18mbps - Page 3

Horace · 16-03-2005, 18:07

I assume that the fact they trialled means they could run ADSL2+ in parallel with the CM network? Or was the trial run in isolation of the current network? Would be damn expensive to exchange all those STB's and CM's. Maybe they'd go down the same route as happened with CM originally and sell/rent the modems to customers, assuming it could run in parallel of course.

**Paul** · 16-03-2005, 18:17

They won't get rid of the existing local network - at least not for a good few years - I expect the ADSL would run in parallel.

AdrianC · 16-03-2005, 19:16

Quote:

The ntl access network has deep fibre and short copper - we estimate that 95% of our copper loops are under 1km

The copper loops, would they be the bit that runs from the green cabinet down the road to my house, or could the green box down the road be connected via copper to somewhere else?

16-03-2005, 20:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by ian@huth

BT haven't even started the 8Mb trials yet and if they are successful less than half their customers will be able to get 8Mbps and those that can will find it could drop to 2Mbps at peak times.

Bt have not trailed it yet but with a ruling from oftel bt now has to allow exchanges to add to the architecture which has seen ukonline and soon bulldog to offer 8meg now with ukonline going live at major exchanges by the end of may im from near coventry and we are getting it and we are only a town

I cant even set a quote properly someone shoot me lol lol lol lol
Edit (Paul) - Quote fixed.

Chrysalis · 16-03-2005, 20:32

I hope it is parallel it would kind of suck to have only 1 cable provider in the whole of the uk.

eshaq786 · 17-03-2005, 00:34

If they start running DSL in the cabinets then would that mean OFCOM would force them to open it up to competition?

purenuman · 17-03-2005, 00:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by eshaq786

If they start running DSL in the cabinets then would that mean OFCOM would force them to open it up to competition?

No!

If they were going to do it the delivery method of services would not even come in to it.

If NTLs network was once public property and was built with public funds then handed to them for next to nothing it would happen.

NTL would have to be recompensed (to a huge degree) if it was to happen now.......

Chrysalis · 17-03-2005, 14:22

ofcom is nothing to do with public funds its to do with market share, NTL has a lot of broadband customers, I think so far they have been lucky with ofcom but if they did move over to DSL I am wondering how ofcom would react. Telecoms is a regulated market in both the regulator for fair competition and the government in the public getting a certian standard of service, eg. if BT who are currently regulated decided tommorow to stop all broadband services then someone would probably step in and change the law to so they have to provide it to be allowed to compete in the market. At this time this hasnt need to be done because broadband has been rolled out quite well.

purenuman · 17-03-2005, 16:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

ofcom is nothing to do with public funds its to do with market share........

Correct it has nothing to do with public funds but if NTL had inherited their network at little or no cost they (Like BT) would have been forced to open it up. The fact that NTL spent millions and millions on building/buying the network will mean they don't have to open up IMHO...

Ofcom is about fairness for consumers and businesses......not punishment for investment.

What on earth makes you think a company that spends so much on something should be forced to share it with companies who have invested nothing??

The delivery method of services has nothing to do with it either.

kronas · 17-03-2005, 17:25

the BBC has picked up on this with further clarification.....

Quote:

Even though NTL is a cable company its network also has the copper wires needed to provide ADSL.

One of the issues with the technology is that the speeds it can deliver deteriorates the farther the home is away from the network's access point.

In this, NTL claims an advantage over BT because 95% of the 7.9 million homes its network passes are within 1km of the access point compared to 5% of BT's customers.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4355665.stm

i want high speed!

Chrysalis · 17-03-2005, 17:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by purenuman

Correct it has nothing to do with public funds but if NTL had inherited their network at little or no cost they (Like BT) would have been forced to open it up. The fact that NTL spent millions and millions on building/buying the network will mean they don't have to open up IMHO...

Ofcom is about fairness for consumers and businesses......not punishment for investment.

What on earth makes you think a company that spends so much on something should be forced to share it with companies who have invested nothing??

The delivery method of services has nothing to do with it either.

I never said NTL should be made to share the DSL if they invest their, but ofcom might make them do it. BT will argue they have invested in upgrading the exchanges and have been forced to allow all isp's to sell that service. NTL with over 1 million broadband users will find it hard to argue their point for been excempted.

Ofcom are just their for fair competition not for consumers eg. they have been making BT keep prices higher then they need to be so the competitors using datastream can compete, the > ÃƒÆ’Ã†â€™ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…Â¡ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£1 gig traffic prices we seen floating around are due to ofcom, actual cost to BT wholesale is 10-20% of that.

purenuman · 17-03-2005, 18:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Ofcom are just their for fair competition not for consumers eg. they have been making BT keep prices higher then they need to be so the competitors using datastream can compete, the > ÃƒÆ’Ã†â€™ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…Â¡ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£1 gig traffic prices we seen floating around are due to ofcom, actual cost to BT wholesale is 10-20% of that.

They have stopped them selling the service cheaper than they let their competitors have it

etccarmageddon · 17-03-2005, 18:24

I thought regulation was about protection against abuse of a dominant market position rather than who originally financed the infrastructure.

Ignition · 17-03-2005, 18:37

It's about whether or not a company has been assessed to have SMP - Significant Market Power.
At the moment neither ntl nor Telewest are classed as having this as they don't cover enough of the UK, simple as.
They could offer fibre to the arse of everyone in their areas and it wouldn't change the fact they don't have access to enough of the population with their networks to be considered to have SMP.
When they merge no doubt this will be reconsidered but at the moment that's the way it is.

purenuman · 17-03-2005, 18:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by etccarmageddon

I thought regulation was about protection against abuse of a dominant market position rather than who originally financed the infrastructure.

Yes a position BT were in because they didn't spend on the network they inherited so the had the use of something that, it was decided, others should be allowed to use for a service charge.

Maybe NTL will at some point be made to open up the network but I would doubt that would happen until after they have cleared their huge debts accrued acquiring/building the network. If it was forced on then NTL would be at a huge disadvantage.......... unless they could charge huge service charges and that kind of makes it pointless.

I think NTL will open up their network, in one way or another (like with AOL), way before being forced to.