Skip Navigation
Homepage » News Archive » View News Item 4318

BT Openreach's fibre-to-the-home trial gets underway
Tuesday 20 July 2010 10:03:27 by John Hunt

BT Openreach's fibre-to-the-home (FTTH) trials are now under way following a 6 month delay which has stopped some areas getting up to 100Mbps broadband, according to ISPreview. The pilots were scheduled to begin in January at the two brownfield sites of Bradwell Abbey in Milton Keynes and Highams Park, London, connecting homes and business in each region. The delay came following what BT learnt at earlier trials carried out at Kesgrave in Ipswich, close to their research facility at Adastral Park. Two additional areas are also to be added to the pilot which are Leytonstone, East London and York, bringing the total premises passed to around 40,000.

"We've learnt a great deal from our earlier technical trials of FTTP in Kesgrave, Suffolk. As a result of those learnings, we have decided to push back the start of the FTTP pilots in Bradwell Abbey and Highams Park to July. It's critical that we learn as much as we can from the pilots so that our commercial FTTP offering is introduced as smoothly as possible.

[..]

The pilot has commenced in Bradwell Abbey with Highams Park joining the pilot in September. The exact dates for the remaining two pilots will be confirmed by Autumn this year."

BT Spokeswoman

If these pilots go well, BT may introduce more areas to receive fibre-to-the-home. This will one day be the way most people receive their Internet connection as it allows a continual upgrade in bandwidth by changing equipment at each end of the fibre optic cable. There is a significant investment required to run fibre optic broadband to replace every phone line that is used however.

A full-fibre based broadband solution like fibre-to-the-home is not affected in the same way by distance to the exchange so everyone should receive the same underlying service no matter if they live in a city centre close to the telephone exchange or several miles away in the rural countryside.

[ Topic: Broadband | 124 comments | link to this item ]

Comments

Posted by mattbibby about 1 year ago
BT start with Fibre to the ACTUAL home... wow

What's next the wheel? :)
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
Yep its great news, no doubt some will pull it to bits though. Only thing is the trial ends mid 2011 so I don't expect they'll be any further deployments until after the trial is done. Oh well... its a start.
Posted by cyberdoyle about 1 year ago
The future.Great stuff. Bring IT on.
Posted by shaunhw about 1 year ago
Perhaps they should first PROPERLY support FTTE so they can support their wholesale ADSL customers with realistic usage levels instead of the usual mananaged, capped, limited "unlimited" connection which people have to endure when receiving their service via BT infrastructure.

FTTE = Fibre To The Exchange.

When they get this right, maybe then they can talk about taking it directly to the home.
Posted by Somerset about 1 year ago
shaun - presumably the ISPs could pay more...
Posted by bezuk about 1 year ago
Still interested to hear about their strategy for wiring up large blocks of flats. Sadly, I expect the Virgin Media strategy: ignore and do not service under any circumstances...
Posted by jumpmum about 1 year ago
Shaunhw; All exchanges apart from the smallest/remotest have fibre, many have WDM that can support up to 40 wavelengths each with 10G ethernet paths on across the chain of exchanges served. See Openreach sites for backhaul costs. No shortage of ability. Problem is consumers only want to pay ~£15 per month and after Access and core costs, that leave pence for the backhaul costs so ISPs do not want to light up more wavelengths. So most just have 1G or 2G working.
Posted by jumpmum about 1 year ago
The flight to cheapest BB means there is no incentive to invest in more backhaul, only those ISPs that have aimed at the higher cost market (£30-£50 PCM) can afford to and funnily these have fewer capacity problems. Mass consumer ISPs with under £20 pcm will always have contention issues. It is how they try to make a profit! This is known as "you get what you pay for".
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
Exactly the point I was trying to make to CB, shaping/capping is put in place by ISP's to maximise revenue.
Posted by brutos about 1 year ago
leytonstone i live there but not with bt pity but lets see if they still offer me a trail
Posted by otester about 1 year ago
I think shaun was referring to BT Retails product.

Since BT is a private company it should be able to manage itself, if it wants to go down the VM path and not resell at all then that should be their choice.

If people want competition they need to start their own companies, companies like Vtesse & Rutland Telecom are examples.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
mattbibby you sir get comedy genius post of the month... That was superb :)

quote"Exactly the point I was trying to make to CB, shaping/capping is put in place by ISP's to maximise revenue."

And i quite clearly said give examples of Bt based FTTC which isnt throttled or capped and with me willing to pay upto £80 a month........ Hardly low budget and still nobody could point to an ISP that can do it, and its because of what BT charge them
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
Otester is right they wanna be a private company, then let them instead of dictating the market and pricing with their poor products
Posted by herdwick about 1 year ago
"then let them instead of dictating the market and pricing with their poor products"

what does this even mean ?
Posted by herdwick about 1 year ago
£80/month - IDnet would give you 80 GB peak, 320 GB off-peak and 33GB on top for that on FTTC.

Unthrottled uncapped products don't survive in the UK marketplace due to pisstakers and low prices. Easynet clearly have issues, Be/O2 make a loss and prostitute themselves in a desperate bid for customers.

Talk Talk LLU is highly managed, throttled and capped and makes money - no doubt you'll blame BT for that too.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
"and still nobody could point to an ISP that can do it, and its because of what BT charge them"

How many ISP's have taken up FTTC so far? And can you prove that is why ISP's throttle and cap (because of BT prices), do you have inside knowledge of all ISP's decisions or have you just made it up..
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"£80/month - IDnet would give you 80 GB peak, 320 GB off-peak and 33GB on top for that on FTTC."
Wow thats terrible value... Virgin as an example give you faster speed and more data for half the price. Someone there is greedy and i doubt its IDnet as they are respected.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"Unthrottled uncapped products don't survive in the UK marketplace due to pisstakers and low prices. Easynet clearly have issues, Be/O2 make a loss and prostitute themselves in a desperate bid for customers."

I have no issues with my UKonline connection.... Be/O2 make a loss do they? They must be happy to make a loss given over the past 2 years they have expanded further and offered new products... All those loses, all that expansion and still in business.... Hmm something there doesnt add up either.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"Talk Talk LLU is highly managed, throttled and capped and makes money - no doubt you'll blame BT for that too."
Talk Talk at one point were losing money hand over fist, and as to their services, agreed they are terrible also.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"How many ISP's have taken up FTTC so far? And can you prove that is why ISP's throttle and cap (because of BT prices), do you have inside knowledge of all ISP's decisions or have you just made it up."

Decent LLUs dont cap, Virgins top end product has no silly caps (it has fair use... Fair doesnt equal only 80gig or similar stupid small amount though) All BT based products from UPTO 8Mb all the way upto FTTC are capped though...... The consistant factor is Stuff with BT involvement is capped, stuff that BT dont dictate pricing on is not capped, not rocket science.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
Infact even remove caps from the equation..... Why is it BT on their FTTC product throttle P2P??? If its only about AMOUNTS of data why cant you grab x amount of data at full speed on a P2P app? Caps and throttles, are the fault of BT and until you show me a BT FTTC product that doesnt have caps or throttles that statement is accurate like it or not. Disprove what im saying if you want to defend them and insist im wrong, go on do it!
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
"that statement is accurate like it or not." The statement makes no sense, what is to prove/disprove it doesn't make any sense. Its like saying out of these three red cars made by Ford, show me where the blue one is. As usual talking in riddles....
Posted by wirelesspacman about 1 year ago
"80gig or similar stupid small amount"

So what planet do you live on then?
Posted by Essex about 1 year ago
More BT stalling .. you might get something in the future If you pay the new price increases that are designed to rippoff pensioners the low incomes and those who do not want / need / cannot get broadband, What amaze me are those people / website's who continually hoorah hnery BT.. Come on! this dinosaur gets older not brighter.
Posted by Somerset about 1 year ago
Stalling for what?
Posted by Dixinormous about 1 year ago
'Be/O2 make a loss do they? They must be happy to make a loss given over the past 2 years they have expanded further and offered new products... All those loses, all that expansion and still in business.... Hmm something there doesnt add up either.'

It's being a part of one of the largest telcos in the world which is happy to take a loss in return for retaining / gaining customers on its' profitable cell service :)
Posted by Dixinormous about 1 year ago
BT Retail do indeed shape and cap.

BT Wholesale do not do either, they charge per Mbps or per Gbit / month.

BT Openreach deliver an unmetered service, operators pay for capacity to individual exchanges in Gigabit increments and per line only.

Nothing stopping any operator that isn't happy with BT Wholesale's products from doing VLLU and going to Openreach directly.
Posted by chrysalis about 1 year ago
am I seeing things or has herdwick admitted too low retail prices are a factor.
Posted by Dixinormous about 1 year ago
That's exactly what he said and he's absolutely right.
Posted by themanstan about 1 year ago
It's the situation where competition is based on price and not quality, or a mix of both. 'A la' value bacon, looks great and the price is too, but in the frying pan it shrivels up and dumps a load of water in the pan. You're left with not-crispy bacon and panning yourself for not getting the lovely dry-cure! Especially as your stuck with a 2lb bargain bag of the value stuff!
Posted by colinbarrett about 1 year ago
As a user who is connected to the Bradwell Abbey (Milton Keynes) exchange, I look forward to a significant improvement in the connection speeds we experience on a day-to-day basis. At best it's "OK" and at worse it's abysmal.
Posted by brutos about 1 year ago
Be/O2 make a loss?
....hmmm just dont believe that ...

and i work in telecoms for the last 4 years
Posted by phil_cooke about 1 year ago
Interesting that they add York to the trial after Fibrecity have announced their rollout......
Posted by whatever2 about 1 year ago
if their rollout is anything like the one here, that's nothing significant.
Posted by Shempz about 1 year ago
Wow....Fibre to Home, this is great news....can't wait to get it.


Oh no, my mistake...BT aren't even set to make mine a "21CN" exchange for the foreseeable future.

FAIL.
Posted by shaunhw about 1 year ago
Well if the ISPs don't want to pay more, that's because the customers don't want to pay more. So what's the point then ? In anycase I was thinking of the cost of BT centrals. There's a long way to go for many with ADSL on BT, never mind FTTH. What would be the usage allowance 50 gig or something ? What's the point ?
Posted by shaunhw about 1 year ago
OOHHHH... We'll be able to watch HI-DEF Blu Ray movies on BT's FTTH connection.

Well, er two a month maybe... If we're lucky.

One (or at most two) BD films a day would be 750GB month. I am sure they'd provide bandwith for that. So what really is the point ? Such a connection isn't really necessary just for web browsing...

This FTTH sounds good in theory, but without use near full capacity I really don't see the point.
Posted by Dixinormous about 1 year ago
If you'd care to pay the appropriate amount to be able to use it near full capacity shaunhw I'm sure an operator would be happy to service your requirements.
Posted by otester about 1 year ago
BT Wholesale also charge by the GB.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"BT Retail do indeed shape and cap."

So im right there

quote"BT Wholesale do not do either, they charge per Mbps or per Gbit / month."

Resulting in ISPs including BT retail having to cap and shape due to the pricing, just as i said.

quote"BT Openreach deliver an unmetered service, operators pay for capacity to individual exchanges in Gigabit increments and per line only.

Nothing stopping any operator that isn't happy with BT Wholesale's products from doing VLLU and going to Openreach directly."

What differencee would that make All areas of BT overcharge.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"If you'd care to pay the appropriate amount to be able to use it near full capacity shaunhw I'm sure an operator would be happy to service your requirements."

What price he or anyone is willing to pay for their end service at home, they will never get hundreds of gigs per month from any BT service. How much would he have to pay for a service to use 750gig? Point to the service he could take that is BT based? You cant it doesnt exist and even if you could it would still be overpriced compared to non BT services and it would still have P2P throttles.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
BT overcharge, BT force caps due to their overcharging onto people and other ISPs, BT throttle, BT are doggie poop...... Anyone without the shares in BT or working for them or wearing rose tinted BT glasses knows it. No BT fanboy can point to any BT based home fibre services where you could do 750gig no matter what you are willing to pay.
Posted by otester about 1 year ago
@CB

Idnet do one for £90.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
"Resulting in ISPs including BT retail having to cap and shape due to the pricing, just as i said." - I've asked for evidence from you that ISP's cap because of the BT pricing, I've asked 3 or 4 times now as you've not provided it we'll all assume its another fictitious statement. Again there's no point trying to "discuss" anything that involves BT with someone who has such hatred for them, your views will never change so its pointless discussing anything with you relating to BT - which makes up about 80% of the news items.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
^^^ There is no product out there that meets the spec i have mentioned. Ive pointed out above BT based services cost more than others, AND THEY ARE ALL CAPPED OR THROTTLED 50Mb virgin cable is cheaper than similar spec BT fibre products for more data, LLU ADSL2+ is cheaper and also gives more than BT ADSL2+ products. The only consistant thing in high prices, caps, throttles etc, is when a service has a BT link in the chain, a blind horse can see that.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
As for your other ranting at me, i dont have pure hatred for BT at all, evidence.....
http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/general/t/3879891-bt-to-increase-line-rental-install-charge-and-call-costs.html
Posted way before you made that comment and i made this reply.
You are just an upset fanboy that wants to attack personally as you cant defend anything you have to say. The sign of a beaten man.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
@Otester..... Yeah had a look at their business packages, the £89.50 and £99.50 packages are the closest thing ive also seen, overpriced IMO (Get basically the same with Virgin 50Mb for more than half the price.... BTs fault again) but atleast they are offering something close to resonable for a BT based service.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
"The sign of a beaten man" and that comment right there is what it truly boils down to and how you see it, a game. For you its not place to provide meaningful comments its a place for you to try to get a rise of of people and "win your game", which I'm not interested in playing with you thanks :)

Anyway back on topic BT FTTP great news at last someone who can actually deliver rather than these H20 have a go's.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"....For you its not place to provide meaningful comments"

I thought proving i dont have a hatred for everything BT was very meaningful when replying to your accusations. Then again the accusation i hate BT in the first place was hardly a meaningful comment. I guess to you accusations are meaningful, but defending and proving them wrong is not.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
The first Plusnet customer goes on the latest FTTP trial:- http://community.plus.net/blog/2010/07/20/100mbps-has-arrived-plusnet-begins-fibre-to-the-premises-trial/
Posted by otester about 1 year ago
@CB

50/1.5 vs 40/10 - I'll take the latter.

FUP vs Unlimited - Obvious.

£38 vs £90 - I'll take Idnet, VM is just too much of a risk, go read the cable forums.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
^^^ Agreed faster upload is nice but wouldnt be enough to sway me into paying all that extra.
VM isnt a risk, like any service it performs better in some areas than others. In my road speaking to people it performs very well, afew streets away though and it can be a bit flakey with thruput speed suffering. Pays ya money and takes your choice, me personally i dont think what is a similar spec service in alot of aspects is worth more than twice the monthly cost.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
@GMAN if thats full FTTP why are they not getting the full speed? (NOT trying to start an arguement before you think it just curious) It says there are overheads but the overheads from that story dont seem to affect the up speed. I didnt read all the embedded links either but they also mention in the forum it was slightly slower during peak... I wonder why that is?
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
Ok well I would give this same comment whether it was BT, Virgin or whoever was providing this service. I noticed the lower speed as well and I would say this:-

1) First up the customer should be running a test direct from the modem not the router, that router *should* be capable of running a full pelt but it would be better to test direct to the modem
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
2) It could be down to the speedtester, remember all that fuss when Virgin went to 50Mb and said current speedtesters couldn't cope, it could be the same issue here, although it looks like he did get 92Mb on the "My Broadband" speed test and that is as high as I would expect it to go with overheads, so maybe not.

3) Don't laugh but when you get up to these speeds for some people the PCI bus could be a problem, PCI is shared across the whole PC and depending on your PC & network card you can find the max throughput on your card can be 90Mb
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
4) The above points are all valid but based on the posts in the forum I think its just down to the simple fact that its a trial, there will no doubt be many things going on in the background to monitor the service/changes/differing profiles etc which all could have an impact on his speed, its what a trial is about they are allowed to play and change things around without upsetting the customer as they agreed to that upfront.

I'd say the 92Mb is bang on I wouldn't expect much more than that, hopefully by the end of the trial that figure will be constant
Posted by otester about 1 year ago
Thinkbroadband speedtester has been tested at over 250Mb, there's a video on this site somewhere were they go to an ISP.

@CB

I can understand why people wouldn't want to pay double. VM's end product isn't what I'd be worried about vut customer service side.

If I ever land in a VM area and there is no FTTC, I would take them without hesitation.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
Good points GMAN and otester :) Will be interesting to see more results of this FTTP trial. It does seem a little weird the speedtest on here only measured the trial users speed at 67Mb though the tester here does also report my LLU connection as a few Mb slower than it actually is. The my broadband test the user ran and got 92Mb seems more accurate until you look at the uprate also where it reports 15.34Mb which is actually more than it should be (nevermind overheads).
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
All in all a bit early to tell if its all working as it should and as you say GMAN it may be the "trial" effect or even his PC, will be interesting to watch what others report :) Nice link either way and an interesting forum read :)
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
Yep I mean even the firmware used on the modem could be part of the trial it may not be up to scratch yet and not the final version.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
This is also quite interesting:- http://community.plus.net/fttp_faq/ especially about the 4 ports on the ONT may deliver different services for each port at a later date.
Posted by otester about 1 year ago
Could well be backhaul, FTTP isn't 1:1 contention and ISPs only buy pipes in 155/622, IIRC.
Posted by otester about 1 year ago
Could well be backhaul, FTTP isn't 1:1 contention and ISPs only buy pipes in 155/622, IIRC.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
Did you see item 12 in that link GMAN?
quote"12. Will I have a dynamic/static/same IP address?
You will have the same IP address as you have on your existing account type."

Thats interesting i guess some on the service are dynamic IP and some are static.

Also regarding it possibly being firmware issues... Maybe...CONT
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago

"18. What router do you supply?
We intend to use a number of different routers during the trial, we’re expecting the first customers to receive a Thomson TG789vn but will also supply different routers. We may also send you more than one router to do some extended testing for our router suppliers."

So looks like they expect some to perform better than others and some that need further testing before they know if they perform well.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
With regards to the ONT do you mean point 21?

That sounds great in theory and could be lots of services from one box, but it will be a nightmare if you want to run serveral PCs...... More boxes, more wires, more configuring. Maybe the final thing they could have an 8 port option (though obviously for a price)
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
Realise you can network from your router but unless im wrong can you not also hook straight into the ONT? and network from that (or will it only do the connection side of things?) If you can network through it also, having everything hardwired in a single place would be nice! (Maybe im hoping too much there lol)
Posted by New_Londoner about 1 year ago
Some of the rather ill informed comments above about various companies ignore the rather obvious point - for the vast majority of the population this is a very competitive market, if you don't like your supplier you have choices. Why criticise BT when it is investing £2.5bn in FTTC / FTTP, who else is investing at this scale?

There seems to be a minority of people around the country that want very high speeds (ie FTTP) but don't want to payanything/much for the provision, this is not a compelling business case for a service provider.
Posted by New_Londoner about 1 year ago
what about upstream speeds, which are far more important to SMEs than ever higher downstream rates. Seems like a big problem for VM at present, is this an inherent weakness in the cable system?
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
No I think you will hook PC's into the router, the separate ports are for later and what I think is a great idea. So say port 1 goes to the router with 100Mb down/15up (or whatever) and then maybe port 2 goes to you set-top box with is own separate bandwidth for your TV/Films etc, a third port for your phone etc etc.

RE: VM's upstream, there's nothing technically stopping them offering more AFAIK. Even with DOCSIS 1 you can do 10Mb up, DOCSIS 2, 30up, DOCSIS 3 multiples of 30up
Posted by otester about 1 year ago
@GMAN99

I'm just going what's available currently.

Technically VDSL2 (BT FTTC) can do 100Mbps up to 500m and symmetrically if required.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"Why criticise BT when it is investing £2.5bn in FTTC / FTTP, who else is investing at this scale?"

Thats an estimate of what it will cost not what they are going to spend.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"what about upstream speeds, which are far more important to SMEs than ever higher downstream rates. Seems like a big problem for VM at present, is this an inherent weakness in the cable system?"

Virgins system is capable of Waaaay more than BTs FTTC system as it stands both in upload and download terms.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
@GMAN thats a shame :( i agrre its a good idea all different devices and would be very nice from the same ONT, but id also love the thing to have more than 4 ports, ah well cant have everything, though as its only a trial we never know (hey i can live in hope ;) ).
Posted by New_Londoner about 1 year ago
@CarpetBurn - if VM can offer much higher upstream speeds, why is this not part of the current packages?
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"@CarpetBurn - if VM can offer much higher upstream speeds, why is this not part of the current packages?"

If BT can offer faster up and down rates through their FTTC why isnt that currently available? Stupid argument that works both ways
I clearly stated "Virgins system is CAPABLE of Waaaay more than BTs FTTC system as it stands both in upload and download terms." And it is......CONT
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
As both systems STAND, Virgins is the one CAPABLE of faster down rates (around 3-400Mb as opposed to BTs FTTC 100Mb and for that you would have to have literally only metres of copper) and faster uprates (Virgins is capable of around 120Mb, BTs FTTC 100Mb, again in the ideal, longer the BT copper run the more you lose) Virgins system is TECHNICALLY the more CAPABLE of the two.., The end! You can always google DOCSIS 3 if you dont believe me.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
Now where was i, thats right having a new and interesting conversation with other users, and agreeing with GMAN for a change rather than having to deal with bloody BT defending posts again.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
VM can certainly do more up, why they don't... who knows, no competition to date?
Posted by New_Londoner about 1 year ago
@CB SO back to my question, FTTC is already offering upload speeds of 10Mbps, I think VM is currently stalled at 1.5Mbps?

Also, I see mixed FTTC and FTTP deployments are announced now, which obviously gives much higher symmetric capability when using FTTP, does VM have the option of hybrid deplyments or it is limited to coax for the last mile?

Personally I far prefer to see an open system being deployed rather than the closed system being used by VM - name one other ISP offering service over VM cable?
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"@CB SO back to my question, FTTC is already offering upload speeds of 10Mbps, I think VM is currently stalled at 1.5Mbps?"
Your question actually was......
"@CarpetBurn - if VM can offer much higher upstream speeds, why is this not part of the current packages?" And my answer covered it BTs FTTC can do more than 10Mb upload so why dont they do that? The arguement works both ways. Neither Virgin or BTs services run at their MAX POSSIBLE. I could quite easily bang on and ask why is BT only 40Mb download and Virgin is 10Mb faster at 50Mb. But im not stupid.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"Also, I see mixed FTTC and FTTP deployments are announced now, which obviously gives much higher symmetric capability when using FTTP, does VM have the option of hybrid deplyments or it is limited to coax for the last mile?"

1) Where has FTTP been announced? This is a trial
2) Much higher symmetric capability BT and Virgin dont even do that now with cheaper Fibre based systems let alone with more expensive ones, the FTTP trial isnt doing it so no idea why you think theres going to be a FTTP deployment with same up and down rates
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
3) Hybrid what the heck are you talking about FTTC is just that FTTP is just that, they are different products, why would virgin need a hybrid system, what are you on about?
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"VM can certainly do more up, why they don't... who knows, no competition to date?"
They are just sitting back. When BT announced ADSl2+ services, they announced 20Mb, when BT announced FTTC, they done 50Mb. The real fun and games is when the flogging of 100Mb starts. Thats when the battle with regards to uprates is likely to start. Virgin are being pretty clever and cagey, each time releasing something thats just a bit better. Once BT FTTC rolls out more i wouldnt be shocked to see Virgin announce 100Mb down and match BTs FTTC 10Mb up << Mark my words!
Posted by New_Londoner about 1 year ago
"Virgin are being pretty clever and cagey, each time releasing something thats just a bit better."

Well FTTC is already released with up to 40Mbps downstream / up to 10 Mbps upstream, and with 60Mbps/15Mbps already stated as coming next. VM still seems to be stalled at 1.5Mbps upstream, so no sign of it releasing something that's just a bit better yet.

A key limitation of VM is the shared coax segment that routes through up to 1000 homes - if too many customers opt for the higher bit rate services you run out of capacity very quickly.
Posted by New_Londoner about 1 year ago
@CB You seem to be very defensive of Virgin and (elsewhere) Sky. Why defend two companies that either refuse to open up their network (Virgin) or have to be forced by Ofcom and immediately appeal the decision (Sky)? Why favour monopolistic companies when there are over 400 service providers in the UK?
Posted by otester about 1 year ago
@New_Londoner

I think the lack of upload could be because of two things:

1. Capacity.
2. VM works with the entertainment indusyry to try to reduce filesharing.

Also VM is a private company and therefore doesn't/shouldn't have to open up their network to anyone. BT is the victim of forced socialism which has actually made the situation worse.
Posted by Somerset about 1 year ago
'BT is the victim of forced socialism which has actually made the situation worse. '

The Conservatives privatised BT. Worse than what?
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"A key limitation of VM is the shared coax segment that routes through up to 1000 homes - if too many customers opt for the higher bit rate services you run out of capacity very quickly."

LMAO thats its advantage over BT, BT dont have any plans for a full FTTP roll out only FTTC and that limiting coax for virgin gives them an advantage over BT.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"@CB You seem to be very defensive of Virgin and (elsewhere) Sky. Why defend two companies that either refuse to open up their network (Virgin) or have to be forced by Ofcom and immediately appeal the decision (Sky)? Why favour monopolistic companies when there are over 400 service providers in the UK? "

I favour who gives me the better product with more choice that isnt BT....... The End.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"BT is the victim of forced socialism which has actually made the situation worse. '
The Conservatives privatised BT. Worse than what? "

In the last 20 years as PRIVATE companies who spent more with regards to delivering BROADBAND Telewest/NTL/Virgin or BT?
Obviously it wasnt BT, the FTTC investment (and its not 2.5 billion before someone says that as thats a guesstimate) is the first seriously significant spend since they became private.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
Oh and no nonsense about Telewest going belly up, so would BT if they had spent as much. As it is though BT are still sniffing round for tax payer investment.

If we are going to compare BT fans, lets compare not name random products that are so called competing. But deliver so much less.
Posted by Somerset about 1 year ago
cb - Are you excluding the complete conversion of 5500 digital exchanges fully interconnected by fibre in the last 20 years? The extensive fibre core network connecting businesses, mobile networks etc.

The cable companies were set up for TV and BT were not allowed to roll out fibre by the government.

Have you looked at the BT accounts to find out about their investment?
Posted by Somerset about 1 year ago
cb - can you list all these competing products that deliver less.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"cb - Are you excluding the complete conversion of 5500 digital exchanges fully interconnected by fibre in the last 20 years? The extensive fibre core network connecting businesses, mobile networks etc."

What has connecting exchanges with fibre got to do with the services provided to us end users? Why are some still stuck at 512k?
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"The cable companies were set up for TV and BT were not allowed to roll out fibre by the government."

Ah the old BT defense. Remind me again how many years BT have been private, remind me again about their year on year profits, remind me again what improved services they have given users. NONE, we still get ADSL thats all.

Why has it taken them until 2010 to start rolling out a fibre product? They have been private for how many years? Over 20 isnt it? So its took them 20 years..... Pardon me if i dont clap.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"cb - can you list all these competing products that deliver less."

Not sure what you mean, i said..... "If we are going to compare BT fans, lets compare not name random products that are so called competing. But deliver so much less."

BT fans want to compare the likes of virgin, to BT, BT is meant to be a competing product? FINE...... Here goes, who gives you more TV channels? 1-0 Virgin. Who gives you cheaper telephone line rental 2-0 Virgin. Who gives you broadband with no limits on their top end product and allow you to download all that data quicker 3-0 Virgin...... GAME OVER!
Posted by Somerset about 1 year ago
So why don't VM have all the phone and ISP business in their areas? And expand to the rest of the country, they can't lose.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"So why don't VM have all the phone and ISP business in their areas? And expand to the rest of the country, they can't lose."

Stupid question, works the other way also, if BT are better why dont they have all the customers Virgin have in areas its available? If BT are better why dont they have me as a broadband subscriber? You are getting into personal taste now and that has nothing to do with comparing services from a company to see who offers more.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
BT fans would never sub to a Virgin product even if it were £1 a month and gave you 100Mb up and down along with 1000 TV channels, because you actually believe BT are the better company.

And dont deny it either because if it wasnt true you would had gone to a LLU product... Infact and excuse me if im wrong, didnt you once sub to pipex and then left and went to plusnet even though bethere was available? That would tend to indicate your choice was driven on price not the superior tech.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
^^^ Just to be clear again i may be wrong on that last bit as obviously im thinking back years now.
Posted by New_Londoner about 1 year ago
Agree with CB that the bar on BT investing TV services is hardly important now, although it did extend well beyond privitisation to protect the newly granted cable licences.

I don't think CB has a good grasp of how cable works though, and doesn't seem to understand why sharing a cable segment with up to 1000 others will have a major impact on performance if many want to take the high-end broadband services, a problem that does not affect the FTTC and FTTp architecture being deployed by BT and others.
Posted by New_Londoner about 1 year ago
I also think the most recent post about people not taking service from one supplier or another irrespective of the competing offer is rarely true - look at the proliferation of service providers in the UK as evidence that many of us have a pretty low loyalty threshold.

Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
Its certainly going to be an interesting few years, if you compare Virgin's Fibre + Coax to BT's Fibre all the way to the home (FTTP) you don't have to be a genius to work out which will run out of steam first if it was an all out speed war, but I don't see that happening anyway.

What I do think will happen is this, as FTTC rolls out more and more and other ISP's take up the service (they will as they've no other way to progress broadband at the moment) we will see more players in the market offering better stable speeds.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
..cont

At the moment in Virgin areas no-one can touch them on speed, but this will change when more ISP's take up FTTC, you have to ask yourself what speed does the average punter want at the moment, I'd say a stable 10Mb, no ISP in the UK can guarantee that for the majority at the moment not even with LLU, but they will be able to with FTTC.

So I foresee other ISP's taking a lot of business from Virgin in their own backyard, and because Virgin services are not available everywhere they obviously can't compete where they have no presence.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
If I were Virgin I would be looking at putting a curb on these super speeds that even their own customer base tells them they don't want and look at expanding the network as they will have to - to keep in the game.
Posted by CaptainHulaHoop about 1 year ago
CB- i don't think it's people defending BT, just pointing out your inaccuracies. Granted BT havn't invested as well as people would like, for some daft reason thye invested billions to buy 3G licenses, then were in too much debt and had to give up cellnet(o2)
Posted by CaptainHulaHoop about 1 year ago
but to say they havn't made any major investment is just wrong..Name one CP that has adsl equipment in more exchanges than BT wholesale.
Posted by CaptainHulaHoop about 1 year ago
the fact is everyone wants something different, and we are lucky that we have so many different CP's giving the choice, but that also makes investmnet difficult to justify..the largest number of customers are "average joe" and just want stable internet at a decent speed, which to most people means stable iplayer etc. and be able to get itunes content at a in a resonable time
Posted by CaptainHulaHoop about 1 year ago
so for most people 10meg is enough for now.
in most cases FTTC will provide this and fttp anywhere but on new housing estates is a massive cost and not enough people want/need it..
I agree with GMAN, virgin are not safe in their own areas, maybe they are for now with the low number of customers that want top speeds but still most people want what they see as value for money, which is why in area with cable and sky llu, lots of people leave virgin to go to sky for an all in one package, not basede on top speeds, but on price
Posted by CaptainHulaHoop about 1 year ago
and if virgin loose customers to adsl2, chances are if sky or other providers can provide a value for money solution using FTTC in cable areas they could loose or fail to gain customers when they start needing a bit more speed because its going to be quite sme time before average joe needs more than 20meg, and most regard that to be openreaches FTTC average speed
Posted by otester about 1 year ago
People seem to be forgetting that BT has been trying to get rid of their once £30bn debt, now ~£10bn.

Also about speed, it's not about what one needs, you get a higher speed, you find more things to do with it.

Hence I have a 3Mb connection, I can't do what I could do in my other property which provided 14Mb. Before you could say I didn't "need it".
Posted by TheGuv about 1 year ago
Quote - "BT fans would never sub to a Virgin product even if it were £1 a month and gave you 100Mb up and down along with 1000 TV channels, because you actually believe BT are the better company."


Er - no. If it's value for money by a country mile, then BT fans would shift or get that service in parallel (since it's only a quid as you point out!

Not a good example provided there Carpetburn - more just your opinion masquerading as fact.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"i have yet to see anything on their FTTC with more than 40down, but i have seen 15up, it is being trialled"

When i said "link to the 60Mb roll out product please it doesnt exist" I wasnt refering to a product myself... I was asking for a link to the imaginary 60Mb product New_Londoner thinks exists.
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
@Theguv...... Then why dont they go to Virgin for their TV, Broadband and phone bundles??? They could have this bundle......
http://allyours.virginmedia.com/html/bundles/mplusoffer.html
Which is cheaper than any triple service BT offers and gives you faster broadband. The point is perfectly valid especially when one BT fan in this very thread likes to bang on about packages a company offers and price. CONT
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
Instead though they think a more expensive package from BT with only UPTO 8Mb is what people should choose if they want a package deal. Therefore price and what you get for the money obviously is irrelevant to them. Me personally i dont want a pacakage deal from any company for all my services, thats why i have 3 seperate digi boxes, LLU broadband and BT for my phone. I refuse to agree with someone that says price and content is important and when challenged with a product that is better on price and content to still insist BT is better. Its fanboy(ism) nothing more.
Posted by New_Londoner about 1 year ago
@CB
Read the FTTC briefings and you will see the planned upgrade to 60Mbps/15Mbps. Will be interesting to see what different service providers choose to offer to their customers when they can flex between different guaranteed minimum speeds at different price points.

By the way, FTTC (Infinity Option 2) costs the same as Total Broadband Option 3 at £24.99/month, so comparisons above are valid - but yet again don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant!
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"@CB
Read the FTTC briefings and you will see the planned upgrade to 60Mbps/15Mbps."

LMAO is that from the lips of BT and them being bitter they are still currently slower? My god they havent even delivered 40Mb yet to their so called "two thirds" LMAO
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"By the way, FTTC (Infinity Option 2) costs the same as Total Broadband Option 3 at £24.99/month, so comparisons above are valid - but yet again don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant! "

comparisons of what to what???
Are you getting mixed up with news story comments and refering to package deals you mentioned on the Bethere story?? In that case
You clearly stated the broadband you was including in you BT triple package was option 3 and its 8Mb so you fail there also.
Posted by New_Londoner about 1 year ago
@CB
Er Like I said, Option 3 BB and Option 2 FTTC are the same price? Hopefully this is clear for everyone.

Like I said, don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant!
Posted by New_Londoner about 1 year ago
In terms of future services, you're happy to include your own speculation about VM services that the company itself has not announced, so bit rich to criticise anyone referring to actually company briefings!
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"In terms of future services, you're happy to include your own speculation about VM services that the company itself has not announced, so bit rich to criticise anyone referring to actually company briefings!"

Oh i bet you wished you waited until today to type that......
http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/4325-uk-broadband-speeds-increase-but-promise-to-delivery-gap-widens.html#news_comments

Top speed for Virgin 46Mb...... BT lose.
Posted by Somerset about 1 year ago
Is it a competition?
Posted by CARPETBURN about 1 year ago
quote"Is it a competition?"

Nah not really unless the pub side BT are allowed to play against the premiership?
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.