Skip Navigation


The importance of full fibre broadband
Saturday 23 February 2013 12:55:45 by Sebastien Lahtinen

Over the past few days, thousands of delegates have gathered in London for the FTTH Councils' Fibre-to-the-Home Conference at Excel in London. This event has been designed to bring together network operators, equipment suppliers, contractors, policy-makers and investors to help promote FTTH adoption across the EU.

When we talk about fibre-optic broadband in the UK, we usually mean fibre-to-the-cabinet (FTTC) 'hybrid' solutions rather than fibre-to-the-home/building/premises (FTTH/FTTB/FTTP), the so called 'full fibre' solution. Most of the rollout by BT, and all the Virgin Media fibre services are at present based on FTTC, using a copper cable (telephone twisted pair in the case of BT or coax in the case of Virgin) to connect the home to the nearest fibre distribution point, a street cabinet within a few hundred metres of the premises usually. Alongside some limited rollout by BT, a number of niche operators in the UK are rolling out FTTH and FTTB focussing on new-build properties in cities as well as some rural projects.

The FTTH Council released its bi-annual market report which revealed the state of fibre adoption across Europe, and confirming that an increasing gap was developing between countries pushing ahead with fibre and those lagging behind. This should be of concern to government (who were absent) as there is some evidence that ultra-fast broadband connectivity is a key driver of economic development by promoting a start-up culture according to keynote speaker Alexander Bard.

The demand for full-fibre

One of the most common criticisms of full-fibre advocacy is the suggestion that consumers simply don't need the sorts of speeds delivered by this type of solution, and investment is better targeted at hybrid FTTC technology. One of our Twitter followers yesterday asked:

"What you can do with gigabit that you can't do with 60Mb?"
@nickg_uk

A fair question we would argue; so we visited the 'application dome' at the FTTH conference showcasing new technology which is expected to be adopted in the next few years, to find out what the speed requirements for all the technology in the dome required? Included in the dome were a Microsoft Surface table letting you explore a real-time map of the world, telemedicine robots which allowed patients to consult with doctors over video conferencing, a 3D printer, a 4K super-high definition television amongst other interesting toys. Most of these applications didn't actually require fast speeds, although telemedicine and the general requirement for interconnectivity does mean reliable Internet connectivity is a common requirement. Perhaps the best example of a high bandwidth application was the 4K TV, a super-high definition (about four times the number of pixels as standard 'HD' we use today) which would struggle on a 60Mbps connection today, but as with existing HD transmissions, the codecs use will improve and we will see the use of compression techniques that remove detail (something you may notice if you watch a very fast moving event such as an explosion on Sky HD) to bring this down further.


Selection of applications which broadband is expected to support in future

When Virgin launched its 50 and 100Mbps services, these were exactly the questions the press were asking–yet we have accepted the benefits of superfast broadband services for some time, and uptake is improving. The answer back then was of course the 'family'; whilst parents are watching Netflix in the living room, the kids may be playing World of Warcraft upstairs, each needing a high quality connection, be it in terms of bandwidth or low latency. There is however now evidence that faster broadband services can be a significant influence in creating a community of startups, with a typical delay of five years. Keynote speaker Alexander Bard cited Nordic capital cities including Helsinki, Stockholm and Copenhagen as key locations where startup communities are going to be growing substantially in the future, and technological innovation brings a multitude of long term benefits.

"You are higher up the value chain the earlier you adopt technology such as FTTH. In Nairobi you can pay for a taxi with a mobile; in Stockholm you pay by credit card. When Scandinavian countries implement mobile payment systems, they will pay Kenyan companies substantial amounts in patent fees"

Alexander Bard, philosopher & keynote speaker

Mr Bard also challenged the concept of the 'home', explaining that Internet use was now much wider than just the home. Fibre was needed to 'everywhere' users would be. In mature economies such as Japan, the average worker no longer spends five days a week at work, but 3.8 days; 1.2 working days are spent working from home or elsewhere. This is also particularly visible for young entrepreneurs. Over the next 20-30 years, people will find new ways of living, and this is likely to increase the need for ubiquitous faster broadband services. He also suggested that we are likely to see people living in other parts of the world and teleworking using fast connectivity.

An investment in all-fibre networks is about providing future-proof infrastructure which encourages new applications to be developed. Fibre optic connections have always lead over copper in terms of speed on short distances, but on long distances, the gap is even larger. Copper can today deliver 10Gbps connections over relatively short distances (measured in metres) whilst fibre can do so several times this, across kilometres and beyond.

Commitment to the future of fibre

The UK government has invested in a mix of technlogies to try and narrow the gap between those on superfast connections and those in the slow lane. Notable by their absense at the conference, it was left to Chi Onwurah MP and member of the shadow cabinet to provide a parliamentarian's perspective on investment in next-generation infrastructure. She explained that digital infrastructure was key as a platform for innovation and criticised the recent cut in EU broadband budgets:

"A cut of 85% of the broadband budget is not a positive signal for the investment priorities for Europe" she explained, comparing it to a mere 1-2% cut in Common Agricultural Policy budget. "Why is it that we do not reward long term investment? Companies that invest in long term FTTH see their share price suffer [in the short term]" she adds.

"My constituents in Newcastle aren't demanding fibre-to-the-home now. They are demanding decent broadband, something they weren't asking for three years ago. When the demand pull comes, these networks take years to roll out, and government needs time to establish a regulatory vision. I'm very concerned that we don't have a plan, a future, from government, or from our major providers that includes FTTH in significant numbers."

Chi Onwurah, MP and member of the shadow cabinet

Ms Onwurah acknowledges the UK's high take-up of broadband with the highest proportion of the economy online as well as burgeoning creative industries, however two major problems also exist. Firstly, the growing digital divide between cities and rural areas when it comes to super-fast broadband, and secondly the lack of a long term vision–something her party is looking to address. She explained that the current government has no plans beyond 2015 and that a ten-year vision was needed. She believes that BT comes under a lot of criticism on its FTTH investment, but suggests most of this is unjustified as the incentive for a public company to invest in long term solutions is currently not present. By getting everyone connected to universal basic broadband, it becomes possible to bring all of government services online too, and reduce associated costs.

Comments

Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
"I'm very concerned that we don't have a plan, a future, from government, or from out major providers that includes FTTH in significant numbers."

Fibre on Demand. When you outgrow FTTC you buy FOD
Posted by herdwick about 1 year ago
Is 4K what they use in cinemas now ?
Posted by Somerset about 1 year ago
Many organisations have comms delivered by fibre, and have had so for at least 20 years, do they count in the figures?
Posted by 21again about 1 year ago
" By getting everyone connected to universal basic broadband, it becomes possible to bring all of government services online too, and reduce associated costs."
The 2Meg USC isn't good enough for this purpose, I've tried filling in forms with such a connection and it would be quicker using a pen to paper with it sent by RM.
Posted by herdwick about 1 year ago
you can fill in forms on dialup, reliability is more of an issue than the bandwidth required to send a few hundred kbytes of form and text.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
Rubbish, I've been filling in forms online for years on 2Mbps
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) about 1 year ago
@somerset Leased lines do not count
Posted by herdwick about 1 year ago
Perhaps they should sell the whole fibre idea as better faster cheaper telly and not mention the internet ? Seems that's the primary user for the extra bandwidth anyway. Better than Sky, cheaper, no dish, no Murdoch - has to be a winner ?
Posted by dogcat about 1 year ago
@herdwick BT are already ahead of you. They wanted to convert to full fiber network 20 years ago and offer TV services! But they were blocked by the regulators; just imagine the situation the country would have been in if that would of happened, the UK could well have been THE forefront of the internet revolution.

The bandwidth demands of 4K will be the driver for FTTH and BT knows this that long term its network is in the best position to deliver on demand video services to the home. Its probably one of the factors why SKY have spent so much on building a broadband network.
Posted by omnius about 1 year ago
why was the UK government not there? we are still part of Europe (for now)

" BT are already ahead of you. They wanted to convert to full fiber network 20 years ago and offer TV services! But they were blocked by the regulators"

Considering that BT are required to open up there network to all wouldn't it be better to just let them do what they want since once they are done anyone else can buy space on there shiny new network and sell under there own name? and before anyone mentions virgin theve been around long enough now to play without a safety net
Posted by herdwick about 1 year ago
like HD, I can avoid 4K by not buying a TV too big for the conventional resolution :-)
Posted by zyborg47 about 1 year ago
I don't see the point when we still got websites that load as if we are using dial up. just trying to get onto vodafone website now, it is like watching paint dry.
Posted by FTTH about 1 year ago
Sony have confirmed the PS4 will have a 4K output. So it is not too far away. So the excuses are done now really, operators can not really use the 24Mb excuse anymore.
There is content.

I fear we have a way to go yet though.
FTTC, FTTPole, FTTGarden, FTThome..

Slowly, slowly catchee monkey


Posted by comnut about 1 year ago
filling in forms online is NOT dependent on the speed of Internet!!!

it DOES depend on how well it is written, with fail-safes etc.. would you fill in a 10 page form, needing very complex information, taking more than an hour?? During which time any accidents may happen.. :(

I guess the suits want the high speed, so they can use an advanced form where the characters you type are saved continuously.. very over-engineered I think!!

the easiest way is a 'locked form' in Word that you download, and fill in offline in your own time and then send when you are sure all is correct..

Posted by comnut about 1 year ago
zyborg47: yes, but... : demand will always rise to the level of that provided...
and when it exceeds it, companies will then realize it is getting too expensive for them, so will start limiting it to try to reduce costs..

Vodafone's site uses a good cheap system, that works ok for say a 1000 people try to access it at one time, but when 100,000 people try to do it using their new faster system, (that Vodafone hasn't got yet!!) then it will be like 100 people trying to get in a small door at the same time!!!
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
@FTTH

Nope just FTTC then FTTP(remise) for those that want it, from Spring 2013, not far to go at all
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
Comnut, yeah this already happens, PDF files that you fill in offline and then submit/verify when you are ready, very small files
Posted by ronreid about 1 year ago
In Nairobi you can pay for a taxi with a mobile; in Stockholm you pay by credit card.

In the UK? Cash only! (With a few exceptions)
Posted by Somerset about 1 year ago
What's preventing other taxi payment methods in the UK, lack of FTTP?
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) about 1 year ago
The taxi thing is an example of the danger of ignoring change, e.g. if you build a pay by mobile system likely to mean paying for patents to Kenya.

How technology is changing established orders and the danger that if you don't keep up you will be left behind as society and thus business models change
Posted by comnut about 1 year ago
GMAN99: I WAS stating the obvious... (in answer to the offtopic comment by '21again' and 'herdwick'..) But I dunno how you fill in a PDF form?? mistake??
Posted by comnut about 1 year ago
taxi payment has nothing to do with internet, more to do with credit card companies etc wanting too much money to manage it!!
Posted by ValueforMoney about 1 year ago
If business customers in cities French, Dutch, Swedish, Japanese, HK and S Korea can replace their PSTN service for the wholesale equivalent of 10-15 euros, then UK business should demand the same.

BT re-evualation of its ducts in 08/09 and stating VDSL cab/path are £100k a go, will now act as cost barriers to a 25 year fibre transition plan which policy makers and Ofcom are avoiding.

Ofcom (Chi former employer) could at least reference the possibility in their action plan for 2013/14.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
Yeah you can fill in PDF's they can be made interactive, check boxes, fields to enter info in that can be validated offline, you can fill in corporation tax submissions using this method. When you are ready you can send it in to be fully verified.
Posted by nmg196 about 1 year ago
The only real use they've come up in answer to my question ("What you can do with gigabit that you can't do with 60Mb?") is 4K TV. However this is very unlikely to affect home users anytime soon. Home sized TV's do not need 4K - it's only needed for TVs several metres across (ie cinema sized).
Posted by nmg196 about 1 year ago
...and 4K TV when encoded with MPEG 4 (standard for SkyHD and Blu-ray) only requires around 16-32Mb depending on quality settings. Ie it will be easily streamable over a 60Mb connection.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
I bet there's tons of people that don't have HD TV's yet, and even more than don't have 3D so people replacing their sets in big numbers with 4K sets is probably a decade away probably longer
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) about 1 year ago
So gman we don't need to worry for another decade? And can spend the usual five years planning the roll-out, meaning it will be 2028 for anything meaningful to happen?
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) about 1 year ago
@nmg196 There are people happily watching 720p HD feeds compressed down to 1 Mbps.

Compress 4k to squeeze onto a connection and the improvements are largely lost.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
Andrew, nope not saying that. Fibre on Demand is there when its needed
Posted by michaels_perry about 1 year ago
A key issue that nobody is mentioning is reliability. Speed is all very well but ONLY if it is reliable and available at least 99.9% of the time. That is not the experience of everyone yet but should be. Get things reliable first before ramping up speeds.
Posted by michaels_perry about 1 year ago
Lots of hype about higher definition TVs. Correct viewing distance = 5-6 times screen diagonal, correct height = just below sitting eye level. Ideal definition, good enough to not notice defects in normal viewing. Ideal transmission should be good enough to not produce visual/audible artifacts. DTV fails these tests as bit rate too low to fit in all the 3D, HD and adverts (sorry, TV programmes).
Posted by gt94sss2 about 1 year ago
I currently live in Japan and the statement that "the average worker no longer spends five days a week at work, but 3.8 days; 1.2 working days are spent working from home or elsewhere." is rubbish as far as Japan is concerned - unless you are talking about going to meetings. Its got nothing at all to do with fibre.

As for the debate on taxi fares etc - Japan has had a system called Mobile Suica which integrated oyster card type functionality into mobiles - as well as trains, taxi's etc, you can even use it in shops like McDonalds - it launched in 2006..
Posted by ahockings about 1 year ago
It's mostly down to Government and the people in Government from any party are bloody useless as we know. To get FTTH to everyone would be about 25 Billion. We would get the money back in about 5-8 years. they can't see it though, they're stupid.
Posted by cyberdoyle about 1 year ago
GMAN99 the only FOD needed right now (as most near cabinets are happy enough with their 'upto' 80 meg) is for people on long line lengths stuck on dial up, and they can't afford the excess charges. The FOD bit is all a con. Those who could take the service don't want it yet, and those who do face massive bills of thousands to get it.
Posted by cyberdoyle about 1 year ago
Chi & her government and her ofcom insisted 99.8% of us were broadband enabled years ago. So why does she now say that is the job that should be being done? What is happening is we are using the money to make those who already have broadband go a bit faster. Also we'll be laying more COPPER to long lines, taking off DACS and bonding said COPPER thus wasting taxpayers money to give a USC to the edges of exchanges that is pitiful.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
cyberdoyle but the product is there, well in a few months anyway. That is what I'm getting at, we don't need another massive rollout , people can upgrade to it as and when needed
Posted by themanstan about 1 year ago
100% ftth is a myth without national or local goverment full intervention. Infrastructure can be built upto to a certain point in a commercial or semi commercial manner after that only full funding from a gov agency covers unrecoverable capital costs. Even the latest French "talk" i doubt will cover 100%
Posted by Bob_s2 about 1 year ago
The economics of a full fibre deployment in urban areas are now pretty compelling.
You remove the need for active equipment scattered around the streets in an uncontrolled environment. This means high maintenance costs.
You remove the need for copper and remove the growing problem and costs of copper thefts as well as generate cash by selling the copper
You can discontinue the current terrestrial TV transmitters and sell off the freed up bandwidth
You gain benefits to the economy by having Ultra HS Broadband
Posted by pkaulf about 1 year ago
@michaels_perry Exactly. The people who make these decisions seem to be unaware that moving to full fibre would eradicate all manner of problems that plague copper lines. Tired of the dismissive attitude towards FTTH because "nobody really needs those speeds". Maybe not now, but what about in 5 years? 10 years? All they're interested in is short term profits
Posted by AndrueC about 1 year ago
Reliability is not guaranteed by FTTx. I have issues every 60 days and it's is 99% sure now that they originate within BTor's or BTw's network /not/ my line. Sadly it seems to be a dead area where no-one can be found to take responsibility.
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) about 1 year ago
@michaels_perry Not short term, but whether they will get re-elected at next election, be that local, general or other election.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
I do not believe for an instant you can easily say that the costs for FTTP can be paid for quickly by maintenance savings, no way

As for theft that will continue, they'll just end up nicking fibre by mistake instead of copper.

As for TV transmitters BT won't benefit there so you can't include that.

As for economy benefits of HS BB, still unproven?
Posted by pkaulf about 1 year ago
@GMAN99 - I did say "short term profits", so I'm not suggesting they'd make their money back quickly. But it would work out better for absolutely everyone in the long run. Changing everyone over to fibre is going to be a long gradual process anyway. It's just a pity they didn't have the foresight to start 10-15 years ago.
Posted by Somerset about 1 year ago
'They' wanted to, but 'she' would not let them.
Posted by themanstan about 1 year ago
@pkaulf

OFCOM would have jumped on them in an instant, they didn't have permission to operate fibre in a residential market till 2009. All the profits that could have been used back then were funnelled off to dividends. No other choice as wouldn't be able to buy out competitors or sit on the cash and they'd gambled plenty of money on global ops.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
Yep.. the foresight was there 20yrs ago, the green light was not.

Its a lot of money to invest to get back very slowly. I'm sure they'd do it in the blink of an eye if they didn't have to wholesale as they'd reap all of the profits directly, as it stands Ofcom continue to squeeze them on pricing making the ROI even longer so... you can see why they aren't going all in, plus aren't they still in debt?
Posted by ValueforMoney about 1 year ago
@GMAN99 But you could sensibly plan a fibre transition plan over 25 yeats, which if declared could at least get it into Ofcom work plan, so the economic incentives could be re-aligned, and more of BT's annual £2-£2.6m capex could be invested in fibre. BT CE on fibre is a mere £750m in there reg accounts.

The UBF funds and the £300m could be used to make a meaningful start. The incremental cost savings were proven by BT in the mid-eighties, it is running both networks which creates the doubt.
Posted by ValueforMoney about 1 year ago
There looks to be a real issue for BT and GOV on the drop in Capital Employed needed for an all fibre network.

BT can use RCA to re-state duct values, but once you start taking out copper access costs the opportunity to recover costs is much reduced.

A fibre transition date 25 years out is needed just so the discussion can begin.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
VFM, there's no need though is there? 2/3rds of the work has been done (fibre to the agg node) the customer will pick up the tab for the rest when they need it via FOD
Posted by ValueforMoney about 1 year ago
@GMAN FOD - no immediate need for BT or Gov, but there is an absolute need if UK customers in cities at least are to pay the same as those in European - 10-15 euros wholesale pm minus the phone line. The latter is the emerging benchmark.
FOD came as BT's answer to build and benefit requirements for BDUK. It is not nor can it be a panacea for FTTP transition activity, particularly in urban.
Posted by ValueforMoney about 1 year ago
@GMAN will do you think FOD now reflect the one off 29% reduction in BT ECC charges Ofcom have in the Business Connectivity review - Feb 20th?.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
But that is a pricing issue (as in people don't want to pay) not a lack of technology/infrastructure. Why would we pay the same rate european, do we pay the same for petrol, food, gas etc etc
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
I don't understand why FOD is not an answer, why shouldn't people pay what it costs to provide?

Are BT a registered charity?
Posted by themanstan about 1 year ago
But there was a declared interest in fibre back in the Thatcher years. Which was stamped upon and the effective restrictions put in place to protect cable.
At which point what you state is moot, as any company sitting on cash (in the UK at least) returns excess funds to the owners of the business, i.e. the shareholders.
The situation is wholly government created, there was an opportunity and restrictions were put in place. BT could have in more recent years begun negotiations to return to the fibre market, but the capital rich BT that was no longer existed hence the negotiations on wholesale.
Posted by ValueforMoney about 1 year ago
@GMAN99 In the context of world class infrastructure.
FOD for rural is as good as it gets. FOD as presented in urban not so.
@themanstan, role of Gov accepted which is why I suggest it is time for to discuss a transition plan, - lower lric, lower opex and more capacity
Posted by andrew (Favicon staff member) about 1 year ago
@GMAN99 I think what people are saying, is that the first 1,000 people to buy a new Ford model don't pay twenty times the usual price for having something better.

Also the early rollout of FoD appears to target the 330 Mbps product, so price per month will be a premium, unless providers throttle back to slower speeds to control bandwidth use.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
I'm not sure I get you andrew, when buying a car they'll all pay the same price, not sure how it is a comparison.

There is nothing else to really compare this (FOD) to is there? To date everything has been existing cabling. Who do people expect to pay for that last drop in terms of installation charges , I assume BT?
Posted by ValueforMoney about 1 year ago
@GMAN99 there's the rub I think, nothing to compare too in the UK, -BT dominance - but other markets and regulation developing faster delivering more capacity, more cheaply with more competition in urban, where governments/regulator make that a priotity. Not BT's fault they have a significant position to defend. That defensive position is still sub-optimal for customers and shareholders if Gov could trust BT not to rip it off, which is not the case given the £100k cabs/paths in rural.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
Well you could compare it to Virgin (a little) Virgin aren't even rolling out to new areas despite them getting 100% of the returns on their investment (obviously they do not wholesale their cable network)
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
So BT have a choice. They can either spend billions of their own money and get a very thin slice on their investment over many many decades (due to them having to wholesale and Ofcom will no doubt squeeze the prices down and further down over the years) or they can have FTTP demand led and get the installation paid for in full upfront. You don't have to be too clever to work out which is best for any business
Posted by otester about 1 year ago
Typical of the public to not want something and then when they do need it they want it instantly...
Posted by ValueforMoney about 1 year ago
@GMAN99 - BT could outline their perpsective on a FTTP transition plan and what would be needed to make it happen. It would be a better public supported infrastructure investment than any other.

Yes Ofcom market reviews are only 4 years and this is a 25 year project, so that would need changing. But this does not excuse BT claiming a VDSL Cabs/path upgrades are £100k each for rural, or L2 switches in handover points cost millions in each exchange.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
Well your grievance about £100k cabs are a different subject :)

As for a plan, just refer to my last comment, which of the two would you choose? Which would any sane business choose?

As I said even Virgin are not rolling out new plant to new areas and they can recoup 100% of the income from their invest as they don't need to wholesale.

Money now for those that need it or Money drip fed over a very very long period of time, likely to get longer as Ofcom squeeze more. A no brainer
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
The other option is to make PIA pricing more attractive, then the burden isn't all on BT, other providers can then put their money where there mouths are and actually build their own provision out to the customer
Posted by ValueforMoney about 1 year ago
GMAN99 BT needs to put some numbers in the hands of policy makers - 25 year perpsective. It is probably 300-500m worth of transition incentives a year, including a secario for duct sharing in urban - even if it is rarely used.

A City planner with a 25 year perpsective can declare market failure for Ultrafast. See next.

Posted by ValueforMoney about 1 year ago
@GMAN99 Ofcom analysis only looks at 4 years - here ULtrafast looks like an adjacent market - Business Connectivity Review is very logical for a 4 year perspective.

BDUK procurement looks at 2 years, so you can only procure what's available hence connection vouchers for FOD Virgin City Fibre, unless the broader context exists.

Like BT, Virgin C&W/Voda plus others need to declare their views.

Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
I still don't see the issue with FOD. Its an investment like any other for your home. I spent £1.5k having my roof replaced 2yrs back , its an investment in my home that I expect to last me many years.

If I "needed" FTTP that much that would also be another investment
Posted by ValueforMoney about 1 year ago
@GMAN99 no issue per say with your point, but functioning competitive markets for FTTP are absorbing £1.5k connection costs, or FOD are first effort monopoly rates. GOV/Ofcom can do more, BT cannot be expected to do this itself, the change is too big.

Posted by themanstan about 1 year ago
Functioning competitive markets are able to share infrastructure or as in France actually pay the PIA costs (which are pretty much on par with BTs)... There is also a lot of government owned infrastructure that is not present in the UK, which these companies can rent. So in Sweden they piggy back on the electrical distribution network and in France local authorities often own ducts. Failure by GOV and OFCOM to realise that crucial infrastructure access that is not part of the "market" is necessary if they apply restrictive market forces.
Posted by ValueforMoney about 1 year ago
@themanstan - agree with the sentiment, cities with ambitions and duct and a willingness to vary planning rules have a big role to play in the short term.
Posted by neil123 about 1 year ago
I don't think there is a single number on this thread that is even close to the mark!

Just one point I'll make. The current infrastructure that Openreach has rolled out is the exact same infrastructure for the first step needed to roll out FTTP.

Also, EVERY SINGLE Internet service is an UP TO service on fibre, copper and wireless. If anyone thinks otherwise they are demonstrating that they have ZERO clue on how the Internet works.

Neil.
Posted by GMAN99 about 1 year ago
Its not even just the first step its like 2/3rds for the majority of people
Posted by otester about 1 year ago
@ValueforMoney

Why should you get everything subsidised by the government?

If you want something, work for it!
Posted by AspieMum about 1 year ago
herdwick, you can only fill in forms on dial up if you have only 1 internet enabled device on the premises AND you are lucky enough to stay online long enough to complete & send the form (likely to be hard with long benefit forms) AND your computer has the right sockets for the telephone cable & suitable built-in modem (some computers don't now due to most people using broadband with ethernet cables or wireless & broadband routers)
Posted by BTfanboy about 1 year ago
@otester

Like the banks who worked to fail and were bailed out.
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.