Quote:
Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq
Well given the discussion was about the release of >100Mbps packages accompanied by vectoring (which makes sense since the former requires the latter) then I think it's totally relevant. If they do release 110/120Mbps then they're not going to do it without vectoring so non-vectoring speeds aren't going to be the ones achieved on said service.
|
Given BT haven't announced any plans to go above the current speeds I'm not sure what discussion you're referring to. Quite the opposite actually, they're on record as saying vectoring, at least initially, is not seen as an opportunity to increase headline speeds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq
Now you're quite vocal about your objection to BT's current er, investment strategies, however I do wonder what you think about the comparison with Germany. After all, Germany started deploying VDSL several years before the UK yet we've already overtaken them in coverage and are offering comparable service for similar money (50/10 service is €40 on a 24m contract there). The investment, per home, by BT is only slightly lower than that done by DT (assuming those figures haven't changed drastically) - 66% of 25.7 million households for £2.5B here, 65% of 40.1 million households for £4.8B there, and we're getting there 2 years earlier and achieving a 60% faster headline speed. The last figure I could find for Germany put their FTTP coverage at a paltry 2.6% as well.
Perhaps we're getting a bit spoilt in Britain. Despite Openreach's "bargain basement" spending as you call it we're already well ahead of all other major European economies for NGA broadband speed, availability, price, and takeup. We have the most superfast broadband, the cheapest superfast broadband, the most widely available superfast broadband and the fastest superfast broadband [of the big 5 EU economies] - and many of those are true for our standard broadband and mobile broadband too. How much more do we really need?
|
I couldn't care less about our comparison with Germany, owing to the fact that I'm in the UK, not Germany, and have no more interest in comparing our services to Germany's than I do comparing the private parts of my anatomy with someone else's
If we're talking about that article you might get a kick out of
ThinkBroadband's most recent fact sheet.
Compare it to their
first forecast less than 18 months earlier.
We can play games by comparing ourselves with countries that are far more sparsely populated, hence have far higher costs of deploying NGA, doesn't change that we could and should be much better.
A far more accurate comparison would be if we compared ourselves to Switzerland or the Netherlands. 85% of our population live in England; England is more densely populated than anything in Europe apart from Malta. 98% of the Netherlands has access to SFBB, there's more FTTP in one city than in the whole of the UK.
Clearly other companies agree given competition beginning to crawl out of the woodwork and show a face in some cities despite their cost of deployment being sky high compared with BT's.
Strange - you're constantly spending money on IT, seem to have more hardware at home than you support at work and have a NAS larger than some SME's but are fine with broadband way slower than many comparable urban areas outside of the UK.
Would have thought symmetrical gigabit would be of huge interest to you.