High speed broadband to become a legal right in the UK

[Millennium]

This is interesting. I hope it's not too expensive. On the one hand, investment in broadband / fibre infrastructure is important moving forward, on the other hand running FTTH in nowhereland, nowhereville outer Hebrides is bound to be expensive and we shouldn't all be paying too much more for that I would think.

I have been making do with ADSL2+ for quite a number of years now. I believe it's now time to move to some kind of fibre situation though, mainly because my current ISP (Origin) is not particularly reliable (they are OK now but I had to complain and they were pretty iffy before...) but also because it looks like I'll be able to fairly happily afford it moving forward.

I'm about to get on ThinkBroadband and make a post asking for advice on this (I've still got about 9 months left on my ADSL contract right nows)... if anyone has any advice on companies and switching from ADSL to FTTC (no cable here?) I would be happy with that. One thing I am somewhat concerned about is if I switch from ADSL now, will it be easy to maybe go back to ADSL later at the same address if I find I would pay less in the future or mobile networks become enough. I'm also keen on keeping latencies low is Fibre latency generally lower than ADSL (I think I'm around 15ms now)?

Sorry for thread derail Hexus not really deliberate !)

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The thing is even in the radius around London,and surrounding counties,interwebs can be pretty crap - 40/10 would be considered "very decent" FFS in some parts(guess where I live).

This is why instead of headline speeds,I would rather the government targets something like 20/5 as a minimum,and also with additional capacity for the future.

Heck,the 10MB target is a start and is certainly more than useable since I doubt whole parts of the country can barely even stream a programme at 1080p.

If certain areas want to spend more from local taxes to up that level,or companies want to do so,then they can chose to.

Its more important we get the millions of people in rural areas,and not so rural but poorly served areas better minimum connections. There is huge congestion.

The whole point of what the government doing is not for you to download your Steam game 5 seconds quicker,or upload that 60GB BluRay movie you made to the interwebs quicker.

Some of you need to realise,that with whole parts of the country barely having functional internet as it does affect the country more than you think,especially if you really consider that businesses do run outside cities too,and you know with our expanding population,it might be a good thing to try and not concentrate everything just in maybe one part of the country?? Just saying!

The issue is if they were to target something like 100/40,etc it will just push the cost up and slow down the deployment time,meaning it will only be a few cities being served and whole parts of the country will be stuck with the same flaky connections for decades more,and millions of people being stuck with subpar connections.

Enthusiasts need to be realistic. Its like saying an i3 7100 is crap compared to a Core i7 8700K at 5GHZ,and the alternative is for someone to keep using their first generation Atom based netbook. However,for most people its more than fast enough for their purposes and would be an upgrade over an Atom,or a PS4 is crap for gaming compared to a Core i7 8700K/Titan Xp combo at qHD but than for many its "good enough" and is better than using the IGP on their laptop.

This is about raising the minimum bar,not about making already "decent" areas for interwebs twice as fast.

The minimum bar in too many places is barely useable connections ATM!!

[Saracen]

How do people even survive with this internet speed.

If they aren't downloading loads of software, streaming lots of video or playing online games, etc., then they'd probably cope just fine. And I don't.

I rarely download more than a PDF or two, and large downloads are pretty much limited to the occasional Linux distro package. Streaming is probably half a dozen youtube clips .... per year.

I has a 4MB until recently, when a switch for TV services for the other half meant switching bundke supplier and I ended up with much, MUCH faster than government's 10MB "high speed". Going back to 4MB wouldn't bother me at all and if it would save me a few quid a month, I'd already have done it.

It all depends on what you do online and I'm doing less and less.

[3dcandy]

It's not restrictive for me 'yet' but I can see it becoming more restrictive in the near future. My use case is sending files etc to clients (I work from home) and I'm seeing a gradual increase in file sizes with 1GB+ being a very common scenario, purely because of the usual bloat from year to year (thanks software companies) and the extra bits you add in as you learn new tricks etc.

You've also 'everything' going towards 'store and access it all from online storage' (for a monthly fee of course) versus at home so I can only see uploading requirements increasing.

You've also got to look at it from a 'family' perspective, with just one maybe 2 people it's not likely an issue but if you start looking at 3+ people using the upload it can seriously dent it's speed.

But you're not really the "average" user are you? And that, in a nutshell, is the problem...when the average user will now stream most of their stuff and upload very little

[3dcandy]

And just to add... there are specialist companies who will allow you to have a better upload rate, but you will have to pay for the privilege. I imagine that you currently use a pretty normal home account at the moment...

[Ttaskmaster]

Oh great, means lots of us will have the 'privilege' of subsidising uneconomical and expensive installations.

What, like sewerage and electricity?
You don't seem to mind subsidising those... in fact, you probably don't realise which ones you are and aren't subsidising.

(guess where I live).

Thought you were in Saskatchewan, or summat?

Some of you need to realise,that with whole parts of the country barely having functional internet as it does affect the country more than you think,especially if you really consider that businesses do run outside cities too,and you know with our expanding population,it might be a good thing to try and not concentrate everything just in maybe one part of the country?? Just saying!

^ This.
That and finally being able to use this new USO for slapping anyone who thinks I should quit complaining about my 0.7Mbps connection because "high speed broadband is not a legal entitlement or anything"... particularly since most of those people tend to have over 75Mbps their own selves!

[3dcandy]

This is interesting. I hope it's not too expensive. On the one hand, investment in broadband / fibre infrastructure is important moving forward, on the other hand running FTTH in nowhereland, nowhereville outer Hebrides is bound to be expensive and we shouldn't all be paying too much more for that I would think.

I have been making do with ADSL2+ for quite a number of years now. I believe it's now time to move to some kind of fibre situation though, mainly because my current ISP (Origin) is not particularly reliable (they are OK now but I had to complain and they were pretty iffy before...) but also because it looks like I'll be able to fairly happily afford it moving forward.

I'm about to get on ThinkBroadband and make a post asking for advice on this (I've still got about 9 months left on my ADSL contract right nows)... if anyone has any advice on companies and switching from ADSL to FTTC (no cable here?) I would be happy with that. One thing I am somewhat concerned about is if I switch from ADSL now, will it be easy to maybe go back to ADSL later at the same address if I find I would pay less in the future or mobile networks become enough. I'm also keen on keeping latencies low is Fibre latency generally lower than ADSL (I think I'm around 15ms now)?

Sorry for thread derail Hexus not really deliberate !)

FTTC just generally has a modem capable of receiving the correct protocol VDSL and then the service is switched on. As most modems already have ADSL2+ and VDSL then going back is as easy as asking to switch. Just remember that the Sky routers are currently rubbish for wireless (No N support, poor speeds and especially poor with fruity type devices for some reason) BT Home Hubs are pretty good and the Talk Talk ones are just OK. My Virgin "Super" Hub is pretty good but wifi range is not the best at all

[LSG501]

But you're not really the "average" user are you? And that, in a nutshell, is the problem...when the average user will now stream most of their stuff and upload very little

True but like I said the situation is changing where companies are trying to 'encourage' us to use their online storage (for a monthly fee). It's not just about now, it's about what it will be like in 2020 and beyond, plus there's no mention of any further improvements after they hit 10 down in this announcement either. You only need to look at the latest windows 10 updates to see that MS is starting to integrate their online storage etc into the OS more to see that this is a direction things are heading in.

There's also a lot more people working from home now than there used to be (and I can see it increasing too), companies that don't need to be face to face with people can easily work around vpn's and remote offices in a lot of cases and it can also reduce their overheads because they don't need an office etc.

The thing is while I'm not an 'average' user there isn't really any alternatives other than 'average' user packages for a lot of the country, f2p and ethernet last mile is stupidly expensive and I'm limited to basically what BT offers and they seem to be focusing down not up on most things (I'm not in London so no fancy stuff at reasonable prices). They could have easily done a 80/40 package or something similar with g-fast (actually pretty sure normal vdsl could support it), because lets be honest 80Mbits down isn't slow for most people.

EDIT: I'm actually on a 'business' package not that there's any real difference with fibre packages in all honesty.

[3dcandy]

Not arguing...but you STILL are not the average person. Most people will sit at home and stream netflix and upload next to nothing apart from a video to facebook of their cat. So they will download 200 meg and upload 1. Until that changes, which I can't see it doing anytime soon then you will be a different case and will have to just realise that most internet useage is down and very little up. I remember reading some report earlier this year from my current ISP that their internet useage is roughly 99.1% download and 0.9 upload for an average customer in actual data. Very few ISP's have synchronous useage, mostly business packages and yes you will pay through the nose for it. ISP's wil cater for the majority - they still have a business to run, like you. Cost to provide a better upload would be considerable

[Ttaskmaster]

Not arguing...but you STILL are not the average person. Most people will sit at home and stream netflix and upload next to nothing apart from a video to facebook of their cat. So they will download 200 meg and upload 1.

What about people who game on PC and console?
Last time I checked, the average console game was about 45GB without DLC.
What about people who download TV series box sets - I understand things like SkyTV use the internet for such services.

Most people I know would download and watch later, perhaps even stream content while they wait for the download.

[3dcandy]

What about people who game on PC and console?
Last time I checked, the average console game was about 45GB without DLC.
What about people who download TV series box sets - I understand things like SkyTV use the internet for such services.

Most people I know would download and watch later, perhaps even stream content while they wait for the download.

Exactly..that's ALL download from servers..no uploading.

[Pob255]

EDIT: I'm actually on a 'business' package not that there's any real difference with fibre packages in all honesty.

wrong you're on the generic "business" package which is more of a small/not high internet demand business.
if you can get the 80down 20up then you will also be able to get a Leased Line, which is meant for larger/high volume traffic and that is an equal up/down line . . . however the cost isn't cheap.
BT are not the only ones who do that Virgin do as well they call it "Managed Internet Access" they go from 30\30 to 1000\1000 if I remember correctly, what you can get depends on your location and such.

10\10 used to be the common starting speeds for a dedicated line

[Ttaskmaster]

Exactly..that's ALL download from servers..no uploading.

Bit more than 200meg, though... and what if I want to backup all such files to The Cloud? How big is that? How long do you think it'll take to back up my twin 3TB drives with online storage at only 1Mbps upload?

[LSG501]

Exactly..that's ALL download from servers..no uploading.

There's also this lovely feature that MS decided to add to windows 10, and is enabled by default iirc, where they decided we'd all be happy to upload the updates to other users for them.... yes it's one of the first things to get turned off, along with A LOT of other things.

Obviously there's bidirectional things like video calls etc and then there's the 'streamers' (becoming more common too) who upload video's while playing games etc.

wrong you're on the generic "business" package which is more of a small/not high internet demand business.

it's sold as a business package, it's invoiced with vat etc for a busines, so it's aimed at businesses but as I said I do know it's basically no different to the consumer one....

if you can get the 80down 20up then you will also be able to get a Leased Line, which is meant for larger/high volume traffic and that is an equal up/down line . . . however the cost isn't cheap.
BT are not the only ones who do that Virgin do as well they call it "Managed Internet Access" they go from 30\30 to 1000\1000 if I remember correctly, what you can get depends on your location and such.

10\10 used to be the common starting speeds for a dedicated line

As I said in my original comments, while I neglected to mention leased lines specifically, those sort of things are stupidly expensive, not to mention overkill for a lot of people.. there is basically no middle ground which is what is needed. I'm also, due to their basic monopoly and my location, at the mercy of BT so they can basically charge what they like for 'true' business connections.

[Corky34]

Probably an obvious or stupid question but why do ISPs restrict upload speeds so much, i wouldn't have thought it was a technical thing as a wire doesn't care what direction an electrical signal is going, does it?

[peterb]

Iirc it is related to the overall bandwidth of the final copper connection. The digital signal is modulated onto a carrier, and the overall bandwidth of the cable is finite. Again iirc, the upload is at a lower frequency, the download at higher to give greater capacity..

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/VDSL