Quote:
Originally Posted by sollp
The cash is being spent and there are massive programmes of investment in the network happening over the next few years as VM know the network will not fully support VOC,Docsi3.1 so have to invest to achieve it.
|
Running VoIP needs changes either side of the physical plant rather than directly on it, and possibly some battery backups being installed. DOCSIS 3.1 will require some work.
None of this is any consolation to those suffering or changes the fact that VM couldn't give a crap whether or not their customers can reach their tier's maximum speeds as it's simply not a metric they measure.
The DOCSIS 3.1 upgrades don't, in themselves, add any extra capacity. That still needs nodes to be split and additional channels to be added.
If the cash is being spent why are the average speeds at peak times lower than they were a year ago? I'll answer my own question - because the rebuild budget, the one the DOCSIS 3.1 upgrades come under, is not the same or has anything to do with the capacity budget. Those upgrades are worth nothing in terms of relieving congestion without extra fibre to split nodes, and extra CMTS ports to terminate those nodes on.
VoC/VoIP does nothing, at all, to resolve these capacity issues. The voice services will run on UGS, unsolicited grant, so even when a node's broadband customers can't even manage a megabit voice calls will run perfectly. They need zero additional capacity.
---------- Post added at 21:56 ---------- Previous post was at 21:53 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by sollp
No help needed thanks. There are the limitations of the service causing the issue, hence my moan about those limitations as they seem acceptable to BT to give such low speeds and do nothing about as they have now lowered the spec to 40Mb. So as you can see not a very good service.
Sadly BT need to invest in there network to bring it antwhere closer to what VM are offering. The excuse of,"Thats the limitation of our service is frankly a rip off". I agree that only very recently they have now made it clearer when ordering the service what you actually get is not what is offered, this can then give an informed choice to the customer wanting to take up the service, but this has obviously come about due to the poor limitations of the BT network and must say is a smart move by BT. Now you have no room for complaint,(convenient).
|
From what I can see BT appear to be doing fine as far as sales go, despite these poor limitations, those such low speeds, and doing nothing about them.
Your comment on the lowering of the spec, given this is a comparison to VM, also doesn't take account of what the 'spec' of VM cable services is. Specifically that there isn't one, and people on 152Mb services can, and do, find themselves getting less than 1/20th of that performance at peak periods.
Is 40Mb really 'such a low speed'? Admittedly it's not much good as a cock replacement when discussing broadband speeds with nerds but it's fine for everything, up to and including a 4k stream and some activity on the side.
As far as investment in the network goes, all things being well BT will be delivering a gigabit to my property next year. Not that it's relevant of course.
VM, and Liberty Global, don't care about their customers' speeds as long as they pass some quality of experience metrics. That is the point I've made over and over again and you've not contradicted it. They try and spend as little as possible doing the bare minimum in capacity upgrades to ensure marketing can release tiers.
The symptoms of this are people spending months in oversubscribed areas, having received two sets of 'upgrades' and needing a third as the first two didn't cut it, and average speeds dropping 5% over the course of a year, just in time for a tier uplift.