In reply to a post by JNeuhoff:

BT have done more than any other telecoms country in the UK (and maybe the world) to bring broadband to everyone

Depends on how you define 'broadband'. BT has wasted many years and money investing in yesterday's technology for tomorrow's needs based upon a last-mile copper-lines infrastructue inherited by them. BT didn't dig up roads on a large scale to replace the last-mile copper lines, unlike what the cable campanies did some years ago. The least BT should do in the interim is to offer far more affordable leased line solutions so that at least business customers can enjoyhalf-decent telecom services.

Margaret Thatcher stopped BT from rolling out a fibre service back in the 1970's to stop it competing with the newly established cable companies AFAIK.

Didn't BT want to install FTTP but Mrs. Tharcher wouldn't let them?

In reply to a post by CARPETBURN:

In reply to a post by JNeuhoff:

We are talking here about BT who do way too little too late. To quote from their own document:

The speed of rollout of Fibre to the Cabinet (40% of UK homes
and businesses should have access by 2012) is due to the fact that
there�s no need to replace the copper pairs running from customer
premises to Openreach street cabinets.

Don't expect any normal FTTP telecom services anytime soon to arrive in the UK, certainly not from BT, they don't have a longterm vision nor business sense as regards desperately needed telecom services here. FTTP is something for a longterm investment strategy, not something for BT who is mainly interested in pleasing its short term shareholder's interests, rather than doing a genuine infrastructure development.

Good point their spiel which states "attractive proposition for the widest possible customer base" was enough to make me laugh....... "Widest possible", translated from BT spiel that equals the areas we can be bothered with and if you are living up a mountain even though its "possible" to supply you, you can forget it.

I thought you were the one who was not interested in subsidising people in remote areas? What else can 'widest possible' mean?

In reply to a post by CurlyWhirly:

In reply to a post by JNeuhoff:

BT have done more than any other telecoms country in the UK (and maybe the world) to bring broadband to everyone

Depends on how you define 'broadband'. BT has wasted many years and money investing in yesterday's technology for tomorrow's needs based upon a last-mile copper-lines infrastructue inherited by them. BT didn't dig up roads on a large scale to replace the last-mile copper lines, unlike what the cable campanies did some years ago. The least BT should do in the interim is to offer far more affordable leased line solutions so that at least business customers can enjoyhalf-decent telecom services.

Margaret Thatcher stopped BT from rolling out a fibre service back in the 1970's to stop it competing with the newly established cable companies AFAIK.

Yup. BT said they'd only do it if they were granted a broadcasting license. Thatcher refused to allow that.

In reply to a post by Andrue:

In reply to a post by CARPETBURN:

In reply to a post by JNeuhoff:

We are talking here about BT who do way too little too late. To quote from their own document:

... nested quotes trimmed ...

Don't expect any normal FTTP telecom services anytime soon to arrive in the UK, certainly not from BT, they don't have a longterm vision nor business sense as regards desperately needed telecom services here. FTTP is something for a longterm investment strategy, not something for BT who is mainly interested in pleasing its short term shareholder's interests, rather than doing a genuine infrastructure development.

Good point their spiel which states "attractive proposition for the widest possible customer base" was enough to make me laugh....... "Widest possible", translated from BT spiel that equals the areas we can be bothered with and if you are living up a mountain even though its "possible" to supply you, you can forget it.

True - OTOH even you ought to be prepared to admit that BT have done more than any other telecoms country in the UK (and maybe the world) to bring broadband to everyone. Some people have pretty crappy speeds, it's true, but there's not many people who are forced to use a modem.

What they have done in the past hardly matters this is about the future and once again their complete and utter nonsense wording.
Widest possible ...... LOL my sides

In reply to a post by somerset:

Didn't BT want to install FTTP but Mrs. Tharcher wouldn't let them?

Yep and their excuse for the past 20+ years is what exactly?

In reply to a post by somerset:

In reply to a post by CARPETBURN:

In reply to a post by JNeuhoff:

We are talking here about BT who do way too little too late. To quote from their own document:

... nested quotes trimmed ...

Don't expect any normal FTTP telecom services anytime soon to arrive in the UK, certainly not from BT, they don't have a longterm vision nor business sense as regards desperately needed telecom services here. FTTP is something for a longterm investment strategy, not something for BT who is mainly interested in pleasing its short term shareholder's interests, rather than doing a genuine infrastructure development.

Good point their spiel which states "attractive proposition for the widest possible customer base" was enough to make me laugh....... "Widest possible", translated from BT spiel that equals the areas we can be bothered with and if you are living up a mountain even though its "possible" to supply you, you can forget it.

I thought you were the one who was not interested in subsidising people in remote areas? What else can 'widest possible' mean?

Im not interested, in subbing them......... Oh and hardly my fault BT wants to hoe the profits from inner cities and not provide to those in rural locations.

If i had 20 billion laying about and gave it to BT they would still do inner city and towns first, and some people (especially rural) would still get lousy speeds, or even worse no service at all......... Ill sub them when they stop talking gibberish and actually come through on their wild promises.

In reply to a post by CARPETBURN:

Yep and their excuse for the past 20+ years is what exactly?

Perhaps this. For a while now BT has been looking like a pension fund with a communications network attached.

If you want to know why they want/need a subsidy, it's all there. Wonderful thing privatisation wasn't it? The fat cats got the profits, the rest of us now have to pick up the liabilities when it's all gone pear shaped.

So instead of moaning about BT all the time what's your solution?

Edited by deleted (Mon 14-Sep-09 17:09:22)

BT have chosen to rollout nationwide however I dont think they saints for doing it.

They did it full well knowing that.

(a) they have a monopoly in various areas
(b) the local loop infrastructure was in place and only backhauls needed to be built.