OFCOM - Push for faster net 'premature'

[Stoo]

BBC NEWS | Technology | Push for faster net 'premature'

Both regulator Ofcom and BT have expressed doubts about whether the time is ripe for rolling out what would be expensive fibre optic networks.

"We need significant evidence that such a network is required and I don't think it exists yet," said Peter Philips, Ofcom's head of strategy.

"The question is how to make money and I'm not sure the answer is good," said Justin Paul, a development manager at telecoms equipment firm Alcatel-Lucent.

There is also uncertainty over whether people would be willing to pay more for faster broadband.

Of course people don't want to pay more for faster access speeds, we already pay far more for our current connections than the countries with faster net speeds!

Blithering bloody idiots.

Not sure if the case is there yet? No, it probably isn't *right now*, but by the time you get around to building it it will be needed, and if you don't act now, the UK will be even further behind, and relegated to an also ran rather than the innovator which we have been in the past.

There is lots of competition and innovation in the broadband market and [it is not clear that] current bandwidth is a problem. We don't need to make any rash moves but the time is ripe for some collective thinking," he said.

No, but even getting the current bandwidth in a reliable and cheap enough form bloody well is!

Do these people forget there is life outside major city centres?

[TheAnimus]

careful if you go down the chicken and egg path you will fail miserably in the eyes of buisness.

If you have a backwads place, lets call it cornwall, and it has no motorway, then no one will build any infrastructure for using the motorway, no one (in their right mind) will try and have a distrabution centre there.

But no one will invest in a motorway there, because htere is no one who would pay the toll to use it, its a poor area, and they'd sooner use the B roads.

You need governmental vision to encorage this, or people to figure out a clear, present or garanteeable income stream from doing this.

This is why no one will give a whoot about the backwaters, and as it stands 8mbit is more than enough for the vast majority of users, there are plans for getting more than just 24mbit down copper, this will continue for some time yet, until you get a premium provider war between the likes of virgin and bt. Bt are already advertising their TV on demand services, but its currently expensive as it stands. Give the new technology time, content providers who see a chance for income will lead the way on getting anything but copper services to your house.

And if you live too far away from the exchange, its hardly fair to ask those who live in condensed areas to subsidise you, think how many pensioners are at the mercy of the over priced bottle gas service, why not upgrade that? Its simply not cost effective.

[Agent]

Its just another perfect example of how Ofcom is unable to understand technology.

"We need significant evidence that such a network is required and I don't think it exists yet," said Peter Philips, Ofcom's head of strategy.

But by the time the research, funding, implementation of it ect. has been done, you can bet that there will be.

There is lots of competition and innovation in the broadband market

What a joke of a statement.
You either have cable/Virgin who loads of people are having issues with and limited coverage.
Then you have your 'normal' ADSL providers, that still need a BT phone line.
And lets not forget the LLU lot.....for which you still need a BT line.

Broadband is expensive and often coupled with a poor service. Statements like these only help provide part of the reason why - tits running Ofcom.

[kalniel]

Ofcom or Ostrich?

[EvilMunky]

I used to with some people who now work for Ofcom and they havent a clue what they are doing. The organisation is a complete joke. I still talk to people who work there and they dread when things like this get said as their contact centre goes nuts with the large volumes of people calling / emailing to complain.

[Stoo]

I love how they keep saying 8mbit is good enough for most people.. yeah, if you're part of the 2% of broadband users who live close enough to the exchange to get it that's wonderful, but for the rest of us, even getting a 2meg line up and running is nigh on impossible.

*That* is why we need to get fibre in, because the copper (or aluminium if you're really unlucky..) simply cannot cope we what we have at the moment, let alone what we'll need 5-10 years down the road..

Data pricing needs to come down to stop those silly usage limits, and the ISP's need to get their shizzle together and put a network together which doesn't need the heavy throttling..


Useless bunch of trouser-ferrets.

[EvilMunky]

amen to that brother. Its embarrasing to have our isp speeds wee wee'd upon by the other members of the EU

[TheAnimus]

I love how they keep saying 8mbit is good enough for most people.. yeah, if you're part of the 2% of broadband users who live close enough to the exchange to get it that's wonderful, but for the rest of us, even getting a 2meg line up and running is nigh on impossible.

*That* is why we need to get fibre in, because the copper (or aluminium if you're really unlucky..) simply cannot cope we what we have at the moment, let alone what we'll need 5-10 years down the road..

Data pricing needs to come down to stop those silly usage limits, and the ISP's need to get their shizzle together and put a network together which doesn't need the heavy throttling..


Useless bunch of trouser-ferrets.

I really doubt that its 2% who are too far away to get anything above 2mbit.

The problem is, simply, I don't want to pay for it, do you? I'd sooner have the water pipes fixed so that i can have a bath in the summer months.

Now, think, even fiber to the kerbside would be rather expensive. Good, but its not going to happen any time soon. Think of it in kidney machines, or aids medication for photogenic orphans etc.

[moogle]

The arguments in favour of this makes me laugh!

You can shoot someone so much quicker at 50 megabits.

Just too funny

[badass]

What made me laugh more was that Virgin were claiming 50 Mbit.
Surely with 25% packet loss the throughput is a max of 37.5 Mbit?
Virgin=useless bunch of

[Nickg]

the thing is though, you pay for a 2MB ADSL Line, but when you have a contention ration of 50+>1 its not too hot.

people want "on demand" entertainment. I.e download and watch the latest film, or next episode now, or even yesterday quick.

they dont want to see, 50% Buffering messages.

they dont want kids to complain about their Ping hitting 1000 whilst the family is watching a programme on IPTV....


but yes the companies are right, if they upgrade the infratsucture they are not going to realise revenue streams in the next 5 or 10 years to offset the investment. It should take 20 years plus for this to come back and turn a profit, however the companies are not looking that far ahead...

[dave87]

I actually support the idea of 21st Century Network.

The placing of Fibre to the Street Cabinets allows for upgrades in the future, whilst minimising cost to the consumer. It may not jump us to 100mb straight away, but how many people are actually capable of using that sort of bandwidth legitimately? I'd rather have 20mb with decent upload than 100 down and 1 up.

The idea of on demand content is a good one, the only problem being how many companies have the infrastructure to provide a reliable service without using something like a Bit Torrent backend/distribution network. That is something that is probably down to cost, so as others have mentioned, reduction in transit costs may be the best way forward.

Again, this requires the upgrade of the backbone network, so won't happen until there is an economic motivator for it to. Surprisingly, I do actually support BT's outlook on this one...

[Lucio]

I'm still on "standard" ASDL, rather than the new packages being pushed via LLU because I'm that far from the exchange, having extra phone points wired up in the house destroyed the signal.

Though I admit, it is nice always getting my 1Mbps connection speed regardless of the time of day, it's like having a 1:1 contention ratio as everyone else has chased after the cheaper packages

[dave87]

I'm on 8mb both at my house in Norfolk and at my parents in Essex, and the situation is completely different.

Essex - 7.5mbit out of an 8mb package, so as close as possible to the max speed.
Norfolk - 2.8mbit out of an 8mb package, not exactly fast.

However, I'm some 4-5miles from the exchange, so I would have been getting max 512kb under the old system. So I've actually done better under ADSL Max. The problem lies, however, with consumers expectations, as few people fully understood the nature of ADSL Max, and how it was up to. Hopefully, the new 21st Century Network will provide stable speeds at a lot quicker than previously available.

[moogle]

I'm still on "standard" ASDL, rather than the new packages being pushed via LLU because I'm that far from the exchange, having extra phone points wired up in the house destroyed the signal.

Though I admit, it is nice always getting my 1Mbps connection speed regardless of the time of day, it's like having a 1:1 contention ratio as everyone else has chased after the cheaper packages

if your internet is on your phone line doesnt that make the ratio 1:1? or is it shared with everyone at the exchange?

[dave87]

Your connection with the exchange is 1:1, but then the meaningful part (to the internet) is shared amongst x number of people, usually 50:1 but can be higher.