This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Why is the UK's internet so crap??

Reply 40

mprules

8

Im pretty happy with my 10mb service to be fair more would be nice but it could be a lot worse!

Reply 41

DarkWhite

17

Mad Vlad

I irritatingly can't find anything specific that's particularly authoratative and written in terminology that I fully understand..., but I'm reliably informed by my Communications and Networks lecturer that 21CN has upgraded the backbone, all the way to the exchanges, to fibre. The principle of it is to aggregate different traffic streams into one medium; in 21CN's case - IP over fibre. This aggregation's done at access nodes and all of BT's access nodes are at the exchanges.

The thing is, you'd have to roll it out to everyone, regardless of whether they wanted it or not, short of hooking up the individual subscribers until they order it. That would mean investment similar to that of NTL.

BT wants to focus on fibre to cabinet, to begin with, but even then - it'll fall far short (in the medium term at least) of Virgin Media's urban infrastructure.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/17/digital_britain_bt/

That's fair enough. It was a matter of interest is all as I did have a quick scout around myself but couldn't find much on it - not the specifics anyway.

Yeah I understand it'd have to be rolled out to everybody, which is why the capital cost would be difficult to fund. But short of an initial connection fee, higher subscription charges and taxes, I don't think BT have much room to move in that regard.

I'm all for fiber to cabinet, since it at least lays the path for a more futuristic infrastructure. But the main problem people seem to be worried about, or at least what the media keeps reporting on, is the 40-something percent of people who haven't got a connection speed above 2Mbps, which is a result of being connected to a distant set of hardware by old cabling. Well, I could say that at present, it's also caused by the lack of ADSL2+ connections, but this won't really affect people obtaining 2Mbps. If they're obtaining less than this, then they'll get a bit more (but still no more than 2Mbps). People currently receiving speeds of 8Mbps will see a rise, with speeds of up to 24Mbps, but this figure relies on the distance to the exchange more than ADSL's figure does. So from what I can see, the immediate effect to consumers is a slight increase if you're very far from the exchange; some form of increase if you're very close - the closer the better, and for those currently getting about 2Mbps will continue to do so.

Reply 42

*mustache_fart*

nah, it gets my juices going :perv:

Reply 43

HCD

16

The communication infrastructure of the UK is archaic, and there is little investment in it.

Reply 44

MarcD

12

Dunno but Im generally happy with my 8mb home connection...and 50mb term-time accomodation connection :awesome:

Doubt we'll ever catch up to Japan mind. I swear they came out with a 1GB internet recently...

Reply 45

Miss Mary

14

If you think yours is bad, have a look at mine...

Reply 46

mfaxford

1

fire2burn

Indeed. BT dug up the roads in a street not far from mine to redo everyone's connections to the exchange recently. But rather than taking this opportunity to upgrade they merely reinstalled new copper. They're definitely dragging their feet about moving onto fibre optic lines.

Probably because the costs for fibre are much greater than those for copper. Especially when you want real speed. They also can't run power over fibre so you're normal telephone won't work in a power cut so how do you make a 999 call or phone the electric company in a power cut?

del1507

As has been said, it's due to an ageing copper telephone network.

I'm pretty sure the BT backbone is all fibre probably running at 155mpbs or 625mbps or multiples of those (ATM speeds).

I believe the main bit of 21CN is moving to IP backbone rather than ATM and virtual circuits which should make things more efficent (ATM isn't that efficient for data) and presumably allow ethernet speeds 1/10/40 gbps.

Reply 47

del1507

10

mfaxford

I'm pretty sure the BT backbone is all fibre probably running at 155mpbs or 625mbps or multiples of those (ATM speeds).

Yes, the problem is between the often overloaded telephone exchanges and people's houses.

Reply 48

Collingwood

15

ibs137

why??

http://i.imgur.com/xVT0F.jpg

:confused:

This doesn't count subsidies. Korea's cheap internet price is mostly subsidy, same as Japan, I would guess the same applies to the other cheap countries too. They still pay the same for their internet, in other words, only they do so mostly in tax rather than ISP bills. Also, sucks if you don't use internet, but still have to pay most of the cost for someone else's 50mbs fibre connection.

Internet speed seems to be positively correlated with wealth of the country, to a point, then subsidy becomes the dominant factor. I would guess this is because there's actually not much use right now for more than 3.5mbs (what is needed to stream HD). Any program you want will already download in an hour or two, or at worst overnight. The only big beneficiaries of really high speed connections and fibre are people who pirate massives amounts of stuff. For most people, 1mbs is probably fine. When people are asked to pay the true cost of 50mbs (which you can do here, with virgin cable), take-up tends to be low.

That's not a bad thing: people are prioritising their spending to things that are of most value to them, rather than to boosting UK's position on intergovernment pissing contest league tables. Of course, the govt has brought out a white paper on future internet access so that will probably all have to change soon :rolleyes:

Reply 49

Liverpool F.C.™

11

Miss Mary

If you think yours is bad, have a look at mine...
:sigh:

Don't worry mines not all that either.

Reply 50

gingerrninja

1

well i know some companies want to wait for the next jump is there any point putting in fiber optics when other technology may come along which can be a substitute for it without upgrading the infrastructure which is the main reason its so slow stuff like the massive city wide wifi networks offcourse this goes into the territory of mobile infrastructure also going down the hole so in the end government need to pump money into the system>not going to happen

Reply 51

freecom2

2

So little investment. And when there are calls for investment, private companies are unwilling to foot the cost of it, and demand that public money is used. Government is unwilling (more so now than ever before) to pledge any money when there just isn't any left in the coffers. Then the cycle starts again when another one of these stories comes up!

Reply 52

fire2burn

17

mfaxford

Probably because the costs for fibre are much greater than those for copper. Especially when you want real speed. They also can't run power over fibre so you're normal telephone won't work in a power cut so how do you make a 999 call or phone the electric company in a power cut?

It maybe costly yes but it's eventually going to have to be done, the information we require from internet is only getting larger. HD visual formats, gaming, interactive media, etc.

Dial up was fine for when we were browsing text sites with few pictures, Copper broadband was fine for low quality video, mp3's, flash applications, etc. But now streaming HD visual formats is becoming more and more relevant, downloading huge gaming applications (16GB+) rather than purchasing them in a physical format from a shop, etc.

Laying new copper is simply prolonging the inevitable switch over that will need to occur.

The 999 issue is really an issue at all, most people use mobile phones these days, and the majority of masts have backup power sources in the event that the power goes out. If Japan, Hong Kong, and South Korea can find a way around the issue, I'm sure we can too.

Reply 53

The-Wi$e-One

2

OceanInTheSky

I have 54 mbps here, and this is a pretty cheap wireless, so that's ********

Note: Mb, not MB before someone misinterprets that.

Thats the connection to your w/less router from what you have said, not the actual speed of your broadband connection.

rorydaredking

Woo
50Mbps :smile:

ditto

Reply 54

mfaxford

1

fire2burn

It maybe costly yes but it's eventually going to have to be done, the information we require from internet is only getting larger. HD visual formats, gaming, interactive media, etc.
...
Laying new copper is simply prolonging the inevitable switch over that will need to occur.

But in a few years time it may be cheaper to put in something that's even better. There are a multitude of fiber optic standards all which have a speed/distance limitation (much the same as with copper). If we had fiber to the house 10 years ago the likely standard may have only allowed up to 100mbps for most houses (multimode). If we do it now it might be up to 1gpbs or maybe even 10gbps(single mode). If we wait a few years then dark fiber might be possible (with much longer distances available). The various types of fibre have been available for a long time but the cost of manufacture is decreasing making the better options get to a point where they might be affordable.

Yes the current copper infrastructure is a limiting factor. However the longer it can be prolonged the better the replacment technology is likely to be. With the advancments in wireless it might be that that becomes the prefered medium to deliving internet to homes. WiMax appears to have the potential to deliver similar or better service than the current ADSL infrastructure so what could the next version look like. And that's likely to be much cheaper than fibre into all homes.

That said if you want really good speeds (10G to the house) you we need vastly improved backbones which is going to be extremely costly. Most Carrier class stuff is only in multiples of 10G, I think the new standards being looked at are around the 40-100G mark.

fire2burn

Dial up was fine for when we were browsing text sites with few pictures, Copper broadband was fine for low quality video, mp3's, flash applications, etc. But now streaming HD visual formats is becoming more and more relevant, downloading huge gaming applications (16GB+) rather than purchasing them in a physical format from a shop, etc.

In terms of bandwidth you're never going to beat the hard disk in a fedex van method (other media and carrier are also available). To some extent people either need to accept that big downloads (16GB) will take a while or we need a lot of new architecture. If you want a 16G file to download quickly then you're talking about a 1gbps connection with no contention and with current technology the server at the other end is only going to be able to handle around 10 simultaneous users.

fire2burn

The 999 issue is really an issue at all, most people use mobile phones these days, and the majority of masts have backup power sources in the event that the power goes out. If Japan, Hong Kong, and South Korea can find a way around the issue, I'm sure we can too.

I've been in plenty of places where I don't get a mobile signal. Luckily I've not had to test the ability to make emergency calls in any of those situations. I believe there used to be some sort of legislation around the making of emergency calls. It seems to be an issue for businesses putting in IP based phones. I suspect the real answer to this might be to have seperate phone and data infrastructures. So you keep phones (or at least some phones) as they have been but have fiber, wireless or even better quality copper for data and additional phones.

Reply 55

member101

1

Liverpool F.C.™

Don't worry mines not all that either.

Reply 56

Alex Rallye

It isnt different for countrys. Its the same all over the world, just the type of connection and how you connect is different..

Reply 57

Stef90

I think I win :shifty:

Reply 58

kevin_123

13

OceanInTheSky

Well then the universe makes no sense.

Haha did you seriously think you had 54mb broadband because your router has "54mb" ? hehehehe Dont worry about it though, you're just obviously not into computers/technology and stuff like that :wink:

On another note, good to see Sweden, no, actually every country in Scandinavia being in the Top 20! Ahh.. the awesomeness of Scandinavia..

Reply 59

The1truebelieber

Oh ffs, stop bitching about copper.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very_high_bitrate_digital_subscriber_line

Copper can handle higher speeds than most people have, it isn't a 3mbps line.

You don't NEED FO for 100+Mb/s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uni-DSL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VDSL2
:rolleyes:

DURR WE NEED FIBAR UPTAC.

No, we don't, we need updated copper service at the moment, because FYI typical Fibre Optic service isn't PON FO service and thus won't reach PON speeds.

Why is the UK's internet so crap??

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you