General Discussion
  >> General Broadband Chatter


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.


Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | (show all)   Print Thread
Standard User robbieglover2k7
(experienced) Mon 13-Jan-20 15:14:16
Print Post

Is Broadband behind in the UK? (Speeds, phone lines etc)


[link to this post]
 
I thought you guys here would have a great insight and discussion on this as I've just had a conversation with Plusnet and we were talking about how 99% of the problems are due to line issues, breakages in the lines, noise interference, BT Openreach issue's etc. it's always the case unless it's Virgin Media who have their own way of delivering broadband to people's homes.

It's always felt dated to me how we still use phone lines to deliver our internet, I know for this to change it would be a huge job and a lot of money but to me it does feel like we're behind (reminds me of someone using Analogue for TV instead of Digital which we eventually switched to in 2012) however when speaking to the guy at Plusnet he mentioned this and said about how South Korea have an amazing internet which isn't the first time I've heard the UK are really dated in regards to the delivery of internet.

I've also heard that in the US their average internet speed is what we would pay additional or higher packages for and I'm not 100% sure how they have their internet delivered but I'm sure it's a much better, stronger and more reliable way than going through phone lines which does seem very old in regards to technology now for me.


So what do you guys think? Is the UK behind in regards to this and how do you feel internet and the way it's delivered could be improved, specially now we're in 2020.

I'd be interested to hear, as I say 99% of the problems with outages, cutting off, issue's etc. with any provider other than Virgin is due to phone line issue's.

Hope all is well for everyone smile

-------------------------------------

Edit: Just to add I was reading about BT Openreach doing something so that Sky could offer their new Ultra Fast connection they've just gone live with but it's only available to like 1% of the country or something due to BT delaying the work.

I'm not sure if you can link articles here so I'll just quote the text if anyone wants to have a read as I thought this was interesting.

Openreach Put the Brakes on Future UK G.fast Broadband Plans


Openreach (BT) has today informed ISPs that they are holding off giving any further guidance on future build plans for their hybrid fibre G.fast “ultrafast broadband” (100Mbps+) technology, which means that under the existing rollout they will only cover 2.73 million UK premises by March 2020.

The writing has been on the wall for awhile, not least since the last G.fast (ITU G.9700/9701) related rollout update was in November 2018 (here) and there have been no further updates (i.e. no new locations announced in 2019). The most recent coverage update confirmed that they had so far put the service within reach of 2,166,000 premises and the rollout pace was slowing (here).

Under the original plan Openreach had intended to push the 330Mbps capable G.fast service to reach 10 million UK premises by the end of 2020 (March 2021 financial), although pressure from competitors, Ofcom and the Government’s move to prioritise “full fibre” networks has combined to encourage a greater focus toward much more desirable Fibre-to-the-Premises (FTTP) lines.

In August 2018 this resulted in Openreach’s decision to revise down their G.fast rollout plan to just 5.7 million premises by March 2021 (here), while today’s decision means that no new locations are currently planned to be added to the build programme. As such they will continue to rollout until March 2020, when just 2.73m premises will have been covered.

Just to be clear, the G.fast rollout hasn’t yet stopped but any build plans beyond March 2020 are currently under review. A final decision on that review is expected to be communicated to ISPs by March 2020 but we’d be very surprised if that included a major expansion beyond the planned 2.73m premises (probably not to the previously expected 5.7m level).

As before the reason for all this stems from Openreach’s desire to focus on FTTP deployments and avoid overbuild, which is a positive. Lest we forget that last year’s move to scale-back the G.fast rollout was ultimately followed by the operator’s decision to raise their full fibre rollout to cover 4 million premises by March 2021 (up from 3m), including an ambition for 15 million by around 2025 (up from 10m) – here.

Admittedly we suspect that the mixed performance and limited take-up of the G.fast service itself, which only tends to be very good over shorter copper lines, probably hasn’t done much to help its future prospects. By comparison FTTP can easily handle multi-Gigabit or better speeds in the future and doesn’t suffer from the same reliability issues, plus take-up has been good.

The BT Group are currently in the process of restructuring and a lot of that focus has to do with raising money in order to fund their full fibre plans. Today’s predictable news very much plays into that effort.


There is an image also on the page which I can't share here but what do you guys think? (I don't know much about it so it's all a learning curve for me).

---------------------------------------------

Another interesting article too which you guys might find interesting smile

What is the UK’s broadband future?
On downtime alone, the cost is substantial – estimated at £11bn per year. We are moving into a new era where speed – in upload, download and latency (the delay that happens in data communication) – as well as reliability will determine Britain’s place in the future digital economy. But what is the UK’s broadband future?

But without a substantial shift – from short-term incremental improvement to long-term future-proof progress – the UK runs the risk of falling further behind while its burgeoning tech sector decamps elsewhere.

Britain’s telecommunications network and resulting broadband and connectivity woes did not appear overnight. They are the result of nearly two centuries of evolution and the compound distortion of decisions made long ago.

Starting in the 19th century under Benjamin Disraeli, one by one, all the mediums of communication were nationalised: the telegraph companies (1869), the radio spectrum (1904) and, in 1912, the Telephone Company.

Fast-forward to today and the greatest issue at stake for Britain is the 2015 Ofcom strategic review of digital communications, which will set the framework for the next 10 years.

So how does it all work, what are the connectivity chokepoints and how do we compare internationally?

(there's more in the article but I'll switch to here).

Rival technologies
There are many competing and complementary broadband and connectivity technologies available or soon to be ready.

Fibre to the premises (FTTP).
This is for now the highest-performing internet connection. By bringing a fibre cable into the home or office, symmetrical upload and download speeds become available at 1Gbit/s, with low latency rates. However, by comparison with other European countries, the penetration of FTTP in the UK is very low – 0.003%.

Satellite broadband.
Many Britons have been receiving data from satellites since the late 1980s. Satellite broadband runs on the same principle but with higher bandwidth and can serve remote, poorly connected locations at much lower cost, more quickly. All of today’s broadband satellites operate in geostationary orbit at a height of 22,000 miles, which creates longer latency – 250 microseconds or more. However, download speeds are improving. ViaSat3 from 2020 will offer 1Gbit/s and largely uncapped data. It is well established in the US, with 700,000 subscribers but only a few thousand in the UK.

Fibre to the cabinet (FTTC).
This brings fibre-optic cable between the cabinet (often a roadside box) and the exchange for a high-bit-rate digital subscriber line (VDSL). This is the superfast option being deployed across the UK by Openreach and can deliver speeds at up to 76Mbits/s depending on the distance to the cabinet.
Asymmetric digital subscriber lines and ADSL2+. In the UK, these are the standard broadband services and offer speeds from 0.5 to 24Mbits/s.

Aerial fibre.
To avoid the costs of digging trenches in pavements and to the premises, in some cases it may be possible to deliver FTTP wound around existing telegraph poles and lines.

Line-of-sight or fixed-wireless access.
Line-of-sight broadband connections essentially place a transmitting tower on top of a hill and relay either satellite or mobile wireless connections to anywhere that is within range and has line of sight of the connection.

Mobile wireless.
In the UK, Relish has led the way with this offering, using 3G and 4G signals only for data to deliver 50-60 and up to 700Mbits/s to a router in city centres or rural not-spots that are poorly served by broadband.

Mobile broadband – 3G, 4G, 5G.
The average download speed for mobile today is 6.1Mbits/s rising to 15.1 Mbits/s for 4G ; 5G promises to have a speed of at least 1Gbit/s and may be available from 2020.

A superfast future?
In December 2010, the government published Britain’s Superfast Broadband Future, with the aim of the UK having the best superfast broadband network in Europe by 2015. So did the government achieve that?

Based on data compiled by Analysys Mason, it appears that the UK achieved its aim of having the best network by 2015. But the wider picture is more complex and it does not mean that the UK could not have done better.

First of all, a national average of download speed would be a much more important measure, if the UK had an equal geographic distribution of population and economic activity.

However, it doesn’t. Very high bandwidth in remote corners of Britain will never have the same dynamic impact as in a concentrated bustling city centre. So it is concerning that London – Europe’s biggest city by economic output – has such a poor ranking compared to other European capitals, ranking 26th, just above Minsk.

What can we learn from abroad?
All countries are different and work with varying legacy telecoms structures, regulatory environments, players and standards of living. However, there are two successful examples that the UK should pay close attention to when considering future broadband growth and investment.

Lithuania
Lithuania has the third-fastest connections in Europe. This is no small achievement considering it has a GDP per head around a third of the UK’s and a fifth of the population density.

How can it do this? In 2004, Lithuania’s equivalent of Ofcom, RRT, mandated the compulsory sharing of all passive infrastructure “…suitable for construction of electronic communications networks”. To further incentivise network investment, RTT went for low-cost access to ducts and poles.

In Lithuania, the typical price per metre per month of duct access is £0.028 whereas in the UK it is £0.078. The bottom line is that competition and very low access costs gave Lithuania additional network investment and much faster broadband than would have happened if the incumbent’s privileges had been left in place.

New Zealand
Across the UK, many telecoms companies – apart from Virgin Media – have been calling for Ofcom to refer BT to the Competition and Markets Authority in order to split off BT Openreach as a separate company.

This has worked well in New Zealand. In 2011, overseen by the regulator and approved by shareholders, Telecom NZ was separated into two companies – Chorus and Telecom New Zealand, which became Spark New Zealand. Chorus, the Kiwi equivalent of Openreach, is responsible for the network infrastructure and Spark provides internet, mobile and fixed-line telephone services. Crucially, Chorus was spun-off, not sold off.

This meant that existing shareholders were able to see an increase in value and retain enough cash flow for future investments. New Zealand is racing ahead not just in delivering more fibre-network investment and subscriptions, but in a flourishing range of consumer choice in video on demand, ISPs and fixed-line services with a goal for FTTP to reach 75% coverage by 2020.

The road ahead
The UK finds itself at a crossroads. The demand for data, largely driven by video and hand-held devices, is growing fast, but the fixed-access network investment has been woefully behind the curve, especially in comparison to many other nations.

The lack of network infrastructure competition has been a huge hindrance. BT has done well to extend the life of the copper network, but Britain cannot be ready for the future with a mere 0.003% penetration level of FTTP. Incremental improvements with pre-existing assets based on short-term targets are no longer appropriate in a non-linear digital world.

Britain needs to have ambition, vision and longer-term infrastructure planning. This requires looking beyond the next five years and estimating what demand and technologies will look like. With multi-gigabit speeds, many new capabilities become possible.

Virtual reality is coming to market too, with headsets from Oculus Rift, Samsung, Google and HTC. A virtual world will be low cost, and more varied, spontaneous and flexible than the real world.

Above all, the marginal cost of adding new stock-keeping units – a measure of products in a given economy – will be close to zero and quickly exceed those in the real world. Virtual telepresence will lead to the death of distance.

Equally, the digitisation and automation of transport will be dramatic and requires low latency and frequent updates. Fully self-driving cars, expected on our roads from the middle of the next decade, will require high bandwidth in both directions.

Network Rail believes digitising the signalling system can increase capacity by 40%. And Nats (the national air traffic system), plans to make huge improvements by reducing the gaps between planes in airspace from nine to ten miles to just one mile. And flying drones – inevitably for deliveries, and maybe for people too – will rely on high-capacity, resilient two-way networks.

Britain already has many street cameras, but as the cost of data storage falls, much more will be recorded on video, which is demanding for networks.
Looking ahead, fibre to the premises has to be a big part of the solution for two reasons. First, in pure bandwidth limits, it is future-proof. At around 100,000 times that of copper, once it is in place, maintenance costs are low, it lasts for decades and hardware upgrades to much faster speeds for optical splitters, optical network units, and terminals are simple and off the shelf.

Until 2030, policy must look at more immediate concerns. Priority has been given to connectivity to the home to serve the retail market. But business needs much higher importance given to faster networks and competition for services to the workplace.


If you guys want to read that of course smile

Plusnet Broadband

Edited by robbieglover2k7 (Mon 13-Jan-20 17:59:43)

Standard User Zarjaz
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Mon 13-Jan-20 16:24:40
Print Post

Re: Is Broadband behind in the UK? (Speeds, phone lines etc)


[re: robbieglover2k7] [link to this post]
 
The Korea thing ?

Yep, you can get smoking fast internet in the city centres ... but on the whole, out in the sticks it’s a different story.. not entirely convinced things are so much better in the states either.

As for 99% of issues being to do with the lines ... that just simply isn’t so. I’d say the commonest cause was poor internal set up/customer error.

Why are you excusing Virgin, they have their issues too ?

Standard User ian72
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Mon 13-Jan-20 16:28:33
Print Post

Re: Is Broadband behind in the UK? (Speeds, phone lines etc)


[re: robbieglover2k7] [link to this post]
 
It depends on who you compare with and what you compare.

The UK were an early adopter of telephony systems and as such have a huge investment in technology that wouldn't be used in a "green field" today.

South Korea started at a different point and were able to pretty much jump straight to modern technologies (ie fibre). Also, the vast majority of them I believe are in sky rise blocks and therefore the way it is deployed is very different.

US is a mixed economy. Some states/areas have great broadband and others don't. The US has pockets where they have cheap fibre and other areas that are using old cable tech that is expensive.

Some countries have spent a lot of public funds to deliver broadband, some have simpler regulation regimes that make implementing easier. Some have lower taxes on new technology. Some have high personal tax which helps to fund initiatives.

The UK have largely concentrated on availability over pure speed. This means that a large percentage of the country have basic access but a much smaller percentage have fibre or similar technology.

In some league tables we would be near the top, others we are near the bottom. So, depending on your viewpoint we are ahead or behind or somewhere in the middle. With enough investment we could head towards the top but that would almost certainly require government intervention and either higher tax rates or a redirection of taxes from other areas (and there are plenty that people could suggest that they consider to be lower priority).


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.

Standard User robbieglover2k7
(experienced) Mon 13-Jan-20 16:38:00
Print Post

Re: Is Broadband behind in the UK? (Speeds, phone lines etc)


[re: ian72] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by ian72:
It depends on who you compare with and what you compare.

The UK were an early adopter of telephony systems and as such have a huge investment in technology that wouldn't be used in a "green field" today.

South Korea started at a different point and were able to pretty much jump straight to modern technologies (ie fibre). Also, the vast majority of them I believe are in sky rise blocks and therefore the way it is deployed is very different.

US is a mixed economy. Some states/areas have great broadband and others don't. The US has pockets where they have cheap fibre and other areas that are using old cable tech that is expensive.

Some countries have spent a lot of public funds to deliver broadband, some have simpler regulation regimes that make implementing easier. Some have lower taxes on new technology. Some have high personal tax which helps to fund initiatives.

The UK have largely concentrated on availability over pure speed. This means that a large percentage of the country have basic access but a much smaller percentage have fibre or similar technology.

In some league tables we would be near the top, others we are near the bottom. So, depending on your viewpoint we are ahead or behind or somewhere in the middle. With enough investment we could head towards the top but that would almost certainly require government intervention and either higher tax rates or a redirection of taxes from other areas (and there are plenty that people could suggest that they consider to be lower priority).



Yeah, the guy on the phone mentioned that about the UK being the early adopter and the South Korea thing too (he mentioned to me when talking about this check out South Korea, they've got it amazing over there).

Yeah the US is such a big place so it no doubt differs, on interesting thing I found was this here.

The UK's always been a bit behind when it comes to telephony, in the US, they had electronic tone-dialling phones in the 60s, while we still had rotary dials & mechanical exchanges until the 80s when the GPO broke off the phone system into BT and things started changing, but they took too long to change, and we're still lagging behind...

I know people over in Canada who have FTTP (Fibre to the Premises) connections that are at Gigabit speeds, which compared to the UK is light years ahead, but due to monopoly control over the landline infrastructure, we're held by the short & curlies of Openreach & their shareholders wanting profit, not investment...


I honestly do feel we are lagging behind big time but like you say, it's the investment thing and this is probably why.

Thanks for the kind response smile

Plusnet Broadband
Standard User ian72
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Mon 13-Jan-20 16:45:08
Print Post

Re: Is Broadband behind in the UK? (Speeds, phone lines etc)


[re: robbieglover2k7] [link to this post]
 
There are a fair few people on this forum that have fibre (me included). Also, Virgin tech is not a laggard for speeds (gigabit is often not required and materially 100Mbps + is enough for most - actually 40Mbps is enough for most).

Also, you will find people that have gigabit from B4RN, Cityfibre, Gigaclear, etc. The connections are out there and you will find people that have them - but what is key is the percentage.

The other slowing factor is that even once fibre is available a lot of people won't upgrade as they are fine with what they have. Some haven't upgraded from ADSL to FTTC, many don't buy the packages above 80Mbps even when they are available - this is the case in many countries.

Companies invest where they can make a profit but if people don't upgrade to faster packages then there isn't any additional profit to be made by switching tech (except maybe because it is lower cost to maintain but that could take years to pay back).
Standard User ian72
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Mon 13-Jan-20 16:49:00
Print Post

Re: Is Broadband behind in the UK? (Speeds, phone lines etc)


[re: ian72] [link to this post]
 
Something else worth adding. If you are old enough you would possibly remember Tomorrows World on the TV. Back in the 80's they did a show where they were talking about BT doing trials of fibre to the premise. They were looking to provide fast network connections allowing for TV to be distributed over the fibre. It all looked great and could have kick started a revolution... However, the government refused to give BT a license to distribute TV signals and so the project was shelved as they wouldn't be able to make money out of it (the Internet wasn't really a thing and people certainly didn't need the network speeds for anything other than TV distribution back then).

EDIT : Not 100% how I thought it happened but here is an article about how BT were stopped from rolling out fibre

Edited by ian72 (Mon 13-Jan-20 16:55:15)

Standard User robbieglover2k7
(experienced) Mon 13-Jan-20 16:55:48
Print Post

Re: Is Broadband behind in the UK? (Speeds, phone lines etc)


[re: Zarjaz] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by Zarjaz:
The Korea thing ?

Yep, you can get smoking fast internet in the city centres ... but on the whole, out in the sticks it’s a different story.. not entirely convinced things are so much better in the states either.

As for 99% of issues being to do with the lines ... that just simply isn’t so. I’d say the commonest cause was poor internal set up/customer error.

Why are you excusing Virgin, they have their issues too ?


Excusing Virgin, where you get that idea from? They deliver their internet differently hence why they don't have the outstanding amount of issue's with line's causing a problem with internet.

And of course taking the consumer errors aside, you can say that about ANY service!! [facepalm]

I'm talking about issue's and faults within the service when they occur and yes, nine times out of ten it's to do with line issue's as mentioned above (a lot of ISP's have told me this on the phone).

And in regards to Virgin Media they are awful. I was with them before my current provider and would never go back to them, I won't go into it but it was a nightmare. I've been with Plusnet ever since and although they've had their problems on a whole they are very good and provide a good service that care about their customers which is important I feel.

Anyway, back on topic smile

Plusnet Broadband
Standard User robbieglover2k7
(experienced) Mon 13-Jan-20 17:00:55
Print Post

Re: Is Broadband behind in the UK? (Speeds, phone lines etc)


[re: ian72] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by ian72:
Something else worth adding. If you are old enough you would possibly remember Tomorrows World on the TV. Back in the 80's they did a show where they were talking about BT doing trials of fibre to the premise. They were looking to provide fast network connections allowing for TV to be distributed over the fibre. It all looked great and could have kick started a revolution... However, the government refused to give BT a license to distribute TV signals and so the project was shelved as they wouldn't be able to make money out of it (the Internet wasn't really a thing and people certainly didn't need the network speeds for anything other than TV distribution back then).

EDIT : Not 100% how I thought it happened but here is an article about how BT were stopped from rolling out fibre


Thanks Ian, I appreciate that smile

No, I don't remember Tomorrows World haha but yeah, I do just feel though that the way broadband is delivered through wires and phone lines etc.. just to me it feels old and dated and not a very solid way of delivering internet.

As I say when I've spoke to ISP's about this (Sky, BT, Plusnet, AOL a while back and even Virgin have mentioned this to me) they have said that more times than not it's line issue's because they're just not very solid from either breakages, noise is a regular one etc...

I get it and understand it's a huge job and more about it'll cost a lot to do also (specially across the whole of the UK) but it just does feel to me that it really should have progressed now.

Just my personal feelings on it of course, it honestly does remind me of how it took us ages to switch off the analogue to the digital world for TV, we were way behind on that when other countries had pretty much advanced from it years ago.

I've seen a few conversations in regards to this too and many have agree'd how outdated we are but of course it would cost a lot though eventually I'm sure they will have to invest?

Just a general conversation anyway as I was interested to see people's take here on this smile

Plusnet Broadband
Standard User ian72
(eat-sleep-adslguide) Mon 13-Jan-20 17:16:25
Print Post

Re: Is Broadband behind in the UK? (Speeds, phone lines etc)


[re: robbieglover2k7] [link to this post]
 
Copper was never designed for broadband - it is a testament to human ingenuity and science just how far copper has been pushed in this respect. All the time incremental upgrades could be made to keep pace with user requirements it made business sense to do so. However, whilst more could be squeezed it is no longer considered viable to continue to squeeze.

It is also inevitable that a lot of the issues with connections is likely to be the "last mile". The number of instances of failure at this part of the network will pretty much always outweigh those individual instances in the rest of the network - and therefore will always be the highest number of calls. However, if your copper (or fibre) breaks it breaks for you. If however a central core network link fails it is one instance of failure but could affect thousands of people's connections.

ISPs will always look to highlight the failures in areas they don't control. But, they all have failures of various parts of the service that on a single instance will affect large numbers of customers.

The Virgin network is a different design and is mostly copper to the premises. It is a different way of delivery but still is "old fashioned" copper for most users. They are continuing to drive copper harder (although starting to move to fibre for the last mile as well). Virgin though tend to see much more contention and slow downs at peak time as they have far more points of contention in their network that the users actively feel - for BT based services a lot of contention can be resolved by replacing one link at an exchange for for Virgin the contention often can be closer to homes.

So, yes, copper is old and feeling the pinch - but if you put in brand new copper links they wouldn't see significant support issues for years - but why would you do that rather than put in fibre now.
Standard User robbieglover2k7
(experienced) Mon 13-Jan-20 17:23:19
Print Post

Re: Is Broadband behind in the UK? (Speeds, phone lines etc)


[re: ian72] [link to this post]
 
In reply to a post by ian72:
Copper was never designed for broadband - it is a testament to human ingenuity and science just how far copper has been pushed in this respect. All the time incremental upgrades could be made to keep pace with user requirements it made business sense to do so. However, whilst more could be squeezed it is no longer considered viable to continue to squeeze.

It is also inevitable that a lot of the issues with connections is likely to be the "last mile". The number of instances of failure at this part of the network will pretty much always outweigh those individual instances in the rest of the network - and therefore will always be the highest number of calls. However, if your copper (or fibre) breaks it breaks for you. If however a central core network link fails it is one instance of failure but could affect thousands of people's connections.

ISPs will always look to highlight the failures in areas they don't control. But, they all have failures of various parts of the service that on a single instance will affect large numbers of customers.

The Virgin network is a different design and is mostly copper to the premises. It is a different way of delivery but still is "old fashioned" copper for most users. They are continuing to drive copper harder (although starting to move to fibre for the last mile as well). Virgin though tend to see much more contention and slow downs at peak time as they have far more points of contention in their network that the users actively feel - for BT based services a lot of contention can be resolved by replacing one link at an exchange for for Virgin the contention often can be closer to homes.

So, yes, copper is old and feeling the pinch - but if you put in brand new copper links they wouldn't see significant support issues for years - but why would you do that rather than put in fibre now.


Yeah, I've shared an article in the OP which I edited that you might find interesting Ian smile

I understand what you mean, I guess as technology evolves though at some point it's going to have to to deliver the speeds solid as we need, I mean imagine if we still had dial up speeds today, nothing would run hardly haha

Yeah, correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Virgin Media used to be Bell Cable and then later NTL or something like that, I'm sure when Cable TV first started becoming a big thing they were doing roadworks all over the country installing all the underground work to deliver this which is what Virgin uses so I hear you with that being old too but it does seem a lot better than the phone line's people use, I mean hardly anyone has landline phones anymore and the only reason we have landlines is for internet lol

I do wonder if and when they will advance and how, they surely have to be close to it now as technology evolves (we're going into 4K for TV now and I've even heard about 8K briefly) so it's going to have to to keep up with technology but it is interesting.

If you have some time read the little article I edited into my OP here titled "Openreach Put the Brakes on Future UK G.fast Broadband Plans" and see what you think.

And thanks for the kind replies Ian, I really appreciate that smile

Plusnet Broadband
Pages in this thread: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | (show all)   Print Thread

Jump to