In reply to a post by MHC:

You need to remember that BT, including OR, have been shackled. In the late 80's BT wanted to run co-ax to provide TV and oice services, They tried again in the 90's and even now they are shackled by have charges capped at level where they cannot make a return.

+1

Exactly. That's what I'm trying to get at. Copper is not sustainable in the long run...

In reply to a post by Grimers:

Exactly. That's what I'm trying to get at. Copper is not sustainable in the long run...

Aluminium has never been a good conductor for broadband and is not as easy to work with compared to copper. Yes we need to move to fibre but to make statements like fibre is more reliable is being a little unfair to some E-side main cables that been in the ground for 50+ years without any issues.

I'm talking about on the whole, yes some parts of the copper network have been reliable, but a lot of it hasn't, repeatedly becoming faulty etc.

Coax? That's copper.

AIUI BT were intending to go full fibre until Thatcher kiboshed it.

For me personally, the move to fibre is all about the ability to have faster speeds above those available via FTTC and G.fast. All the telephone lines I've every had have been very very reliable so that is not a factor for me although others will have different experiences and some who get fibre may also have these experience sometime in the future.

In reply to a post by pluralist:

AIUI BT were intending to go full fibre until Thatcher kiboshed it.

I think in the 80s full fibre would have been prohibitively expensive, but since they wanted to compete in TV (internet wasn't a thing then!) most likely they would have deployed coax, no?

I remember Thatcher licensed the "local cable firms" as she wanted telephone competition with BT and she wasn't bothered by television. Of course personal mobile telephones (PCS/PCN) revolutionised portable telephone costs, and digital terrestrial & satellite quickly hit the cable TV firms almost about the same time as network build complete.

A politician's vision is about 2 weeks.

That's not what I have read just today. It has been said many times that BT wanted to start installing FTTP when she was PM.

The story actually begins in the 70s when Dr Cochrane was working as BT's Chief Technology Officer, a position he'd climbed up to from engineer some years earlier.

Dr Cochrane knew that Britain's tired copper network was insufficient: "In 1974 it was patently obvious that copper wire was unsuitable for digital communication in any form, and it could not afford the capacity we needed for the future."

He was asked to do a report on the UK's future of digital communication and what was needed to move forward.

"In 1979 I presented my results," he tells us, "and the conclusion was to forget about copper and get into fibre. So BT started a massive effort - that spanned in six years - involving thousands of people to both digitise the network and to put fibre everywhere. The country had more fibre per capita than any other nation.

"In 1986, I managed to get fibre to the home cheaper than copper and we started a programme where we built factories for manufacturing the system. By 1990, we had two factories, one in Ipswich and one in Birmingham, where were manufacturing components for systems to roll out to the local loop".
...
But, in 1990, then Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, decided that BT's rapid and extensive rollout of fibre optic broadband was anti-competitive and held a monopoly on a technology and service that no other telecom company could do.
....

In reply to a post by pluralist:

That's not what I have read just today. It has been said many times that BT wanted to start installing FTTP when she was PM.

Thanks for the link & quote. Interesting, perhaps she was right, only the effective monopoly and ability to charge customers "whatever they wanted" would have given the income to deploy FTTP back then. Many people have for decades disliked the BT (probably now "retail") price list, once you understand it, it gets changed. Perhaps Thatcher was one of those? After privatising wanting to ensure they were not still operating a monopoly.

I note in the US the national split of "Bell" into the "Baby Bells" had a different impact, regional monopolies. I read a rumour Thatcher was a fan of the US regional approach, hence the sheer number of small cable TV licences. (which financially never worked, hence the market amalgamation)

Now being repeated with these small Alt Nets.

Yes, I don't see how all the Alt Nets will survive if BT decide to over-build once they've got the main coverage done. Punters thinking of moving into restricted availability areas could well be deterred once they find they can't stay with their existing supplier. Forcing the house prices down.

They will need to merge like, or possibly join, Virgin Media (aka NTL).