In reply to a post by keith969:

OK, thanks. I was under the impression that VDSL2 used not only the ADSL2 frequencies but higher ones also, the Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Very-high-bit-rate_dig... is a bit ambigous. It claims that VDSL2 performance drops to ADSL2+ at 1.6km but I guess a lot depends on the condition of the line.

VDSL2, when unhampered, drops down to work like ADSL2+ at somewhere around 1.6-2km.

However, VDSL2 as deployed in the UK is *not* unhampered.

Unfortunately, to make cabinet-based VDSL2 compatible with exchange-based ADSL, the VDSL2 has limitations placed upon it. These limitations reduce the power of VDSL2 frequencies that overlap the ADSL2+ frequencies.

For short-range subscribers, the effect can be enough to knock 10Mbps off the top-speed that perfect VDSL2 could achieve theoretically.

The net result for long-range VDSL2 is that, even from a cabinet closer than the exchange, it cannot work much better than ADSL2+ from the exchange, if at all.

In practice, though, it seems to be upstream that gives up first at long-range. I haven't figured out exactly why, but it wouldn't surprise me if power came into it again; certainly there are power reduction schemes at play there too.

Thanks, I did not know about that 'hampered' stuff ( and don't know what that means anyhow) . It may explain why I don't get the speeds I was hoping for. Indeed upstream speed is not as good as the BT Wholesale test predicts. Downstream is within the predicted range.

In reply to a post by Bladesman:

Just seems unfair that certain people seem stuck due to circumstance outside their control - no other service industry would get away with it.

In what sense? Services are always provided on a 'best efforts' basis. The law has never applied a 'fitness for purpose' test to them. You pay a company (BT/<insert ISP name here>) to get you the fastest network connection they can.

As long as they don't overcharge and are open about the limitations of the service and aren't incompetent the jobs a good 'un.

So legally there's no problem. Now if you mean 'because some other competitor would do the job' then..well yes. It's true that in a lot of cases an openreach line is the only choice you have. But..well..that's the real world. It isn't practical for anyone to go around upgrading individual telephone lines and it's clearly not easy to upgrade them en-mass either.

So unfortunately you're just stuck and no-one is to blame other than the laws of physics and/or God.

Edited by Andrue (Wed 09-Sep-15 16:46:02)

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

Just seems unfair that certain people seem stuck due to circumstance outside their control

Outside their control ??? Were you forced to live at that address ???

Are you seriously suggesting people should move home to get a better connection?? wow.

OK fair enough, there are people in the UK that are struggling even to get basic services, nevermind just a net connection, however, this has now been covered and is way off topic, so lets leave that there.

Of course there are people in a way worse situation than me, but that is not an argument to not push for better. BDUK is tax payer funded, as a tax payer I have every right to question it. All I am asking for is transparency and more of a push for equality. Getting info out of BTOR or BDUK is like getting blood from a stone. I also think more should be done for those who struggle to get a good connection when it seems the focus is more on upgrading those who are already getting a pretty good service. You can be sure as hell that when newer tech rolls out, it will be to those who already get a great FTTC connection rather than those stuck on long EO lines or other such like complications. I dont think BTOR having a monopoly on this helps the situation whatsoever

In reply to a post by Andrue:

In reply to a post by Bladesman:

Just seems unfair that certain people seem stuck due to circumstance outside their control - no other service industry would get away with it.

In what sense? Services are always provided on a 'best efforts' basis. The law has never applied a 'fitness for purpose' test to them. You pay a company (BT/<insert ISP name here>) to get you the fastest network connection they can.

As long as they don't overcharge and are open about the limitations of the service and aren't incompetent the jobs a good 'un.

So legally there's no problem. Now if you mean 'because some other competitor would do the job' then..well yes. It's true that in a lot of cases an openreach line is the only choice you have. But..well..that's the real world. It isn't practical for anyone to go around upgrading individual telephone lines and it's clearly not easy to upgrade them en-mass either.

So unfortunately you're just stuck and no-one is to blame other than the laws of physics and/or God.

In the sense that you wouldn't pay the same price as your neighbour to receive half as many tv stations or half the quantity of gas. Anyway, I am really not trying to blame anyone here, I merely raised the thread, to see if anyone could help me with my connection. BT and Sky both gave me an estimate of 14-20 on my line, 11 is obviously a bit under that.

TV Stations bad example, as you don't pay less for the TV Licence if you don't get all the FreeView channels.

Estimates could be better, and a wave of changes are due in the autumn that may improve them, but with any xDSL based service until its live you can never be sure of what you might get.

In reply to a post by Bladesman:

OK fair enough, there are people in the UK that are struggling even to get basic services, nevermind just a net connection, however, this has now been covered and is way off topic, so lets leave that there.

Of course there are people in a way worse situation than me, but that is not an argument to not push for better. BDUK is tax payer funded, as a tax payer I have every right to question it. All I am asking for is transparency and more of a push for equality. Getting info out of BTOR or BDUK is like getting blood from a stone. I also think more should be done for those who struggle to get a good connection when it seems the focus is more on upgrading those who are already getting a pretty good service. You can be sure as hell that when newer tech rolls out, it will be to those who already get a great FTTC connection rather than those stuck on long EO lines or other such like complications. I dont think BTOR having a monopoly on this helps the situation whatsoever

Agree with all of that. Headline mega speeds may be good for the industry press offices but do nothing for those who still get dial up speeds.

Internet connection is essential these days even if you only want to tax your car or file a tax return. Those who suggest it is an option and if we live in a certain locality we should either put up with it or move should think on that the universal 6 day mail delivery is another service hanging by a thread. Many areas, internet and mail, will never be profitable or even pay their way. They need cross funding from the street that makes money hand over fist

This applies in the wealthy south east just as much as in NW Scotland

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

TV Stations bad example, as you don't pay less for the TV Licence if you don't get all the FreeView channels.

Estimates could be better, and a wave of changes are due in the autumn that may improve them, but with any xDSL based service until its live you can never be sure of what you might get.

I more meant subscriber TV such as Sky.

Can anyone confirm what was the point in moving the EO lines to cabinet 27 if its too far away for any benefit whatsoever?

In reply to a post by 961a:

Agree with all of that. Headline mega speeds may be good for the industry press offices but do nothing for those who still get dial up speeds.

Internet connection is essential these days even if you only want to tax your car or file a tax return. Those who suggest it is an option and if we live in a certain locality we should either put up with it or move should think on that the universal 6 day mail delivery is another service hanging by a thread. Many areas, internet and mail, will never be profitable or even pay their way. They need cross funding from the street that makes money hand over fist

This applies in the wealthy south east just as much as in NW Scotland

Best post on this thread and fully agree. Coincidence that BT's profits happen to go up a substantial amount each year? I think not

Edited by deleted (Wed 09-Sep-15 18:05:24)