Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mr_Burns
The network has to be underground - it's in the licence granted by the Government to ntl, etc. Even BT's new network has to be underground (I think). If they could have done it overhead, they would have - it would have been a hell of a lot cheaper but it would have made the sky line look very untidy!.
The old Reddifusion network in Wales is now redundant, but the majority of Poles and cabling still remains.
|
This was the clause that rather crippled the financial viability of cable in the UK, slowed the speed of cable roll out and increased the cost, probably on both by a factor of 10.
I agree it makes the skyline a nicer place, and now most of the pavements have been repaired and trees that were killed reinstated.
Perhaps they will be able to lease duct space to BT in the future as they start their VOIP network upgrade and get rid of the poles from the streets.
The overhead power and cable and telco in the US does make it look very untidy, and makes power distribution less stable, the high winds of the last few years have regularly knocked whole areas of the countrys power out for days.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by andrew_wallasey
So was the original rollout of cable supported by government funding?
|
I don't know but this article indicates that it is in other countries and that the government is unwilling to consider it going forward, I suppose rightly so as the costs would benefit a plc (as well as broadband Britain). A third way would need to be found.
http://www.broadbanduk.org/reports/r..._appendix7.pdf