Fibre v ADSL

Discussion in 'Broadband' started by ash burton, Jan 1, 2015.

  1. ash burton

    Graham J Guest

    Davey wrote:

    [snip]

    In the global scheme of things it would be a very good idea to avoid the
    need for travel. More specifically this would be to avoid the need for
    reqular and frequent travel.

    Examples would be the daily commute to work, and the movement of
    manufactured goods. I'm always annoyed that when I'm stuck behind a
    lorry carrying for example biscuits there's another biscuit lorry coming
    the other way!

    Without this travel we would have more time to do useful things, would
    use less energy, create less pollution, and ultimately require less
    road-building. Maybe it would also provide more local opportunities for
    work - at a local biscuit factory, for example.

    A useful contributor to this travel minimisation would be a better
    faster internet to all the population.

    Of course there are lots of other things that would be necessary -
    improvement of insulation in the housing stock would save useful
    quantities of energy, and the availablity of local facilities and work
    would encourage more walking and cycling thereby improving the health of
    the population.

    But these other things will take major investment and a change of
    mindset; whereas a universal fast internet service (say 20Mbits/sec
    available to abolutely everybody) would be very low cost by comparison.
    All it needs is for the ISPs to accept a universal service obligation,
    in much the same way as the electricity companies did at the end of the
    second world war.

    FTTP is probably the best solution, and I'm told its costs would be
    covered by the value of the copper cable that could be recovered.
     
    Graham J, Apr 10, 2015
    1. Advertisements

  2. ash burton

    Kraftee Guest

    That's if they can get it out before the 'pickies' do
     
    Kraftee, Apr 10, 2015
    1. Advertisements

  3. It doesn't matter what you provide to the premises, the major cost is
    always going to be digging up the roads or putting up poles to get it
    there. Most of the improvements to internet services over the years
    have been to do with better ways of bodging and adapting systems to
    use infrastructure that's already present, rather than extending it.

    The parts of the telephone infrastructure that consist of wires to
    millions of premises were installed in a bygone age when public
    services acted like public services without considering things like
    "cost effectiveness", only how effectively they could reach their
    cutomers to provide them with the service. Until we have a government
    that understands the difference between a public service and a
    profit-seeking business, I don't foresee much progress being made.

    Rod.
     
    Roderick Stewart, Apr 10, 2015
  4. "Graham J" wrote
    reqular and frequent travel.
    manufactured goods. I'm always annoyed that when I'm stuck behind a
    lorry carrying for example biscuits there's another biscuit lorry coming
    the other way!

    In the good old days a goods train with a truckload of Carr's biscuits would
    cross with one with a load from Huntley & Palmers.

    Free market, yes ?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carr's
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huntley_&_Palmers

    In your world they would be perhaps required to be made in the same British
    Food factory with as small a label as possible stuck on.

    Unless they contained too much salt or sugar in which case plain packaging
    would be mandatory (with a standard health warning).




    -- --
    Mike D
     
    Michael R N Dolbear, Apr 10, 2015
  5. ash burton

    Kraftee Guest

    I really wish I could say AMEN to that, hang on I just did...
     
    Kraftee, Apr 11, 2015
  6. ash burton

    grinch Guest

    The fundamental problem is this . The amount of money the home punter is
    prepared to pay for their ISP service comes nowhere near the cost of
    providing it in rural areas.

    So unless taxpayers are prepared to subsidize the installation, none of
    the private companies will unless forced to.

    It is a value judgment as to whether taxpayers money should be used to
    do this, personally I think not but I live in a town.

    One thing that a government could do is raise the minimum data rate BT
    are obliged to provide in the universal service to say 2meg with a 95%
    up-time. I doubt any of them have the bottle though.
     
    grinch, Apr 12, 2015
  7. ash burton

    Graham J Guest

    The same is true of your electricity supply, and for the connection of a
    phone line. But for most domestic installations the actual connection
    charge is constant regardless of location - what happens with this is a
    cross subsidy from one class of customer to another.

    In the case of the phone line, the fact that a subscriber has a
    connection increases the earning opportunity for the phone company since
    more people can call that customer.

    Of course there are exception for premises some distance from any
    existing installation; but these are fairly few and may have some
    ability to fund the excess charges (I'm thinking of remote farms, or
    island locations).
    That doesn't follow at all.
    The problem is that there is no "Universal Service Obligation" for
    broadband. By contrast, postal deliveries (of letters, at least) do
    have that obligation. Given how useful the internet is to government as
    well as the population as a whole, (more useful thn the postal servcie,
    I would have thought) a "Universal Service Obligation" for internet
    connectivity ought to be in place.

    There's an election coming up; get your candidate to commit to that
    obligation.
     
    Graham J, Apr 12, 2015
  8. ash burton

    Kraftee Guest

    They'll just break their 'promise' afterwards.
     
    Kraftee, Apr 12, 2015
  9. ash burton

    Richard_CC Guest

    I read that in the USA the FTC are about to reclassify internet
    provision as a utility. The providers can still make a profit, but will
    have more constraints and duties placed on them.
     
    Richard_CC, Apr 12, 2015
  10. ash burton

    grinch Guest

    Then pray explain why most rural villages don’t have gas let alone FTTC
    and the only reason they have telephony is that it was put in pre
    privatisation .


    Like they committed to not increasing university tuition fees ,worth a
    try though.
     
    grinch, Apr 12, 2015
  11. Easier said than done. Simply passing a law that says something must
    happen doesn't automatically make it happen, or even possible, and it
    doesn't provide the money for it either. Improving and/or extending
    the nation's internet service would require huge investment in
    infrastructure, i.e. cable trenches, poles for overhead cables etc,
    and who would pay for all that?

    Rod.
     
    Roderick Stewart, Apr 12, 2015
  12. ash burton

    David Guest

    Might not help rural areas but the rest of us if Virgin Media were to
    allow other Providers to use their network this would mean competition
    for BT as we would have fibre down every street.
    Would make BT think more about FTTP more.
    Regards
    David
     
    David, Apr 12, 2015
  13. ash burton

    critcher Guest


    It is available now, I can go to BT Sky Plusnet and they all are ready
    to give me fibre.
     
    critcher, Apr 12, 2015
  14. "grinch" wrote
    and the only reason they have telephony is that it was put in
    pre-privatisation .


    The USO for POTS and narrowband seems to have worked OK, I have no knowledge
    of the USO for electricity supply.

    For these the subsidy was not from taxpayers but from other private and
    business users.
    Same for mobile phone coverage.
     
    Michael R N Dolbear, Apr 12, 2015
  15. This is the same Virgin that used to drop leaflets through my letterbox
    telling me how wonderful their cable service is. But it didn't come down
    that road...

    Where we are now there's no chance. Annoyingly the old address now has FTTC!

    Andy
     
    Vir Campestris, Apr 12, 2015
  16. I'm not the only one then. And I've actually gone to the trouble of
    telling them that they don't provide any service in my road (because
    it's an unadopted road), but they still keep sending the leaflets.

    Failure to communicate between their own departments doesn't seem a
    very good advertisement for a communications company.

    Rod.
     
    Roderick Stewart, Apr 13, 2015
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.