120M : Surprise, surprise the fastest in UK are.........

IIRC the problem in Milton Keynes has, for may years, been the aluminium wires that were used to connect the place up when it was built.

[qasdfdsaq]

Yet despite being built recently it still turned out to be exceedingly hard to deploy FTTP over the existing ducts, so you gotta wonder about the rest of the country :-/

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Chris

Point taken ... Though its hardly an improvement, is it, given the reality for far too many people. 16Mb would be more than 5x faster than the best speed someone on sub 3 Mb could dream about.

yes the ruling was an insult to me, only requiring 10% of customers to achieve the advertised speed. It smacked of one of those rulings where the regulator does so at the blessing of who it regulates but had to be seen to be doing something to the public.

[General Maximus]

yeah that is stupid and just doesn't make sense. If a company is going to advertise a feature/service to its customers then they should be able to provide that service to the "majority" of its customers the "majority" of the time. I would say 60% of the customers 60% of the time. I know it is a shared connection bla bla bla and they haven't got the bandwidth to guarantee it but look at this way, how would you feel about the following 2 scenarios:

1) VM sign you up to XL TV for £30 a month (I don't know how much it is) and you feel great because you think you have got access to 200 channels. But hang on.........you can only access 30 channels and most of them are freeview. VM only have to provide access to all the channels to 10% of the customers for 30% of the time.

2) Xmas is coming and Asda advertise on tv and in the newspaper that Bollinger champagne for £10. You nip down to get some only to be told that it is available in 10% of the supermarkets and they can't order any for you.

... And in my case, my exchange isn't even enabled for the 24Mb service I'm paying for. The hardware supports 8Mb max, yet BT sells me the same service plan at the same price as someone in the city centre who lives next door to an exchange enabled for 24Mb. And this is all perfectly legal and the regulator has nothing to say on the subject, despite the fact that those of us living in rural areas are still effectively dealing with a monopoly provider, precisely the sort or thing an industry regulator is designed to deal with.

[qasdfdsaq]

Gets even worse when you consider BT deliberately priced 80Mbps VDSL2 to cost the same as 24Mbps ADSL2+

[DanielMeah]

I would not trust these results the whole uswitch speed checker is crap. ive ran tests before today on a 10Gbps server and only managed 92Mbps

[MUD_Wizard]

Originally Posted by DanielMeah

I would not trust these results the whole uswitch speed checker is crap. ive ran tests before today on a 10Gbps server and only managed 92Mbps

Yeah, "anecdotal speed tests" is an oxymoron. Guessing would be a better word.

Telford netindex: http://www.netindex.com/download/4,140//
Dumbarton netindex: http://www.netindex.com/download/4,2...mbarton/?tab=3

UK Netindex (where Telford isn't even rated in the top 50): http://www.netindex.com/download/2,4/United-Kingdom/

[MUD_Wizard]

Originally Posted by General Maximus

getting back on topic, it is disappointing to see that an area such as Milton Keynes which you would have thought been bang on up to date technlogy wise is the worst in the table with a third of it's population <3mbits. I accept the points Qas made but I wouldn't have thought it was the kind of place that has the demographic of "i am not fussed about my bb speed or contract and 2mbits is fine".

No Virgin Broadband adding to the average speed as BT own the local cable TV network there:
http://www.ispreview.co.uk/story/201...keynes-uk.html

http://www.netindex.com/download/4,8...on-Keynes,-GB/

BT waiting to wring the most amount of funding out of the government and local authorities:
http://www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/b...band-1-5440536