@Stonck13 Yes, that’s right, Liberty Global, the parent company of UPC, has taken over Sunrise.
https://www.upc.ch/de/ueber-uns/information/mitigung/
No, that’s not what I meant. Sunrise’s statement was that they do not see themselves as a discounter, but as a premium provider. From this I conclude that the merger with UPC will not trigger a downward slide in prices here. Since there are now only two big players on the Swiss market, in my opinion further development will focus on expanding/further developing the services and not on low prices.
That’s why I come to the conclusion that the probability that prices will rise is greater than the probability that prices will fall. It remains to be seen whether this is actually the case. In any case, there is more money left over for FTTH expansion, for example, which is also something. 😉
3 months later
In fact, Blu TV has poorer picture quality compared to cable and SAT because it is very heavily compressed. But since more and more connections are very broadband, I would like to see improvements made here. In addition, more and more people have large 4K TVs and therefore the upscaling and massive compression of the box and stream are insufficient. Quality doesn’t match the picture. Quality is right in terms of operation, office location, etc. Why not proceed adaptively according to Anschluss? So compression depending on the connection.
@Swissco wrote:
In fact, Blu TV has poorer picture quality compared to cable and SAT because it is very heavily compressed. But since more and more connections are very broadband, I would like to see improvements made here. In addition, more and more people have large 4K TVs and therefore the upscaling and massive compression of the box and stream are insufficient. Quality doesn’t match the picture. Quality is right in terms of operation, office location, etc. Why not proceed adaptively according to Anschluss? So compression depending on the connection.
There are providers (Init7) who do not compress the TV streams at all: [https://www.init7.net/de/tv/angebot/technik-voraus/](https://www.init7.net/de/ tv/offer/technically-advance/)
@millernet bad comparison. init7 doesn’t build its own network, they only rent space where there is already a very good infrastructure. Swisscom must design its service in such a way that Swisscom TV can also be consumed reasonably sensibly over a copper cable. That’s why the streams are compressed.
By the way: not compressing does not necessarily mean better image material. Only lossy compression leads to a reduction in image quality. You probably know zip and rar, some of which are massively compressed, but that doesn’t mean it’s lossy.
However, image comparisons suggest that the image is actually slightly worse compared to other providers. Anyone who values the highest image quality would do well to really take a look at the competition.
But as long as the 24P stuttering on Netflix and co is not perceived as problematic by customers, the slightly poorer image quality on Swisscom TV won’t really play a decisive role 😉
@kaetho I know the difference between lossy and lossless (e.g. redundancy reduction) compression. Init7 also compresses, otherwise we would have data rates in the range of several 100 Mbit/s. Init7 means the 1:1 transmission of the received raw signal via satellite, which in turn corresponds to H.264 or MPEG-2. MPEG-2 is probably still being “recoded” into H.264. However, there is no additional compression. Today, H.264 (MPEG-4 AVC), H.265 (HEVC) or VP9 is usually used for compressed video signals. These codecs can be adjusted and optimized with many parameters, usually in favor of a lower bit rate but at the same time slightly worse image quality. But here, too, there will eventually be a movement similar to that of high-resolution audio: high bit rates with maximum image quality, which will then be the case with 4K or UHD HDR 60 fps could probably mean 200 - 400 Mbit/s, at 120 fps it becomes even more demanding. However, no streaming service currently offers such bandwidth because bandwidth costs. The stream has to be brought to the end customer via a CDN, which costs a lot of money with such throughputs. In addition, Swisscom, UPC and Co. would also charge considerable sums for peering, as there is a high asymmetry between upstream and downstream. Fortunately, Init7 is one of the few ISPs in this country to steadfastly defend itself against such double-sided deals (https://www.itreseller.ch/artikel/91423/Init7_gewinnt_Peering-Process_against_Swisscom.html). I also find the WEKO proceedings against XGS-PON justified and am looking forward to the outcome of the decision. Init7 or Künzler is controversial, but certainly respectable as a little David against the federal company Swisscom.
What kind of marketing blah blah? There is no such thing as “uncompressed”, unless you have a RAW stream of x-Gigabit/s directly from the television studio. It is not additionally compressed and corresponds to the quality from satellite or full HD when supplied directly from the broadcaster. To put it better: It corresponds to the quality of the “raw” stream available.
@millernet wrote:
@…I also think the WEKO proceedings against XGS-PON are justified and I’m looking forward to the outcome of the decision. Init7 or Künzler is controversial, but certainly respectable as a little David against the federal company Swisscom.
Unfortunately, Mr. Künzler doesn’t care at all how long it takes for the majority of the population to have fast internet >100Mb, the main thing is that he can rent as cheaply as possible.
For example, he sells his Internet at a fixed price, regardless of how much speed the customer can achieve, which is of course more lucrative for him.
@thoems wrote:
@millernet wrote:
@…I also think the WEKO proceedings against XGS-PON are justified and I’m looking forward to the outcome of the decision. Init7 or Künzler is controversial, but certainly respectable as a little David against the federal company Swisscom.
Unfortunately, Mr. Künzler doesn’t care at all how long it takes for the majority of the population to have fast internet >100Mb, the main thing is that he can rent as cheaply as possible.
For example, he himself sells his internet at a fixed price, regardless of how much speed the customer can actually achieve, which is of course more lucrative for him.
Well, I’m a bit of two minds about that too. Künzler already has the habit of sitting in the prepared nest; anything else would not be financially viable for small providers like Init7. In Switzerland one simply needs to differentiate more clearly between infrastructure and service. I would find it justified if you have a free choice of different providers everywhere on the fiber optic network, but depending on the region you pay more or less for the Anschluss / fiber optic connection (Layer 1) itself. If, for example, the fiber optic expansion was mainly financed by Swisscom, then I think an additional amount of CHF 30 or more per month for the pure fiber optic connection is justified. But if you live in the city of Zurich and have over 600 million francs in tax money there. Interest-free loan helped finance the fiber optic expansion, so of course no additional amount is due. But: The free choice of providers should also include a free choice of technology. If Swisscom now simply uses technologies based on XGS-PON and P2MP, then this will clearly restrict competition. With AON and P2P topologies you are much more flexible, you can implement dedicated bandwidths or even higher bandwidths than 10 Gigabit/s and can already do this today with existing commercially available Ethernet or. QSFP+, SFP28, QSFP28 etc. and doesn’t have to get involved in proprietary nonsense from Huawei or Nokia. From a technological and competition law perspective, it is a mistake to build the fiber optic network in large parts of Switzerland with XGS-PON based on P2MP and thus consolidate a monopoly. Swisscom is entitled to a higher fee where the taxpayer has not provided any support for expansion, but not to a technology monopoly. With a P2P topology, competition can be created flexibly and economically. With P2P, every competitor is free to “send” XGS-PON, Ethernet, quantum or Morse code over the fiber. Unfortunately, Swisscom is now in a dead end: if it wants to supply the individual buildings with fiber optics from the thousands of MFGs and manholes that will be created with the FTTS expansion, this cannot be done due to the small number of fibers (estimated at around 24 - 48 Fibers between the control center and MFG/manhole) can only be done on the basis of P2MP with splitters, otherwise fibers have to be tightened.
Hello @millernet
In order for fibers to be added, all customers who are after the MCan must first also be running on it.
Only when the copper is empty and there are no more customers on it can you pull out the copper and then you have space to pull in fiber optics from the headquarters again.
Maybe the splitter will be replaced later and there will be P2P fiber.
And if you can’t get the copper out anymore, it will be extremely expensive if you have to pull new empty pipes.
Greetings Lorenz
@millernet wrote:
….
With a P2P topology, competition can be created flexibly and economically. With P2P, every competitor is free to “send” XGS-PON, Ethernet, quantum or Morse code over the fiber.
If the infrastructure is financed by the state, yes. However, if the infrastructure has to be created by a provider, it simply incurs additional costs and the expansion takes longer, meaning many residents will get ‘reasonable’ speeds later.