quite a few things, including specifying which bandwidths are provided as minimum/normal/maximum. The problem, however, is the time dimension behind this: if I have full bandwidth for 22 hours a day, it doesn't help me if during prime time I can only get every bit one by one.
It's clear that everything must be financially viable, but when I look at how affordable prices are in our current location—which, by the way, uses the more expensive and generally higher-performing Active Optical Network (AON)—then the achievable contribution margin should still be reasonable for Passive Optical Network (PON), even if not all ports are fully utilized.
hampshire schrieb:
In practice, very few people are left stranded with only 40 Mbps. I completely agree with that, but I just wanted to mention that fiber optic is not synonymous with "exclusive line usage."