Originally Posted by J..M (Post 34610080)

Umm....... Where are these optic fibres then ?

Do they feed the steel cubicals VM have at the side of the road ? ...... Cos the stuff under my garden is copper ........

What I do know is @ peak times both VM & BT sloooooooow right down...... Which ain't brill.... But it would appear to be one of those unfortunate facts of life......Another fact of life is that VM is cheaper :)

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 34610095)

I always thought it was fibre to the cabinet (but could be wrong), then copper to your house.

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 34610059)

You really think BT's recent announcement that it will be rolling out fibre will come to VM's areas? Not likely mate. BT have insisted they won't make the investment unless ofcom slack regs which means they are able to make a worthwhile profit from their investment. This stink to me of BT wanting to charge over inflated prices to offer fibre bb connections. They also want max penetration of the market and have no competition which also tells me that they won't be doing it in VM areas for the forseeable future because they want to invest in areas where they are going to make money and where there is competition they won't make the sort of money they can if they offered fibre optic bb in non vm areas.

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 34610380)

The fibre runs to the cabinets in the street then it's not copper to your home at all it's coax. Steel coated with copper to protect it. Still much better than coax and it prevents detiriation of the network and also your speed. (Sorry if i spelt that wrong)

The reason VM slow right down is because of STM.

---------- Post added at 09:37 ---------- Previous post was at 09:36 ----------



Close, but no quite right see above:)

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 34610059)

You really think BT's recent announcement that it will be rolling out fibre will come to VM's areas? Not likely mate. BT have insisted they won't make the investment unless ofcom slack regs which means they are able to make a worthwhile profit from their investment. This stink to me of BT wanting to charge over inflated prices to offer fibre bb connections. They also want max penetration of the market and have no competition which also tells me that they won't be doing it in VM areas for the forseeable future because they want to invest in areas where they are going to make money and where there is competition they won't make the sort of money they can if they offered fibre optic bb in non vm areas.

Originally Posted by Stuart C (Post 34610196)

Based upon past performance, I doubt Sky would do that. What they may be trialling is a Homechoice/Tiscali style IPTV system based upon ADSL. Not sure they'd even trial that, as any such system would be competing against Sky's satellite system as well.

Unless, of course, VOD has affected Sky more than they are willing to let on, after all with the current Sky, Sky + and Sky HD boxes it is impossible to create a system that offers the amount of content Virgin's VOD does.

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 34610197)

Arthur, Sky bought EasyNet a couple of years ago, which gives them a network and local loop access, so your rumour is in fact, history.

Originally Posted by J..M (Post 34610080)

Umm....... Where are these optic fibres then ?

Do they feed the steel cubicals VM have at the side of the road ? ...... Cos the stuff under my garden is copper ........

What I do know is @ peak times both VM & BT sloooooooow right down...... Which ain't brill.... But it would appear to be one of those unfortunate facts of life......Another fact of life is that VM is cheaper :)

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 34610197)

Arthur, Sky bought EasyNet a couple of years ago, which gives them a network and local loop access, so your rumour is in fact, history.

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004 (Post 34612453)

"FTTx or Fibre to the Cabinet in this case, up to the last 200m is copper. Any slowing of internet speeds though is not down to the length of copper cable used and would be down to, probably, UBR usage etc."


Probably down to UBR usage?
If we are to believe the VM spin about " copper cable " being for "Telephone lines" whether it is 200m or even 10% of that then it is still going to be slowed down?
I can see right through the VM BS unfortunately there are some that cannot ;)

Originally Posted by Stuart C (Post 34612470)

No, you have your own agenda..

Actually, as far as it goes, VM's statement is not BS. The simple fact is that ADSL (even the wonderful 2+ that is used for LLU connections) does have distance limitations. Cable does not. Of course, it has other problems (such as capacity on UBRs), but ADSL could theoretically suffer those as well.

If you believe that is BS, just look at any vaguely technical documentation on ADSL..

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004 (Post 34610975)

Where is your evidence that BT will not be providing to VM areas?
After all, if they are after " Max penetration " that you refer to your statement with all respect is blown out the water.
I for one would welcome any competition that gives the choice that even Richard Branson has stated customers should have.
People in vm areas could easily switch if BT are offering a better deal, which is all about choice after all, I do not agree with your sentiments at all with due respect.

---------- Post added at 09:32 ---------- Previous post was at 09:29 ----------

BT have said to ofcom that they won't bother doing it unless there is something in it for them. In other words it can be read as they want maximum profit from their investment. They won't get this if they fibre up VM areas because competition will be rife and most VM customers now take 1,2 or even 3 or 4 services from VM which makes it much harder for BT to persuade them to move over to them. In the same report BT have said they want Ofcom to relax regs so they can get a decent return from their investment, in other words they want to charge a decent price for their bb offerings. I hope VM do get some competition and it drives prices down. It gives the likes of me more choice and better prices because they have to fight for my custom.

What do you mean you don't agree with my sentiments? I am more than happy for VM to have the competition if it means i get a better deal but from what BT have said it doesn't look likely and looks like they would sooner fibre up non cabled areas and therefore there would be no competition which means BT can demand a higher return for their fibre optic bb and won't be challenged.

When i said max penetration i meant max customer penetration, the only way they can do this and gurantee a good income from their investment is start of cabling non vm areas where there is no competition apart from ADSL and LLU ADSL+2


Atleast you admit that vm slows down for some reason, vm advertising BS does not even claim that their service slows down at all! merely ridiculing any other service provider, bring on the competition thats what I say.
VM must be a tad worried, how much are these adverts that they are running?

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004 (Post 34612494)

Stuart please dont insult me and say I have an agenda.
I am merely questioning VM'S publicity.
They claim that " Copper " has an effect on speed, they claim basically that copper is only used by BT, and that the use of copper is only good for telephone calls.
But then we hear, this is not in the adverts by the way, that around 200m of copper is used in its broadband service.
You believe what you want, dont accuse me of having an agenda.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 34611078)

Its more to do with not been forced to wholesale their product at cost. BT will do city areas primarily thats a forgone conclusion. BTw is losing customers to LLU, rolling out fibre to LLU ares (which are typically also cable areas) is the best way to get those customers back. You right it may well cost more, but that isn't necessairly a bad thing because currently retail prices on many adsl isps at the moment is too low and stopping investment.

---------- Post added at 13:33 ---------- Previous post was at 13:32 ----------

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 34611078)

It is true sky have been trialling fibre to the cabinet, probably for VOD style services I expect. Sky anytime on the sky+ boxes has always only been an intermediate service. ADSL wont cut it on its without FTTC/H because only approx 25% of lines would have enough bandwidth to reliably supply the service.

---------- Post added at 13:35 ---------- Previous post was at 13:33 ----------

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 34612806)

BT will stay behind VM in the local loop but will be ahead in the backhaul, of course BT are also ahead in profitability as well with the ability to invest when required.

The question is, what is the point of a local loop that can do 50mbit when the service provider can only cater for 5mbit of bandwidth uncongested?

Originally Posted by camy (Post 34572638)

hi, im sick of all of those people who say virgin is rubbish, there always complaning and most of them dont even have virgin, im with them for xl tv, l broadband and l phone and i have never had any problems with there broadband or tv sevices ive had a couple of problems with my phone service but when ive rang virgin they've always sent an engineer around as soon as they could and fixed the problems ,and ive never had any trouble with there on demand services and im on 4mb broadband (soon being upgrade to 10mb !!!) and whenever i check my speed i always get between 3.6 and 4 meg which is great so if your gonna talk about virgin in a badway FIND ANOTHER FORUM