Re: Is there any difference if no LLU?

"robbieg" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> I work from home and my local exchange is not LLU enabled so I guess
> that all the broadband providers I have just resell me whatever BT
> provides to the exchange. Is that correct?
>
> If so, does it matter which provider I choose and can I therefore just
> pick the cheapest??
>
> If someone offers me 'Business Grade' broadband, then will I get better
> performance/quality with no LLU??
>
> I am particularly interested in getting VoIP and wonder if a Business
> Grade supplier such as Timico will actually be able to provide me with
> a higher quality service even if there is not LLU at the exchange (nor
> is it planned).

In principle all suppliers ought to be the same.

In practise if you choose a "professional" supplier you should get:

A) Minimum 1 month contract that you can cancel at any time.

B) UK-based English-speaking technical support who will understand your
questions, and who *will* call out BT to fix things if it becomes apparent
that there is a fault on the line or elsewhere in the BT system.

C) Better backhaul speeds from the exchange to the rest of the internet.
Thus the limiting factor for your download speed will be primarily your
distance from the exchange. In an urban area Fibre To The Cabinet (FTTC)
should improve this; in a rural area FTTC may well never be implemented.

D) Monitoring tools which will show usage information and the like.

If you work from home all these things are probably more important than
minimum price. Just consider the cost of a week's lack of connection.

--
Graham J

On 14/01/2010 19:24, Graham J wrote:
> "robbieg"<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>> I work from home and my local exchange is not LLU enabled so I guess
>> that all the broadband providers I have just resell me whatever BT
>> provides to the exchange. Is that correct?
>>
>> If so, does it matter which provider I choose and can I therefore just
>> pick the cheapest??
>>
>> If someone offers me 'Business Grade' broadband, then will I get better
>> performance/quality with no LLU??
>>
>> I am particularly interested in getting VoIP and wonder if a Business
>> Grade supplier such as Timico will actually be able to provide me with
>> a higher quality service even if there is not LLU at the exchange (nor
>> is it planned).
>
> In principle all suppliers ought to be the same.
>
> In practise if you choose a "professional" supplier you should get:
>
> A) Minimum 1 month contract that you can cancel at any time.
>
> B) UK-based English-speaking technical support who will understand your
> questions, and who *will* call out BT to fix things if it becomes apparent
> that there is a fault on the line or elsewhere in the BT system.
>
> C) Better backhaul speeds from the exchange to the rest of the internet.
> Thus the limiting factor for your download speed will be primarily your
> distance from the exchange. In an urban area Fibre To The Cabinet (FTTC)
> should improve this; in a rural area FTTC may well never be implemented.
>
> D) Monitoring tools which will show usage information and the like.
>
> If you work from home all these things are probably more important than
> minimum price. Just consider the cost of a week's lack of connection.
>

What he just said!

If I were you, I would avoid all the mass-market, cheapo providers who
advertise heavily just to tie you into a contract and then deliver a
minimum service with poor customer support. You will see from other
posts on this newsgroup that ISPs operated by Carphone Warehouse score
very badly. These include Talk Talk, AOL and Tiscali.

BT themselves aren't too good either - they're relatively expensive and
yet still run their customer service operation from India.

Go for quality, not cheapness.
Do some comparisons on www.thinkbroadband.com and see what customers
really think.

George

Graham J wrote:
> "robbieg" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>> I work from home and my local exchange is not LLU enabled so I guess
>> that all the broadband providers I have just resell me whatever BT
>> provides to the exchange. Is that correct?
>>
>> If so, does it matter which provider I choose and can I therefore
>> just pick the cheapest??
>>
>> If someone offers me 'Business Grade' broadband, then will I get
>> better performance/quality with no LLU??
>>
>> I am particularly interested in getting VoIP and wonder if a Business
>> Grade supplier such as Timico will actually be able to provide me
>> with a higher quality service even if there is not LLU at the
>> exchange (nor is it planned).
>
> In principle all suppliers ought to be the same.
>
> In practise if you choose a "professional" supplier you should get:
>
> A) Minimum 1 month contract that you can cancel at any time.
>
> B) UK-based English-speaking technical support who will understand
> your questions, and who *will* call out BT to fix things if it
> becomes apparent that there is a fault on the line or elsewhere in
> the BT system.


What i find shocking is how some suppliers will just not take responsibility
for faults, and will not forward faults out to BT. I once had a running saga
with TalkTalk (on behalf of someone else), the line would sync and
authenticate, but wouldnt get past the homepage, browsing would be
significantly less then regular dialup. ie, ten minutes to find a webpage.

Because we were unable to complete the bb speed test at one of their
websites, they would not help further. They insisted that three different
tests be done at differing times. Explaining to them that the test would
time out because the connection was so slow made no difference.
I was forceful and persistant, but they just would not full stop elevate the
fault, the problem was only resolved by asking for a MAC and going somewhere
else.

George Weston wrote:
> On 14/01/2010 19:24, Graham J wrote:

>
> What he just said!
>
> If I were you, I would avoid all the mass-market, cheapo providers who
> advertise heavily just to tie you into a contract and then deliver a
> minimum service with poor customer support. You will see from other
> posts on this newsgroup that ISPs operated by Carphone Warehouse score
> very badly. These include Talk Talk, AOL and Tiscali.
>
> BT themselves aren't too good either - they're relatively expensive
> and yet still run their customer service operation from India.
>
> Go for quality, not cheapness.
> Do some comparisons on www.thinkbroadband.com and see what customers
> really think.
>
> George

Despite their cheapness, Sky are remarkably good. If Sky subcontracted out
their Max truly unlimited service, to another company and charged £30 a
month for it, people would rave on here about good they are.

Smurf wrote:
> Graham J wrote:
>> "robbieg" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> I work from home and my local exchange is not LLU enabled so I guess
>>> that all the broadband providers I have just resell me whatever BT
>>> provides to the exchange. Is that correct?
>>>
>>> If so, does it matter which provider I choose and can I therefore
>>> just pick the cheapest??
>>>
>>> If someone offers me 'Business Grade' broadband, then will I get
>>> better performance/quality with no LLU??
>>>
>>> I am particularly interested in getting VoIP and wonder if a Business
>>> Grade supplier such as Timico will actually be able to provide me
>>> with a higher quality service even if there is not LLU at the
>>> exchange (nor is it planned).
>> In principle all suppliers ought to be the same.
>>
>> In practise if you choose a "professional" supplier you should get:
>>
>> A) Minimum 1 month contract that you can cancel at any time.
>>
>> B) UK-based English-speaking technical support who will understand
>> your questions, and who *will* call out BT to fix things if it
>> becomes apparent that there is a fault on the line or elsewhere in
>> the BT system.
>
>
> What i find shocking is how some suppliers will just not take responsibility
> for faults, and will not forward faults out to BT. I once had a running saga
> with TalkTalk (on behalf of someone else), the line would sync and
> authenticate, but wouldnt get past the homepage, browsing would be
> significantly less then regular dialup. ie, ten minutes to find a webpage.
>
> Because we were unable to complete the bb speed test at one of their
> websites, they would not help further. They insisted that three different
> tests be done at differing times. Explaining to them that the test would
> time out because the connection was so slow made no difference.
> I was forceful and persistant, but they just would not full stop elevate the
> fault, the problem was only resolved by asking for a MAC and going somewhere
> else.
>
>
>
yup. On a clear nmight wioth a blue moon, any isp is as good as any other.

It's when its a normal day, with everybody watching internet porn, its
pissing with rain, and someones driven a digger through half the optical
fibres up the M1 again, that the difference becomes apparent

'have you tried unplugging any telephone equipment you may have,
goodness gracious me' versus

'er, we heard there's a digger gone through the fibres up teh M1 again,
whiole countries split in half, routing via finland to get to
manchester. Things will be total crap for 2 days, but we are trying to
peer with amsterdam instead'

that tells you which sort of ISP you have.

Smurf wrote:
> George Weston wrote:
>> On 14/01/2010 19:24, Graham J wrote:
>
>> What he just said!
>>
>> If I were you, I would avoid all the mass-market, cheapo providers who
>> advertise heavily just to tie you into a contract and then deliver a
>> minimum service with poor customer support. You will see from other
>> posts on this newsgroup that ISPs operated by Carphone Warehouse score
>> very badly. These include Talk Talk, AOL and Tiscali.
>>
>> BT themselves aren't too good either - they're relatively expensive
>> and yet still run their customer service operation from India.
>>
>> Go for quality, not cheapness.
>> Do some comparisons on www.thinkbroadband.com and see what customers
>> really think.
>>
>> George
>
> Despite their cheapness, Sky are remarkably good. If Sky subcontracted out
> their Max truly unlimited service, to another company and charged £30 a
> month for it, people would rave on here about good they are.
>
>
Isn't it the other way round? someone subcontracts their sales to sky?

The Natural Philosopher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: > Despite their cheapness, Sky are remarkably good. If Sky subcontracted out
: > their Max truly unlimited service, to another company and charged £30 a
: > month for it, people would rave on here about good they are.
: >
: Isn't it the other way round? someone subcontracts their sales to sky?

No! Sky own Easynet - who run a major (and very fast) LLU network.