In reply to a post by Andrue:

More likely if we BT was still government owned we wouldn't even have ADSL and we'd be paying far more for our bills. It amazes me how many people still think that nationalisation is a good idea.

What you forget is if not for CUT we would not have unlimited internet access.

In reply to a post by Cobra001:

I did not say that it would be any better under government control, all I said was that if it was still under government control then access for all would be an onjective which they would have to consider, under the current system access for all is not even considered when it comes to upgrading an the area network.

Fair enough, my apologies.

though i do think if bt open reach had been something like network rail we would be in a better position.

Yeah I think that properly separating BTor would be an improvement.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

My theory is that some areas will miss out on possible company investment as firms will see that they might get 20-30% of the money from sources like councils and BDUK and Welsh Assembly.

In my county we have our own urban/rural divide with the newer industrial and commercial centres to the South, agriculture to the West and the remains of the old heavy industies in the North and East. The geographical topology of the area is horrendous with steep sided valleys, narrow lanes, unstable ground from previous heavy industries etc and some very sensitive areas such as SSSI's, SSI's, A world heritage centre and a national park to traverse.

The Southern half of the area has access to just about all services including almost universal cable whilst the rest can't even begin to dream of anything other than low speed BT Wholesale based services. For many, even if it were financially viable, satellite services are unavailable because of the topography.

The local authority is attempting to offset the "divide" (Not only digital in nature) by siting the new "Shared Resource Centre" at the Northern head of the valley. This resource centre is a major "digital service centre" which has been realised by cooperation between and investment by adjacentl local authorities, regional government, Police and other emergency services, local commerce and industry and international industry leaders such as Microsoft, HP and Cisco, etc. Several international telecoms companies are also on board. The list of industry associates and investors is still a little sensitive so I'll only mention those who are already publicly associated.
Already, several data centre operators from London and Europe have expressed an interest in moving. In some cases, discussions are said to be advanced and fruitful. The SRS, although only just opened, is I believe already turning a slight profit and projections look good. All future net profits will be reinvested within the local communities.

This is all very exciting for those within the industry but it all goes straight over the heads of most ordinary mortals who, through council tax etc are investing in this. But, because of it's current and projected success, an intended spin off to the SRS known as "The Digital Valley Initiative" is now a very real proposition. The first "real" phase of the "Digital Valley" will be to provide high speed internet to the whole community via FTTH over existing national grid infrastructure.
In the meantime, Cisco and others have equipped community centres, churches and other buildings throughout the county with wireless base stations and repeaters to increase coverage. Another large corporation has linked all of this into the local authorities' etc infrastructures to form free of charge wireless intranet connections to the internet whilst a major PC manufacturing company in partnership Microsoft and others have provided cheap home computers to many residents and voluntary organisations who would not otherwise have had an internet connection of any sort.
I can get around 2-3Mb down from my bedroom at the moment although obviously, the service is pretty heavily restricted to basic usage. It's speed limited to a maximum of 4Mb down and around half a Meg up and understandably, heavily managed but, it's available and it's free!

It's envisaged that when the "Digital Valley" project is complete, every property in the area, no matter where it's situated as long as it's connected to the electricity supply, will have high speed internet access for around a fiver a month.

We have been very lucky in that an impending situation forced a usually staid couple of local authority's to completely change their current arrangements so this is basically a silver lining from a pretty dark cloud. However, local visionaries with determination, the right people in positions of power with the right contacts and the drive and vision to realise this project is what has delivered.

I'm sure that other areas will want to take a lead from us as we have proved that the finance and goodwill is there if you're prepared to work to get it. Our vision is far from fully realised yet and it won't be for some time but the huge investments made so far, the catastrophic alternative to failure and the dogged determination of those involved at all levels will I believe, ensure that the dream will be realised, and sooner rather than later.

Edited by Deadbeat (Sun 13-Mar-11 00:18:37)

The number of lines isn't the only factor. It's just one of many.

Sone ISPs are offering bonded DSL - yes, it migth cost a little more.. but if the OP can get a few more voice lines in - they could look at that option..

In reply to a post by alcockell:

Sone ISPs are offering bonded DSL - yes, it migth cost a little more.. but if the OP can get a few more voice lines in - they could look at that option..

Spending money to go faster...what a novel idea. Maybe it will catch on someday

I think you'll find that we in rural areas are subsidising cheap fast internet for you townies. We have to pay more as most rural exchanges are market 1. Faster exchanges pay less for a better service. As we HAVE TO pay more due to OfCom regulations, we should be upgraded too.

In reply to a post by Anonymous:

I think you'll find that we in rural areas are subsidising cheap fast internet for you townies. We have to pay more as most rural exchanges are market 1. Faster exchanges pay less for a better service. As we HAVE TO pay more due to OfCom regulations, we should be upgraded too.

If you dont like it then move house to a better area for broadband
No one has forced you to pay more for your internet

Oh that old chestnut again!

Yeah great idea.. we'll all move that would mean for this area that we would shut down the 2 LNG plants that provide fuel for heat and power to the national grid, the 2 oil refineries that provide fuel for the country and the new power station that will be adding to the available power to run the country. Thats without the call centres fishing industry and ferry terminals locally Some backwater I live in huh? all this heavy and hi tech industry and still last century telecoms with premium pricing.

You have to laugh at the hypocrisy. IPSC data pricing was jacked up to lever customers onto WBC, (WBC was adjusted downwards at the same time) shame that WBC isnt available on may exchanges subjected to this rip off. We hear so much bull about long lines... and yet the lines here are all capable of adsl1 so not especially long, Our WBC upgrade dates were pulled at the same time the FTTx roll out started, thats a huge coincidence huh?. A BT guy I was talking to recently reckons the figure on Sam Knows is a few years out of date and that our exchange has (easily) 10k lines so hardly a shed in the middle of a village green huh?

Poor service should see a low pricing point, its like that in every other market, The "I'm alright jack" attitude of many is laughable, I bet they wouldn't like it if their (premium speed products) pricing was taken with our costs used as a base line and thus sold at a realistic level. Clearly OFCOM agree there is an imbalance now that works against those in Market One areas as they are looking at the unfair pricing for a service that is provided on equipment that at our price point is long ago paid for.

So yes we are subsidising upgrades elsewhere both by predatory pricing and the fact that the inward investment here has been pulled while other areas that already have a significant speed advantage are getting a further upgrade, to provide cheaper services to those already well served areas.

In reply to a post by Koppo:

BT made over a billion pounds in profit last year. No-one wants to hear their viability excuses. They are clearly doing very well for themselves.

And part of that doing well is no doubt only spending where they'll get returns