Read more.Quote:
Will offer the widest Gigabit coverage in the UK; across hundreds of cities, towns, & villages.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Will offer the widest Gigabit coverage in the UK; across hundreds of cities, towns, & villages.
As i'm a BT customer this is very interesting news, but i need to find out more ie: pricing etc...
Virgin are a joke though.
Agreed to stay with them a couple month ago.
Obviously a new contract, since them unable to use service in room outside modem / router location.
Launching 500mb and 1gb services comes at a cost to all other users.
Virgin have always been the same.
No worries, they'll likely increase prices e extortionately again, we'll bet to leave for free.
My home town has been tagged by Openreach as getting FTTH by this time next year, so I'm gonna keep an eye on this...
Virgin sit on the fact they are faster, which is great until they are oversubscribed, then you have to deal with a crap connection until they hit a certain oversubscription level and then upgrade the kit near you..
BT, also suck, so what if they have even the same speeds as Virgin, great if you live near an exchange, if not, forget getting near advertised speeds if you're out in the sticks..
We need a decent 5g ISP that'll do what BT/Virgin cant..
As long as the kit comes with a free tinfoil hat so we dont all get microwaved..
This sounds like proper FTTP in which case it doesn't matter how far you are from the exchange as there isn't any copper in the way. Just the cost of pulling the fiber to your house, which is probably where it will all come unstuck.Quote:
Originally Posted by [GSV]Trig
5g sounds like a non-starter for me. You need line of sight to get good speeds, and I suspect mm wave means speeds will drop like a stone in poor weather. So that gets you dropped back to 4G speeds at those fequencies. Now you just have the heavy filtering of a mobile network in the way, so that means I would need a VPN to tunnel through all their nonsense, adding hassle and latency.
I love how they mention villages getting it, there's not a chance me seeing this anytime soon imo, and I suspect the only villages which will are ones with 'well to do' type people living in them. And 2025 for 'half the homes'... well that will be biased towards places like London then....
Ironically the only things that seem to make my 80/20 line work at full speed is things like torrents (legal obviously) because even high res media streaming doesn't always max it.
The rest of the time I'm more restricted by the servers sending the data than I am my connection and getting a faster download speed isn't going to speed up the server or network backbone sending it to me....
In all honesty, I'm not actually that interested in more download speed (wouldn't say no mind), I would rather see more upload speed (which funnily enough isn't mentioned here), which would in all honesty benefit me more by allowing faster uploads to clients/websites/ftp etc.
EDIT: seems existing bt is 115MB/s upload at 1GBPS.... which in all honesty isn't that great imo
You might be surprised. These places will get FTTP within the year, and I know for a fact some of them aren't full of 'well to do' type people (As said above, one of these towns & villages is mine):-Quote:
Originally Posted by LSG501
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2020/01/openreach-add-227-rural-uk-areas-to-fttp-broadband-rollout.html
Are you within 'commute' distance of somewhere like London or another major city?Quote:
Originally Posted by iworrall
If we get FTTP by the end of 2025, in a small village in West Somerset, the surprise will probably give me a heart attack!
GigaClear are still trying to connect us up with fibre... FTTP, I believe...
By absolutely pure coincidence, the very day after GC connected an actual cable to my property, BT 'suddenly' popped up and said they were now going to bring me Super-Mega-Ultra-über-Fast broadband speeds.... but still only to a maximum of 3Mbps and zero guaranteed minimum. However, they're insisting on sending me out a new router and stuff, to take advantage of this amazingly fast new internet.
But with all the drives from the big companies, plus the GC types who have laid their own fibre to remote customers, that just means there's a whole network of 1GB fibre laid that BT didn't have to fund.... and now it's there, antimonopoly laws mean that you can choose who supplies you, which means BT are hoping to secure your business via the infrastructure for which someone else paid.
Big whoop.
I guess 30+ years late is better than never.
I’ll believe this when it happens BT are an absolute joke, pack of thieving fly by nights, been squandering tax payers money on incompetence and inefficiency for years they couldnt blow up a balloon without 60 people being involved and cancelling the order four times
All ready started in my town! Digging up everywhere but in strange area's of town.
Well I've been with Virgin for many years. I'm on their 350mb tariff and it has worked very well. Any issues have been resolved fairly promptly. Admittedly I'm not in a city so that may be why I'm getting a better service. I think I'll stick with what I have for now.
Yeah yeah. Not believing this until I see it.
What? The web was only invented 30 years ago. I used the internet 5 years before that, but not a lot of people outside of the odd researcher in universities was even aware of it then, let alone needing gigabit fibre to their home.Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky34
My email address and domain was bought by myself in erm...1993 or 1994. I must hold some strange record thenQuote:
Originally Posted by gagaga
And we were right up there as one of the countries leading the way, BT had plans and even facilities to manufacture the equipment that would be needed for a full fibre network, the first wide area fibre optic network was set up in Hastings.Quote:
Originally Posted by gagaga
Quote:
Unfortunately, the Thatcher government decided that it wanted the American cable companies providing the same service to increase competition. So the decision was made to close down the local loop roll out and in 1991 that roll out was stopped. The two factories that BT had built to build fibre related components were sold to Fujitsu and HP, the assets were stripped and the expertise was shipped out to South East Asia.
Sticks-livers, (ohh-arr) forget that its uneconomical to reach them with fibre? Why should I, as a city dweller (non-dung-flinger), subsidise YOUR internet connex?. I cant get Fibre in Central London, so am having to go for wireless Broadband instead, supposedly unlimited (1000Gb/pm). Stump up more taxes , you tax dodging clod-hoppers.
BT OpenReach should be re-nationalised, it's critical national infrastructure and shouldn't be in the hands of shareholders whose only interest is making money, rather than providing a public service.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaddogPepper
Lol should be re-nationalised and private shareholders.. methinks you're a bit confused there sir or being very ironic. I can't quite tellQuote:
Originally Posted by jimborae
Lol you should read the actual reply rather than an email notification! :) I spotted the mistake and edited right away but obviously the notification got sent before I updated it. Still would have made for a very ironic reply as you say.:rockon:Quote:
Originally Posted by 3dcandy
Yeah as I did it it changed.... ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by jimborae
I am not a London dweller.Quote:
Originally Posted by persimmon
Why should I have to pay for the massive super-sewers to alleviate YOUR flooding, when I'm on top of a hill 40 miles away and not even connected to the same SDAC as London?
Why should I have to pay insane fees for my train travel, just to subsidise your Tube fares?
Moreover, you likely cannot get fibre because you live in such a stupidly high population in such a stupidly built-up area... for the same reason you now need a super-sewer. Namely, there have been so many services and utilities laid, one atop the other, atop another, atop yet more, that companies can no longer get through all that cack to service their own assets. There are many locations where we cannot get to ours because someone built a railway over the access point, then laid gas over that, then sewers, then more gas, then electric, then clean water, then telephone lines, then more electric.... Oh, and good luck getting council permission to dig up any roads. Your precious fibre internet will cause traffic jams for weeks!
That's just the physical practicalities, never mind factoring in how much it'd actually cost to lay fibre, as well....
A lot of London fibre is having to be laid inside the sewers because there is absolutely no accessibility anywhere else!
Thing is, London generates a lot of tax revenue for the government, but companies private generate a lot more in private revenue from those outside London... and you wouldn't be in this situation in the first place if you'd invested outside of London instead of trying to cram it into a seething cesspool just because it's the capital city. This is why places like Reading get lots of investment and big companies headquartered here, instead of London.
If you prefer, we can just keep this food we grow here and you can fend for yourselves...?
Nationalised services are mostly funded from borrowing. Private companies (certainly the likes of ours) get some revenue from customer bills, but the vast majority comes from.... borrowing. Yep, 's true.Quote:
Originally Posted by jimborae
The only difference is in, respectively, public government borrowing vs private borrowing and investment.
Certainly we have become utterly amazeballs with the power of private investment, compared to the utter spit-shower we were when nationalised. Do not be too quick to nationalise something...
Doesn't sound too exciting imo. Gigabit fibre has been available for years if you live in the right area or are willing to pay for the cables to be put in - BT are "Just another ISP" these days so it's quite amazing the amount of PR they are able to get from launching a new product that so few people will be able to get.
I think a lot of people still associate them too closely with Openreach and therefore assume that this also means BT are going to magically make this available to lots of people - but it will still rely on the Openreach rollout. Sky et al will also be able to sell this service on the same infrastructure (and in fact, Sky have been testing FTTP for a while now)
Given how slowly FTTC went and how G.FAST is taking even longer, I suspect it will be a very , very long time before most of us can order this product....
Errm, it's entirely privately funded (ultimately via London sewerage charges for customers). https://corporate.thameswater.co.uk/...ill-pay-for-itQuote:
Originally Posted by Ttaskmaster
The tube is self-funding https://www.timeout.com/london/blog/...-profit-052617Quote:
Originally Posted by Ttaskmaster
Higher density = cheaper to deploy, especially to appartment blocks (if you've ever been to SE Asia you'll understand why they have so much fibre - 10s of 50 odd story residential towers tightly packed together). That's why Hyperoptic started in London to deploy to new appartment blocks. It's why they are so cheap too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ttaskmaster
https://www.openreach.com/fibre-broadband/fibre-first The map on this page shows how far off most people are.
yup. I'm within the london zones and still nowhere near!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonatron
Errmm, to quote that very page you just linked - "Over time, the tunnel will be paid for by all the customers who use Thames Water’s sewerage service"Quote:
Originally Posted by gagaga
Besides, it also doesn't maintain itself, so someone has to look after it... and I don't work for free.
It's far more complicated and interconnected than that page suggests, but there's a lot of subsidising and creative accounting going on that underpins the entire London Underground system.Quote:
Originally Posted by gagaga
I confirmed this with our Train Geek - Our team employs a Civil Engineer who is an absolute Trainiac and really knows his stuff when it comes to the railways... so please don't debate me on this, as I'll have to get the long, detailed version out of the guy and I really don't want to speak to him unless absolutely necessary!!
This is the UK, not SE Asia...Quote:
Originally Posted by gagaga
Higher density in places requiring lots of delicate and high-risk excavations = Getting very expensive again.
Add to that all the TWOSAs and BAPAs and all the other protection orders, with all their unlimited liabilities.
Add to that the hassle of securing NRSWA notices on top tier traffic sensitive and engineering difficult roads.
Add to that the cost implications if you actually damage the wrong asset, with the knock-on effect it'd have on all the surrounding ones.
Oh, and it's London, so in some areas you can expect a metric flip-tonne of Grade x Listed historic buildings and features that are at risk from any roadworks.
Sounds like you want have more of a problem of not having enough money for reasonable service than problem with its services. As for wifi covarage - there is a thing called router, go look it up! The modems that come with your connection never have or will be any good as they are FREE. So, again, cba to spend some money but want it all? yeah gl with that, especially with btQuote:
Originally Posted by Yoyoyo69
I'm always surprised by how bad UK's regulation on broadband are, I'm from Brazil and really, they just can't get away with things like this. Over here, you pay not for access but for speed, so my ISP as an example; have packages from 30mb all the way up to 3gb speeds, I pay for 300Mb and they need to deliver at least 80% of that all the time, otherwise it's considered that my service was interrupted untill they're able to give me that 80% of 300mbps once again and while I'm in a "service interupted" situation, I don't pay for my internet even if it only happened during night time when I'm sleeping, they need to deduct that from the bill I'll pay. This ended up creating a situation where ISPs here deliver 10% more boradband than you actually pay for, just for the off chance that there's any problem with the connection. And there are problems, my bill is R$144,00 and there were months when I paid less than R$120,00 thanks to interruptions of the service (144 in Brazilian money is about the equivalent of 30 euros or so). Still, it sems ages beyond what happens in the UK, we get consistent speeds most of the time, there's few outages and we don't end up paying more after a given period, it's actually way more likely that they offer us a cheaper package down the line to keep us from moving to another ISP.
uk has minimum speeds required and many other laws to not scam customers so not really that bad, there are worse countries (usa)Quote:
Originally Posted by meuvoy
problem with uk is copper lines in last mile where physics take control, unless you want to pay for your own optic cable :]
This is typical BT, they'll upgrade cities before anyone else due to population density to claim they're covering "millions" of people. Basic PR fluff, sod the other 25 million households in the UK, essentially they'll cover ~8% of the UK population if they aim for 2 million households. They can't even deliver the speeds they advertise for FTTC, it is literally just theoretical PR nonsense.Quote:
We don’t have plans to upgrade your area yet.
We've been here before. I'll believe it when I see it.
Sounds promising, looking forward to the increase of internet speeds.
My rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbishty, high-ping, unstable 18Mb remains sceptical. How about providing everyone else with decent broadband first? I'm not even in a rural area!
I'll believe it when I see it.
And I probably won't see it in my area.
No UK government has ever understood the importance of a decent FTTP network that reaches the majority of the population.
With the country on lock-down the current paucity of quality coverage is going to be writ large as everyone and his dog start streaming 24/7.