Skip Navigation


Virgin Media launches 50 meg broadband service
Monday 15 December 2008 11:14:59 by Andrew Ferguson

After what feels like months of being drip fed minor details about the Virgin Media 50 meg product, we finally have the official details.

It is to be known as the XXL package and will have a monthly fee of £51 (including VAT). As expected there will be a 12 month contract for those migrating onto the product from an existing Virgin Media broadband package, or signing up for the first time. Subscribers to the XXL package will receive a N wireless router with their new cable modem to ensure the wireless network in the home is not the bottleneck. Upload speeds will initially be 1.5Mbps with options to increase this in the future.

The monthly price of the XXL product is actually lower if you take an optional telephone line from Virgin Media, with this double play bundle costing £46. The triple play bundle of television, 50Meg broadband and a telephone line works out at £66 a month.

The product will be rolled out in phases, with some 1.3 million customers having the product available to order from today. 10Mbps (L) and 20Mbps (XL) customers will also be moved onto the new network, but will not get a new modem which means that while their connect speeds will not increase, they may find that congestion is less of an issue. The capacity this frees up on the old DOCSIS 1.0 network may also resolve some of the local congestion that people see currently.

The roll-out to cover all the 12.6 million homes passed by the Virgin Media network will complete during the summer of 2009.

By taking a gamble and launching a product with no traffic management suggests that Virgin Media is confident that it has created a large enough network to cope with hundreds of thousands of people downloading the internet. Of course if the majority do decide to try and build the worlds largest repository of internet data at home, they may change their minds, but for now we have a next generation product that people can go and use, and the content providers may now have a market to whom they can sell true HD online video.

Comments

Posted by jrawle over 8 years ago
Is there definitely no traffic management? They hardly advertise the traffic management prominently for existing packages.

All Virgin Media packages used to be truly unlimited. What's to bet once a fair number of people take up the XXL package, they will introduce some limits?

And who's going to not take a phone line with that pricing? Presumably you don't even have to use it.
Posted by witekwojas over 8 years ago
Firstly some of the prices quoted in this article are misleading and incorrect.
I have just subscribed to the 50Mb service for 12 months at a cost of £35/month for the Broadband+telephone. Taking into account the phone costs £11/month, that makes it £24/month for 50Mb broadband with no traffic management.
Secondly I found it quite amusing when calling them that no one new anything about 50Mb,I was passed around 3 depts, all saying that its still on trial before I got through to someone in the know.The earliest an engineer can 'install' it for me is Jan 8th.
Posted by witekwojas over 8 years ago
and Yep, There is definitely NO traffic management!

BTW, the prices I am paying are on the Virgin Media website.
Posted by olisun over 8 years ago
@witekwojas

It's £35 for BB + 11 Phone line and comes to a total of £46 pm...
Posted by ceedee over 8 years ago
@jrawle: "Virgin Media will be trialling a variety of different approaches to traffic management and upstream speeds, to improve the unique performance of this service." (in note 6 of the VM press release at http://pressoffice.virginmedia.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=205406&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1235740&highlight= )

@witekwojas: I think you'll find that XXL+phone will be £46/month! Suggest you call VM back to check.
Posted by keith_thfc over 8 years ago
http://pressoffice.virginmedia.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=205406&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1235740&highlight=

"Premium launch offering includes unlimited downloads, no traffic management"

"Virgin Media will be trialling a variety of different approaches to traffic management and upstream speeds, to improve the unique performance of this service."

In other words there is no traffic management on day 1 but you can bet there soon will be.....
Posted by witekwojas over 8 years ago
Apologies, I've just spoken to Virgin media again... indeed you're right about the charges, although it was just explained to me that as I have had to start a new 12 month contract in order to get the service, as an existing customer I get a 'Loyalty bonus/discount', which means in affect I WILL get the 50Mb+phone for £35.
Posted by xrio over 8 years ago
Wow that means if you stick 2 of them through the www.xrio.com UBM appliance you can have 100meg connections!
Posted by whatever2 over 8 years ago
and just think what you can do with that...

erm...
Posted by olisun over 8 years ago
nothing...Get STM'd before everybody else... ;-)
Posted by JohnAlt2 over 8 years ago
I object to this (even more so than many other services) being marketed as Broadband let alone 50mb broadband. Why? It has a maximum two way speed of only 1.5mbs!

This seems like a continuation of the industries much criticised speed measurements. It is also another postponement of "Online Britain", instead we have download Britain - "Sorry, voyerism only here". A huge broadband revolution will be when the Joe Blogs, Joe Home Busines, Joe Charity, Joe Corner Shop and all the other Joes can publish the internet rather than just view it.
Posted by cawrey1 over 8 years ago
I am at the moment on a 2 week free trial of xxl, upto now no big difference is obvious, compared to 20meg and has of yet no cost for the upgrade as been Quoted to me by Virgin.
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
JohnAlt2: and what speedtest are you using??? A lot use a SLOW US server..

I only rely on www.speedtest.net , or TBB's own one, here..
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/3768-thinkbroadband-launches-bandwidth-meter.html

quick test here - click video to test viewing/dowloading
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/3760-can-speed-testers-cope-with-50-meg-broadband.html

Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
I just checked the video download - still getting full 10Meg in south london!:)

only a few good sites will get up to 10M at this time, even youtube - you need to try either early morning or about 2Pm, though I'm not sure as a lot of kids are on hols now!!
Posted by c_j_ over 8 years ago
"content providers may now have a market to whom they can [red]sell[/red] true HD online video."

Sell? SELL?

Ho ho ho.

Well it is nearly Christmas, and anyone who believes there is a worthwhile market for *selling* content, especially while much of it is still going to be freely if dubiously downloadable elsewhere, is probably soon going to be waiting for Santa. Or I'll eat my red hat (and white whiskers).
Posted by Colin_London over 8 years ago
What standard does this 'new' Virgin cable system use? It seems to be no more than EuroDOCSIS 1.1, but EuroDOCSIS 1.1 system with a proper return path should be capable of up to 9Mbps usable upstream (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS).

Could it be that they are still using DOCSIS 1.0 (hence the limit of 1.5Mbps upstream),& the only thing they have done is improve their head-end equipment to provide the full speed capable under 1.0?

Don't get too excited by this - I have read that Norway are already using EuroDOCSIS 3.0 with 300Mbps downstream speeds
Posted by uklad77 over 8 years ago
@Colin_London

It's EuroDOCSIS 3
Posted by Colin_London over 8 years ago
uklad77 - If it's EuroDOCSIS3 then they are only using a single downstream channel still, and must have something that's preventing them from inceasing upstream speeds. Methinks they've done everything they can without actually spending money on their street infrastructure.

My sister bought a new build in a VM area - whereas the streets all around have VM they are not prepared to run cable down her road. Just illustrates how they won't be putting any money into hardware anytime soon...
Posted by jchamier over 8 years ago
@Colin_London - maybe VM have improved the cable side of things, but forgotten they need to invest at the TCP/IP network (ethernet) end!!
Posted by uklad77 over 8 years ago
@Colin_London

As far as I know, yes it is a single downstream channel and a single upstream channel

Channel bonding in both directions is coming later (starting with upstream bonding once the full rollout is complete)

Unfortunately it's the analogue TV service is limiting what they can do, nothing to do with the amount of cash spent. Once that goes, things should get interesting
Posted by AdamGz0r over 8 years ago
Colin_London: if you knew anything about cable you would understand that the modulation the frequency is on would have a big part to play with it. You have to remember that alot of their DOCSIS 1.1 HW is very old and may not be able to use a run at the required rates to obtain those speeds ;) Kind of like comparing FM radio to AM radio. It is DOCSIS3 with dual bonded 25mbit channels.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
No, they've put other people on the new network because the frequencys they have are very limited. They'll have very little bandwidth avaliable on the old network, since they need to be able to offer 50MBit speeds to their XXL customers - via squashing the speeds of L and XL in many areas.
Posted by herdwick over 8 years ago
How many 25M channels are available on the shared coax going down a street with DOCSIS 3?
Posted by kev445 over 8 years ago
They are bonding 4 downstream channels and no bonding on the upstream.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
£51... 12 month contract... no traffic management (HA yeah right until they change their minds in the middle of your 12 month contract)........

Conclusion..... Waits for betheres service to destroy this on price and how long you are tied to them.

Mind you they got one thing kinda right.... Including a wireless router in addition to the modem...... Something i said was needed months back and what many argued with me about.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Nuts. It ties you down to a specific router and stops you from using a deacent one without the issues which allways plague this sort of supplied router with their "custom" firmware.
Posted by uklad77 over 8 years ago
@Dawn_Falcon

It is completely seperate bandwith. No squashing needed.

Also, they are also moving their L and XL customers to the new network

It will only be M customers left on the old one
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
uklad - Now actually read what you typed. The L, XL and XXL users will be on the new network. Together. And XXL users will have absolute priority.

This is not speculation.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
I see someone isnt content bashing just LLU but also spreads dis-information about virgin cable.... As usual its also obvious who they support in news stories LOL
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
I see someone can't read VM's own press releases.
Posted by lee1199 over 8 years ago
It didn't take long for the VM haters to start wingeing eh!!!
Posted by chrysalis over 8 years ago
why has this got more criticism than BE's offering? BE you require 2 phone lines and to even get close to 45mbit need to be on one of the 2% of lines that can get that kind of synch. The higher speed dsl services get sold for the more of a scam they are, at least everyone on cable synchs at the same speed.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
I can answer that chrysalis, because some here cant be objective and are blinkered by BT love.
No doubt they will say im the same with regards to LLU services.... Probably because they choose to ignore all the times ive beehatched at the likes of Tiscali and the other providers at the toilet end of LLU... Some people just cant be constructive here, you only have to say one negative thing about the organisations they support and they totally flip
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
Virgin will probably end up capping their 50Mb service within a year (Its virgin money grabbing, need cash for famous people adverts and junk mail to shove through your door after all)
For now i dont think the price is bad for whats being offered, but i also know and have experienced if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
lee1199 - It's called realism.

Carpet - 6 months. They've even stated this: when the rollout is complete, they're capping.

Crysalis - Because VM don't have the backend to support it. They didn't for 20MBit, and service degraded. This will be worse. Also, "synch" speed is irrelevant when your actual speeds are far lower (and you get high packet loss) due to UBR overloading
Posted by chrysalis over 8 years ago
I am not saying VM's 50mbit service will be great but I am extremely confident in saying that the typical performance on it will wipe the floor over adsl. Dawn the main point of contention on cable at the moment is at the UBR level, with that part now having investment we dont know how good or bad it will perform yet.
Considering typical synchs on adsl are below 6mbit, 50mbit would have to be under extreme congestion to get lower performance.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Well, bluntly I'd describe you as deluded then. I've used NTL services in the past, and at peak times (and for hours outside them) in busy areas (most NTL regions) speeds drop dramatically and packet loss and ping are such that playing games, using VoIP or any other remotely real-time application is effectively impossible.

Cable suffers from UBR load, not congestion. Different technologys, and VM have not significantly invested in anything which would resolve this. I remember Oxford and the lower speed profiles kicking in after 41MB download very well, since it was SO overloaded...
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
(I hear from friends there that it's down to 37MB on the these days)
Posted by scragglymonk over 8 years ago
interesting comment from virgin about being able to download a film in 3 mins on the new service, then admit to planning throttling the only service likely to offer people to download that fast :(
Posted by uklad77 over 8 years ago
@Dawn_Falcon

You may have used cable services in the past, but the DOCSIS 3 network is the cable equivalent of ADSL2+

Completely seperate network that just happens to use the same cables.

Its the same as saying I've used BT before and they were terrible, so Be* are going to be just as bad
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
@uklad, no, it's not. The technology is not directly comparable between ADSL and cable.

They have *some* additional bandwidth avaliable due to the DOCIS3.0 shift, but with only limited frequences avaliable this will not offset the effect of higher headline speeds.

They themselves admit they can't handle it, that they'll be traffic managing the service AND also shaping protocols, including bittorrent and other p2p apps via DPI (which, incidentally, causes huge latency issues with cable services with allready-overloaded UBR's).
Posted by chrysalis over 8 years ago
dawn you make the mistake of thinking things havent moved on in the cable world, docsis3 is a whole different beast to docsis 1.1. Also cable congestion isnt in all areas, like yourself I was in one of the worst areas but some people on cable see performance in comparison to BE and ukonline.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
chrysalis, no, I made the corect move of knowing several several people who work for US cable companies, and who have been kind enough to explain to me the technical implications

The vast majority of VM areas are overloaded. (remember, the entire reason non-overloaded areas exist is there's few subscribers in the first place there!) Sure, some get what's promised in the advertising, but the vast majority don't.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"The vast majority of VM areas are overloaded."
I dont think that is the only issue.I live in an area with loads of virgin subscribers, id say half my road is virgin subscribers (virgin boxes are on their walls outside) In my general area and road though speed is good, if i travel just 5 miles to a more rural(ISH) location with less subscribers though the speed is terrible. Im no fan of Virgin but i dont think they are any worse than BT and ADSL, some areas get lucky, some dont, As said in my street the speed is good but ill never sub to them with their capping scheme.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Carpet - the areas connected to a single UBR dosn't necessarily make logical sense unless you trace the underground cable layout.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
Its no different to BT based services really, many get good and many get bad speeds, same thing happens with Virgin, doesnt really matter the causes, neither service ensures top end available speed for everyone.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
No Carpet, it's not the same at all. You're ignoring the underlying technology.

You get a line synch on an ADSL line. That tends to be at least a moderately stable speed. Even relatively slow-synch connections are still low ping, however.

Speeds on NTL vary wildly through the day, every day. Pings rise and fall, packet loss comes and goes. It's really not pleasent to use, and for large parts of day real-time dependent applications are often unuseable.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
Sorry cant agree ive had some ISP services with pings 3 times slower than i currently get.
ANY type of broadband is the same the world over, some are lucky and get fast, consistant speeds and a good service, others only a mile or so away will not, its nothing new and its not just a virgin cable. I personally wouldnt touch virgin cable but i do know its not all bad and its totally resonable that you can and many times will get a service which pings just as well as anything from BT and give you faster speed.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
I personally know someone with virgin cable and they get a sync and throughput of 20Mb day and night (providing of course they dont use up all their daily limit in a few hours).

For some virgin as you say is unreliable and a living hell but for many others its a good fast reliable service, like anything broadband related its luck of the draw and where you live that plays a big part
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
...

The technologys are different.

Also;
VM dosn't have a "daily limit". it has multiple limits based on figures proven to drop drastically with UBR overload.
Very few people, and in specific areas have deacent VM connections
ADSL speeds typically only vary with either a marginal SNR for a connection, or due to congestion in their ISP's network.
Cable speeds and ping vary wildly due to usage factors even on "stable" connections with perfect SNR's.
Posted by chrysalis over 8 years ago
dawn "The vast majority of VM areas are overloaded"

how many times does it need to be explained? the upgrades are in the local areas, docsis is equipment in the local UBR. In simple laymen terms to you which I hope you understand VM are upgrading the most congested points of their network during this 50mbit rollout, if you still dont understand I give up.
Posted by chrysalis over 8 years ago
"Speeds on NTL vary wildly through the day, every day. Pings rise and fall, packet loss comes and goes. It's really not pleasent to use, and for large parts of day real-time dependent applications are often unuseable. " happens on various adsl isp's as well this isnt something unique to cable. It also doesnt affect everyone on cable in fact I am the only person I know personally who has experienced heavy congestion on cable, everyone else I know on cable has good performance. So the claim of the 'majority' of areas has little evidence to support it.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Chrysalis, not as a matter of course. In certain cases where insufficient bandwidth exists on the ISP side, yes, but that is entirely different to the routine and widespread issue on cable.

And I'd suggest you read Cableforum and other sites with VM users.

Also, yes, they might be doubling the avaliable bandwidth (the frequencies are too restricted for it to be otherwise, especially since the M service is still using some), but if you hadn't noticed they have a new service *and* doubling would insufficient to bring UBR load below 100% in many areas anyway!
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"The technologys are different."

That has nothing to do with how good or bad your choice of provider is IN THIS CONTEXT.

When 21CN goes country wide there will still be people with rubbish speed and ping times, just as there will be people on the virgin 50Mb service that will have rubbish ping and speed. The very fact you have experienced reliability issues with virgin doesnt mean its the same for everyone or down to the tech used. Im no fan of virgin or BT but i can look at this objectively and realise just because an odd person may have issues doesnt mean everyone does.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
As mentioned i know a person on the virgin 20Mb service and their speed and ping matches my LLU service. I also know of a small area not far from me where both virgin and BT services are complete rubbish with slow sync speeds, poor ping times and much more. When 21CN fully arrives and people take the ADSL2+ BT based option i doubt many will get the full 24Mb or super low ping times, when that happens (AND IT WILL) what will you blame for that occuring?
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Sigh.

They've outright stated that 50MBit users will be stepping on and taking priority over 10/20Mbit users, plus they won't be traffic limiting them, making them take even more of the avaliable bandwidth.

One example does not a case make.

And for ADSL's limits? I blame physics. If they could kick the LLU leeches off, mind, it'd make possible FTTC, which would provide far more people with faster connections.
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
what do you mean by LLU leeches?? If you mean customers, they are not just on LLU....
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"And for ADSL's limits? I blame physics. If they could kick the LLU leeches off, mind, it'd make possible FTTC, which would provide far more people with faster connections."

Yawn! Yeah like its LLU thats stopping BT, the day BT put hand in pocket and spend seriously will be the same day you get a clue!

quote"what do you mean by LLU leeches?? If you mean customers, they are not just on LLU"

Dawn_Falcon is another BT fan, anything that dare goes against BT and provide faster speeds at cheaper prices is bad... Atleast in their mind (teerm used loosely)
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
There is an intimate little circle of BT fanboys and shareholders on this site that thinks the sun shines out of their backside, despite them being the first to snap up phorm, the last to provide speeds that match ADSL2+ and the first to beg government for some money to fix their old knackered Graham Bell museum pieces.
Posted by chrysalis over 8 years ago
I do read cableforum and compared to 3+ years ago there is very little complaints regarding to things like congestion and ping spike issues, instead the majority of moaning is about STM. STM is enforced throttling tho and is very different to your claims of majority of cable customers been under heavy congestion.
Posted by chrysalis over 8 years ago
dawn LLU wouldnt be so successful if BT werent so greedy with BT central profits and BT retail. BT have an advantage over the LLU operators in that they have the volume and the fact they owna lot of infrastructure but the demands of their shareholders is holding the company back.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Chrysalis - And BT central prices are as they are because they have to maximise the profits they can make. If they didn't have to waste so much time and money pandering to LLU leeches, they could reduce the pricing.

STM is only necessary because of UBR overload, it's an attempt (a failed one) to reduce the load.

Carpet - You use infrastructure emplaced by BT. Hypocrite.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"Chrysalis - And BT central prices are as they are because they have to maximise the profits they can make. If they didn't have to waste so much time and money pandering to LLU leeches, they could reduce the pricing."

Complete tosh, if LLU was costing them money prices for braodband over the years would had increased rather than decreased. BT are just bitter others do things better. I dont know why you continue to whine about LLU and call us leeches... If we are all leeches you should be happy we aint on your cack, old tortoise pace network.
Posted by chrysalis over 8 years ago
CB I was quoting dawn :) nice comment about BT's network LOL

Dawn we use the local loop part of BT infrastructure but once it hits the exchange its handed over to easynet onto a uncongested quality network. :)
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Carpetburn, that's completly ignoring falling costs for equipment and in other areas. Prices were allways going to fall, they were falling.

I don't know why you defend your leeching, which is directly harmful to the national infrastructure.

You're envious I can use a 100Mbit connection for downloads, that's all. And I have a nice stable, low-ping connection for gaming at home.

Chrysalis, it's still BT-dependent and it still makes Carpet a hypocrite.
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
FFS, dawn.. are you that stupid to not know the difference between BT the ISP, and BT lines, that are in almost 100% of the country??? These were put in decades ago by the GPO before it was privatized and split into many parts, some more hopeless than others....
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
I think Dawn has a screw (more likely a few bolts) loose, and obviously thinks LLU bandwidth and equipment somehow affects BTs network and equipment, they dont seem to be able to comprehend all we use is the bit of wire from exchange to us, we dont touch any of that 2 paper cups and bit of string BT are still using.
My god i wish leeching at 20Mb did affect some BT fan idiots, ill let my connection run 24/7 then Dawn wouldnt be here posting nonsense.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
Seriously i dont know what is more slow and out of touch now..... Dawn or BT... Its a tough call!
But remember folks the capped, throttled, congested and limited BT fibre network dream will save the day, its not like all the ISPs out there in internet land will have to pay BT stupid rates to make the cost of fibre back and thus have to still cap you BT fans monthly.... Opps for a moment i was in Cuckoo land like certain others LOL I spose that will also be LLUs fault even though its differnt tech entirely, seriously you couldnt make brain rot like this up.
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
And dawn is NOT in UK !!! - just chatter about 'competition can be replaced with oversight' WTF that means..

people, please pause to check the REAL meaning of LLU - It DOES NOT 'belong' to BT...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_loop_unbundling

BT were FORCED to do this (or be broken up) by ofcom, due to their anti-competitive practices in 2004..
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communications/0,1000000085,39174236,00.htm
- as a result of this, BT aloowed other ISPs transparent and equal access to their network in 2006.
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communications/0,1000000085,39220176,00.htm?r=1
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
- and without the above, BB monthly cost would still be in the 3-figure league, BT stuck in its Torpidness, due to no reason to bother....
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
Indeed comnut, if anyhing BT CUSTOMERS the likes of some here should be thanking LLu and cable services as well as even the less desirables like Tiscali and car phone warehouse, without them they wouldnt be able to get BT based internet from some providers nowadays for £10 or less per month, competition if anything is the reason we have prices so cheap from everyone concerned with internet nowadays.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
No Carpet, the screw loose is you' You're the one who insists ISP's shouldn't be able to fight spam (again, same rationale as IWF blocking), for example.

Having to provide cheap space and servicing, wih all the attendent problems, massively inflates BT's costs. BT is forced to cap, to throttle, becuase it can't afford to invest becuase of the government-imposed LLU.

Comnut - There is zero difference. BT is BT is BT. Claiming otherwise is simply dishonest.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
More, Ofcom's ruling of the time is clearly and directly harmful to the future of the telecoms infrastructure of this country and should be overturned by legislation.

And no, BB monthly costs were falling. When BT did not have to pay massive amounts to support other people's equipment inside their exchanges, UK broadband was relatively cheaper and faster compared to other countries.
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
No, dawn... BT is...
BT openworld
BT openreach
BT Yahoo
BT Concert
BT Ignite
BT Global Solutions
BT phone services
BT wholesale
BT retail
BT vision
BT Syntegra

Its no wonder it takes so long to get anything done!!

"When BT did not have to pay massive amounts to support other people's equipment inside their exchanges"
aahhh, sweet anarchy, when you did not depend on customers, and the PM paid your bills...

go back to your french villa, you BT shareholder!!!
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
There was a gap between BT going private and LLU being forced onto them. It's noteable that prices fell much more sharply during that gap..

Also, big companys often operate with many semi-independent groups. This is *normal*.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"No, dawn... BT is...
BT openworld
BT openreach
BT Yahoo
BT Concert
BT Ignite
BT Global Solutions
BT phone services
BT wholesale
BT retail
BT vision
BT Syntegra

Its no wonder it takes so long to get anything done!! "

LMAO they are like a cancer, slowly develops and does nobody any good.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"There was a gap between BT going private and LLU being forced onto them. It's noteable that prices fell much more sharply during that gap.."

Complete cack, when they went private prices actually initially increased, the only reason prices across the industry have fell nowadays is down to one thing..... Competition, something you dont want to see either becuase you A)Love BT B) Have shares in them C) Work or are otherwise connected to them in some manner. Cheaper when they went Private, pfffft try blowing some wind out the other hole for a change.
Posted by Somerset over 8 years ago
CB - you are completely wrong on the BT divisions.

http://www.btplc.com/Thegroup/Ourcompany/Companyprofile/index.htm
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"CB - you are completely wrong on the BT divisions."

Huh where did i mention their numerous groups?? All i did was quote somebody else and laugh
Posted by Somerset over 8 years ago
Yes, it's duf info from comnut.
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
HEH so you lamely believed without checking, loser..

check my last few posts for how...
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
yeah I checked the link - grossly simplified for first-year readers LOL
Posted by Somerset over 8 years ago
comnut - you are confused. Syntegra, Concert and Ignite no longer exist. Yahoo and vision are product names. What is 'phone services'?

Please check facts before posting!
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
hmm - google Syntegra - guess who it points to???

GPO no longer exists, but is still in the history... looks like we have another shareholder!!! (who just believes, does not see the connection or checks it... )

And if you dont understand your company's most basic service, you are definitely getting senile.... :p


Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"comnut - you are confused. Syntegra, Concert and Ignite no longer exist. Yahoo and vision are product names. What is 'phone services'?"

To be fair to him somerset he does have a point BT own the yahoo brand (or they did maybe thats changed) so mentioning yahoo has as much merrit as mentioning for example Openreach its still part of the BT group.
Posted by Somerset over 8 years ago
CB - comnut seemed to be complaining about the problem of dealing with different parts of BT. A quick Google shows he has not worked out the difference between divisions like Openreach and Global Services and product names/brands like Yahoo and Vision. Plus he has invented 'phone services'!
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
no problem - I just dont bother...

now just have a look at this, you may see something familiar.... Its big text, so you should see it....

http://www2.bt.com/static/i/btretail/panretail/terms/bt1049.htm
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
I cant agree somerset, while there may indeed be differences between the various divisions they all have one thing in common, something i wont say to remain polite (trying the New Year resolution early this year ;) )
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Carpet - Yes, prices initially increased. That's what happens when they were unrealistically low because of the governmenr control you're so keen on.

They fell from there.

D) I want to see FTTC rolled out with a USP, something your ISP is not in a position to do, and BT are
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
ROFL, CB... Is it Big Text, or Bar Trainees that dont know what a beer glass is??? :D :D
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
LOL comnut, something even funnier is the new hopes of the BT faithful and that Fibre is going to save us all.
Hold on lets look at history from these idiots.........
BT MAX will be great..... REALITY = FAIL
21CN will be great and cheaper... REALITY = FAIL
FIBRE will be great and save the internet in the UK......... Haha shall we ask Einstein what the reality of that BT and BT based service will be LOL BT fools just dont get it...... BT ARE CRAP (Do the big letters help them at all i wonder?)
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
:D and the biggest joke is that they pulled it all out(yes, fibre, from new building estates!) years ago.... It wasn't 'compatible' with their system profile.... ???????

Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
:D and the biggest joke is that they pulled it all out(yes, fibre, from new building estates!) years ago.... It wasn't 'compatible' with their system profile.... ???????

Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
The BT faithful like Carpetburn, who are dependent on their infrastructure, right.
Posted by Somerset over 8 years ago
Carpetburn - what's your plan for the UK? Please share it with us because you don't like anything else.

Please try and write in clear English.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"The BT faithful like Carpetburn, who are dependent on their infrastructure, right."

What "infrastructure" of BTs does my service rely on??

quote"Carpetburn - what's your plan for the UK? Please share it with us because you don't like anything else."

Its certainly not fibre if it needs government investment. I think the government have plenty of other things which need shed loads of money to put right before they give it to the whingers named BT. I dont expect you supporters to comprehend that BT = Private company which = they should place hand in pocket.
Posted by Somerset over 8 years ago
So should VM also 'place hand in pocket'?
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"So should VM also 'place hand in pocket'?"

In what respect... To increase coverage or increase speed? Technically they have BT beaten on speed (Technically only of course, facts may differ in areas) and as for coverage i know of several areas VM wanted to lay their cables but the local authorities said NO
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
Much as i think VM are just as scummy as BT, alot of time in terms of covergae VM have wanted to lay cables in areas but been denied but little government hitlers in their little cubicles. Cant blame VM if they were prepared to spend money but fat cat so called authorities in suits said NO
Posted by Somerset over 8 years ago
Which areas?
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"Which areas?"

The area i USED to live for one. The council said no to what at the time was Telewest and since according to my sister have also said no to Virgin Media despite them appealing against the decision and several home owners also writing to say they want the service available. On both occasions its been pretty big local news with local papers covering it and residents opinions who want or dont want Cable services, its a resonable sized town also although is surrounded by a rural area which the council claim is the reason for the big NO
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
My god it sounds about as stupid as California years back, where the residents said they did not want more powerstations ruining the view...

A year or so later, they started suffering power cuts, due to lack of generating power....

Mind you my experience with the local council is that they are too bound by chronically slow govmnt process, where it can take a whole week for just a small change or correction!!

Then clueless self-styled Bureaucrats protest because they have an over-inflated idea of how much disturbance it will cause... (usually very
little!)
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
So name the town, Carpet. It's not like it'd identify anything except the local council area you once lived in, and it's checkable.

And you are entirely dependent on BT for your service, get over it.
Posted by Somerset over 8 years ago
I know a town where they started, did a few roads, and stopped. 15? years ago.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"I know a town where they started, did a few roads, and stopped. 15? years ago."

That sounds like where i live now LOL... run out of Tarmac so skipped a few streets LOL

Back to where my sister still lives and where i used to live, i dont agree with the local authority but i can kind of understand if i think about it, the town basically has 1 giant ring road in some areas VM have cabled they are dog slow at doing the job (thats only some areas others they seem to do quickly) if they did my sisters town slowly it would cause complete and utter traffic chaos for months :(
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
this link (good find!)is VERY good reading for those that think BT is wonderful, etc....
http://uk.geocities.com/btalicables/tech.htm

they have NO cable or LLU, so are stuck with BT, like most that are 50 Miles away from a major town...
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
comnut - And who put them down? The PTO, before BT. Replacing it in many cases requires council permission, which is often not forthcomming.

In any case, 25 houses could easily afford a small leased line.
Posted by Somerset over 8 years ago
Highly unlikely and impractical for 25 houses to get together.
Posted by Somerset over 8 years ago
re the link - not that exciting.

Milton Keynes - no update since 2004, GPO put some cables directly in the ground near a farm, aluminium is / has been replaced, the government didn't sort out all having broadband by the end of 2005.
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
it wasnt just for you but for "BT is the best & only" people.....
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Somerset - uh? There are plenty of cases of community-lead broadband, please don't provide misinformation like that.

Incidentally, the site you refer to was recabled almost *two years ago*. Heh.
Posted by Somerset over 8 years ago
DF - OK. But so much for government Broadband for all...
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
I love this site and the people that think BT can do no wrong and the otherside that thinks Virgin can do no wrong... Better than a night out at the apollo watching stage comedy.

quote"Replacing it in many cases requires council permission, which is often not forthcomming."
Rubbish the main cable break occured in a PRIVATE field from where the BT jackasses never originally placed it in a duct
Posted by edster27 over 8 years ago
hello, i was on the net looking into virgins new 50mb service being that im currently on their 20mb..... id like to comment... more so on dawns claims of poor speeds.. here goes..
1. firstly i find their c/service rubbish (when i have to call...few and far between)
Posted by edster27 over 8 years ago
2."the service" SPOT ON.... aside from restrictions when ive been downloading loads i get....erm 20mb!!! i download at a consistant 2.2 - 2.5mbs a second.. ALWAYS....a divx film of 700mb takes say around 5 mins.... i love my broadband... thankyou virgin, not cos ur virgin, for the speeds you i recieve, o dont care who gives me it, but in my case i want fast broadband and im stuck with you and happy for it!!!!!
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Somerset - It was never "for all", it was "at every exchange". I agree it wasn't a good way to go ahead, but it was the government's choice.

Carpet - You mean the PTO, pre-BT government jackasses. Nothing to do with BT. Also, you often still need permission for the works.

edster - And which region are you in? If you're lucky, and there's no other way to put it, you're in an undersubscribed area...
Posted by edster27 over 8 years ago
Dawn - im in South Yorkshire - i also have no problems with online gaming - both xbox360 and ps3
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Yep, you're in an area which isn't generally badly oversubscribed. There are others too, but if you were in, say, Oxford or Leicester you'd be singing a different note.
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
edster27: a happy customer then?? Its those who are 50 miles away from a good town that have the problems.. And never say where they are, have never used it, just join in the moaning..
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"Carpet - You mean the PTO, pre-BT government jackasses. Nothing to do with BT. Also, you often still need permission for the works."

Hard to say with regards to the story concerned as nobody knows for sure when the unducted cable in farmer giles field was laid.

Also assuming it was a private field and the cable was already half dug up i highly doubt they would need local autority permission to spend a few minutes rejoining the cable, infact id say the farmer concerned and a fair share of the village would had been begging them to do it.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Unfortunately, while you doubt it, that's how it is. Indeed, it's very unlikely they could get permission to work on an unducted cable at all now.

It's also not "a few minutes" work.

(And BT has never allowed unducted laying to my knowledge, the PTO did under certain circumstances)
Posted by comnut over 8 years ago
yeah, sure, so why do you blame VM for NTL and TW's work????
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"Unfortunately, while you doubt it, that's how it is. Indeed, it's very unlikely they could get permission to work on an unducted cable at all now.

It's also not "a few minutes" work.

(And BT has never allowed unducted laying to my knowledge, the PTO did under certain circumstances)"

READ the whole story and you will see how relatively simple the fix was in the end.
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.