[UK-Bug] News .. Oodles of Noodles ?

Another supplier will shortly be hitting the market with their Voice
over Broadband services aimed at both residential and business broadband
users, citing savings on telephone calls by as much as 75% over
traditional methods.

http://snipurl.com/6rsi

--
Regards
Andy M Jenkins

UK Broadband Usergroup http://www.uk-bug.net

Andy M Jenkins wrote:

> Another supplier will shortly be hitting the market with their Voice
> over Broadband services aimed at both residential and business broadband
> users, citing savings on telephone calls by as much as 75% over
> traditional methods.

I quote from your 2Mbps for £32 article:

"Hopefully this is 'the start of the end' for the recent reduced speed
'broadband' offerings."

Pray tell, Andy, what is wrong with the 150k-250k broadband offerings?
There are many people, my parents for instance, who use their Internet
connection for little more than e-mail and casual WWW use. For them, 512k
would be overkill, but not having the telephone line engaged is a major
benefit. I imagine the same is true for many others, not to mention those
who are on a tighter budget than we ourselves might like to be.

150-250k services are still 'broadband' -- a broad set of frequencies are
still used down the telephone line/cable TV network in order to carry the
data from the home to the exchange/head end.

--
Now Playing: something else

nsj <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> 150-250k services are still 'broadband' -- a broad set of frequencies are
> still used down the telephone line/cable TV network in order to carry the
> data from the home to the exchange/head end.

But when people speak of 'broadband' internet connection they are
generally referring to its having a greater bandwidth, rather than to
the particular technology used. So in that sense 'broadband' is a purely
relative term.

--
Alec McKenzie
(E-Mail Removed)

On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 09:52, in uk.telecom, nsj <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Pray tell, Andy, what is wrong with the 150k-250k broadband offerings?
>There are many people, my parents for instance, who use their Internet
>connection for little more than e-mail and casual WWW use.

It might just be that there were a number of sub-500 services announced
by Tiscali, and PlusNet (the latter avtually using the former for them)
and Andy doesn't want to see another 20 firms offering lower speeds at
lower prices as they all need announcing/coverage, and they'd just be
shaving pennies off one anothers pricing to say "we're cheaper" (?)

A look at the range of names (many of whom I had never come across in
the past as dial-up ISPs) that offer ADSL is growing - OK there are a
few thousand possible IPSTAG holders too, one doesn't expect to know
them all, but 3-4 years ago there seemed to be a dozen or so big
names that many people used while the move to ADSL might have been
handy for a number of previously unheard of ISPs to get exposure.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Alec McKenzie wrote:
> nsj <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>>150-250k services are still 'broadband' -- a broad set of frequencies are
>>still used down the telephone line/cable TV network in order to carry the
>>data from the home to the exchange/head end.
>
>
> But when people speak of 'broadband' internet connection they are
> generally referring to its having a greater bandwidth, rather than to
> the particular technology used. So in that sense 'broadband' is a purely
> relative term.

It is a shame that common "misusage" of a term gets to change that
term... IMHO.

Having said that, most people refer to "broadband" are in fact refering
to a conventional ADSL line which is indeed broadband. The "misusage" is
people who refer to some of the other technologies as broadband, and
that is not a "common misuage".

Does language change is people say something correct (e.g. calling ADSL
"broadband" because it is a broad spectrum radio signal) but think they
are saying something else (i.e. it is a fast internet connection)?

I suspect this is better in an english language group!

- --
Rev Adrian Kennard
Andrews & Arnold Ltd / AAISP www.aaisp.net.uk

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFAvFupHBb4e52L0Y0RAhJ0AJ9QuLyIjyvLUsSxEQRZ/jXRK0S8hACfeb+V
y1LyLUoAQdjDxBUl4Delrcw=
=a4lX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 09:09:04 UTC, Alec McKenzie <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

> But when people speak of 'broadband' internet connection they are
> generally referring to its having a greater bandwidth

Then they would be wrong. They probably think 'baseband' has to be
really slow, too.

--
Bob Eager
begin a new life...dump Windows!

Bob Eager wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 09:09:04 UTC, Alec McKenzie <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>
>>But when people speak of 'broadband' internet connection they are
>>generally referring to its having a greater bandwidth
>
>
> Then they would be wrong. They probably think 'baseband' has to be
> really slow, too.
>

Probably because they think it's just "basic broadband".

--
Tony

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Tony Walton wrote:
> Bob Eager wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 09:09:04 UTC, Alec McKenzie <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> But when people speak of 'broadband' internet connection they are
>>> generally referring to its having a greater bandwidth
>>
>>
>>
>> Then they would be wrong. They probably think 'baseband' has to be
>> really slow, too.
>>
>
> Probably because they think it's just "basic broadband".

1000-baseT is baseband <-:

- --
Rev Adrian Kennard
Andrews & Arnold Ltd / AAISP www.aaisp.net.uk

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFAvHwUHBb4e52L0Y0RAizzAJ9X+MZUyQBAzIdISi2VOT iapIS7XwCgin81
ruG7SIROEVyjPpMRPNHu3eQ=
=K/Oh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Rev Adrian Kennard wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Tony Walton wrote:
>

>>
>>Probably because they think it's just "basic broadband".
>
>
> 1000-baseT is baseband <-:


*I* know that. I was referring to what the great amorphous "they" think (-;

--
Tony

On Tue, 1 Jun 2004 12:52:36 UTC, Rev Adrian Kennard <`@o.gg> wrote:

> >> Then they would be wrong. They probably think 'baseband' has to be
> >> really slow, too.
> >
> > Probably because they think it's just "basic broadband".
>
> 1000-baseT is baseband <-:
I know that. Tony knows that. You know that. Bet 'they' don't....!

That's why I said it!
--
Bob Eager
begin a new life...dump Windows!