Per home but I think based on 4. If there were 16 port nodes then I suspect the cost would drop to only a few quid a month.

For £6.50 a month, if it was the difference between 2meg or 200meg, I'm sure most would see it worth it.

Alternatively, Openreach pay for the power, and charge an extra £6.50 a month for the rental. Eithrr way, you pay for the service and everything that goes with it.

You could always get some solar panels with some storage batteties to power your modem and reverse power unit

Edited by deleted (Wed 16-Aug-17 13:54:46)

So if G Fast has a limited range what's it for, who's it aimed at? Do BT think fibre punters like me will upgrade their speed? I'm more interested in the higher upload speed than the download TBH as I have a lot of large files to send to off-site backup.

(I'll look but I bet there's a handy chart with expected G Fast speed based on current FTTC delivery somewhere in Think Broadband?)

So if its just for speed what about all those who still don't have fibre or only have slow fibre connections. There's a street nearby which has just had a fibre cabinet installed on the pavement (not yet live). You'd think sticking a G Fast pod on the cabinet would have been a better idea. Or is it the case that G Fast wouldn't reach all the lines on the PCP as some may be too far away?

G.fast is all about getting to 10 million premises with access to an ultrafast broadband option as soon as possible.

G.fast is NOT about bringing faster broadband to those who have slow speeds now, why? Because people have lobbied for higher speeds and this is the response, a little like why does Virgin Media keep offering higher speeds on its network...

Politically getting the UK to an ultrafast footprint in line or better than other major economies is something politicians want.

Those that don't have fibre or slow fibre now, depends on where you live, and g.fast is paid for by Openreach money alone so they can deploy where they like. For those with no fibre, some inner city areas are due to be covered by the 2 million FTTP premises roll-out, and this may also cover some on cabinets where the g.fast has not reached. Then there are the BDUK projects still delivering and then there is the USO which is under discussion.

Or alternatively as in common in the UK we can all just sit and complain

It is a cheap upgrade for some.

It does not help many at all, but for some it will bring improvement to the current VDSL speed without FTTP work, which OR is currently very reluctant to do as no one is currently interested in funding it. It will allow them to compete with Virgin in many areas.

This will not help those who need a faster uplink it can offer. Nor does it help those who are far away from cabinets or on EO lines. It is just one technology to extend the life of the copper network without excessive investment.

Even if they started digging in fibre to every home now, it would be ten years before completion. Technologies like this will basically help bridging this gap.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Because people have lobbied for higher speeds and this is the response

So those on the very fast end of superfast are getting faster, while those on the slow end of superfast, or ADSL2+, or even slower are getting nowt?

Way to go UK...hide the slower areas' and slow-spots' problems by pushing the national average speeds up for those already on very fast lines.

As MrS says they are looking to get 10 million premises at ultrafast speeds using G.Fast. If that is "not many" then how many do you think they have to support to be worthwhile?

Did you miss this part of MrS's post?

For those with no fibre, some inner city areas are due to be covered by the 2 million FTTP premises roll-out, and this may also cover some on cabinets where the g.fast has not reached. Then there are the BDUK projects still delivering and then there is the USO which is under discussion.

This is a no win scenario - lots of people complain we are behind because we can't offer super fast speeds so BT look to do something about it. Then people complain that some can't get fast speeds (which BT have and are working on, some of which using government funding). No matter what BT do they cannot please everyone (unless of course there was an enormous pot of cash and human resources sitting around somewhere to do all the work).

You'll find those on left with ADSL are not economically viable hence Openreach are waiting for someone else to pay for it.

Anyone know if BDUK funded cabs are getting G-Fast - If so what makes them economically viable now?

In reply to a post by lee111s:

You could always get some solar panels with some storage batteties to power your modem and reverse power unit

I do have solar panels, but batteries are not economically viable, but that's a different topic.

I would guess it depends on takeup of VDSL and, number of properties close enough to the cab to benefit.

Openreach will likely have calculations for the various possibilities.

I would imagine though that they'll be just as eligible as a commercial FTTC cab if the meet the criteria.

Openreach aren't always right on what is and isn't a good commercial investments. A number of BDUK cabs have far surpassed expectations - my cab alone is a BDUK cab and all 128 ports were gone within 24 hours of them being made available.