FAO NTL + Lesser Extent Telewest
 

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/51607

Hint hint!

Re: FAO NTL + Lesser Extent Telewest
 

LOL - do they take hints :erm:

Re: FAO NTL + Lesser Extent Telewest
 

Thought you needed to have this printed on every loo roll that goes into the managment loos. :rofl: :rofl: then they might read it.

Sorry guys it was too much of a temptation and it had to be said by someone. :angel:

Re: FAO NTL + Lesser Extent Telewest
 

But you'll use up your 1 Gig cap in about 25 minutes :rofl:

Re: FAO NTL + Lesser Extent Telewest
 

Time Warners cables standard consumer speed is 3Mb!

Meep Meep.

Re: FAO NTL + Lesser Extent Telewest
 

Don't forget this is the USA we are talking about and concidering they had broadband approx 10 years before us we are not doing too bad catching up.

Re: FAO NTL + Lesser Extent Telewest
 

10 years?!?! I think not sir! We got the broadband in 2000 and in 1990 speeds didn't even extend to 56k modems, or for that matter 33.6k!

One of the earliest big broadband rollouts was in Canada in 1998 that's one of the earlier references I can find. There's no real catch up to do, we should really all be using the same technologies!

Re: FAO NTL + Lesser Extent Telewest
 

Actually, the USA was not one of the forerunners of rolling-out broadband - although certain American companies were jointly responsible for developing the technologies involved.

The biggest problem that America had regarding roll-out of xDSL is that geographically it is so large, and also that it had been one of the pioneers for traditional POTS back in the early part of the 20th Century, which meant it had an enormous amount of ancient hardware in place that needed upgrading.

Ironically, some of the countries that are leading the way are those that were, until recently, considered undeveloped, eg Romania. They have been installing new telecommunications networks as the countries develop, as opposed to upgrading, so they have less hardware to replace.

This is also the reason why phone phreaking used to also be more easily achieved in so-called more advanced countries, like USA, Canada, Western European countries, etc... because they didn't necessarily have to replace the old analogue equipment (which was old but still working for normal voice communications), with new digital equipment that was more difficult to hack.

Of course, things could come round full circle, as even newer technlogies are invented, and those countries currently considered to be bleeding-edge are those at the back of the pack, and other countries (China for example) could take the lead.

Finally, an interesting statistic that I remember hearing from a Partner in the telco side of a firm I used to work for was that half the worlds population have never ever made a telephone call. It kinda brings things into perspective a bit, eh? ;)

Re: FAO NTL + Lesser Extent Telewest
 

A lot of Eastern European countries went straight for mobile phones, as upgrading the Soviet era POTS was pretty much pointless, given that mobile technology was there for the taking and cheaper and better to use.

Regarding higher speeds in the UK, when people start shopping around by speed rather than price and connectivity, maybe we'll see it. It'll probably happen when prices have reduced a bit though.

Re: FAO NTL + Lesser Extent Telewest
 

Yep, I remember back around 96-97ish Poland and Romania were upgrading their networks. Operators were installing HFC systems with RF telephony, ie:VOIP We trialed it in the UK afew years before the company I worked for got taken over by CableTel/ntl. All development stopped because it wasn't the americans idea, apparently they said phone and cable TV were seperate networks and should stay that way.

I think the Americans obviously helped fob investors into parting with cash, but they actually held technology up in certain areas. I remember when Front Row launched on the CableTel/ntl Analogue system and certain people wanted to use the POTS network instead of the return path! Imagine what a shambles that could of been for forthcoming products like cable modems, digital Tv and VOD.

Theres always at least one American clown, and they are generally well paid. :rolleyes:

Re: FAO NTL + Lesser Extent Telewest
 

As much of a shambles as going for, say, DAVIC instead of DOCSIS when looking at DTV? One case where the American way was the right way.

Telco return is actually an optional feature of UBRs that's intended for the more diffuse networks in the US where an HFC return path wasn't possible - not generally required in the UK, where quite often we have a return path...

Re: FAO NTL + Lesser Extent Telewest
 

Yes, DAVIC-DOCSIS decision was a shambles, I have said many times before the person responsible should of been sacked. In typical reward for failure ntl policy they are now working in an either higher position in the company.
Same with the Cheeta/Acterna HFC management gear, the guy who decided on that should of been sacked, He's now making decisions on things such as "RF levels for UBR's for upgrades" :D And we know what a shambles that is.

The suggestion by a particular person to use Teclo return when there was a return path network in reasonable shape available was plain stupid. It was the same time if I remember correctly that they couldn't keep up with the telco upgrades because people were taking second lines for internet. Capacity was stretched to the limit, the switch in Cardiff fell over a few times because of congestion and ntl lost big business customers as a result.

Many decisions of that sort are all about big egos and not based on a sound technical basis. :rolleyes:

Re: FAO NTL + Lesser Extent Telewest
 

"Within two years both companies [ntl and telewest] hope to be able to offer broadband at speeds of up to 20Mb"

link: http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcas...314891,00.html

holding one's breath would be careless :D