Kitz Forum
Announcements => News Articles => Topic started by: phi2008 on May 22, 2018, 09:43:04 PM
-
The Chancellor is to promise a major expansion of Britain's superfast broadband network in a bid to boost the post-Brexit economy.
In a speech at the annual CBI dinner later, Philip Hammond will pledge to make "full-fibre" connections available to most homes and businesses by 2025.
He will also set out other measures to improve Britain's productivity rates.
However, experts cast doubt on the broadband plan, saying many small and mid-sized towns would miss out.
In his speech the Chancellor will say that full fibre - which can be 40 times faster than typical high speed services - will help firms to compete after Britain leaves the European Union.
"In the 21st century, fibre networks will be the enabling infrastructure that drives economic growth," he will say.
"Over a million premises already have direct access to them… but if we are to achieve our ambition of a truly high-speed economy, and keep up with our competitors, then we need a step change in our approach."
Mr Hammond will say the government will target full-fibre connections in 15 million homes and business premises within the next seven years.
This would be delivered by the telecoms industry, he will say, but not via "government Diktat".
...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44215833
:)
-
Nice to hear, hopefully it'll become reality. I think that leaving the EU will ultimately benefit this country in the long term.
-
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2018/05/chancellor-targets-full-fibre-for-majority-of-uk-premises-by-2025.html (https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2018/05/chancellor-targets-full-fibre-for-majority-of-uk-premises-by-2025.html)
It's good that people are talking about full fibre these days.
It would be good to see some of the council regulations streamlined and simplified.
I think broadband is rapidly becoming an essential service. I mean, if I forget where I put my smartphone the panic sets in! lol
-
So, almost half of homes and businesses will be left out of this planned Fibre rollout? :'(
That, in my view, will be much worse than nobody having fibre, because if/when services that actually need full fibre start to become available, it will create an even bigger divide between those who have it and those who have not.
Fttc speeds suffice for most applications. We can watch UHD TV, we can browse the web, upload/download personal data in cloud, what real need is there for more? Effort and money would be far better spent just trying to fill in the remaining gaps in fttc coverage, imho.
-
Fttc speeds suffice for most applications. We can watch UHD TV, we can browse the web, upload/download personal data in cloud, what real need is there for more? Effort and money would be far better spent just trying to fill in the remaining gaps in fttc coverage, imho.
I know many people with FTTC speeds of 5 or 6Mb arguably not fast enough for even DVD streaming certainly not 4K/UHD! It isn't really good enough for a single person to use the web nowadays.
FTTC is not the correct technology, full proper fibre is what should be aimed for. Perhaps with newer mobile/wireless helping out when digging a 3 mile trench for a single property just doesn't make sense.
Personally I like the idea of the TV license money being diverted to broadband rollout. Just put adverts on BBC or make it a pay channel.
Taking a five year view that is £750 contribution to getting fibre to my house. Multiply by number of surrounding properties that must make rollout much more palatable for companies to do the job.
-
I know many people with FTTC speeds of 5 or 6Mb arguably not fast enough for even DVD streaming certainly not 4K/UHD! It isn't really good enough for a single person to use the web nowadays.
These people are unlikely to be included in the plans, remember it's only targeting half of all UK houses. Their handicap will be all the worse if FTTP gets delivered to the other half, and services become all the more bloated and unusable at low speeds.
Sure, fttp for everybody would be good, but fttp for only half... are you sure that's what you want?
-
It's half in the next 7 years, not half then lay down tools and leave it at that.
Seems a pretty ambitious target to me.
-
These people are unlikely to be included in the plans, remember it's only targeting half of all UK houses. Their handicap will be all the worse if FTTP gets delivered to the other half, and services become all the more bloated and unusable at low speeds.
Sure, fttp for everybody would be good, but fttp for only half... are you sure that's what you want?
I think you are both arguing from the same side.
80/20 speeds are fit for purpose if you can get it, but using FTTC to deliver that results in only a subset of those served by enabled cabinets doing so.
A more robust network plan should have been made given the huge subsidy BT/OR received, and starting with the infrastructure to deliver FTTP would have given a clearer/cheaper path to filling in the gaps.
-
The point I was (trying) to make is FTTC speeds are not suitable or suffice if the speed is only 5-6Mb. I guess we are arguing from the same side though.
FTTP for half would suck for the other 50% but it is no worse than what we have now ie FTTC for half (if that). At least with fibre to property half should be getting full speeds and none of this distance to cabinet, crosstalk and unreliability of copper.
I get reasonable FTTC will more than likely be too far away for Gfast and even though I was on commercial rollout of fttc I get the feeling fibre to the property is unlikely.
I agree I feel I will be left behind but as long as they are not going to stop after 50% I think getting 50% coverage in 7-8 years is a very ambitious target. Just think how many days it seems to take for a team of workmen to dig just a 10m long trench.
-
I can't see how it could be left with only half of people being able to access it.
It is not just about speed. It is a new way of delivering telecommunications. It's not an 'addon' like FTTC, or ADSL technologies were added to the original copper network.
I think building a fibre network will take time, which to be fair to OR this was one of their arguments against full fibre. But now they have found ways to speed it up.
I've noticed on the latest exchange list (17/05/2018) information most FTTC exchanges are now listed as having FTTC/P & FOD. Very few are listed only with FTTC.
-
It's half in the next 7 years, not half then lay down tools and leave it at that.
Seems a pretty ambitious target to me.
The plans, as reported in the BBC link, make no mention of the other half. Given that govt are now moving on to the 'next' technology while so many people do not yet have useful fttc (if at all) I think it would be foolish to assume fttp will fare any better, in the absence of concrete commitments.
-
The point I was (trying) to make is FTTC speeds are not suitable or suffice if the speed is only 5-6Mb. I guess we are arguing from the same side though.
FTTP for half would suck for the other 50% but it is no worse than what we have now ie FTTC for half (if that). At least with fibre to property half should be getting full speeds and none of this distance to cabinet, crosstalk and unreliability of copper.
You're a little bit off
95% of the UK has access to at least 24Mb.
http://home.bt.com/tech-gadgets/tech-news/superfast-broadband-extended-to-95-of-uk-premises
The plans, as reported in the BBC link, make no mention of the other half. Given that govt are now moving on to the 'next' technology while so many people do not yet have useful fttc (if at all) I think it would be foolish to assume fttp will fare any better, in the absence of concrete commitments.
I think it would be more foolish to assume they would just stop at 50%
They have moved on to FTTP as most places that can economically use FTTC likely have it by now.
Once the 50% has FTTP they will move on to the other 50%.
It's not like they can do what they are doing with G.Fast and come back at a later date and give that existing 50% the next new tech. FTTP is already future proof.
As time goes on the pressure being put on the government and OpenReach to use FTTP will continue to increase.
-
Personally, I think we need an entirely new technology, which has yet to become commercially feasible.
Supplementing fttp, fttc, fttdp, etc, it will be named FTTOH.
Fibre To The Other Half :D
-
You're a little bit off
95% of the UK has access to at least 24Mb.
http://home.bt.com/tech-gadgets/tech-news/superfast-broadband-extended-to-95-of-uk-premises
I get an "oops" when opening that page and think even if it did open the stats would be misleading. 24mbit actual downstream speed to 95% of UK premises? Jog on.
And what about upload? Content producers or just people that need more than 2000s quality video conferencing are SOL with a connection outside of urban areas.
Edit: Up to 24mbit I can believe.. so 95% of people are connected to a 21CN exchange, that means nothing as far as their actual connection speed goes.
-
I get an "oops" when opening that page and think even if it did open the stats would be misleading. 24mbit actual downstream speed to 95% of UK premises? Jog on.
http://home.bt.com/tech-gadgets/tech-news/superfast-broadband-extended-to-95-of-uk-premises-11364246768896
https://www.kitguru.net/channel/generaltech/damien-cox/superfast-broadband-now-covers-95-percent-of-the-uk/
https://www.engadget.com/amp/2018/01/29/bduk-superfast-broadband-coverage/
https://www.silicon.co.uk/networks/broadband/superfast-broadband-uk-227673/amp
*keeps jogging*
They hit that target a few months ago. In what way do you dispute it?
Upload has never been a priority or had targets, which is a joke I agree.
edit: missed your edit.
no, it means 95% can order a service that will receive 24Mb
-
I have skimmed your links and the banner claim does seem true.
I just find it very hard to believe the statistic. I live in a BDUK area and the houses served by our cab barely reach that target where I am and there are many further from it. There are many areas near but not served by the subsidised exchange that only have 21CN, and calling that 24mbit (as I sceptically believe has been included in this calculation) could not get 24mbit actual downstream throughput unless they were living opposite the exchange.
It'd be great to see a breakdown of how these (BT no doubt) figures were reached.
-
no, it means 95% can order a service that will receive 24Mb
And if all of did order that service, imagine the effects of all the crosstalk. :)
-
Check out any of the BDUK sites that councils/counties set up and look at their coverage. Its minimal, and all the premises outside of that reach in these areas are on at best 21CN, which is by definition below 24mbits.
-
I very much doubt the capacity is there for everyone in the first place.
That goes for both backhaul capacity as well as free ports on the DSLAM's/MSAN's.
I would also assume the 95% will be based on sync and not actual throughput.
-
I have skimmed your links and the banner claim does seem true.
I just find it very hard to believe the statistic. I live in a BDUK area and the houses served by our cab barely reach that target where I am and there are many further from it. There are many areas near but not served by the subsidised exchange that only have 21CN, and calling that 24mbit (as I sceptically believe has been included in this calculation) could not get 24mbit actual downstream throughput unless they were living opposite the exchange.
It'd be great to see a breakdown of how these (BT no doubt) figures were reached.
No, it's 95% of uk properties can actually order at least 24Mb. That doesn't include everyone on 21CN exchanges, only those with 24Mb estimates.
They've picked the lowest hanging fruit already though. The final 5% are the hardest/most expensive to reach.
No doubt some of those properties will be fobbed off with discount vouchers for satellite once any future US0 comes in to force.
-
No, it's 95% of uk properties can actually order at least 24Mb. That doesn't include everyone on 21CN exchanges, only those with 24Mb estimates.
See I just cant believe that.
More than 5% of the houses served by my cabinet cannot order 24mbit, its VDSL enabled and I do not live in the middle of no where. I have a little over 24mbit now, but on order I was only guaranteed 14.
Given that and the number of UK homes not served by VDSL enabled cabs it just seems made up.
-
Related in some small way to the topic, I guess .... but the average UK speed now is 48Mbps.
Not got a link, as it was part of an internal 'Employee only' communique.
-
48 Mbps median?
-
48 Mbps median?
Not a clue.
-
Neither has Hammond. :)
-
:lol:
-
See I just cant believe that.
More than 5% of the houses served by my cabinet cannot order 24mbit, its VDSL enabled and I do not live in the middle of no where. I have a little over 24mbit now, but on order I was only guaranteed 14.
Given that and the number of UK homes not served by VDSL enabled cabs it just seems made up.
Thanks for proving that the estimations are conservative. The 5% of your one cabinet is more than offset by the 100% of the 1.7k premises in this area that can all order >24Mb, and the 11,000 premises in this council ward that are 100% covered at 24Mb or greater.
This city as a whole across the metropolitan area has coverage of 96.9% at 24Mb or greater - and rising as Virgin Media continue building their network, and Openreach infill gaps where there's no, or slow, FTTC with FTTP.
Not that either is in any way a guide to the country as a whole, however I'm not aware of any data indicating the 95% figure is inaccurate. There are indeed a number of cabinets without VDSL, however these are on average way smaller than those that are enabled, and alongside the FTTP and cable coverage it's a reasonable figure backed up by Think Broadband data too.