An interesting philosophical debate. I have long held the deeply unfashionable view that that most people don't actually want it - they think they need it.

I'm often bemused by the posts from folk who are irritated to report that they contracted for 80mb/s but only get 63.5, or whatever. What on earth are they actually doing (apart from running speed checks)?

For my part, I'm irritated by the frequent press releases from BT about their release of a bright shiny new megazillion service (often reported here by TBB). As someone has already posted that's not going to be of interest to even 1% of users - although they're probably in London EC2. Say no more.

Surely there'd be more brownie points in serving the many, many who get desperately low speeds. But no profit, of course.

Edited by deleted (Wed 30-Mar-16 21:29:10)

Just because people aren't testing using the think broadband test doesn't mean no one has taken up the service. In a 1/2mile radius of my postcode there are about 5 sets of results. There are hundreds of houses in the capture area, this doesn't mean only a few people have broadband.

Also, most people will test on wireless. Even if you have 330mbps FTTP, you might only get 20meg throughput on an older wifi device.

People are buying the services otherwise the companies in question wouldn't bother offering them. Of course, FTTP services are going to typically have a much higher take up in rural areas than they would do in an area that is close to an exchange where people can get 20meg plus on ADSL2+.

What faster VM service are you refering to? The 300meg service? Or 200meg?

I agree, people THINK they need it but in reality, they do not. As I have shares in BT though, long may the "need" continue

I knew all along I couldn't be the only person that thinks this way. I often wonder what these "speed demons" as I call then feel you can not do with 40meg that you can with 50, 60, 80 or even 300meg (aside from download files a bit quicker)

They're obsessed with the needle on a speedometer without actually understanding what it means.

The only time I ever do a speedtest is if whatever I'm wanting to do isn't working, just to rule that out before I start looking at other possible causes.

Just because people aren't testing using the think broadband test doesn't mean no one has taken up the service.

Of course, we only have TB data to look at, and looking at the data, demand is not proven at all. Even of a 1/2 mile area only had 5 speedtests and that area was FTTP or LLU copper, you would expect a showing of ultrafast, I'm not seeing this at all in areas with far higher population and TB data.

People are buying the services otherwise the companies in question wouldn't bother offering them.

In FTTP areas. mass market providers like Sky and TalkTalk are not offering FTTP services. These guys really know their market. They are selling copper DSL services from their kit in the exchange, They have no desire to offer FTTP services. It's all about cheap and content.

If Sky and TalkTalk were feeling threatened by Virgin Ultrafast, they would be all over FTTP in available areas. I don't think they are feeling threatened by Virgin Ultrafast.

Edited by deleted (Wed 30-Mar-16 21:53:56)

I believe the reason they're not offering FTTP at the moment is due to the cost of training employees, the time it would take, the changing of systems etc versus the small percentage of the country that it's been deployed in. I'd be interested to know what the actual takeup of Openreach FTTP is. We know FTTC is around 20% but again, portions of that will be in areas where people can get 10meg plus on ADSL services.

In reply to a post by lee111s:

I believe the reason they're not offering FTTP at the moment is due to the cost of training employees, the time it would take, the changing of systems etc

Nah. What training does an employee need to order an FTTP service on Openreach's Equivalance Management Platform when they are are already ordering on that system for their LLU copper and FTTC services tens of thousands of times per day.

If Sky and TalkTalk were losing market share because of Virgin and BT Retail's ultra fast services, they would be all over it like a badly fitting set of overalls. They are not and so they are not. These guys know the market and they have the customer numbers, even in Virgin areas to prove it.

Edited by deleted (Wed 30-Mar-16 22:09:37)

It's more the technical support side I was referring to, plus all the system and marketing changes. It's just not worth it for the number of potential customers at the moment I think.

I think Sky are however teaming up with a fibre network in York? Or have I just made that up?

Plusnet, Zen, AAISP and BT all offer FTTP through Openreach, there must be profit it in otherwise they wouldn't offer it.

I dislike Sky and TalkTalk just because of their attitude towards the Openreach roll of out FTTP. They basically want all the expensive and tile consuming donkey work done by Openreach so they can flog it cheap and make money. They never complain that they can't utilise VM's network however.

It's 2016, things are moving very fast in technology, the future is happening right now. Gigabit should be the norm for a country like ours. We have AI making leaps and bounds, autonomous vehicles round the corner, VR, 4K, and I'm even able to play my maxed-out games from my powerful gaming PC on my relatively weak MacBook Pro within the home network, and you're saying I should be just fine with a paltry 18 Mbps upload? It just doesn't seem like forward thinking to me.

I should be able to back up and retrieve all my files regardless of the size in one or two seconds. Not only that, I should be able to play games from my gaming PC in other places without a problem. Sadly though, it comes down to one thing for the telecom businesses... What they get out of it and it just isn't worth it right now.

I'm not saying most people will make use of gigabit, but it will make a difference to our lives, the way we use technology and the economy.


-----------------------
Relevant little rant:

I'm in my early twenties and when I was fifteen (not that long ago) it wasn't common for one to know anything about programming, but that has changed and I'm now seeing a lot of fifteen year olds that are starting to program. This is because education's constantly getting better and more easily accessible which means there's likely going to be a higher creative type/consumer type ratio compared to now in the not-too-distant future, which could really benefit from better technological infrastructure.

Edited by deleted (Thu 31-Mar-16 00:01:27)

In reply to a post by djfunkdup:

In reply to a post by lee111s:

I said majority, not all. Don't forget, there are LOTS of people who simply want to watch iPlayer, do a bit of browsing, send a few emails. Typically the likes of people on this forum are not those. We are the very small minority

You could be right Mr Lee btw that was and still is one of my fav late 80z/early 90z dj/producers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUsztunGKvc


i still think you might be surprised though how little 20Mb is in bandwidth in the year 2016. some netflix,online gaming and the kid/kids wanting to use youtube etc .. saturation to say the least lol

Due to a fault I was running at 20Mb downstream for a while. It rarely saturated.

There are 2 teens and 3 adults using this connection. One of the adults works from home 5 days a week, another is currently at home all the time due to recuperation from an operation. The other has Now TV. The two kids are You Tube addicts with one of them frequently gaming.

Usage in the past week.
Last 24 hours.
Last 48 hours.

Edited by deleted (Thu 31-Mar-16 00:25:00)

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

In reply to a post by djfunkdup:

In reply to a post by lee111s:

I said majority, not all. Don't forget, there are LOTS of people who simply want to watch iPlayer, do a bit of browsing, send a few emails. Typically the likes of people on this forum are not those. We are the very small minority

You could be right Mr Lee btw that was and still is one of my fav late 80z/early 90z dj/producers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUsztunGKvc


i still think you might be surprised though how little 20Mb is in bandwidth in the year 2016. some netflix,online gaming and the kid/kids wanting to use youtube etc .. saturation to say the least lol

Due to a fault I was running at 20Mb downstream for a while. It rarely saturated.

There are 2 teens and 3 adults using this connection. One of the adults works from home 5 days a week, another is currently at home all the time due to recuperation from an operation. The other has Now TV. The two kids are You Tube addicts with one of them frequently gaming.

Usage in the past week.
Last 24 hours.
Last 48 hours.

Ok then lets say the bandwidth getting used in your home is average for a family home situation .. .. we will agree on that for the time being ..

Now i would say that you are a pretty level headed guy and the facts you state above are indeed correct..


Now lets go to the question that you first asked,the one thats up for debate here in this thread

Subject: Re: Has the Openreach / Virgin speed gap ever been wider?


Why on earth would these two companies in question spend tens of millions of pounds updating older networks and installing new networks investing in superfast broadband if it is not required ?


The question you raised is indeed an interesting one but the way you replied to me suggests that superfast broadband is not required in the uk ?