Reply to post: Re: Not all of London has 'superfast' Broadband

Government calls for ideas on how to splash £400m on fibre

Adam Jarvis

Re: Not all of London has 'superfast' Broadband

Make sure that it is FTTP, none of this FTTC cop out.

"That's fine as long as you accept that it will mean upgrading significantly fewer properties"

AndreuC,

The criticism of your comment is fully justified.

You're making this assumption here without any regard to the topology/landscape - properties types serviced, you didn't clarify your generalised comment and is based at best, on some stereotypical 'urban' landscape. You're making this statement 'FTTC is cheaper' without knowing the properies being serviced.

I'm picking you up on it, because that's a typical biased type BT statement (as though from the horse's mouth. Maybe you're just too close to BT, you hear this line everyday from BT's marketing dept).

Let stop this bullshit. It's an outdated idea. FTTC v FTTP costs differences are less significant today, because most of the selective 'ideal' i.e. cheaper, cherry picked locations are already serviced, i.e. where there are existing POTS cabinets.

New FTTC 'infill' rollouts will often mean either new copper cabling, redirects of existing lines (exchange only lines). These new FTTC cabinets also will require new Power/Connections to Grid, new Cabinets + Planning, because they required to be 'active powered'.

This includes actively powered FTTdP,FTTrN infill.

There is also the upper limitation of the copper carcass technology, its a Cul-de-Sac limited use technology going forward.

These problems are far less of a problem with true passive fibre, in order to achieve the 'infill'.

I rightly, brought you up on it, because you're feeding the usual BT well worn line that FTTC is cheaper, without any clarification.

With proper planning/use of Mobile Phone Apps for customer notifications/updates, upgrades to true/pure FTTP could be 'street upgrades at a time', not individual properties.

There needs to be a fundamental change to get BT/Customers 'on side' together, to make the FTTP rollout as cheap as possible. Maybe that means Competitions again/use cases, where Communites have to justify why they should be first, all in the roll of getting people 'actively interested' in real Fibre.

Maybe, having local campaigns/targets of 50% take up in the towns (based on the old exchange notion), could mean BT agree to rollout out FTTP to the remaining properties on the outer edges of an exchange. Make the people living closest feel the guilt/peer pressure from the 'outer edge' neighbours without FTTC, living in notspots.

I just don't buy it, that there aren't better ways of rolling out true/pure FTTP, using today's mobile app technology to keep people upto date.

If I can get 1 hour notifcation of a DPD delivery, showing where the Van is on route, BT can do the same for FTTP rollout. The idea that its difficult to contact Customers to enable access for Fibre to the Premises, is been excessively laboured by BT 'as difficult', because its in BT's biased copper carcass interest not to rollout true/pure FTTP, especially now they own EE.

BT are basically sitting on their hands waiting for more handouts.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019