Kitz Forum
Announcements => News Articles => Topic started by: Bowdon on March 05, 2018, 01:22:24 PM
-
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2018/03/cityfibre-take-ads-watchdog-court-fibre-broadband-promos.html (https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2018/03/cityfibre-take-ads-watchdog-court-fibre-broadband-promos.html)
Fibre optic network building Cityfibre has filed for a Judicial Review of last year’s decision by the UK Advertising Standards Authority, which ruled that it was “not materially misleading” for ISPs to describe slower hybrid fibre services (e.g. FTTC / HFC DOCSIS) as “fibre broadband.”
The debate over what should and should not be considered “fibre broadband” in advertising has been going on for a decade. The issue began in 2008 after the ASA allowed so called “hybrid fibre” or “part fibre” services (e.g. FTTC, G.fast or HFC DOCSIS networks that combine fibre with slower metallic copper or aluminium cables) to use the same wording as pure “full fibre” (FTTH/P) ISPs that take the optical fibre all the way to your home.
Pure fibre optic ISPs can deliver significantly faster speeds (i.e. they’re technically able to handle multi-Gigabit or even Terabit speeds) and are generally more reliable, while hybrid-fibre services tend to be slower and less reliable. Experiences do vary, depending upon the network setup and length of metallic cable, but generally there’s a big difference.
I agree with Cityfibre that fibre should only be used when its a full fibre product.
I think allowing slower more unreliable products to use the same term is purposely misleading the customer, and hampering the push to full fibre.
One of the arguments for full fibre, besides the speed upgrade, is the more reliable technology that is used. It is a lot more confusing for the average person to know the difference between fttc and fttp if they are both using the fibre word.
-
Good. I hope they win.
The ridiculous "Fibre" claim has long been a bug bear of mine.
Fibre Optic Broadband which isn't (http://www.kitz.co.uk/adsl/fibre-optic-broadband.htm#fibre_optic_broadband)
-
I hope they win.
+1
Our so-called regulators and watchdogs seem to be asleep on the job for the most part. ::) :(
-
I like the name given to such hybrid local-loop delivery systems -- Fake-fibre. ::)
-
Me too. I used the hashtag #fakefibre today when posting on the site Facebook about it. :D
-
excellent news, that ruling was made because the asa tend to allow stuff when "most" of the big players are doing it regardless of the merits.
-
Sorry to rain on your parade but this looks to me like giving in to the cry to "make it simple" and then being surprised at the resulting confusion.
" Things should be made as simple as possible but no simpler ! " Albert Einstein.
-
excellent news, that ruling was made because the asa tend to allow stuff when "most" of the big players are doing it regardless of the merits.
The ruling dates back to 2007. Despite numerous complaints at Virgin Media using Fibre to describe their 2Mb HFC offering, ASA did nothing. It's therefore no surprise that the other ISPs then did the same with FTTC.
From the main site Fibre Optic Broadband which isn't! (http://www.kitz.co.uk/adsl/fibre-optic-broadband.htm#fibre_optic_broadband)
Virgin Media started the ball rolling in 2007 by advertising their 2Mbps cable service as "super duper Fibre-optic Cable Broadband" trying to distinguish it from, and make it sound superior to 'up to' 8Mbps ADSL broadband.
Virgin Media cable is actually a Hybrid Fibre Coaxial (HFC) network, which means that fibre optic cable is used to carry data only as far as the local cabinet. From the local cab to the home data traverses over coax cable.
Although many complaints were made to the Advertising Standards Agency, ASA ruled that because coax was used for such a small portion of the network compared to the fibre backhaul, that none of the complaints should be upheld.
This decision surprised many, especially the more technically inclined, because even standard adsl uses just a small portion of copper telephone cable to deliver to the 'last mile' compared to what may be hundreds of miles of fibre optic backhaul. If you want to stretch this slightly further, then the same could be said about dial-up
-
Its too little, too late to change perceptions now. Its been over 10 years.
Besides, most customers don't care over what technology their internet service is delivered over - they are more interested in the speed and price they pay