Is FTTP really better than FTTC?

I don't just mean speedwise as sometimes.
I was chatting to someone at work yesterday, and they are saying that they can now order Zzoomm, well when their contract runs out on their broadband they have now. They told me they have a good deal and because they are so close to the cabinet they get 70Mb/s second.

They asked me if there is any advantage from paying more just for a bit of extra speed, all I could think of was maybe reliability, but, I was told they have been with their provider for over 5 years and have had not one problem, and they pay less than I do for 35Mb/s ish

To be honest, I have been thinking the same thing, Zzoomm is not going to get here until the spring next year, but my contract for plusnet runs out a couple of months or so before, that is if Zzoomm is on time. The price for plusnet would rise to about £30 , which is more or less what Zzoomm will cost.

My main problem with Zzoomm is that it is not a simple matter of just changing providers, it involves digging trenches and sticking a box on the wall and that sort of thing, and also if I decide they are not my cup of tea after the contract, it is hassle to get back onto a FTTC network.

The person at work more or less said the same thing

So again, apart from speed, is there any real advantage in going for full fibre?

If you and your friend are both happy with the performance, reliability and cost of FTTC, then stay with it. Doesn’t sound like you’re gagging for gigabit anyway 😉

If the alternative won’t be ready for quite a few months, you have plenty of time to observe and gauge what other local experiences have been like.

For me the push was reliability - FTTC had been reliable for 5 or so years, but then I had issues twice in 6 months, because where the line came in entry wasn't properly sealed, water had got in and corroded the copper and the first time the fix didn't solve this. So with Plusnet's price rises and offers etc. I looked around and decided not a lot more just to go for full FTTP.

The download/upload speeds are obviously much better and the company's laptop with all the cloud/call home to check, seems less likely to freeze/error. But other than that no real difference with most things, so unless speed of link is definitely causing issues I'd just wait it out

The biggest two things with fttp, is lower latency (network dependent though) and getting (in theory) the advertised speeds.

Connection speed will always be the same for the speed you ordered, thruput won't (but that is the same with fttc).

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

you have plenty of time to observe and gauge what other local experiences have been like.

+1

If you don't want extra speed, your connection is reliable and you won't save any money then no point changing at present.

Yes, yes it is better.

It gets one away from the vagaries of a copper line, where distance, conductor gauge, line condition, external signals , etc, etc can all adversely affect the quality and reliability of the service you receive

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

So again, apart from speed, is there any real advantage in going for full fibre?

Yes, you get rid of all the copper (or worse, aluminium) joints in the street between you and the FTTC cabinet, either underground or overground. Those jelly crimps installed in the 70s or even later can gradually disconnect in the last 50 years.

I will reply here for everyone that have replied to my post so far, otherwise there will a lot of replies

First of, the other person is not a friend, just a colleague, I would not pay for gigabit myself, well not for what zzoomm wants for it, and it is not gigabit anyway, it is 90Mb/s and that costs £59 a month, they do have a 2 gigabit connection for £99 a month, I can not see many households going for that or for the 90Mb/s to be honest.
They have a 100Mb/s for £29 a month, but upload is only 10Mb/s and the next one is 400Mb/s and 40 Mb/s upload for £39 a month. It is another tenner a month on top for the last two if there is a need for upload to be the same speed as download.

I don't know what the value is in those prices compared to other FTTP, which is irrelevant here as Zzoomm is the only FTTP most people in the city will be able to get. There is Openreach FTTP in one small part of the city, I think it is just one road, which is very strange.


For me reliability is pretty good, I have not had any problems for a while now, sometimes I have slow-downs, but not sure if fibre would stop that to be honest, if the network become congested. the other person,

A couple of posts say get away from copper wire, which I agree is not a bad thing, the phone lines coming to my house was meant to be replaced when I first moved here, but still have not been sorted, my colleague lives virtually on the doorstep of the cabinet that supplies him, so unless something drastic happens to the cable, he should not have many problems.
My, I live around 500 metres away from the cabinet, that is if the cable goes the direction I measure, if not then it will be even longer, so yes I can understand I may have more problems and I did for a while, but it was not the cable, but something in the cabinet, It was sorted one without me knowing. I could connect with an old Huawei modem, but nothing else, now it will work fine with anything.


Pheasant saying I have plenty of time to observe, that I do, I think the other chappies contract is coming to the end in October if I remember rightly, and he can certainly order FTTP then, I think he can now. Zzoomm have been in Henley on Thames for a while and I have looked at reviews, most seems ok.

I have more time to think about it as have been said, for me the main problems is not being able to change a different provider quckly if things don't work out, like with FTTC, if Plusnet did something that I did not like, or they put their prices up sky-high it is easy to change. i remember changing from my wireless broadband to FTTC, it cost me a reconnection charge since my phone line was disconnected and not used for 2 years. Then I ended up paying for two broadband providers for a month.

the other problem for me is how on earth will they lay the fibre? I have steps and driveway, I do have a small narrow garden alongside the steps, but they will still have to dig out some concrete along by the front door step.
Photo here from my front door.

The other lad have a front garden, so easier for him.


So to sum up, the only real advantage is speed? if plusnet gives me a good deal at the end of my contract, I am in the mind to take it, I don't really want to pay £30 for broadband.
Saying all of that, things could change by next year, I may not even be living here. We will just have to wait and see, I suppose.
the post was more for the other lad than me.

thanks anyway peeps.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

it is not gigabit anyway, it is 90Mb/s and that costs £59 a month

Presumably you mean 900Mb/s, not 90Mb/s.

Most providers label their gigabit packages as 900Mb/s. This is because when presenting a gigabit ethernet (which delivers exactly 1,000,000,000 bits per second), the achievable TCP payload throughput is about 942Mbps on IPv4, or 928Mbps on IPv6, once you've taken into account the overhead of TCP and IP and ethernet headers.

It's clearer to label it as a "900M" service than have customers complain that they paid for 1000Mbps and are only getting 940M according to a speedtest - even though the speedtest only measures the payload data and not the headers.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

the other problem for me is how on earth will they lay the fibre? I have steps and driveway, I do have a small narrow garden alongside the steps, but they will still have to dig out some concrete along by the front door step.

It varies by provider. How is your BT copper delivered? Many providers will follow the same route (i.e. re-use the BT duct using PIA if you have a duct, use overhead from a pole if the pole exists). If neither option is possible they might lay the cable over the surface, or they might dig.

If you want the service, then talk to them about how they would deliver it. If you don't want the service, then it doesn't matter

Having had the issue on several occasions trying to get OR interested in fixing a copper line plagued with faults from wet weather but the engineers turning up in dry weather, I cannot wait for FTTP.

I keep an 80/20 FTTC circuit as a backup - it achieves 72/16. We always hear about the dodgy lines here, but the vast majority of FTTC works just fine.

My area is on the list for copper stop sell next year, so when changing supplier I'll likely end up with Openreach FTTP.

However, I don't think I'd pay extra for it if I had to renew now. Latency (Plusnet) is typically only about 3ms above my primary Community Fibre (XGS-PON), and the 16Mbit upload is *just* tolerable for a short period of time. Reliability is good for copper - I'd say fewer than 3 resyncs a year due to factors outside my control, and I run it on a 1.5dB margin.

Examples: FTTC/FTTP
1.1.1.1 5.6/2.7
8.8.8.8 5.0/2.4
bbc.co.uk 5.2/1.7
9.9.9.9 5.4/1.8

Remember that the first year or two of "stop sell" on copper is only to stop provisioning of new services - it doesn't prevent you from renewing existing copper services. So you won't be forced into changing immediately if you don't want to.

It's only PSTN phone services that are going to disappear soon though. Migrating FTTC to existing copper will still be around.

Nope - if you are in one of the growing list of locations Openreach have announced copper stop sell for then FTTC to FTTC migrations will be blocked unless on 40/10 product next year.

From May next year where I am you will be pushed to FTTP for most orders due to the stop sell. That includes changing ISPs and house moves. Not related to the PSTN switch off.

Edited by Ad_G (Sun 15-Aug-21 20:52:16)

In reply to a post by candlerb:

Presumably you mean 900Mb/s, not 90Mb/s.

Most providers label their gigabit packages as 900Mb/s. This is because when presenting a gigabit ethernet (which delivers exactly 1,000,000,000 bits per second), the achievable TCP payload throughput is about 942Mbps on IPv4, or 928Mbps on IPv6, once you've taken into account the overhead of TCP and IP and ethernet headers.

It's clearer to label it as a "900M" service than have customers complain that they paid for 1000Mbps and are only getting 940M according to a speedtest - even though the speedtest only measures the payload data and not the headers.

Yes, sorry, 900Mb/s I thought that may have been the reason to be honest, not sure how many people would even be ale to even use that amount anyway unless they have a load of high bandwidth devices, like a load of smart TV sets being used for 4K streaming at the same times.
business I can understand and to be honest, I think most people would be fine with !00Mb/s,

It varies by provider. How is your BT copper delivered? Many providers will follow the same route (i.e. re-use the BT duct using PIA if you have a duct, use overhead from a pole if the pole exists). If neither option is possible they might lay the cable over the surface, or they might dig.

If you want the service, then talk to them about how they would deliver it. If you don't want the service, then it doesn't matter

My Bt copper is over head, but Zzoomm uses their own network and while they may use some BT ducting,, they still dig a trench in people's property. On the cycle path I ride to work down they dug their own trench, for when I presume is the equivalent of a trunk cable. They put a cabinet there as well, and boy is it noisy, when we had those few hot days it was really going something, even now when it is cooler it is pretty loud when I pass on my bike. Just a good job the closest neighbours is Aldis and part of Bulmers, well Heineken as it is called now,

I hope they are not going to put them things in estates, I think they have a manhole type thing ion the roads, i have not been down any street that have them, the flats at the back of the service yard where i work I think can now get Zzoomm, but I have not really looked, the furthest I go out there is just to the lorry to chat to drivers asking what they have on board

I am just curious, even if I don't bother with it. Not only that, but I am interested in the technology, I am interested in all technology, even if I don't always agree with it or the way it is used.

In reply to a post by Ad_G:

Nope - if you are in one of the growing list of locations Openreach have announced copper stop sell for then FTTC to FTTC migrations will be blocked unless on 40/10 product next year.

From May next year where I am you will be pushed to FTTP for most orders due to the stop sell. That includes changing ISPs and house moves. Not related to the PSTN switch off.

That is a bit naff, certainly if the price is higher, I presume that is only with BT ISP and not other providers that use the BT openreach network.

I know of someone who still use ADSL, and he has been told that they will have to move to FTTC as their provider are stopping ADSL, I have no idea what provider they use. They are going to move to another provider, so I presume it is not an open reach thing.
I am not sure why they don't want to move to FTTC, something about it being worse than ADSL, I have no idea how, maybe the cabinet is further away from them than they are from the exchange. Pass.
But at the end of the day, it is still naff that they are being pushed onto something that they feel they don't need, and they would have to pay more for.

In reply to a post by Ad_G:

Nope - if you are in one of the growing list of locations Openreach have announced copper stop sell for then FTTC to FTTC migrations will be blocked unless on 40/10 product next year.

From May next year where I am you will be pushed to FTTP for most orders due to the stop sell. That includes changing ISPs and house moves. Not related to the PSTN switch off.

Just to clarify in case folks are confused, there are currently 2 Stop Sell programmes under way:

1. FTTP Priority Exchange Stop Sell
2. WLR Withdrawal Stop Sell

Your exchange area will no doubt be in the former category - unless you are in Mildenhall in Suffolk, in which case it’s already happening!

More here:
https://www.openreach.co.uk/cpportal/products/produc...

The All IP faq:
https://www.openreach.co.uk/cpportal/content/dam/cpp...

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

I am not sure why they don't want to move to FTTC, something about it being worse than ADSL, I have no idea how, maybe the cabinet is further away from them than they are from the exchange. Pass.

FTTC signals operate at higher frequencies, which are more affected by attenuation over distance. So there comes a cross-over point, when you are a mile or two from the cabinet, where FTTC becomes worse than ASDL. Although both are pretty slow by that point

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

But at the end of the day, it is still naff that they are being pushed onto something that they feel they don't need, and they would have to pay more for.

This is true: although for most providers FTTC and ASDL are priced identically, having a worse service sucks.

I suspect the original provider is getting rid of their ADSL equipment from exchanges, due to so few people still using it.

In reply to a post by ft247:

I keep an 80/20 FTTC circuit as a backup - it achieves 72/16. We always hear about the dodgy lines here, but the vast majority of FTTC works just fine.

FTTC is still “working just fine” providing 18 Mbps, and not many get 70 or higher sadly. A lot of my colleagues during the pandemic upgraded to as fast as they could get (to try and improve video calls) and ended up with faster download typically around 55 Mbps, but upload speeds almost never broke 10 Mbps. Lots of people would like to buy a reliable 80/20 without any distance issues.

Edited by jchamier (Sun 15-Aug-21 22:22:05)

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Lots of people would like to buy a reliable 80/20 without any distance issues.

I agree - my point is that if you have a good FTTC line and aren't in an FTTP Priority/Stop Sell area, then the FTTP 80/20 will cost you more for not much benefit.

It will be interesting to see how pricing develops as more stop sells come into effect. Vodafone for example are offering cheap 80/20 FTTP in Salisbury, the same price as they would normally charge for FTTC.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

FTTC signals operate at higher frequencies, which are more affected by attenuation over distance. So there comes a cross-over point, when you are a mile or two from the cabinet, where FTTC becomes worse than ASDL. Although both are pretty slow by that point

That is true, so maybe they are right. when I last spoke to them, they were saying about using 4G, I don't know if they have, this is not the same person from the first post,, just someone I chat to on Discord now and again,

This is true: although for most providers FTTC and ASDL are priced identically, having a worse service sucks.

I suspect the original provider is getting rid of their ADSL equipment from exchanges, due to so few people still using it.

FTTC is priced the same to start with, and then they stick the prices up after the contract, and you have to go through all the hassle of dealing with them again to get the price down.
this is one thing I hate about broadband. It was far easier in the dial-up days, just use who you want when you want.

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

Just to clarify in case folks are confused, there are currently 2 Stop Sell programmes under way:

1. FTTP Priority Exchange Stop Sell
2. WLR Withdrawal Stop Sell

Your exchange area will no doubt be in the former category - unless you are in Mildenhall in Suffolk, in which case it’s already happening!

Case 1 is withdrawal of copper entirely; case 2 is only withdrawing analogue voice (PSTN), which is happening much more widely. In the second case, if you order a "phone line" you'll get either FTTP or SOGEA (copper FTTC/ADSL broadband), and your voice service will be digital voice delivered over any of those technologies.

Unfortunately, even Openreach's own documentation is inconsistent.
https://www.openreach.com/locations/mildenhall
says: "On 4 May 2021 we stopped selling copper broadband services in the Mildenhall area."

But
https://www.openreach.com/content/dam/openreach/open...
says that Mildenhall is a SOGEA transition.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

Case 1 is withdrawal of copper entirely; case 2 is only withdrawing analogue voice (PSTN), which is happening much more widely. In the second case, if you order a "phone line" you'll get either FTTP or SOGEA (copper FTTC/ADSL broadband), and your voice service will be digital voice delivered over any of those technologies.

Unfortunately, even Openreach's own documentation is inconsistent.
https://www.openreach.com/locations/mildenhall
says: "On 4 May 2021 we stopped selling copper broadband services in the Mildenhall area."

But
https://www.openreach.com/content/dam/openreach/open...
says that Mildenhall is a SOGEA transition.

Yes wording inconsistencies aside, for folks outside of the FTTP Priority Exchange Stop Sell areas (some 383 exchange areas so far) - the national stop sell date for WLR (PSTN) is the first key date, which is September 2023, roughly 2 years away. No more ordering 'new' copper line with dial tone after that. if you don't have FTTP outside then it will be one of the SOGEA, SOGfast or SOTAP, non-dial tone products only.

The second key date is of course the full withdrawal of PSTN two years later in 2025 (if they stick to schedule). No more dial tone from the socket after that.

Full copper withdrawl is probably more than a decade away. But by 2026 if you believe the dates, we should be "All IP"

I have a very decent 80/20 line now but for most people they just wouldn't be able to implement the hardware and settings to achieve this. I only pay a total of £35/pm for this including the line with BT.

BQM graph

Takeaway is that for most people WFH at least, a FTTP connection is a better option as you do not need to worry about QoS /AQM to be able to utilise a connection without audio/video dropouts when the kids are streaming etc.

Edited by smouty (Mon 16-Aug-21 10:40:51)

I'm in the north west of Ireland (Derry/Londonderry) - been on FTTP now almost 3 weeks and its been rock solid - my FTTC was rock solid too - due to a short line.

Main advantage is the lowest ping to bbc/google etc I've seen is 15ms - compared to 18ms with FTTC.

In reply to a post by BuckleZ:

I'm in the north west of Ireland (Derry/Londonderry) - been on FTTP now almost 3 weeks and its been rock solid - my FTTC was rock solid too - due to a short line.

Main advantage is the lowest ping to bbc/google etc I've seen is 15ms - compared to 18ms with FTTC.

Does ping really matter unless you are playing games? Ok, really high pings are annoying, but to be honest, I have never had a problem with pings and getting Google to load 3 milliseconds faster is not going to make a difference. I doubt you can even blink your eye in that time.

I have plenty of time to decide, but it seems the advantages is mainly speed, with maybe more reliability for some people. I will tell that to the lad at work when I see him.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by BuckleZ:

I'm in the north west of Ireland (Derry/Londonderry) - been on FTTP now almost 3 weeks and its been rock solid - my FTTC was rock solid too - due to a short line.

Main advantage is the lowest ping to bbc/google etc I've seen is 15ms - compared to 18ms with FTTC.

Does ping really matter unless you are playing games?

Low ping is a big help when gaming but as you say 3ms isn't going to make the slightest bit of difference even if some deluded gamers would have you believe it does.


.

Edited by Jack_Hackett (Mon 16-Aug-21 18:28:11)

In reply to a post by BuckleZ:

I'm in the north west of Ireland (Derry/Londonderry) - been on FTTP now almost 3 weeks and its been rock solid - my FTTC was rock solid too - due to a short line.

Main advantage is the lowest ping to bbc/google etc I've seen is 15ms - compared to 18ms with FTTC.

I get <7ms on FTTC.
I have switched to Stadia over Xbox for gaming and for a streaming service it is as responsive as playing natively on a PC or console.

Edited by smouty (Mon 16-Aug-21 19:09:17)

In reply to a post by Jack_Hackett:

Low ping is a big help when gaming but as you say 3ms isn't going to make the slightest bit of difference even if some deluded gamers would have you believe it does.

.

I don't really game that much, I play a couple, but not online, I am not that good at most of them, so playing online would be useless as I would lose a lot.

Not sure what this lad at work does with his, I think it is only him and his partner.

In reply to a post by smouty:

I get <7ms on FTTC.
I have switched to Stadia over Xbox for gaming and for a streaming service it is as responsive as playing natively on a PC or console.

Another subscription service. I had a look at Stadia, don't look enough on there for many games player, £9 a month is a fair bit and the problem is you lose them when you stop paying.
too many subscriptions, I am thinking of dropping netflix next year, so just Disney+ and Prime.

Post deleted by smouty - double post

Edited by smouty (Tue 17-Aug-21 08:29:12)

Another subscription service. I had a look at Stadia, don't look enough on there for many games player, £9 a month is a fair bit and the problem is you lose them when you stop paying.
too many subscriptions, I am thinking of dropping netflix next year, so just Disney+ and Prime.

You couldn’t be more wrong and this is a common misconception.
You do not need to subscribe at all to play the games you own or are free to play such as Destiny 2.
Even games you buy when subscribed at a massive discount you keep without any restrictions if you cancel.

You do not even require any hardware.

Of course FTTP is better than FTTC. It's faster, has lower latency and far more reliable.

There'll always be a group of people, usually much older people, that'll not be able to tell the difference. Think back to elderly people prefering black and white TV's over colour, for years after they released etc.

Eventually FTTC will be turned off, so even those prefering inferior technology will be forced to move on.

Not ageist then 😉

And there is a lot of people who just look at the numbers and think more is better irrespective whether it will make any difference to them, similarly with reliability if you current line is stable and reliable adding an extra level of reliable won't make much difference.

On the subject of reliability though my FTTC line was more reliable than the power over the last few years - one big loss going with FTTP is loss of phone lines when the power is out, back in 2013 I was in a area where a storm took out the power for a day or so, that knocked out the virgin box fairly quickly and the local mobile networks were gone within a few hours so if there is an emergency you need to call for help then something about being up a creek sans paddle comes to mind.

Note that with FTTP there are no powered street cabinets (unlike Virgin); your fibre path is passive all the way to the headend exchange, which is usually one of the larger exchanges rather than a small local exchange, and it will have good power backup.

Therefore, the only thing which matters is the power at your house for the ONT and router. You can solve this yourself with battery backup, or even a diesel generator, depending on what level of paranoia you wish.

Looks like Virgin are going to go above and beyond the OFCom proposal of back-up for an hour in the event of a power outage. According to the BBC News web-site (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-58233420), Virgin will be offering a battery backup to give 24 hours standby and 1 hour talk time to vulnerable customers and those who do not have reliable mobile phone access.

Doesn't help if you normally have reliable mobile coverage but the outage has taken the mast down but it is a step beyond the regulatory proposals.

In reply to a post by smouty:

You couldn’t be more wrong and this is a common misconception.
You do not need to subscribe at all to play the games you own or are free to play such as Destiny 2.
Even games you buy when subscribed at a massive discount you keep without any restrictions if you cancel.

You do not even require any hardware.

So what is the subscription for? The way it is on their website makes it look like you have to subscribe.

As for no hardware, I am pretty sure you would need some hardware, unless you are going to play the games with your mind.


It is still not something I would use, this sort of thing was tried once before and failed, Amazon has a lot of money to put behind this, but even Amazon will only chuck so much at it if it doesn't start making a profit.
I am not saying it won't do well, just that it have been tried before, people seem to prefer the xboxes and PlayStations, oh yeah and switches.

That is only true with OR FTTP. Many of the altnets (e.g. Gigaclear) use distribution cabinets that are powered. Although the cabinets have backup batteries, my area has lengthy power outages several times a year that are likely to be longer than the battery will run the cab.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

Note that with FTTP there are no powered street cabinets (unlike Virgin)

AltNets often use powered cabinets for their FTTP nodes.

Edit: I see sheephouse was thinking the same thing.

Edited by Pheasant (Tue 17-Aug-21 20:57:10)

In reply to a post by dave2150:

Of course FTTP is better than FTTC. It's faster, has lower latency and far more reliable.

There'll always be a group of people, usually much older people, that'll not be able to tell the difference. Think back to elderly people prefering black and white TV's over colour, for years after they released etc.

Eventually FTTC will be turned off, so even those prefering inferior technology will be forced to move on.

Faster don't make things better, more reliability yes as have already been said above, while latency does make a difference, 3 milliseconds or so is not going to make a scrap of difference to anything
Not everyone requires faster speed and not everyone will want to pay the extra price to get it, sure if providers offered a slower speed on FTTH for a lower price than that is ok.
I am fine with 35Mb/s, I can do everything I need to do with it as long as it doesn't get congested, and we had the same problem with ADSL, the U.S.A would wake up and everything would slow down to a crawl, and it can still happen now. Maybe happened with dial up, but that was so slow anyway I doubt we would have noticed, and there was not so many people using the internet then.
As I was saying, I am fine with the speed I get, which is why I said in my first post, apart from speed what is the advantage of FTTH and I got the answer I thought I would get, just maybe reliability. but again some people have been using FTTc for years without any problems, i have had none since the little problem with the network only wanting to connect to one certain modem for some reason, but that is now sorted.

Money is the thing, if plusnet comes back at the end of my contract and say, yes we will do you a deal for the same price I am paying now, which is £23 a month for my 35Mb/s, I would have to think about why I would need to spend another £6 or more per month to get 100Mb/s which is not going to make a scrap of difference to me. If I really get started with this video stuff, a higher upload would be ok, but if I went for zzoomm, that would cost me another tenner a month to get a higher upload speed that I get now. So £16 a month more than I am paying, plus I get free calls, not that I use them, but that is not the point.

Don't do the ageist thing, I know people who are a fair bit bit older than me and maybe you that would notice the difference, but only if they have a use for it. Do you really think a person who access say Facebook is going to notice his Facebook pages downloading a fraction of a second faster?
My brother lives more or less were ZZoomm is starting to build the network, him and his wife lives there and she does some business stuff on her computers, he does music and other things, so I expect they will go for Zzoomm and they are both older than me.

As for black and white TV, older people stayed with them because the licence was cheaper., I know my Nan did, and also it was rented and because she had it for so long she had a good deal on it. Those days, TV sets was still expensive to buy. so what about people who don't go for a 4K T.V?

I am sure one day FTTC will be turned off, but I don't think it will be for many years, after all i can still get ADSL if I want to.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

Not everyone requires faster speed and not everyone will want to pay the extra price to get it, sure if providers offered a slower speed on FTTH for a lower price than that is ok.

I read this about 4G and everyone said "I'm happy with 3G" and in a couple of years 3G will be turned off. So anyone without a 4G capable handset/modem/dongle will be stuck with very limited 2G.

Progress is progress, even if you choose to buy the entry level product over FTTP that gives the speeds you have now, the infrastructure needs updating.

Openreach will want to turn off the FTTC/VDSL cabinets once they have deployed FTTP to save the electricity bill for one.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by smouty:

You couldn’t be more wrong and this is a common misconception.
You do not need to subscribe at all to play the games you own or are free to play such as Destiny 2.
Even games you buy when subscribed at a massive discount you keep without any restrictions if you cancel.

You do not even require any hardware.

So what is the subscription for? The way it is on their website makes it look like you have to subscribe.

As for no hardware, I am pretty sure you would need some hardware, unless you are going to play the games with your mind.


It is still not something I would use, this sort of thing was tried once before and failed, Amazon has a lot of money to put behind this, but even Amazon will only chuck so much at it if it doesn't start making a profit.
I am not saying it won't do well, just that it have been tried before, people seem to prefer the xboxes and PlayStations, oh yeah and switches.

Like xbox live and PSN you get access to a games library while subscribed.
You of course need some hardware but it is likely to be accessible on the same device you are posting on the internet with

It is Google btw. Amazon have their own service as do both Microsoft and Sony as I think it is the way forward especially for someone who doesn’t want to waste money on a new console or gaming pc. Even some Switch games are streamed e.g. those that the Switch is unable to run natively so Nintendo are also involved.

I also had an Xbox since 2005 but sold the OneX and haven’t missed the time it takes to install a game or an update. With Stadia it is instant.

Trouble with the backup power supplies is you need to maintain them otherwise you'll only find they failed when you need them - that and the risks associated with battery fires.

Where I live now is less likely to lose electricity to a storm so not so concerned personally - but we are yet to have a wide scale power outage with just digital phones, so wait and see.

if your defer upgrading to a 4g phone until you need to then you end up saving money and reducing waste. Similarly If you jump into FTTP now then likely you'll spend more because of limited competition

Battery fires are associated with Li-Ion packs (in certain usually quite extreme and atypical conditions / scenarios).

The UPS units and gen-packs that I’ve seen that don’t use the usual SLA batteries, are using Lithium-Iron-Phosphate LiFePO chemistry which is far more stable than Li-Ion. Not prone to fires.

There is no such thing as an intrinsically safe battery though. They can all be bombs if mismanaged badly enough. Even good old lead acid is lethal or life changing. Then again so is overinflating a tyre or filling up with petrol while smoking.

In reply to a post by Kenneth:

Similarly If you jump into FTTP now then likely you'll spend more because of limited competition

Not necessarily. Example in absolute terms; another thread from today; BT (Full) Fibre Essentials is the same cost whether it’s delivered over FTTC or FTTP. In fact over FTTP the bandwidth is the same for all subscribers whereas over FTTC there is a range depending on how far you are.

In bang for buck, relative terms; divide the cost by bandwidth. FTTP will be miles cheaper per available £/Mbps than any FTTC package. My business FTTP package works out at 5.6p / Mbps.

At that rate 80/20 FTTC should cost £4.51 per month.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

I read this about 4G and everyone said "I'm happy with 3G" and in a couple of years 3G will be turned off. So anyone without a 4G capable handset/modem/dongle will be stuck with very limited 2G.

Progress is progress, even if you choose to buy the entry level product over FTTP that gives the speeds you have now, the infrastructure needs updating.

Openreach will want to turn off the FTTC/VDSL cabinets once they have deployed FTTP to save the electricity bill for one.

I went to 4G as i got a new phone that had 4G on it, I did not go out to buy a phone with 4G and i am pretty sure a lot of people did the same, if they drop 3G what are they going to do about smart meters? Some will work on 2g, but that is going as well. So smart meters will need a new modem, so more waste.
I got myself a new phone a few months ago, I went for 4G and not 5G, because one was the price of the phone, it was a good price for what it offers, two, we don't have 5G here, I know one network is going to install it, three, i don't see the point of 5G on a mobile and 4G is fast enough, after all most of the time 4G is faster than my home network.

But progress is not always progress, just because something is faster, don't mean it is better. Take 5g for a start, I know of someone who got a 5G phone, and live in a place where 5G is supposed to be great and yet their phone spends more time on 4G than 5G.
To be honest, i am getting fed up with being told to use an app for this and an app for that, suppose to be progress, now that we can order again at the bar, I have got rid of the apps I used for two pubs I go into, they only collect a load of data anyway.

I think FTTC will be with us for a few years yet, FTTP will either have to come down to the price of FTTC or providers will have to offer lower speeds at a lower price of FTTP. Also, openreach are still installing FTTC in some places, I can't see them doing that and then getting rid of them after a few years.

By all accounts the one I am connected to have been hit by a car again, but it can't be that bad,, my connection is still working. I was told there was a car on the grass front end up by the cabinet and the cabinet looked at a strange angle, again.

In reply to a post by smouty:

Like xbox live and PSN you get access to a games library while subscribed.
You of course need some hardware but it is likely to be accessible on the same device you are posting on the internet with

It is Google btw. Amazon have their own service as do both Microsoft and Sony as I think it is the way forward especially for someone who doesn’t want to waste money on a new console or gaming pc. Even some Switch games are streamed e.g. those that the Switch is unable to run natively so Nintendo are also involved.

I also had an Xbox since 2005 but sold the OneX and haven’t missed the time it takes to install a game or an update. With Stadia it is instant.

So you can only buy the games while subscribed? This device is a pretty powerful machine, may be a few years old, but still capable of playing games, so I don't really need to stream games on here, but I understand what you are getting at.
I don't know why I said amazon, I did mean Google.

The games I have seen on stadia don't look that great to be honest, and I am not even a gamer., they look to be past their sell by date, they have Doom, surly that is not the original Doom? I know it is a classic, but come on.

I don't think the sale of game consoles is going to fall because of Stadia to be honest, I work in a store that sells consoles and when we can get them, there are a fair few of them on the back of the lorry.

i will stick with steam, for the few games I buy and play.

In reply to a post by Kenneth:

On the subject of reliability though my FTTC line was more reliable than the power over the last few years - one big loss going with FTTP is loss of phone lines when the power is out ....

Come 2025 PSTN will go anyway. Landlines will have to be over whatever broadband one has.

Edited by pluralist (Wed 18-Aug-21 01:07:39)

after all i can still get ADSL if I want to.

Exchange based ADSL will be phased out long before cab based FTTC.

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

Exchange based ADSL will be phased out long before cab based FTTC.

Personally I think this is a sad thing when these exchanges could be modernised and turned into local Internet exchanges instead of shutting them all down. They could rip out all of the old telephone gear and run fibre to them and then connect everyone locally to this one centre instead of an aggregation node that's potentially miles away from you. I'm probably not the first person to have this idea though and since it costs a lot of money to do this investment I can see why most of them will likely all be phased out instead.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

I went to 4G as i got a new phone that had 4G on it, I did not go out to buy a phone with 4G and i am pretty sure a lot of people did the same, if they drop 3G what are they going to do about smart meters? Some will work on 2g, but that is going as well. So smart meters will need a new modem, so more waste.

No 2G is NOT going but the capacity on it is tiny as the bulk of the spectrum has been moved to 4G. It is used for various M2M (machine to machine) communications including some smart meters. I understand the long term plan is for smart meters to use the DCC network and stop using mobile phones.
(You may be confusing with the USA, whom HAVE turned off 2G, but their 2G and 3G was not the same as ours, only with 4G did we all use LTE).

5G is about capacity, and with more capacity comes the ability to do more. It is going to be a lot slower rollout than 4G was. (4G is 9 years old in the UK this year).

In reply to a post by jchamier:

No 2G is NOT going but the capacity on it is tiny as the bulk of the spectrum has been moved to 4G. It is used for various M2M (machine to machine) communications including some smart meters. I understand the long term plan is for smart meters to use the DCC network and stop using mobile phones.

Big chunk, the southern bit, of the DCC is still using the mobile network for the WAN comms. As I understand it (not looked in depth admittedly) that part is managed by Telefonica and Arqiva do the northern (non mobile) WAN part.

In reply to a post by aidanh:

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

Exchange based ADSL will be phased out long before cab based FTTC.

Personally I think this is a sad thing when these exchanges could be modernised and turned into local Internet exchanges instead of shutting them all down. They could rip out all of the old telephone gear and run fibre to them and then connect everyone locally to this one centre instead of an aggregation node that's potentially miles away from you. I'm probably not the first person to have this idea though and since it costs a lot of money to do this investment I can see why most of them will likely all be phased out instead.

That shipped sailed a long time ago. When they sold the vast majority of the exchange estate and leased it back. They’ve already reduced the number of properties they occupy by 30% and that will no doubt accelerate as the lease deal comes up to expiry in 2031, PSTN switches off end of 2025 and they transition to a small footprint all fibre estate.

Post deleted by 69bertie

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

Faster don't make things better, more reliability yes as have already been said above, while latency does make a difference, 3 milliseconds or so is not going to make a scrap of difference to anything
Not everyone requires faster speed and not everyone will want to pay the extra price to get it, sure if providers offered a slower speed on FTTH for a lower price than that is ok.
Money is the thing, if plusnet comes back at the end of my contract and say, yes we will do you a deal for the same price I am paying now, which is £23 a month for my 35Mb/s, I would have to think about why I would need to spend another £6 or more per month to get 100Mb/s which is not going to make a scrap of difference to me. If I really get started with this video stuff, a higher upload would be ok, but if I went for zzoomm, that would cost me another tenner a month to get a higher upload speed that I get now. So £16 a month more than I am paying, plus I get free calls, not that I use them, but that is not the point.

It really does depend on the provider for FTTP. Some seem to have jacked the price up. Mine costs me £39 a month for 500/500 (I get usually around 470/470Mb/s). And it is very reliable and blazingly fast as long as the server I'm dealing with is also fast. GB's of downloads are no longer a problem. The reason I went for the higher connection speed is we, as a family, do cane the connection.

But I could get 120/120Mb/s unlimited for £19 a month. That is vastly different to the OR product (FTTC) which was around £32 a month for 80/20 (I use to get 76/20Mb). Admittedly the above doesn't include a phone line but then I stopped using the landline many years ago. My mobile contract (£7.80/month) is far superior in many ways. i.e. more convenient, more controllable and unlimited call/sms at any time of the day, plus it has data included.

One thing I have noticed is that as the speeds go up, one tends to use it more and more, simply because it is there.

Yes, switching to my new ISP was a leap into the unknown (I kept the original FTTC alive for one month afterwards - just in case) but 6 months on, looking back it was a bit of a no brainer really. And judging by how many times I see other people around these parts getting the fibre installed, it's a case of 'me too!' OR must be kicking themselves.

The whole point about the way fibre is being deployed is it doesn't need a load of buildings as aggregation nodes can be installed in footpaths closer to the people using it. Fewer exchanges can handle larger numbers of connections as fibre can take them all back to a central point as fibre is able to handle longer distances.

It is primarily fibre that drives the ability to close exchanges rather than it being a reason to keep them.

Generally speaking FTTP is far superior to FTTC.

FTTP doesn't have any copper, so there will be zero interference's and risk of connection drop outs. Usually FTTP is symmetrical on many Altnet FTTP providers.

But in the case of Openreach and a few others, 1Gbps upload isn't supported due to lack of XGS-PON. But even then, it's still better than native FTTC as you can select higher speeds than the 80 Mbps limit on FTTC.

Problem with FTTC is most people don't get 80Mbps max due to line length of the copper to street cabinet. Some get only half of the speeds plus also crosstalk is a serious factor to consider. If there are many customers up-taking the FTTC package, then people may no longer get the higher speeds and those speeds are at risk of dropping.

Like for example when I first joined FTTC last year February 2020 I was getting 6dB SNR for 80Mbps and 15dB SNR for 20Mbps upload.

Over the months the SNR slowly dropped as more customers have switched from ADSL formerly EO Line to FTTC. I am now syncing for the same speeds at 3dB for 80Mbps and 7dB for 20Mbps upload. There are some months when connection dropped to 77.6Mbps before climbing back up to 80Mbps. This is the reality with FTTC. Now my only hope will be when part of the customers migrate to FTTP to relief the crosstalk, only then I am guaranteed to get stable 80Mbps sync. Anyway, I will get Community Fibre FTTP by December.

As soon as my contract is over, I will switch to Community Fibre, It is a no brainer.

Also don't forget about the DLM - Dynamic Line Management! On FTTC you have to wait 10 days or so and every day you will experience a connection drop out at 2am approximately before line stabilizes.

If there are power cuts or accidental disconnections to the telephone wiring then DLM will drop your connection. Intermittent router reboots will also trigger DLM to drop your connection. Then you have to wait for days before DLM returns your speeds back up when it interprets your connection as stable again.

This is a headache that you won't have to face with FTTP.

But of-course having said that if the FTTP packages are far more expensive like in the case of rural areas, then FTTC may be a better option. But FTTP in urban London like CommunityFibre, Hyperoptic, G.Network offer packages that are cheaper than Openreach FTTC! Unless the Altnet provider price hikes their FTTP package, I don't see a return to FTTC ever again.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

No 2G is NOT going but the capacity on it is tiny as the bulk of the spectrum has been moved to 4G. It is used for various M2M (machine to machine) communications including some smart meters. I understand the long term plan is for smart meters to use the DCC network and stop using mobile phones.
(You may be confusing with the USA, whom HAVE turned off 2G, but their 2G and 3G was not the same as ours, only with 4G did we all use LTE).

All smet 2 meters will use the DCC system and smet 1 will be converted at some point, but that as far as i know don't make any difference to what is used to send the signal, DCC is a company set up by one of the worse companies ever, Capita, makes me wonder what Capita have over the government, since they seemed to be picked for a lot.
one reason why I will not have smart meters and refused them when the energy company I am with wanted to fit them with the excuse that my gas meter was old and needed replacing, in the end they replaced the gas meter with another normal gas meter, funny that it is older than the one it replaced.

5G is about capacity, and with more capacity comes the ability to do more. It is going to be a lot slower rollout than 4G was. (4G is 9 years old in the UK this year).

Most people will have no use for 5G to be honest, just another bit of technology that they will use to up the price of services. you can get 5G now, we will put the price of the service up per month.
I don't think the provider i am with do 5G, not that my phone is capable of it anyway,

assuming BT is the FTTP option which for OP doesn't sound it.

it will be interesting to see what happens in the first big power outage post loss of PSTN

In reply to a post by 69bertie:

It really does depend on the provider for FTTP. Some seem to have jacked the price up. Mine costs me £39 a month for 500/500 (I get usually around 470/470Mb/s). And it is very reliable and blazingly fast as long as the server I'm dealing with is also fast. GB's of downloads are no longer a problem. The reason I went for the higher connection speed is we, as a family, do cane the
connection.

I have been reading some reviews of Zzoomm and they have already put the price up in the first place they set up, that don't sound good.
It is only me here for the most part and i don't really tax the network, I watch some videos, browse, play some music and that is about it, 4K video works fine.
I can understand you wanting a faster speed with a family

But I could get 120/120Mb/s unlimited for £19 a month. That is vastly different to the OR product (FTTC) which was around £32 a month for 80/20 (I use to get 76/20Mb). Admittedly the above doesn't include a phone line but then I stopped using the landline many years ago. My mobile contract (£7.80/month) is far superior in many ways. i.e. more convenient, more controllable and unlimited call/sms at any time of the day, plus it has data included.

£19 a month? That is good, Zzoomm is £29 a month for 100/10, no phone line with Zzoom either, they do have a VOIP service, but I have one anyway as I had to set one up when I went for Wireless broadband a few years ago. I use sipgate, but to be honest, I don't get many calls on it these days, the only one who do is my brother, the NHS and Work.
My mobile contract is only £7 or less if I don't use all the data, and like yours have unlimited calls and text.

One thing I have noticed is that as the speeds go up, one tends to use it more and more, simply because it is there.

Maybe use more services with it that requires the extra bandwidth, not so many years ago any video we streamed with broadband was standard definition, then we went to HD as speeds got better and now 4K.

Yes, switching to my new ISP was a leap into the unknown (I kept the original FTTC alive for one month afterwards - just in case) but 6 months on, looking back it was a bit of a no brainer really. And judging by how many times I see other people around these parts getting the fibre installed, it's a case of 'me too!' OR must be kicking themselves.

some people get it because they think they need it, then they may have it installed and think why did I do that. If it is cheap then fine, but going for fibre could be more costly for me, depending on what Plusnet offers me at the end of the contract and the other thing is, my contract for plusnet ends a couple of months or so before fibre gets here. So do I just carry on at a higher price on plusnet for a few months until I can get fibre installed, or do I just go for another 18-month contract with plusnet and get fibre when that is done?
Zzoom will find that a lot of people will still be in contract, and it may take a while before they get a few customers. i think using zzoomm as a name is stupid, went out for a couple of drinks with some friends this afternoon, started talking about zzoomm and one of them thought we were talking about the video conferencing zoom.

We will see what happens I suppose.

atypical - you mean like in Samsung Notes or when some company starts shipping cheap poorly designed UPS?

In reply to a post by BLaZiNgSPEED:

Generally speaking FTTP is far superior to FTTC.

FTTP doesn't have any copper, so there will be zero interference's and risk of connection drop outs. Usually FTTP is symmetrical on many Altnet FTTP providers.

But in the case of Openreach and a few others, 1Gbps upload isn't supported due to lack of XGS-PON. But even then, it's still better than native FTTC as you can select higher speeds than the 80 Mbps limit on FTTC.

Problem with FTTC is most people don't get 80Mbps max due to line length of the copper to street cabinet. Some get only half of the speeds plus also crosstalk is a serious factor to consider. If there are many customers up-taking the FTTC package, then people may no longer get the higher speeds and those speeds are at risk of dropping.

Like for example when I first joined FTTC last year February 2020 I was getting 6dB SNR for 80Mbps and 15dB SNR for 20Mbps upload.

Over the months the SNR slowly dropped as more customers have switched from ADSL formerly EO Line to FTTC. I am now syncing for the same speeds at 3dB for 80Mbps and 7dB for 20Mbps upload. There are some months when connection dropped to 77.6Mbps before climbing back up to 80Mbps. This is the reality with FTTC. Now my only hope will be when part of the customers migrate to FTTP to relief the crosstalk, only then I am guaranteed to get stable 80Mbps sync. Anyway, I will get Community Fibre FTTP by December.

As soon as my contract is over, I will switch to Community Fibre, It is a no brainer.

Also don't forget about the DLM - Dynamic Line Management! On FTTC you have to wait 10 days or so and every day you will experience a connection drop out at 2am approximately before line stabilizes.

If there are power cuts or accidental disconnections to the telephone wiring then DLM will drop your connection. Intermittent router reboots will also trigger DLM to drop your connection. Then you have to wait for days before DLM returns your speeds back up when it interprets your connection as stable again.

This is a headache that you won't have to face with FTTP.

But of-course having said that if the FTTP packages are far more expensive like in the case of rural areas, then FTTC may be a better option. But FTTP in urban London like CommunityFibre, Hyperoptic, G.Network offer packages that are cheaper than Openreach FTTC! Unless the Altnet provider price hikes their FTTP package, I don't see a return to FTTC ever again.

Technology wise FTTP is superior to FTTC, but that don't mean it is right for everyone, by all accounts there is no ten day for DLM on FTTC, that is a myth and I proved that myself a few weeks ago when my router went on and off a few times due to power problems, the sync speed was low for a while, but it was back up to normal by the evening.

The only fibre network we have here, or that I will be able to get and most of the city is Zzoomm,, no other here, soi we have to pay their prices and no competition.
at the end of the day, for me price is the thing, if having fibre and 100Mb/s speed is going to make a great difference in my life then yes I would pay the extra, but I really don't think it will, reliability is fine here, as long as we don't get power cuts, that turn the router on and off 5 or more times in under a hour . That don't normally happen to be honest.

We will wait and see, I just wondered if FTTP was a better service, which it is, but what I should have put is would it be better for me?

Well in my case, when I migrated from Plusnet ADSL to TalkTalk FTTC the first 10 days my router was disconnecting for 1-2 minutes at 2am approximately before finally stabilizing after 10 days of it happening every time at 2-5am.

I know that 10 days is no big deal for the first 10 days of signing up to a new ISP. But it is something that can take away the peace of mind. Maybe you're lucky, you didn't experience it. Those first 10 days at those hours I had to avoid playing online games, particularly online chess.

But I also noticed a few months ago when my mum was cleaning the floor of the room. She accidentally pulled the broadband cable from the master socket and immediately upon reconnecting the speed went down to 77Mbps. It took 2 months for it to go back up to 80Mbps.

It is a frustration that will be 100% avoided with FTTP.

In your particular case you are right, FTTC is indeed a better choice. Zzoomm are taking emotional advantage of customers of rural and subrural areas by hiking up their prices knowing that often rural areas have poor broadband. Bit like what Gigaclear are doing charging £79 a month for a gig, which is not reasonable at all. They dropped the price to £49 recently. But at the end of contract it shoots up to £79 and £64 for the 600Mbps. It is a complete rip-off, but they know customers are hopeless and they are taking emotional advantage of them.

Then compare that to Community Fibre London £20 a month for 150Mbps symmetrical, £27.50 for 400Mbps and £39 for 1Gbps symmetrical. You can see that immediately the choice is very obvious.

You are lucky you are getting 70Mbps on FTTC so you certainly may be less obliged to switch to FTTP.

Now if you look at BT FTTP 80/20Mbps costs £30.99, in this case FTTC is certainly a better choice as it is reliable enough to provide a service that is pretty much on par with entry level FTTP Openreach that isn't symmetrical and not priced reasonably. It entirely depends on circumstances. If FTTC can achieve decent speeds and the FTTP provider isn't reasonably priced, then FTTC is more than enough.

If FTTC is giving poor speeds like less than 50Mbps as the max estimates then FTTP may be better even if it costs more.

In reply to a post by Kenneth:

assuming BT is the FTTP option which for OP doesn't sound it.

Nope, no other option, other than ZZoomm and don't have that at the moment, just looking ahead.

Talk Talk, say no more

I used to think that FTTC had a 10 day thing, but I was otld by a few people and even some in this forum that the ten day thing don't exist. Here is a post in the plusnet communities saying how DLM work on FTTC, it is old, 2014, so things have improved even more so since then.
I also found while looking for that about open reach improving DLM in 2019, here. Maybe these changes are what sorted out my modem/router compatibility, or maybe Open reach took out the Huawei stuff from the cabinet

I have not seen this DLM problem anywhere that you speak of, well not on FTTC, ADSL yes.

I don't know if ZZoomm hiked up their prices, all I have seen was a review that said the prices was jacked up, this is from Google reviews.


CUSTOMER REVIEW BY CLAIRE H LEFT ON 18 JAN 2021

Cannot rate this service. It's awful. They jack up your fees in one month's time without consent and are so underhand, it's criminal. They messed up my house with their installation and didn't clear it up after I complained. Was the service faster, better? No, worse. BT was faster, yet I'm in the middle of Henley. After digging up road after road, this service could not be more rogue than anything else. It doesn't even deserve 1 star. Poor customer service too.

The majority of reviews have been good, but this service have only been available in one town until now, we will see what people in Hereford say about it, they are strange people here, I know I am one of them

Matthew Hare who is the CEO of zzoomm, was the opne who started up Gigaclear, so it does worry me if Zzoomm will do a Gigaclear and also if Matthew Hare will just sell up and do something else, I would hate to go onto Zzoomm and they sell to say Talk Talk.


I suppose we will wait and see, I have the answers I asked for, which is just reliability and speed, from the consumer point of view, I am not bothered if the technology of FTTP is better than FTTC, i just want a reliable broadband connection, at a speed that works for me and at a price that is not costing me the earth. at the moment, my plusnet FTTC connection is doing all of them, just wondered if changing to FTTP with all the hassle that will have would really be worth it.
Pricewise, I expect I could get a better price with plusnet, than with Zzoomm, reliability is fine, sometimes there is a bit of congestion, but not that often. Speed, do I really need 100Mb/s?

I don't know, something I thought would be easy to decide is ending up not so easy, still I have plenty of time, as long as Zzoomm don't bug me, they can post a leaflety in my door, that is fine, they can even come and knock on the door once, but no more than that.