Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[broadstairs]

They wouldn't if they split. Same result, but with no investment ............ we've been here many times before.

Yes but the status quo is not acceptable, somehow it needs to be much more accountable to users of their services.

This situation over G.INP is intolerable and should never have happened if the proper testing regime had been in place. From my real world experience  I am well aware that problems can and do happen but a roll out like this should never have been attempted without far more testing than was obviously done. If it had been then I very much doubt that the blanket roll back would have been needed. What we now have is a post code lottery with nothing that the end user or their ISP can do anything about. Intolerable and inexcusable.

Stuart

[Black Sheep]

Yes but the status quo is not acceptable, somehow it needs to be much more accountable to users of their services.

This situation over G.INP is intolerable and should never have happened if the proper testing regime had been in place. From my real world experience  I am well aware that problems can and do happen but a roll out like this should never have been attempted without far more testing than was obviously done. If it had been then I very much doubt that the blanket roll back would have been needed. What we now have is a post code lottery with nothing that the end user or their ISP can do anything about. Intolerable and inexcusable.

Stuart

I agree that the G.INP situation is frustrating ...... but with the greatest respect, what OR do or don't do is up to them ...... it's their product.

I also have a question that I have no idea of the answer ?? When VDSL came on the market, the modems/routers were locked down (as we all know).
Does the fact that you guys who have 'Jail-breaked' or by-passed this security mean that you would otherwise be in the dark as to the various trials OR are conducting with regard to Vect and INP, had you left the software as is ??

If the answer is 'Yes' ....... then as far as I'm concerned you have no rights at all to demand answers of OR. 

[skyeci]

Whilst OR can do what they like as its their product we all pay the same near enough but some of us are not getting the same product features shall we call it through no fault of our own to begin with it seems to me.

The next time I move I will be making sure its not connected to an eci cab 

[broadstairs]

I agree that the G.INP situation is frustrating ...... but with the greatest respect, what OR do or don't do is up to them ...... it's their product.

I also have a question that I have no idea of the answer ?? When VDSL came on the market, the modems/routers were locked down (as we all know).
Does the fact that you guys who have 'Jail-breaked' or by-passed this security mean that you would otherwise be in the dark as to the various trials OR are conducting with regard to Vect and INP, had you left the software as is ??

If the answer is 'Yes' ....... then as far as I'm concerned you have no rights at all to demand answers of OR.

While I agree that some have done what you said I for one run a BT Approved router. I do not believe that the problem has been caused by 1000's of users jail breaking their routers. BTOR should have allowed full statistics to be seen by end users who after all are paying for a service and are entitled  to see what they are getting if they so wish. If BTOR had provided this in the first place then there would have been far less jail breaking as you put it.

I also pay money to have the best possible quality FTTC service which is not being provided currently by BTOR. Also your comment about they own the product and can do what they like with it actually exemplifies what is wrong here. BTOR are a monopoly and are acting in an arrogant way, they are providing a service and if there were real competition this attitude would see them eventually go out of business. There would be a much better view of BT in general if it acted openly and in a way that actually listened to and took account of end users requirements and made a better job of testing and planning roll outs of new technology and explained more to users about might be happening in their area even if that were via the ISPs.

Stuart

[Ktor]

I agree that the G.INP situation is frustrating ...... but with the greatest respect, what OR do or don't do is up to them ...... it's their product.

No they can't. The Enterprise Act 2002 gave them a monopoly and made them accountable to ofcom. The extent of that accountability I don't know, but, what they do or don't do it not entirely up to them.

We get a crap and expensive 'take what we give you and like it' service because their monopoly allows it.

[Black Sheep]

Only accountable on a business level ............. not at an engineering spec level.

[niemand]

We get a crap and expensive 'take what we give you and like it' service because their monopoly allows it.

Our services really aren't that expensive relative to our peers.

Openreach are also accountable to their customers, the CPs. Most of them want services that are 'good enough' and cost as little as possible.

[broadstairs]

Openreach are also accountable to their customers, the CPs.

Well that is certainly not the impression I got from TalkTalk, they quite clearly told me tht they have no way to bring pressure on BTOR.

Stuart

[Ktor]

Openreach are also accountable to their customers, the CPs. Most of them want services that are 'good enough' and cost as little as possible.

Just lol - if their customers don't like the OR service they can get it from someone else, oops no they can't. Maybe you should look up the definition of monopoly.

 

[Black Sheep]

Just lol - if their customers don't like the OR service they can get it from someone else, oops no they can't. Maybe you should look up the definition of monopoly.

I think you're picking a fight with the wrong guy, Ktor .......... not a 'bait' or taking sides, but Ignition knows his stuff from being involved, not just forming an opinion based on what others might say.

[broadstairs]

No BT IS a monopoly and when there is a monopoly there is no alternative so however much pressure you attempt to place on the monopolistic supplier makes no difference because no matter what you have no choice and have to accept what they do whether or not you think it reasonable, realistic or sensible. That is the situation we have with ISPs and BT. If there was a choice ISPs could if they wished vote with their feet and swap suppliers but they HAVE NO CHOICE.... it's a MONOPOLY. There is no argument against this and the sooner everyone here accepts this the better and we can move forward.

Stuart

[ejs]

BT gets to be a monopoly in the places where no-one else wants to build their own network. <sarcasm>Lucky them.</sarcasm>

[Black Sheep]

Exactly ....... Stuart's utopia doesn't incorporate 'The bigger picture'. One man's 'Monopoly' is another mans 'Market Leader'.

[broadstairs]

Exactly ....... Stuart's utopia doesn't incorporate 'The bigger picture'. One man's 'Monopoly' is another mans 'Market Leader'.

Sorry but you cannot equate market leader with this situation. BT was a monopoly long before the internet came about, it inherited the situation of owning all the telephone equipment which has subsequently been used for broadband. BT did not build the infrastructure, the government did and then sold it off not to the highest bidder but by default gave it to BT. You cannot simply start from ground zero and build an infrastructure to compete with BT it would be financial suicide. BT are in a very fortunate position of inheriting the copper and exchange estate they NEVER had to pay for. There is no sensible argument against this BT became a monopoly by default but no one seems to acknowledge this who support BT here. This is why monopolies are bad there is no competition because competing against BT in this area is pointless. I do not believe that any of this will change unless we have a government which is willing to do something about it, and this government is very unlikely to do anything sadly.

Stuart

[kitz]

They may have had the monopoly for telephone lines, but they do not have monopoly when it comes to 'fibre'.

As to ADSL all of the network infrastructure is new investment by BT and not inherited..  also updating the CORE and backhauls to 21CN was 100's of millions of £'s invested by BT.

Nothing stopping anyone else using BT ducts either if they want to lay their own... this has long been the case, even before this years consultation.

Although they may have inherited copper.. fibre doesnt need it, so what's holding anyone else back?  They can have access to ducts and poles.