It is cheaper to build from scratch than to use bt ancient ducts and poles. the red tape, the time wasted and the excess charges make it un economic.
38 posts • joined 20 Jul 2007
It is cheaper to build from scratch than to use bt ancient ducts and poles. the red tape, the time wasted and the excess charges make it un economic.
the only way to fix things is competition.
From being a rural area on dial up, and no hope of broadband, we now have bt crawling all over the place installing superfarce. Putting pcp cabs in tiny hamlets and then a 'fibre' cab next to it. Why? because we built our own real fibre network. We get a gigabit symmetrical for £30 a month. its awesome. B4RN.
Relocate to B4RNland, we have a gigabit symmetrical here for £30 a month.
BT and avanti became partners years ago, they knew this would happen. It gave bt a breathing space to con the councils that they could get superfarce broadband to everyone, then when it became obvious to even the dopy councillors they roll out this 'solution'. Most rural dwellers have already tried satellite. They know it is too expensive and not very good. So now the government will throw millions into advertising it. This will keep the meeja on their side, and they will continue to promote the hype that the uk is leading the world and everyone has superfarce blah blah.
When will someone see that the emperor (EdVaizey) has no clothes? We are going to become a laughing stock and a third world digital nation at this rate. Copper and satellites cannot deliver our future needs. Do not ask what it will cost to get a fibre to every home, ask what it will cost if we don't.
They aren't fibre connections, they are stuck on phone lines too. Hardly anyone has fibre unless the other companies like hyperoptic or gigaclear provide it. BT doesn't do fibre. Its a farce.
What a ridiculous farce this is. Fibre broadband doesn't come down phone lines. Where's the regulator when you need it? What about all the millions who aren't close enough to the rubbish cabinets to get even 2Mbps yet are classed as having fibre broadband?
The whole thing is a superfarce, but until we get a regulator who regulates the farce will continue. We need competition, and support going to new companies who will build proper networks. We need to stop wasting public money patching up old phone networks. We need fibre. Moral and Optic. The CLA won't do anything. They will just advise their clients to get satellites. Its all part of the BT plan and the CLA will fall for it again. They have already been infiltrated with vital visionaries.
You really couldn't make all this up could you?
Millions wasted tarting up a few cabinets so a few near them can go faster, and 'connection vouchers' for those in cities who have already noticed you don't go very fast on a cabinet anyway, and still nothing done for the millions on long lines all over the country. Homes passed is a con, and fibre broadband through old copper phone lines is a con. Satellites will be next, as Gfarce is just another con as well. We'll still be on copper in another decade thanks to the all powerful monopoly leading government by the nose. A superfarce.
If only the EU would wake up and see that this is needed everywhere and stop listening to the snake oil salesmen from bt openreach and all the other telephone operators in Europe. Thank goodness Ireland is leading the way, and soon they will have fit for purpose connectivity. The rest of us are stuck on copper and obsolete FTTC until the buroids get some basic lessons in physics. You cannot brand a copper phone line connection as 'fibre broadband'. It isn't fibre broadband unless its a fibre to your home. Poor Northern Ireland is in the same boat as England and Scotland. Stuck on copper for another decade. Southern Ireland is rocking. Go Hogan!
Yes, at one time it was great. At the moment if you are close to a cabinet which has been enabled, which still has capacity, at most times of the day if you aren't a heavy user it is still great, but not for much longer, which is what we have been yarping on about since the digital britain report. If we want every citizen digital they have to have a fit for purpose connection, and in giving them that we have to give them one that will grow with their needs. Only fibre can do this, and wasting public money patching up copper is sinful. We need the fibre, moral and optic. If a bunch of farmers in a really rural area can do it, laying 500 miles of duct to reach 1000 properties from a standing start with no government help, and still be sustainable then a monopoly telco with existing infrastructure, wayleaves, workforce and equipment can do it too.
In any case, we shouldn't ask what it will cost to do. We should ask what will it cost if we don't.
Agree, we have one of the best phone networks in the world, and some fantastic engineers trying their damndest to keep it working. We can't stay ahead much longer, we are dropping fast, and the current patch up of FTTC is leaving more people having to either cough up for expensive satellites or remain analogue. Its time to get some real fibre in, moral and optic. We can't stay in the caves much longer.
I agree with previous commenters, it isn't fibre broadband if it comes down a phone line. We had patchy dial up, we're too far from the exchange, so we laid and lit our own fibre. My remote farm now gets a gigabit symmetrical for £30 a month. Just done a little speedtest for you from my computer. <img src="http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/1386676.png">
not a problem, we have people with no cabinets in their villages, and some are 11.5km from the exchange, and they are getting gigabit symmetrical for £30 a month because they built their own fibre network. I live on a farm up a mountainside and I just did this test: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/1366714
914 Mbps down, 941Mbps up. Think that could win for B4RN? http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/1366382
Its all part of the superfarce. BDUK will go down in history as the quango who mismanaged Digital Britain. The funding all went to BT, who used it to cherrypick lucrative areas and have ignored the areas that needed it. The money won't come back. It will be re-allocated and wasted. Its a total shambles. The altnets should have got the money and built real fibre networks. This is the speed the B4RN customers get, out in the sticks, where dial up and satellites ruled.
unlimited gigabit symmetrical. for the farmers.
Totally agree Adam, the superfarce that is gFarce is going to come back and bite them. A totally ridiculous situation, patching up obsolete tech. A disgrace. And eejit politicians and councillors fall for the snake oil salesman's hype every time. Nutters.
Whilst Europe continues to allow telcos to use their old copper phone lines and doesn't invest in modern technology there will always have to be 'traffic shaping' in the form of throttling or capping, because ISPs have to pay a fortune for transit. Once the government wake up to the fact that we are working on a scarcity model and do something about it, then we can truly have an open internet using the abundance model that real fibre brings. If we continue to prat about with obsolete technology, we will get left behind. Or even further behind I should say. Other continents are forging ahead. They won't have to prioritise traffic so it can get through the choke points. Other continents don't have a legacy phone network to prop up. They have fibre. Moral and Optic.
Anyone wanting a proper connection can relocate to the Lune Valley Lancashire, where B4RN can provide small businesses (under 5 employees) with a Gigabit symmetrical for £25 +VAT a month. (Slightly more for bigger SMEs) or you can have 10Gbps for £500 +VAT.
Why pay exorbitant prices for OR leased lines when you can have the REAL thing cheaper?
I understand it's going to be very dangerous in the future if we hand over control of too much. But rural areas will be safe, because we can't get online much anyway. The machines won't be able to control us. Dial up is still with us. When it works.
Well done Margaret Hodge, I watched the full hearing and she just kept coming back at them again and again but she still couldn't get answers. BT was shown up for what it really is. Let us hope she continues until its all as transparent as she wants it, and lets hope she doesn't let them class everyone as having 'superfast' unless they really do. Let us hope she can prise out of the councils the figures for the areas not covered, as I think they will be vast.
Let us hope that no more public money is wasted in this way, and government now channels it into altnets who can deliver more bang for our buck and help the people who are desperate for connectivity instead of just making a few who can already get a service go a bit faster.
Cabinets and copper are so yesterday, I know they will extend the monopoly for another decade so you can't blame BT, but what politicians can do is expose the truth. It isn't fibre broadband unless its fibre to the home. Our dial up comes from a fibre exchange... so does your fttc. a few more metres more of fibre feed doesn't make a lot of difference, its still coming through a victorian phone line to you. Ofcom should sort it.
The tenders were skewed to favour the incumbent, nobody else ever stood a chance. They will deploy their cabinets in lucrative areas and the digital divide will grow ever wider. Poor old blighty. We need a dads army to lay fibre to the rural areas and stop this monopoly wrecking what could have been a digital nation.
Considering that most people look for the cheapest deal, it stands to reason most people are on the cheaper packages, so the headline should have been 'BT continue to throttle and cap their customers unless you pay more' ???
Instead of a train saving a few minutes of a journey for a few, far better to get proper internet for all. It would save the government a fortune and easily pay for itself in the ROI. It would also save citizens a fortune too. It won't really work until everyone has access.
a wireless or mobile cloud needs a fibre feed to function properly, so no rural areas will have that, and if they did then its a simple enough job to do fibre to the homes and businesses, and wireless and mobile could complement and sit on top of a real internet connection. Trying to substitute expensive alternatives won't work. The whole job will be to do again.
I just hope ofcom sort out the telcos too, they should not be allowed to advertise 'upto' speeds that the majority can't get. Cabinet broadband should be advertised as 'down to 5 meg' and not the 'up to' 80meg that only people close to the cabinet can receive.
local monopolies are the competition BT need. They must be running scared of them to make an outburst. Usually they just ignore everyone. I would have thought they had conned enough councils into their superfast copper not to worry any more? I do wish they would stop calling it 'fibre broadband'. It isn't fibre unless its fibre to the home.
My dial up is fed by fibre from the local exchange. Superfast it ain't.
Cabinets are not the future. They are a stopgap to bring faster speeds to a few next to them, and to keep everyone tied to an old phone line.
In another few years everyone will realise this country has been held to ransom by a telco as we lag further behind the countries who have migrated to real fibre connectivity.
Well done, you are a true Jedi. You now get a better connection than more than half the people in so called digital britain. Proud of you.
http://localdata.citizenshipfoundation.org.uk/?p=351 I hope Eric has time to read this link, its a brilliant post from people on the inside...
all infinity does is fibre to a cabinet, the broadband still comes through the old copper phone line. It means it isn't fibre broadband at all, but everyone has fallen for the con. It will mean a larger digital divide opens up, as the signal doesn't travel very far before it drops off, and so even more people will have rotten connections. Liv Garfield from BT has publicly stated that any areas getting Fibre to the Cabinet will not be upgraded. Another few decades stuck in the copper slow lane. Infinity my arse.
the fact is that small community networks have been built to provide connections for people in notspots with no broadband and have been under the radar. Now they will be taxed and will fold, as no profits are made on them to start with and are nearly all run by volunteers. That is why the blogsphere was up in arms last week. Do get a few facts together before you write them off as eejits. In this case it is you who is the eejit. sos.
I have the evidence it was trending even if twitter chooses to ignore it!
fibre is the way to go, the sooner the better. Copper is ok for phones. Real broadband needs fibre, what passes for broadband in this country isn't the real thing at all. Soon people will realise this. If the economics of FTTH isn't a sensible one to recoup investment then either the govt should build and own the infrastructure or they should stop saying we have broadband in this country cos we don't. Certain areas might have it but the vast majority get under a meg, and lots of people can't get even that, there are still many notspots. AQA say 44% of internet users in the uk are affected by their ISP not living up to connection speed claims. 63336.com
at last Europe may Do Something Useful
Ofcom haven't done anything bordering on useful in their entire existence. They have let the incumbent telco get away with passing off an obsolete copper network off as broadband, and the government have believed the job is done. Fibre to the kerb is an absolute minimum if we are to compete in the world economy. Fibre to the home would cost a fiver per house. The Government have their heads in the sand and I hope the commissioner makes them listen to sense instead of the jobsworths they listen to at ofcom and BT.
Most of the people in govt are stupid. Most of the people in BT just do their job and don't think, and pay fat cat wages and dividends to shareholders. That is their job...
Fibre to the home would cost an extra fiver on current ISP charges if it was rolled out to EVERYONE ie not just the 30p to the home townies.
The apps are out there, they just won't work here, so we stick with apps that do.
Since we lost our industries, (coal, clothing, steel, cars, farming etc etc) we have become a service country. To do this job we will need telecom infrastructure. The incumbent is not providing it. It says it is (21cn haha) and the government believe that what they are providing is broadband. It isn't.
cbncan dot co dot uk - info on the swedish project on there
Yes Mark, and it may also open up the eyes of government who believe the porkies BT tell them, such as 'the job is done' and 'broadband is available to all'. What a joke.
If the Iplayer is a success then every exchange in the country will fall apart. All BT care about is milking an obsolete copper network for every penny they can get from us, they put nothing back and pay out for fat cat salaries and advertising.
Nothing will work until they light the fibre and provide fibre to the home for everyone. This will cost less than a fiver to every home. Will they do it?
Not until they are forced, so lets hope everyone uses Iplayer....
We have been saying this would happen...
UKplc has obsolete infrastructure. 21cn will be no better.
Light the fibre.
I don't live in No mans land
I live in a rural area, close to a city and lots of people round here can't get even half a meg through the obsolete copper.
there are many people in this country like us, read the notspot survey to see how many.
BT is letting the network go to the dogs. FTTH can be done for less than a fiver per home.
They would rather milk the obsolete copper network for a few more years then they will hand it over to the government and say 'you upgrade it' and the shareholders will be very amused.
and very rich
what passes for broadband in this country should be free as it doesn't cost them much to provide, so once we have paid our line rental that should cover it.
Fibre is worth paying for, because that is real broadband.