General Discussion
  >> Broadband Not-spots & slow-spots


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | (show all)   Print Thread
Standard User Davidmcc3
(newbie) Fri 30-Jul-10 21:06:30
Print Post

In a slow area? We need to only pay for speed we get


[link to this post]
 
Apologies if this is in the wrong thread.

I've never heard this mentioned, but wouldn't it be a good idea for us to only pay for the speed we actually get?

I have an 8Mb service, and typically get about 5.3 ... why should I pay more than 66% of the monthly fee? I'll be moving soon to somewhere that will be little better than dial-up.

If the Regulator made ISPs only charge for what they can deliver, there would be huge pressure to upgrade lines, circuits, cabinets and exchanges!

Would this be difficult? Not really. If I run the BT test (and one other I've come across) it will tell me what speed I can expect ... and it would be close enough as a charging model.

So, how about a campaign to reduce our charges and increase the speeds?
Standard User GeeTee
(regular) Fri 30-Jul-10 22:02:04
Print Post

Re: In a slow area? We need to only pay for speed we get


[re: Davidmcc3] [link to this post]
 
Because the cost to the ISP to provide and service your connection has very very little if anything to do with how fast you synch up to the equipment in the exchange.

Also, ISPs are not responsible for upgrading lines, circuits and cabinets - that is all owned by Openreach.
Standard User Davidmcc3
(newbie) Sat 31-Jul-10 08:27:53
Print Post

Re: In a slow area? We need to only pay for speed we get


[re: GeeTee] [link to this post]
 
How much it costs the ISPs is fixed at the moment, but it needn't be.

There is an analogy here with the railways. Railtrack own and operate the infrastructure, with other companies running the trains. If a section of line has speed restrictions on it (because of the quality or state of the line) the operators can get a partial refund.

Just because the current state of affairs with BT, the ISPs and our speed has always been the way it is now, is absolutely no reason why it should continue that way.


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.

Anonymous
(Unregistered)Sat 31-Jul-10 08:55:51
Print Post

Re: In a slow area? We need to only pay for speed we get


[re: Davidmcc3] [link to this post]
 
You seem to be ignoring the fact that BT are "upgrading lines, circuits, cabinets and exchanges" - they are in the middle of a nationwide roll out of FTTC which will see speeds considerably higher than previously.

You're also ignoring the pace of change here. In the 1990's the fastest line an ordinary consumer could aspire to was an ISDN2e line which could carry 128k of user data out of a raw rate of 160k - we now have an average about 20x (assuming 2.5Mbps average sync) that with a large percentage running more like 100x the ISDN data rates.

It's taken, what, less than 15 years to achieve that.

ADSL (esp ADSL 2+) runs most lines pretty close to the theoretical max data rate (ie the Shannon limit for a given line). It's actually pretty amazing that infrastructure designed for voice with a max bandwidth of 4kHz has been adapted to carry signals up into the MHz range.

Unfortunately the "Max" products haven't been advertised well with the result that anyone who buys an "Up to 8Mhz" product and then gets 2Mhz somehow feels cheated of 75% of "their" bandwidth. Sadly it wasn't theirs to begin with as the line(s) were never going any faster without changing the design altogether (which is what FTTC and FTTP will do).

I get 3Mbps on a 63-64dB attenuation line and am constantly amazed that it works at all - unfortunately there will always be lines like this and worse.

Billing based on achievable bandwidth just doesn't match the costs involved - it costs BT & the ISP the same to install exchange equipment, line cards and backhaul whether the local loop is 100m long or 10km
Anonymous
(Unregistered)Sat 31-Jul-10 08:57:13
Print Post

Re: In a slow area? We need to only pay for speed we get


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
Whoops "Up to 8MHz" and 2Mhz were obviously meant to be "Up to 8Mbps" and 2Mbps
Standard User Davidmcc3
(newbie) Sat 31-Jul-10 09:24:27
Print Post

Re: In a slow area? We need to only pay for speed we get


[re: Anonymous] [link to this post]
 
I think people in the UK have become conditioned to accept less than the best and to be grateful for it.

Ofcom's recent report shows the UK is only 27th in the list of worldwide average BB speed. Is that good enough? It might be for you, but BT should be ashamed.

I'm also amazed at the number of defenders of BT. Having had to deal with them over many years as a consumer and IT Director, I have absolutely no love of BT, their service, or their cost structures.

By the way, I don't necessarily mean that everyone should pay less if they get less than 8Mb ... perhaps people who are getting between 4 and 8 should be paying more. I would pay more to get a higher speed.

But hang on. In my (semi-rural) locality, the best we can get is 8Mb, and that's the nominal speed I pay for. But I could have opted to have a 2Mb contract. I would have paid less, but didn't it cost BT the same on infrastructure costs? Likewise, if I lived in an area where I could have 20Mb but opt to have only 8Mb, aren't the infrastructure costs the same?

Sorry, the infrastructure costs argument doesn't wash.
Standard User MHC
(legend) Sat 31-Jul-10 10:51:30
Print Post

Re: In a slow area? We need to only pay for speed we get


[re: Davidmcc3] [link to this post]
 
But your physical line is twice as long as mine which means there is more copper wire, more poles, more ducts &c &c. Based on that you should be paying twice as much as me for line rental.





~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


M H C


taurus excreta cerebrum vincit
Standard User tommy45
(experienced) Sat 31-Jul-10 11:29:51
Print Post

Re: In a slow area? We need to only pay for speed we get


[re: MHC] [link to this post]
 
But then you have another scenario, where that someone who lives a reasonably close distance from the connected exchange suburbs of a town or city, and what happens on one bt line is capable of interfering with other lines, i get a sync on adsl2+close to the max my isp supplies, which is problem free, until a certain local shop opens for the day, as a direct result of things from how the internal telephone wiring is routed and quality of that cable,to the location of the bt master socket, or the way in which the said line is being used causes serious issues with the supplied adsl signal ,and is quite possible doing the same to others in the immediate area,but they may well be blissfully unaware of the cause of their bb issues ,your bt FTTC won't make a blind bit of difference to my connection,not only will it not use it , but the last section from the cab to my home is the problem section, bt structure is diabolical, why do people keep saying that we will see an increase in speed: we wont unless we pay more to bt for their heavily capped and shaped product , which would make any increase fairly pointless

Edited by tommy45 (Sat 31-Jul-10 11:33:00)

Anonymous
(Unregistered)Sat 31-Jul-10 12:10:30
Print Post

Re: In a slow area? We need to only pay for speed we get


[re: Davidmcc3] [link to this post]
 
If you're looking at international comparisons, how about including price or broadband availability too, which would paint a rather different picture? OECD data shows that the UK has teh lowest prices for broadband from major economies and one of the highest levels of availability (ie % of population).

A downside of wide availability is that it brings the average speed down, but surely better that than not having a ubiquitous service? And remember the deployment in the UK was achieved without the £bns of public funding thrown at broadband elsewhere.

So perhaps better here than you acknowledge. AB.
Anonymous
(Unregistered)Sat 31-Jul-10 12:13:25
Print Post

Re: In a slow area? We need to only pay for speed we get


[re: tommy45] [link to this post]
 
@tommy45

Quote "why do people keep saying that we will see an increase in speed: we wont unless we pay more to bt for their heavily capped and shaped product "

What is stopping you from choosing a different SP? There are more SPs in the UK than pretty much any other market, you cannot complain about lack of choice, so no need to "pay more to BT" if you'd prefer another company. AB.
Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | (show all)   Print Thread

Jump to