Quote:
Originally Posted by camy
you have had problems with vm because youre on the ex ntl network and everyone knows that the ex telewest network (whitch im on) performs alot better because it wasnt rushed and telewest engineers new what they were doing unlike ntl they didnt have the slightest clue what they were doing and thats why you have had problems with your services so if you should be blaming ntl for the poor network they built not virgin its not there fault they just dont have the money to upgrade there network just yet and considering that there 5.6 billion pounds in debt wont help either!!!
peace out
|
Lets correct a few inaccuracies here.
Firstly Telewest didn't design their own digital cable system. Cable and Wireless had paid Anderson Consulting to design and implement their cable network. Andersons then sold this info onto Telewest. Andersons were very good at taking documents and putting their own logos on them. The only difference between CW and Telewests systems were the distribution, Telewest used ATM, CW used a proprietary method.
ntl had designed their own network and system with Divicom. Unfortunately CW cable was sold off to ntl. CW had tied themselves into deals with Liberate (and IBM hence bye bye ntl's excellent internal IT support). ntl had to drop plans to use their own epg and interactive platform due to CW's deals. Liberate sucks.
Then good old Telewest, in order to be the first in the UK to have a HD capable STB they rush out the now V+ box. Its MPEG2 and will be another dead weight Virgin will have to carry for some time. Unfortunately Telewests CTO became Virgins CTO, he doesn't want to admit they made a mistake so Telewests box becomes Virgins.
Telewest had 10 or so headends. ntl had 35 or so. Telewest had fewer channels. In short Telewest didn't have to invest as much money as their network is smaller, it is in no way better! Fewer customers, fewer people complaining. The only thing Telewest took the lead on and seemed to do well was broadband.