Says it all really

because that's available to everyone isn't it, ffs

The connectivity has to go somewhere how is that mast connected to the internet???

In reply to a post by CARPETBURN:

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I dont see anything there thats worse than BT.

Even if it was stateside it isnt just one company controlling the whole country like a borg hive.
So if a provider in one area is poor chances are the rest of the USA with different providers is just fine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_Bell_Operating...

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I dont see anything there thats worse than BT.

I would suggest you look harder. Do pay special attention to Frontier and QWest. AT&T are in a similar way to BT and slightly ahead, deploying VDSL 2 and limited FTTP, Verizon have deployed a fair amount of FTTP.

Do note the almost total absence of LLU services, that the newer VDSL/FTTP networks are closed networks is also noteworthy.

Check their individual forums in more depth you'll find none of them are any better than BT and Frontier and QWest at least are hopeless.

In reply to a post by ian72:

So, the backup is provided by a hong kong company. How do they connect the wireless base station to the Internet? Do they have their own private copper/fibre that runs from the base station (or it's central node if it is a mesh network) to an Internet POP? Do they have their own peering? Or are they doing what a number of people do which is get the wireless back to a specific location and then use BT WES/EES circuits to backhaul it?

It is their own private network which serves a small area on the outskirts of London. (Thats as detailed as im going to get on the location, those that want more can send me their personal info first)
There is no BT equipment involved at all.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

If to always meet a 5 to 10 fault fix as standard, are you willing for monthly fees to increase to pay for all the engineers?

Id be happy to have a minimum price set for the consumer, wouldnt bother me, im not one of the people that pay around £10 for bargain basement internet.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Or should this simply be taken out of the massive profits Openreach make? Or should BT wholesale pay?

Do both those make massive profit then?

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

The splitting up of BT has made fault resolution harder NOT easier

I dont see how giving a company various divisions and each division having its own job rather than arguing whos job it is makes things harder.

In reply to a post by Rich44:

because that's available to everyone isn't it, ffs

NO and that was my point there is no perfect backup plan for everyone.

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

In reply to a post by CARPETBURN:

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

I dont see anything there thats worse than BT.

Even if it was stateside it isnt just one company controlling the whole country like a borg hive.
So if a provider in one area is poor chances are the rest of the USA with different providers is just fine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_Bell_Operating...

Yeah totally split up to the point new companies actually own parts now, Unlike BT who still have their name on all the divisions.

same as here really.

openreach can be great if you in a short line area. service varies dependant on where you live, seems even their approaches to faults varies from area to area.