In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

List Updated in Line with Latest BT information .

Can you post a link to the source please?

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

List Updated in Line with Latest BT information .

Can you post a link to the source please?

It will be easer to find a picture of pigs flying in formation!

It may be easier to report the post...

actually I think its rural areas that were first.

early rollout was the likes of cornwall, sheringham, rothley and various other village and small town areas.

Now its hitting areas like leics,. derby, nottingham, manchester and outlying suburbs.

This rollout has followed unusual patterns where a big chunk of early enabled areas were not inner cities.

The first 4 exchange areas in leics were villages done 2 years before the first urban exchange in leics.

In reply to a post by WWWombat:

The *only* way it is useful is that it acts as a marker in a marketing sense - it is one of the few ways that the average Joe Public can relate to the telecoms infrastructure (ie the exchange name).

It doesn't help us understand how the project is doing in the grand scheme of things - which is about what number of lines could now choose to order SFBB if they wanted to. For this we want a single number (the number of properties passed) or, at a pinch, the number of cabinets converted.

However, you make the same mistake as Bob_s2 except, where Bob uses the number of exchanges in AO as his indicator, you use the number of delayed cabinets to pick fault with.

But i feel that the number of cabs on each exchange that is listed as AO should be highlighted within the public domain ,not only exchange level,

You see it as me finding fault with, Where as i see it as it would show a more accurate account of what they are actually achieving Instead of this charade every 3mths of which exchanges are AO That IMO can serve to distort what is really doing on It would be interesting to have data of how many cabs on each exchange are still not AO 3-6mths after the exchanges where AO, Maybe if they did that i wouldn't have an issue with it

tommy I think that would serve no real purpose.

I would agree with you if order checkers gave misleading answers eg. they said exchange is enabled but on order may be rejected if cabinet not. But checkers do check on the cabinet level meaning people can know fairly easily if they enabled or not.

Whether a exchange has 5% or 100% enabled doesnt really serve any useful purpose as available information to the average consumer.

The target for rollout is not a % of exchanges or % of cabinets its % of homes.

Thats a pretty daft comment. THe only thing that is really usefull to the consumer is if they can get FTTC and if not an estimate of when they can get it. The number of home past may be of general interest but thats all.

At present it is pretty much a black art for consumers to find out that information and many checkers are incaurate as well

It really needs one central source of information where a consumer can look up the information

Interestigle the government is trying to get the energy companies to simplify their information but that is knowhere near the mess that FTTC information is

whats inaccurate?

how often does someone get a cabinet checker state they can get FTTC and they cant or vice versa?

How would a % of cabinets passed on a exchange checker help this?

Was no black art for me, the BTw checker combined with the nga email address gave me the info I needed.

Edited by Chrysalis (Sat 22-Dec-12 15:34:24)

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

tommy I think that would serve no real purpose.

I would agree with you if order checkers gave misleading answers eg. they said exchange is enabled but on order may be rejected if cabinet not. But checkers do check on the cabinet level meaning people can know fairly easily if they enabled or not.

Whether a exchange has 5% or 100% enabled doesnt really serve any useful purpose as available information to the average consumer.

The target for rollout is not a % of exchanges or % of cabinets its % of homes.

Well one of the checkers frequenlty seems to display inacurate or no real info @ Cab level this one, For several cabs served by the same exchange it gives generic info, which is inaccurate in part, Also the BT adsl checker gives or has given some questionable results ,so is far from perfect ,

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

Can you post a link to the source please?

I think asking for that is the best way of not getting a reply from him,