cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

British broadband not fit for purpose - report

Community Veteran
Posts: 2,556
Thanks: 171
Fixes: 2
Registered: 27-05-2011

British broadband not fit for purpose - report


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-28232142
But many businesses on here seem to use domestic lines anyway!
To do is to be - Neitzsche
To be is to do - Kant
do be do be do - Sinatra
37 REPLIES
Community Veteran
Posts: 5,316
Thanks: 465
Fixes: 1
Registered: 21-03-2011

Re: British broadband not fit for purpose - report

One way the Government could encourage the provision of high speed links to the premises is to abolish business rates on optical fibre cables running in the street.
Now Zen, but a +Net residue.
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 25,758
Thanks: 1,120
Fixes: 47
Registered: 14-04-2007

Re: British broadband not fit for purpose - report

A company I am aware of has fallen victim to the demise of Digital Region South Yorkshire.
They now have to fall back on the BT system which offers around 1Mbs which for a database link between 2 sites is woefully inadequate.
Customer and Forum Moderator.
Product of the Tyrell Corporation
Community Veteran
Posts: 6,824
Registered: 27-10-2012

Re: British broadband not fit for purpose - report

You could argue that BT makes more from leased lines than FTTx, so they deliberately delay or do not rollout FTTx to business parks.
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 25,758
Thanks: 1,120
Fixes: 47
Registered: 14-04-2007

Re: British broadband not fit for purpose - report

The company I mentioned above has looked at a leased line but the cost is prohibitive.
Customer and Forum Moderator.
Product of the Tyrell Corporation
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,671
Thanks: 108
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: British broadband not fit for purpose - report

strangely enough this is exactly the reason why getting rid of the monopoly and privatising the service should not have been undertaken, now the government has to provide financial encouragement to get them to do what's best for the nation, before privatisation they could have just told them to get it done never mind that before privatisation they would of have the work force to make it happen instead of needing to engage multiple sub contractors and delays over planning consent etc etc because they had a mandate to get it done regardless but being a purely commercial entity they no longer have those luxuries and are stuck waiting for permission in each area to disrupt things in order to modernise provisions (there's a business park nearby who have opposed planning permission for BT to close off roads while they provide them with a fibre link because it will adversely affect business for the projected 2 weeks it would take but are still complaining about the lack of fibre to them....)
a lot of stupidity though surrounding provision of fibre is down to competition rules driving up prices through the overly bureaucratic endeavour of making people bid for the job and paying them for making a bid......
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 17,249
Thanks: 904
Fixes: 104
Registered: 11-01-2008

Re: British broadband not fit for purpose - report

australia is in a worse position and their fibre network is state owned and the roll out has been canned.
Will Moderate For Thanks
Thunderclap
Grafter
Posts: 673
Registered: 08-09-2008

Re: British broadband not fit for purpose - report

Cool Our nation has the engineering skillset to build the fastest internet ever - but - we have a telecoms regulator whoe mission is to ensure the anti-competitive and anti-inovative practices of BT  keep the UK in the copper age for at least another twenty years. As for the "billions" that are being spent on rural broadband, being spent on what; bonuses and dividends?
For a country that pioneered fibre and wireless technology, we certainly don't use much of it. Why? Because, "it would be too expensive to replace the existing [copper] infrastructure." Look out for a slimey publicist or slippery minister using that quote today.
Community Gaffer
Community Gaffer
Posts: 4,906
Thanks: 179
Fixes: 4
Registered: 04-04-2007

Re: British broadband not fit for purpose - report

I wonder who the 45k businesses who are still using dial up are using
Community Veteran
Posts: 5,316
Thanks: 465
Fixes: 1
Registered: 21-03-2011

Re: British broadband not fit for purpose - report

At the time when the price of copper was soaring I read that the value of the copper wires in the ground was greater than the market capitalisation of BT. They should rip it out and replace with Fibre, then stockpile the copper for later sale. It should free up loads of duct space too.
Now Zen, but a +Net residue.
Community Veteran
Posts: 6,824
Registered: 27-10-2012

Re: British broadband not fit for purpose - report

Hmm - I doubt there's more than £51 billion in copper telephone cabling underground.
Thunderclap
Grafter
Posts: 673
Registered: 08-09-2008

Re: British broadband not fit for purpose - report

Quote from: Kelly
I wonder who the 45k businesses who are still using dial up are using

I came across one! They were a consultancy in a converted Devon manor house. Their inbound line was aluminium and they lived in the world's only 3G not spot. For downloads and stuff, they used their own home broadband. Being a business, they assumed it was someone elses problem to solve.
Quote from: AndyH
Hmm - I doubt there's more than £51 billion in copper telephone cabling underground.

Shhh, don't tell Vince Cable Thief....
nanotm
Pro
Posts: 5,671
Thanks: 108
Fixes: 1
Registered: 11-02-2013

Re: British broadband not fit for purpose - report

is that the figure from the amount of known cable underground at the time of the report back in the 90's or a recent figure where so much of it has been replaced with fibre and aluminium primarily because of the cost of copper ?

@dvork
are you sure the news on whirlpool forum seems to be saying that there struggling to rollout in Telstra areas but already have fttb running at some points and are planning to role out fttn/fttb in a lot more places especially those places not controlled by Telstra
just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,990
Thanks: 5
Registered: 11-12-2013

Re: British broadband not fit for purpose - report

I can think of a few reasons why we have low fiber presence.
1 - population spread, whilst the uk is a densely populated island, higher income groups tend to live in rural areas.  This has led to 2 things, ROI calculations have tended to favour rural rollout by BT, and more wealthy people tend to have more influence so politically that has been pushed also, of course rural rollouts are much more expensive meaning the figures for rollout in the uk are poor.
2 - an existing copper network that is still generating revenue, BT is privately owned and its CEO has to think about his shareholders.  This is the major downside of a private rollout vs a state rollout, a state doesnt have to worry about losses, they just have to consider the political and GDP benefits.  From BT's point of view, copper still is generating revenue, new technologies keep been developed to extend the life of that copper, and as such they are going to go for the cheapest cpaital expnediture possible for the revenue generation.  This is especially the case whilst they are regulated by ofcom.  As already after their investment in FTTC, talktalk complained to ofcom to lower FTTC wholesale costs.
However a state funded exercise has its own problems, at times of austerity, they would have a hard time convincing people that 10s of billions spent on a fiber network is a good thing to do. lso after such a rollout is carried out, although there is no need to pay shareholders, a government might be tempted to bleed such a thing dry by using it to subsidise other government departments, tax cuts etc. like with the north sea oil.
Thunderclap
Grafter
Posts: 673
Registered: 08-09-2008

Re: British broadband not fit for purpose - report

Although fibre is expensive to implement, the piece meal approach adopted by BT et.al. means there are no economies of scale; thus the existing burried copper network is cheap and new fibre networks expensive. Hence, we have a rediculous situation where FTTx is provided on a customer by customer basis. Often needing both copper and fibre infrastructuresto the same street or building. There must be a tipping point where it's no longer economical to keep copper for the last few customers who cannot afford the fibre premium? In my situation, I can have FTTC or, keep my copper line to the exchange or, dump the wires and use a 4G dongle. Madness.