Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
AFAIK, that voice over cable project also involves putting DSLAMS into street cabinets. It's a few months since I gleaned that so I'm not up to date and I think it was initially for business services.
Someone will know, though I suspect that VM insiders will not comment publicly about DSLAMs.
|
Why would VoIP using PCMM involve installing DSLAMs in street cabinets? I'm at a loss as to why VM would want to use VDSL though I've heard those rumours too. First heard rumours about putting this kit in street cabinets in the mid-2000s. There is absolutely nothing for VM to gain by doing this. It would be pointless either in cabled or non-cabled areas.
The plans for VoIP are real and do not require any additional hardware in the field, it's all at hubsites/headends and new CPE for the home.
---------- Post added at 20:41 ---------- Previous post was at 20:25 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq
Yep, it's an Openreach monopoly area because Openreach bothered building a fibre network here and Virgin Media didn't.
Competition? VM could be competing but they're not willing to do any building either unless it's handed to them on a plate. Nonetheless, they did have the option of LLU'ing FTTC but it seems they couldn't be bothered in the end either.
Nah. I'm not excusing BT. I'm just pointing out a "steaming pile of crap" network that delivers a fast and reliable service beats even the best and most amazing network that can't deliver any service at all.
|
What exactly would having a GEA cablelink do for VM? They could supply the same things everyone else supplies over the same last mile network. I can't blame them for abandoning the idea, there's no real option there to differentiate themselves.
Sadly some companies don't inherit a ton of ducting, etc, that allows them to build a 'fibre network' covering 19 million premises for 1.3 billion quid in CapEx. To build a cable or FTTP network in a new area you're looking at, best case, maybe 750 GBP - 1k GBP per home passed.
BT's 'fibre network' was less than years of VM's cable upgrade bill per home passed to build. When you compare less than 70 GBP per home passed with ten times that it's not really that surprising that VM aren't busting a gut to build in new areas. Some companies actually have to dig throughout to build 'fibre networks' rather than using pre-existing civils for the most part.
So if we're talking about companies who only build when it's handed to them on a plate we don't need to look any farther.
These ********* had an amazing opportunity to deploy really fibre-deep next generation access networks, following a hybrid model such as the one in Switzerland where they deployed fibre to the street in more rural areas, basically to distribution points, alongside FTTP in urban areas.
Instead they spend more on football per year than they did on their fibre-to-the-press-release network and deployed something that has no real upgrade path without extensive hardware changes and which Virgin will outperform both downstream
and upstream by next year.
It's a mess when your telco has the money to put bids in on sports rights that make even Murdoch's boys grimace but stubbornly refuses to invest in being a 21st century telco.
I'm actually annoyed that BT deployed their FTTC here, had they not done so we'd probably be looking at an FTTP build this year.