Read more.More than 19 out of 20 UK homes and businesses can now get >24Mbps speeds.
Read more.More than 19 out of 20 UK homes and businesses can now get >24Mbps speeds.
Waiting for comments from people saying ~"well mine is still terrible so this isn't true".
Also, remember this is what is available - not necessarily what you get. For example, I still use copper broadband, which only gives me 2.5Mb (theoretical max 17Mb). Effectively this is my choice - I could go fibre, which would probably take me above the >24mb speed, but therefore choose not to (and save myself a heap of cash!)
How the hell is 24Mbps considered "Superfast Broadband" in 2018? Roughly 10 years ago I signed up for 30Mbps ADSL, which at that point was pretty fast given the general absence of fiber optic infrastructure. These days I'm on 500/500, which I consider very fast, but certainly not super fast.
It's important to distinguish between available (allegedly) and what is actually delivered. I'm on an up to 52Mbps service but, only receive 18Mbps, down from 26Mbps three years ago and yet, for the purposes of this coverage goal, probably still count as having more than 24Mbps available.Originally Posted by Hexus
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." Mark Twain.
I get 200+ on Virgin, but there's no other fibre in the area, so if I want to jump ship, my only option is 8Mbps ADSL. Limits my bargaining power when negotiating with Virgin...
So yes, we exceed that target, but as mentioned before, 24Mbps is not 'Superfast' these days and there isn't much plurality in terms of suppliers.
Pleiades (29-01-2018)
24Mbps is the best you can expect from the ADSL 2+ spec.
So this is just specifying better than ADSL 2+, which is old enough now that it would make a rubbish target for anything.
Given that many business LANs are still on 100mbps, and most people's wireless tops out at about 150mbps in perfect conditions, I suspect you're in a distinct minority there.
I'm on 38mbps fibre, although I rarely get more than 20mbps to anything useful, and I still rekcon that's pretty good. It's at least fast enough for the vast majority of uses - you'd need to be a serious downloader or streamer for less than 20 to be a big issue. I'd agree that by today's standards it's probably not "super" fast (although that's hardly a useful distinction anyway, is it...), but given the first internet connection I had was 56k dial-up, and broadband started out at 512kbps (with actual throughput probably nearer 100 - 200k most of the time), I'm not complaining about the technological progress that's been made. We've seen a real-world 100x increase in internet speeds over the last 15 years - name me something else that's become measurably 100x faster in the same time period...
Pleiades (29-01-2018)
So I'm statistically proven to have worse luck than 95.008% of the country? And still climbing?
Damn.
I realise that's the case, but surely "super fast" ought to mean "approaching or attaining the maximum of what is possible/available"? If I wanted/needed/could afford to I could sign up for 2Gbps right now, so single-digit Gbps is what I would classify as super fast today.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)