What is next

We have 40M FTTC and now this is moving to 80M. The cable companies are selling 100M download. What is happeing next?

FTTP is next. I think they can go a bit further than 80Mbps on VDSL, but nothing as far as 330Mbps.

Of course, it is unlikely FTTP will be able to make it into every single property in the country, so for some, it may not even be a "next" option.

.... Also the plans to offer a 300 Mbps FTTP product in 2012 has been announced before, the bits that are newer are an interest by BT in vectoring to take VDSL2 to speeds above 100 Mbps and the 1 Gbps field trial for FTTP.

Of course, it is unlikely FTTP will be able to make it into every single property in the country, so for some, it may not even be a "next" option.

Some of us are still having to put up with 20CN exchanges and will probably not see any change in the near future unless BT get paid to upgrade/improve them

Wireless electricity-powered cars.

You never know.

In reply to a post by camieabz:

Wireless electricity-powered cars.

You never know.

Auto-guided by strips under the road surface, which will be made from collected nail-clippings and pulverised human hair.

Well BT wholesale is going up to 90% of exchanges for 21CN, last 10% will be spread across the country though if BT do win the majority of the BDUK funds could see the smallest exchanges have their cabinets enable for FTTC etc.

Edited by deleted (Sun 29-Apr-12 00:20:51)

In reply to a post by camieabz:

Wireless electricity-powered cars.

You never know.

A Google sponsored team says that it will have driverless point to point delivery trucks on our motorways within five years.

Who's going to unload and protect it from theft?

Cheaper to have a driver.

In reply to a post by Deadbeat:

A Google sponsored team says that it will have driverless point to point delivery trucks on our motorways within five years.

Isn't getting stuff from Google quicker using the internet than in a truck?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car
http://www.roadsafetygb.org.uk/news/541.html
There is much more info out there. I've seen a paper somewhere involving Google, truck companies, Tesco (Or one of the major supermarkets) and logistics outfits that state that 2017 will see the first point to point driverless artics on UK motorways. Foresight, a government sponsored organisation is pressing for changes in the law to allow "autonomy".
Loading/unloading will also be fully automated. Amazon's Swansea plant is supposedly already geared up for this.

Edited to correct typos

Edited by Deadbeat (Sun 29-Apr-12 10:27:11)

Well I hope the Google geniuses know we drive on the left hand side of the road when they write the software !!

Edited by deleted (Sun 29-Apr-12 08:49:07)

FTTP on Demand http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/5016-fttp-on-dema...

In 2013, if you can get FTTC you will have the option to pay for the install and get full fibre, might cost you £1000 or more though.

FTTC VDSL2 will get Vectoring in a few years, giving speeds of over 100 Mbps for some, and boosting those down at the 30 to 40 Meg by perhaps 20 to 50%.

Give it 20 years then full fibre will become more common, for now the cost to install is whats holding it back.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

In 2013, if you can get FTTC you will have the option to pay for the install and get full fibre, might cost you £1000 or more though.

I don't know whether I would be willing to pay that but if the cost was spread out over a time frame (as the article says) then I might consider it.

Don't suppose you have heard anything about when wider trials might be starting ?

If you mean FTTP on demand, no sorry.

how fast do most people really need?
i got 4megabits, sure I would not mind a bit more speed, but I have no need for 20,30, 40 or more megabits to be honest.,

I think some people just think they need the extra speed.
FTTP no doubt will come to more people, but I think it will take time.

Generally I get 6.5 Meg, and am hoping I'll get 12-13 Meg with ADSL2+

In my mind I won't need any more, as most of my usage is burst, rather than maxing out the pipe. Occasionally if there's a Beeb or YouTube stream my connection copes fine, even with 1080p on the latter site.

I'd be at a loss to need more than 20 Meg down and 5 Meg up, even if I downloaded more often. Rock solid connection with very low pings would be my priority.

Folk forget about site upload speeds, contention and FUPs when thinking about FTTx.

I should add that I believe that the powers should be aiming for 4 Meg / 1 Meg as a minimum for all users though. The modern web requirements means that suppliers need to have new minimum standards and definitions for broadband.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

how fast do most people really need?
i got 4megabits, sure I would not mind a bit more speed, but I have no need for 20,30, 40 or more megabits to be honest.,

I think some people just think they need the extra speed.
FTTP no doubt will come to more people, but I think it will take time.

I agree. I was happy with 12Mb/s most of the time. I went for 40/10 because the cabinet was there and it wasn't much more money - plus the upload increase is nice. I'm about to go to 80/20 but only because the upgrade is free. Even with a family I think I'd be hard pressed to find a genuine need for anything more than 40Mb/s.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

how fast do most people really need?
i got 4megabits, sure I would not mind a bit more speed, but I have no need for 20,30, 40 or more megabits to be honest.,

I think some people just think they need the extra speed.
FTTP no doubt will come to more people, but I think it will take time.

We went from 3mb to 26mb on FTTC and we do use it. We have 3 kids and at times between ipods, ipads, computers, iplayer blah, blah I have found up to 20 devices on the network. On 3mb if one person downloads anything it kills the network, with 26mb rarely does anyone get an issue. Speed matters.

In reply to a post by doleawg:

We went from 3mb to 26mb on FTTC and we do use it. We have 3 kids and at times between ipods, ipads, computers, iplayer blah, blah I have found up to 20 devices on the network. On 3mb if one person downloads anything it kills the network, with 26mb rarely does anyone get an issue. Speed matters.

20 devices at once? even with 5 people in the family I can't there being 20 devices using data all at once, they may be connected, but that is a different thing.


I can understand needing more speed if you have a family, but i still think some people think they need the extra speed or just like to boast that they got the extra speed.

6-8 megabits would be idea for me, enough to use netflix ar a better quality, but i will not have that choice, I either have to stay as I am or sign up eventually when fibre is here for a higher priced service with more speed than I really need.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

20 devices at once? even with 5 people in the family I can't there being 20 devices using data all at once, they may be connected, but that is a different thing.

I suppose it depends on the family but I can see that anyone over the age of 12 might have their own smartphone and laptop. For a family of four that's eight devices. Then there's the TV for the parents and one each for the kids. That's another three devices.

Hmmm.

Yeah 20 sounds unlikely unless it's a large family. But I can see all devices hitting the net at once. I often surf while watching TV so that's potentially two machines hitting the net at once (not for me because I watch Sky but in some households IPTV reigns). Smartphones might happen to be doing something at the same time although usually that's going to be temporary and low bandwidth.

I think I'd assume 10Mb/s per person over the age of 12 (or whatever age is assumed old enough to be more or less let loose these days). To me that's plenty for everyone and you could probably get away with half that most of the time.

Edited by Andrue (Tue 01-May-12 10:22:54)

In reply to a post by Andrue:

I suppose it depends on the family but I can see that anyone over the age of 12 might have their own smartphone and laptop. For a family of four that's eight devices.

I assume you don't have kids? Iphones, ipods, ipdads, 3DS's, Wii's, BB's, iPlayer, external media hard drives, Internet TV's, Skype, Facetime, laptops to name a few (if not all!) of the devices each kid will have.......

Its easy to have 20 devices connected and in the evening a lot are working. We have had families staying over taking devices to over 30.

Anyway thats not the point. My point was, prior to FTTC the max I could get was 3mb and it was terribly unstable. At 3mb you could not run multiple devices and allow video streaming, gaming, iplayer at the same time. We now get 26mb FTTC and it is brilliant and very importantly it is incredibly stable (touching wood).

I hear rumour the supplier of one of the FTTC lines to the house (ADSL24) will be offering 80mb FTTC soon. Bearing in mind we don;t get 40MB at the moment I will take a guess we might get 60mb. If the jump to this was free I might do it but do I need to pay for more bandwidth? Now thats the real question and I doubt I would.

The rise of the cloud storage services, will mean more people get lazy about LAN file copying, and copy material onto one of these services, to download it on another machine on the same connection a few seconds later.

What is the IP Profile shown by the BT speed tester? If you are only getting 26Mbps speed test results it is highly improbable 80/20 would give you any more than you get now.

It's like a 3Mbps ADSL Max doesn't give more on ADSL2+.

I personally need 10Mbps min

but 20-30 is great for downloading things quick

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

What is the IP Profile shown by the BT speed tester? If you are only getting 26Mbps speed test results it is highly improbable 80/20 would give you any more than you get now.

It's like a 3Mbps ADSL Max doesn't give more on ADSL2+.

Ah, just noticed a thread elsewhere here talking about 80mb trials which was the 1st I had heard of such a thing and that sparked my interest. Response to the effectiveness of the trial and increase in speeds is varied.

Yep OK the "just because I can" argument is stupid, but, I have to agree becoming harder to resist.

But my rational side says that as my modem reports I didn't get the compensating upstream tones in the higher frequencies on the move to the 17a profile (and the modem reports capping at the DSLAM of the upstream at 7.2Mbps - below my 10Mbps profile), and the reported attainable downstream rate is just above 40Mbps, it will be a physical impossibility to get any advantage from the (free) 80/20 upgrade although my profile is the full 38.71 (throughput 38Mbps) on the capped service. The "upgrade" just removes the cap and makes no other config changes. Right?

I wonder too if the drop off of tones reported by the modem at around 1200kHz from 12 to 1 (before recovering up again) is also evidence of a necessary power reduction at the cab which also hobbles my connection?

I'm assuming I'd have to wait for vectoring to sort things out and at, presumably, an increased cost as BT have got to start earning an ROI at some point, somehow.

Edited by deleted (Tue 01-May-12 14:00:12)