Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
Well, the work is already being carried out, and 300 mbps is not necessary! I have 200 and it is more than ample for streaming and all the gadgets we have going here.
Do you really think the country is going to stand still forever? Some on here do seem to live in that dreamy cocoon!
|
The difference between 200 and 300mbps has more to do with network capacity than the last mile of cable to your house. For most people their choice isn’t between 200 or 300mbps, it’s a range of options below 100mbps, and for a depressingly large number of people it’s still below 10mpbs. That’s down to the “last mile” local loop connecting individual homes to the network, which even in ‘superfast’ areas is still relying on a twisted copper pair to deliver services to each customer.
The issue isn’t that some people think the country is standing still, the issue is that you have little concept of other people’s experiences being different than yours (hence your incredulity that anyone is bothered about Virgin getting Dave back, purely because you personally don’t rate it).
Delivering HD content to a PVR by satellite or terrestrial broadcast is relatively inexpensive, using established technology that has years of life left in it. There is no commercial imperative to abandon it in favour of a wholly IP based system. The universal delivery of a high speed IP network connection to every British home ultimately depends on the government wanting to save money by delivering its services online. That’s why it will be many years before it’s even possible to deliver a universal TV service that way.