"The Gigabit internet War" continues in Hungary

[TMS]

https://www.telekom.hu/about_us/press_room/press_releases/2017/october_31 (English Press release from Telekom Hungary)

https://www.hwsw.hu/hirek/57994/telekom-gigabit-internet-gbps-savszelesseg-letoltes-feltoltes.html (Hungarian article)

 

From Telekom's English press release:

Quote

from November 1, in areas covered with the optical network a 2000 Mbit/s (=2Gbit/s) speed home internet package is offered to customers that - in the case of the simultaneous connection of multiple devices within the family - doubles the bandwidth so far available at Telekom.

A little more than a year ago one of the ISPs in Hungary (Digi) started to offer gigabit internet options for cheap (less than $20). Another one (Telekom HU) started to provide a gigabit subscription a year ago too in response and now it's providing a new subscription with a maximum download speed of 2 Gbit/s.

 

Hungarian quote from the Hungarian Article:

Quote

A Telekom mellett jelenleg egyedüliként gigabites internetet kínáló DIGI-nél nincs jele annak, hogy a sávszélességet megemelné FTTH területen a cég, a kapacitás ugyanakkor a román RCS&RDS tulajdonában álló szolgáltatónál is adott lehet ehhez. Erre utal legalábbis, hogy a szolgáltató október végétől FTTH hálózatában már kizárólag csak a "DIGINET 1000" nevű díjcsomagot értékesíti, azaz minden olyan lakossági tarifát kivont a portfólióból, ami 1 Gbps-nél lassabb letöltési sebességet kínál.

The same quote translated to English:

Quote

The only provider besides Telekom who provides a gigabit internet subscription, Digi, shows no signs of raising the maximum bandwidth of current subscriptions, although the capacity is probably available for the company which is owned by the Romanian RCS&RDS. At least this can be assumed from the fact that the ISP only provides the subscription named "DIGINET 1000" on their FTTH network. This means that they removed all other residential subscriptions which offers download speeds less than 1 Gbit/s.

So in response to the higher maximum bandwidth, Digi responded with only providing their largest, gigabit subscription to new customers, at least on their FTTH (Fiber To The Home) network. I have checked some addresses, where I know they provide internet service, and this is true, although they still provide smaller subscriptions on some addresses on their FTTB (Fiber To The Building) network.

 

I've made a little table showing some of the offers of the 2 companies. Prices can be different in other regions, especially at Telekom. I think this is because Digi is a smaller company and they built most of their own network, meanwhile Telekom has the largest overall availability in the country, with variable technologies and available subscription offers. This is mostly due to Telekom (as far as I know) is renting some of their parts of their network from local, really small ISPs.

I included guaranteed speeds, although it's usually not an issue for ISPs here to provide the maximum speeds they advertise.

 

	Digi			Telekom
	DIGINET 1000 FTTH	DIGINET 500 FTTB	DIGINET 100 FTTB	OTTHONI INTERNET 2000	OTTHONI INTERNET 1000	OTTHONI INTERNET 250	OTTHONI INTERNET 100	OTTHONI INTERNET 50
Maximum Download Speed	1000	500	100	2000	1000	250	100	50
Maximum Upload Speed	200	200	100	500	200	20	10	5
Guaranteed Download Speed	300	200	25	300	300	15	1	1
Guaranteed Upload Speed	50	50	20	50	50	4	1	1
Price (HUF/USD, 27% VAT included, without loyalty programs)	3300 HUF/~$12.5	2900 HUF/~$11	2500 HUF/~$9.5	11631 HUF/~$43.5	6659 HUF/~$25	5816 HUF/~$22	5057 HUF/~$19	4467 HUF/~$17

 

 

[dizmo]

Interesting I guess? Before people start bitching about how low that pricing is, they should consider the fact that Hungary is a tiny country... 

[Syntaxvgm]

And I"m sitting here with my 100Mb/s symmetric for 80USD a month and thinking I'm lucky. 

[PlayStation 2]

inb4 people bitch about the US' internet

[Max_Settings]

1 minute ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

inb4 people bitch about the US' internet

I was just about to XD. 

[heimdali]

2 minutes ago, Syntaxvgm said:

And I"m sitting here with my 100Mb/s symmetric for 80USD a month and thinking I'm lucky. 

You are because you can get that.

 

What about static IPs?  An internet connection without one is somewhat useless.

 

[Syntaxvgm]

2 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

inb4 people bitch about the US' internet

because it's shit and there's no good reason. In the country, I get it. In the cities, wtf. 

[BuckGup]

7 minutes ago, Syntaxvgm said:

And I"m sitting here with my 100Mb/s symmetric for 80USD a month and thinking I'm lucky. 

You are very lucky though. I'm sitting here with 750Kb/s at $150 a month. So screw off everyone complaining 

[Syntaxvgm]

Just now, heimdali said:

You are because you can get that.

 

What about static IPs?  An internet connection without one is somewhat useless.

 

nah don't have one, don't need one. I could get 2Gb/s here from comcast for 300 USD a month, I tired to get 1Gb/s a from them for 150 a month, but they were a fucking headache since 90% of them didn't know they offered it. Then they did the 1TB bandwidth cap, which meant I would have to pay an additional 30 a month, so I got 100Mb/s from frontier. BTW these great speeds didn't happen until I got competition here a few years ago. 

A lot of where I live can only really get DSL or comcast, which with them it's like 100Mb/s down will get you 7Mb/s up. 

On the static IP, I could see what my ISP offers for a business line, but it likely costs more. 

Instead I have 2 connections- one 100Mb/s upa and down, and a backup one from comcast that's 10/1 and has a bandwidth limit. 

For stuff I'd need a static IP for I rent a VPS from Vultr. 

[BuckGup]

7 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

inb4 people bitch about the US' internet

It's true though. We have horrible internet and with net neutrality being shot in the skull in 19 days it will get even worse

[Syntaxvgm]

Just now, BuckGup said:

You are very lucky though. I'm sitting here with 750Kb/s at $150 a month. So screw off everyone complaining 

10-15 minutes south of me that's the case. Ping times so bad it's not able to even load pages at all. 

[BuckGup]

Just now, Syntaxvgm said:

10-15 minutes south of me that's the case. Ping times so bad it's not able to even load pages at all. 

Yup my ping spikes to over 2000ms daily for no apparent reason

[TMS]

2 minutes ago, heimdali said:

You are because you can get that.

 

What about static IPs?  An internet connection without one is somewhat useless.

 

As far as I know you can only get a static IP at either ISP if you are their customer as a company. Although on some of their technologies, for example DOCSIS, the IP rarely changes. For Digi, I don't have a guess. I'm currently at Digi where I live, but I just didn't care about a static IP since then. People here mostly use these bandwidths for piracy, not for hosting servers and stuff.

[Syntaxvgm]

Just now, BuckGup said:

Yup my ping spikes to over 2000ms daily for no apparent reason

it's fucking shit this is 100% the reason i don't live in the country. So I live as close as possible. 

[heimdali]

Internet connections without static IP should be only given out when explicitly requested for those who want only like half a connection.

 

Interestingly, they even guarantee some bandwidth in Hungary.  All these things you can only dream of here.

 

[TMS]

2 minutes ago, heimdali said:

Internet connections without static IP should be only given out when explicitly requested for those who want only like half a connection.

 

Interestingly, they even guarantee some bandwidth in Hungary.  All these things you can only dream of here.

 

Why would you consider a connection with dynamic IP half a connection?

[heimdali]

10 minutes ago, TMS said:

Why would you consider a connection with dynamic IP half a connection?

It limits you to being a consumer who can basically only use what´s being provided by others and is under full control of such others.  That is only half a connection, compared to what you could do if you had a full one.  Not giving out decent connections is a way of controlling ppl.

 

There are other issues to it as well, like not being able to use the IPv6 addresses because the retarded router for which is there is no replacement available doesn´t support delegation.  That´s yet another way of controlling ppl.

[79wjd]

Just now, heimdali said:

It limits you to being a consumer who can basically only use what´s being provided by others and is under full control of such others.  That is only half a connection, compared to what you could do if you had a full one.  Not giving out decent connections is a way of controlling ppl.

 

What would the vast majority of users do with a static IP that they can't do with a dynamic IP?

[TMS]

1 minute ago, heimdali said:

It limits you to being a consumer who can basically only use what´s being provided by others and is under full control of such others.  That is only half a connection, compared to what you could do if you had a full one.  Not giving out decent connections is a way of controlling ppl.

 

I can't imagine a scenario except hosting a game/webserver from your home where you would be in a disadvantage against people who have static IPs.

[heimdali]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

What would the vast majority of users do with a static IP that they can't do with a dynamic IP?

They´d be able to access their networks remotely and to run their own servers.  They´d be able to protect their privacy better.

 

[79wjd]

2 minutes ago, TMS said:

I can't imagine a scenario except hosting a game/webserver from your home where you would be in a disadvantage against people who have static IPs.

Just now, heimdali said:

They´d be able to access their networks remotely and to run their own servers. 

DDNS

Just now, heimdali said:

They´d be able to protect their privacy better.

How?

[heimdali]

1 minute ago, TMS said:

I can't imagine a scenario except hosting a game/webserver from your home where you would be in a disadvantage against people who have static IPs.

I´d be running at least a web server and an email server.  Not being able to do that really sucks.

 

[TMS]

1 minute ago, heimdali said:

They´d be able to access their networks remotely and to run their own servers.  They´d be able to protect their privacy better.

 

They can use DynamicDNS. And as I mentioned, these are residential subscriptions, I don't think much people buy servers to run them off from their home connection.

[heimdali]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

DDNS

How?

DDNS sucks especially for mail servers, and it doesn´t  work for sending outgoing messages.

 

Running my own mail server increases my privacy because my messages don´t go to someone elses server, and running a web server also does because I can stay in control of what I put there.

[TMS]

1 minute ago, heimdali said:

I´d be running at least a web server and an email server.  Not being able to do that really sucks.

 

Well, I guess you are the 1% here who would do that. Others would just simply rent these services for cheap at a hosting provider. Or if they really care about privacy, place their servers in a datacenter.