Have seen lots of the detail mention stuff like this, particularly the projects with deadlines reaching into 2017 where they are looking at wider picture.
I agree. A lot mention things in this kind of area - especially where they try to explain why they haven't included satellite, wireless or 3G/4G in their coverage maps.
But it was a first to see them justify why they had the target at 2Mbps for the final 10%. I wonder how that leaves the county that has set an intermediate target of 8Mbps.
On the 24 - this figure appeared first, and then politicians got all confused over which number to talk about, though does not really matter as until FTTC has shown its true speeds with many millions connected it will be all conjecture or informed guess work.
And that confusion/conjecture is largely why the projects *also* say that they'll only consider the 2Mbps areas after everything else is done.
When, no doubt, vectoring is part of the equation, possibly alongside bonding, and with FTTdp on a realistic horizon. All adding even more confusion.
It wouldn't really surprise me to see BDUK-2 come in an usurp the final 2Mbps stages of the BDUK projects.
The EU 2020 targets while looking nice and clear are as vague as the BDUK ones really, and remember 50% at 100 Mbps is almost achievable if Virgin Media continue speed upgrades in 2014 and beyond
If half the houses on a Virgin cable segment were on 100Mbps and using it to a significant degree, then... well, lets just say that I'm glad I'll be elsewhere.
The real advantage of having the EU targets set for 2020, even if they are vague, is that it allows the government to be running state-aid programmes at all.
And being honest to ourselves, state aid is the only way that we're going to see widespread 100Mbps speeds.