Kitz Forum
Announcements => News Articles => Topic started by: Bowdon on September 19, 2019, 11:00:22 AM
-
https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2019/09/bt-to-propose-full-fibre-move-and-copper-switch-off-by-2027.html (https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2019/09/bt-to-propose-full-fibre-move-and-copper-switch-off-by-2027.html)
Reports this morning claim that BT (Openreach) are in “secret” negotiations with the government and UK ISPs about a new six point plan, which could see the last of their old copper phone lines being switched off by 2027 and replaced by “full fibre” (FTTP) broadband. Provided everybody agrees of course.
It's good to see that BT/OR have now changed their mind set fully about full fibre. 2027 isn't that far away really, and in the meantime we all have a chance to get a modern connection between now and then.
I don't really see why everybody as to agree. It's happening. When all the enforcement groups i.e. the government, ofcom etc are all pushing this way, it would be a very difficult case to make that as an isp you are holding up the future. I'm sure the bad pr generated from such a case would be bad for business.
The most valuable part about full fibre is its immune from many of the problems that blight our connections these days. It will be also easier to fix a problem because the line can't half work, its on or its off, and anything in between produces stats that the isp can look at. So no more arguing on the phone to often far off places that your line as gone bad, because now they will be able to see stats and directly compare them.
-
Excellent news indeed.
-
I don't really see why everybody as to agree. It's happening. When all the enforcement groups i.e. the government, ofcom etc are all pushing this way, it would be a very difficult case to make that as an isp you are holding up the future. I'm sure the bad pr generated from such a case would be bad for business.
Without agreement, you risk long drawn out court cases arguing that such a policy is noncompetitive and ruins the investment plans of other firms...
Most consumers or businesses don't pay attention to why something has been delayed or who may be responsible..
-
So no more arguing on the phone to often far off places that your line as gone bad, because now they will be able to see stats and directly compare them.
I'm pretty confident that any competent ISP could look at the performance of all their ADSL and FTTC lines and identify the poorly performing ones. The fact that ISPs don't do this is not due to the unavailability of the data - they have plenty of stats available with the existing technologies.
-
Hardly dare even hope. (See other thread re this)
Do we really believe this ?
-
The other take on the same news was:
Has Sky News conflated WLR switch off plans with copper replacement plans? (https://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/8537-has-sky-news-conflated-wlr-switch-off-plans-with-copper-replacement-plans)
We may be wrong but to us the Sky News coverage on secret talks to turn off copper everywhere in the UK in 2027 read very like a journalist at Sky has seen some of the WLR switch off plans (scheduled for 2025) or heard of them third hand and is conflating this with other talks around how the Governments 100% full fibre plans for 2025 can be reached.
Perhaps wait for some official announcement.
-
Perhaps wait for some official announcement.
b*cat nods in agreement.
As I currently "see things" the speculation is . . . er . . . unhelpful, time-wasting, speculation. ::)
-
There's more chance of seeing my avatar go past your window than demise of copper by 2027
-
So no more arguing on the phone to often far off places that your line as gone bad, because now they will be able to see stats and directly compare them.
You think they'd be able to see the stats, but if my experience very recently with Virgin Media is anything to go by it won't change a thing (they couldn't see that my fibre line was dropping many times a day, although I know they had the information available). All the time you have first tier support that haven't a clue about what they are asking you, and what the answers actually mean when you do get a fault you'll spends hours on the phone trying to explain the fault to someone who doesn't even know what the lights on the front of their own router mean. And when you ask to speak to someone who does, they transfer you to a totally different department that's nothing to do with faults :wall: :wall: :wall:
Anyway, great news on them trying to get rid of copper.
-
There's more chance of seeing my avatar go past your window than demise of copper by 2027
Completely agree, even though I do see some very odd things going past my windows these days. ::)
Imagine what would become of those rural users who depend upon a horrible, slow, bit of copper because FTTP is not an economically viable alternative. Or those who live in blocks of flats, served with gigabit services to the locality by the likes of Hyperoptic, but delivered to their home via copper? Would they be told they can no longer have any service at all, just to satisfy a gimmicky “copper switch off” headline? And what then, would they be fobbed off with an even worse mobile service?
-
Do we really believe this ?
No. Rolling it out across the country in that timeframe is difficult enough let alone the millions of installs a year.
This is likely the demise of POTS.
-
@7LM Good point. Those of us who are not worthy need to lean on the politicians who are round our way to ensure we are protected.
-
You think they'd be able to see the stats, but if my experience very recently with Virgin Media is anything to go by it won't change a thing (they couldn't see that my fibre line was dropping many times a day, although I know they had the information available). All the time you have first tier support that haven't a clue about what they are asking you, and what the answers actually mean when you do get a fault you'll spends hours on the phone trying to explain the fault to someone who doesn't even know what the lights on the front of their own router mean. And when you ask to speak to someone who does, they transfer you to a totally different department that's nothing to do with faults :wall: :wall: :wall:
It amazes me that in 2019 that there are people hired by ISP's that haven't a clue what they are talking about. This sort of behaviour I could accept in the early 2000's as technology expanded out of the realm of the enthusiast to the masses. It was understandable that it was new information back then. But these days anyone born in the mid-90s have literally grown up with technology and routers. To have no clue about routers, and lets say the home hubs or VM's offering is pure ignorance. Don't these ISP's check people have the required knowledge before they hire them? My favourite is when complaining that my line was having problems I told if my wifi worked then everything was ok ::)
Don't these CEO's or those slightly lower down watch any feedback of people online?
I guess with a full fibre line if it faults and goes down the most benign question they can ask is "can you turn it off and on again?" ;D
-
Many people have no comprehension of how it works, every time mine stopped working my 17 year old daughter complained the WiFi had stopped working again, even though I told her every time it was the broadband. Once to prove the WiFi was OK I told her to type in 192.168.0.12, she wasn't impressed when the Web interface of our printer appeared on her phone, but it proved the WiFi was working ;D
Talking to the engineer that came he said a lot of reported faults are just poor WiFi reception, which is why more ISPs are starting to have mesh systems available.
-
My wife gets confused by this wireless lan vs internet access thing when things go wrong.
Unfortunately apple devices stick with wireless lan even when the internet connection from the router via the main pipe, dsl say, has gone down, and they should switch to 4G if only they knew and had the clue. I wish there was an implementation of a system using a suitable protocol available to link routers to iOS boxes and control routing, there are of course several routing protocol candidates.
Because when the internet access link goes down the seductive wireless lan still keeps the iOS boxes faithful to wireless I have now got 3G failover going in the router. (Have failed to work out how to set 4G NIC up.) this means that wireless lans are not so evil, luring iOS devices when those devices should switch to 4G.
(I don’t know if ther’s Any way if telling devices to switch default gateway?)
-
Many people have no comprehension of how it works, every time mine stopped working my 17 year old daughter complained the WiFi had stopped working again, even though I told her every time it was the broadband. Once to prove the WiFi was OK I told her to type in 192.168.0.12, she wasn't impressed when the Web interface of our printer appeared on her phone, but it proved the WiFi was working ;D
If I had kids I would TOTALLY be that guy. :lol:
-
Ref understanding of technological boundaries, I continue to be surprised (and depressed) by the number of people I meet, outwardly intelligent folks, who think their car sat-navs ‘receive directions’ from the GPS satellites. ::)
-
Do they need to care how it works? I'm sure a lawyer would be astonished by my ignorance of the law. I would hope they wouldn't look down on me because of it.
-
Interesting point. But actually, I’d imagine lawyers might also be occasionally dismayed when they overhear armchair experts debating legal matters, in nonsensical terms. :)
-
8 years is far away, but I am getting older so finding every year more and more valuable. But I will acknowledge its a clear step forward and hopefully BT will get more ambitious in future bringing that date closer.
-
8 years is far away, but I am getting older so finding every year more and more valuable.
Sometimes I think like that too when I see these far off year dates. Will I be alive to get full fibre? Maybe they can connect my grave site up ;D
-
FTTG :)
-
I plan on being cremated, so I guess I want 5G
-
Do they need to care how it works? I'm sure a lawyer would be astonished by my ignorance of the law. I would hope they wouldn't look down on me because of it.
From a security perspective and being able to correctly explain problems to your ISP when they happen, I'd argue yes.
A lot of scams are simply due to a lack of knowledge about how the Internet works. But equally there will be some people who will never "get it", my mum for one.
Kids however, they really should be taught the basics.
-
Completely agree, even though I do see some very odd things going past my windows these days. ::)
Imagine what would become of those rural users who depend upon a horrible, slow, bit of copper because FTTP is not an economically viable alternative. Or those who live in blocks of flats, served with gigabit services to the locality by the likes of Hyperoptic, but delivered to their home via copper? Would they be told they can no longer have any service at all, just to satisfy a gimmicky “copper switch off” headline? And what then, would they be fobbed off with an even worse mobile service?
Trust me .... things are moving incredibly fast in OR regarding FTTP deployment.
Blocks of flats and similar (or MDU's - Multiple Dwelling Units as they're termed) are absolutely part of the programme, as is 'The last 20%', (areas receiving very slow speeds or nothing at all). :)
-
Trust me .... things are moving incredibly fast in OR regarding FTTP deployment.
Blocks of flats and similar (or MDU's - Multiple Dwelling Units as they're termed) are absolutely part of the programme, as is 'The last 20%', (areas receiving very slow speeds or nothing at all). :)
Nice to see you posting, BS, it’s been a while. :)
My concern is not that BT are committing to target dates for fibre that goes further than FTTC, that is good. My concern is that they are (allegedly) committing to target dates for copper switch-off. That would not be so good if, come that date, people were still depending upon on it, no matter how few.
Copper switch-off should imho happen when (meaning ‘after’) it is no longer needed, rather than according to a target date. I actually suspect BT will ‘do the right thing’ left to their own devices, but the media and politicians seem to be encouraging them to ‘do the wrong thing’ in pursuit of a gimmicky headline.
-
the media and politicians seem to be encouraging them to ‘do the wrong thing’ in pursuit of a gimmicky headline
Agreed. There is a lot of hype without understanding technology or what is involved.
Copper switch-off should imho happen when (meaning ‘after’) it is no longer needed, rather than according to a target date.
A date needs to be set as there will always be someone with a need. I'm thinking along the lines of the DSO and switch off for analogue TV. It perhaps does seem a bit premature at this time to set a date when it seems so far in the future and and its only just getting off the ground.
I saw a really good article a several weeks ago about BoJo's fibre promises. I think it was on El reg.
-
I think it was on El reg
Found it -
Boris Johnson's promise of full fibre in the UK by 2025 is pie in the sky (https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/07/17/boris_johnsons_promise_of_fullfibre_by_2025_is_pie_in_the_sky/).
There are quotes in the main article from CarlT and Saffy
-
I wonder sometimes if one of the influences for a copper switch off is that G.fast pushed the copper line to the limit and overall its failed to produce the results they were hoping for, so now they realise if they want to go any faster and provide a consistant service then the copper lines need updating.
I think they did need to name a date, even if it's just a symbolic one, just to set a target so they can track progress towards their overall goal.
-
Nice to see you posting, BS, it’s been a while. :)
My concern is not that BT are committing to target dates for fibre that goes further than FTTC, that is good. My concern is that they are (allegedly) committing to target dates for copper switch-off. That would not be so good if, come that date, people were still depending upon on it, no matter how few.
Copper switch-off should imho happen when (meaning ‘after’) it is no longer needed, rather than according to a target date. I actually suspect BT will ‘do the right thing’ left to their own devices, but the media and politicians seem to be encouraging them to ‘do the wrong thing’ in pursuit of a gimmicky headline.
We have a generation of people who have grown up using landline phones, I think as long as they are breathing the government wouldnt let their legacy services be turned off, its a kind of a generation thing. Now you could argue one could offer voip over fibre, and the handheld device mirrors a legacy phone so the end user isnt confused, but we never going to have universal fibre coverage by 2027, there will be people like weaver still only connected by copper and the government will protect them whilst that generation of people lives.
-
We have a generation of people who have grown up using landline phones, I think as long as they are breathing the government wouldnt let their legacy services be turned off, its a kind of a generation thing.
It may be a generation thing but remember that until comparatively recently we had a generation of people many of whom grew up using analogue TV (some of whom were still using black-and-white technology). The government of the day had no compunction about switching over everyone to digital TV requiring those who had not latched on to modern technology to replace their televisions or source a set-top box. That was driven by the money the government was looking to bring in from the mobile phone companies for the spectrum released by the analogue TV signals.
There is not the same opportunity for the government to bring in revenue if the copper is removed so it will come down to how much pressure BT can put on the government to get sanction to remove the copper infrastructure and take the savings once fibre or other technology capable of bringing fast internet to all is rolled out. The copper switch off will happen once the commercial pressures are stronger than the Luddite tendency.
-
Are we sure we are mean the removal of copper nationally by 2027 and not the closure of the PTSN?
-
It may be a generation thing but remember that until comparatively recently we had a generation of people many of whom grew up using analogue TV (some of whom were still using black-and-white technology). The government of the day had no compunction about switching over everyone to digital TV requiring those who had not latched on to modern technology to replace their televisions or source a set-top box. That was driven by the money the government was looking to bring in from the mobile phone companies for the spectrum released by the analogue TV signals.
There is not the same opportunity for the government to bring in revenue if the copper is removed so it will come down to how much pressure BT can put on the government to get sanction to remove the copper infrastructure and take the savings once fibre or other technology capable of bringing fast internet to all is rolled out. The copper switch off will happen once the commercial pressures are stronger than the Luddite tendency.
I think the cost of moving the country to digital tv signals is far lower than covering the country with wired fibre, I think the government wont make users of copper lines use mobile phones instead, they would for fibre, but fibre wont be done everywhere by 2027 for financial and time reasons. Upgrading air signals is far easier than upgrading wired signals.
-
Just to be clear, my reference to people who ‘need’ copper was more to do with internet access, not voice (though voice might matter too).
If there is a target cut-off date, and it is set in concrete, there is a risk that a few remaining households, that do not have yet access to fibre or cable, will be left with nothing at all or at best, feeble mobile data. Politicians and the media will be able to celebrate that the cut-off date was met, whilst these souls are hung out to dry.
My argument is that the correct process is to set a target for 100% (not 99.9%) fibre coverage and only after that has been achieved, even if it is years overdue, should any subsequent target be set for ‘copper switch off’.
-
I cant see us ever having 100% FTTP, what is probable is alternative techs will be used for certain areas such as 5G and community wifi broadband.
-
Nice to see you posting, BS, it’s been a while. :)
My concern is not that BT are committing to target dates for fibre that goes further than FTTC, that is good. My concern is that they are (allegedly) committing to target dates for copper switch-off. That would not be so good if, come that date, people were still depending upon on it, no matter how few.
Copper switch-off should imho happen when (meaning ‘after’) it is no longer needed, rather than according to a target date. I actually suspect BT will ‘do the right thing’ left to their own devices, but the media and politicians seem to be encouraging them to ‘do the wrong thing’ in pursuit of a gimmicky headline.
Thanks for the welcome back, 7LM .... now then, Dec 2025 is indeed the target date and work is well under way to meet that date. There are lots of considerations being worked on such as security alarm lines, health monitoring lines, ATM's, lift lines, traffic lights etc etc .... but as mooted VoB (Voice over Broadband) should be in play by Dec 2025.
Like anything in scope, this has been trialled (using a fibre city location) and with further trials going into 2020 it is expected 'x' amount of Exchanges to be switched off on a weekly basis from 2020-2025.
Of course, with anything as huge and involved as this .... issues may push the date back .... :)
-
I'm really pleased, great news indeed.
-
Interesting BS, thanks for the insight.
The turning off of exchanges gives a clear indication why they pushing FTTP now.
-
Thank you BS for the additional info :)
-
Like anything in scope, this has been trialled (using a fibre city location) and with further trials going into 2020 it is expected 'x' amount of Exchanges to be switched off on a weekly basis from 2020-2025.
I'll start off by saying I'm in no way questioning what you've been briefed, but it's the opposite of what's been briefed to media/industry.
Would be interested to know how they are going to close exchanges before WLR/PSTN are switched off.
I've not seen anything to suggest exchange closures prior to 2025 and logistically don't see how that's even feasible with some still only having access to ADSL services.
Exchanges with LLU presence are unlikely to be closed prior to 2025 as they are still in consultation over how and when things will be done.
Exchanges with no LLU presence tend to be more rural and would need full FTTx coverage from a parent/handover exchange before xDSL services could be switch off.
Even then that only covers broadband and would leave everyone without a voice option.
but as mooted VoB (Voice over Broadband) should be in play by Dec 2025.
Which is the earliest I would expect exchange closures, for that very reason.
Happy to be informed otherwise but I can't see how they would do this without leaving people without services.
WLR stop sell isn't until 2023 with it being retired Dec 2025
https://www.openreach.co.uk/orpg/home/products/wlrwithdrawal/wlrwithdrawal/downloads/Sept_2019_Newsletter_Issue_3.pdf
The Mildenhall exchange trial (the main VOIP trial exchange) doesn't end till Dec 2022.
Mildenhall isn't a Handover exchange.
Proposed Trial Timeline:
o Start voluntary migrations October 2019
o Notification of products stop sell January 2020
o SOTAP pilot start January 2021
o Products stop sell January 2021
o Orphaned asset migration start January 2022
o Withdrawal of stopped products in trial area 5 December 2022
o Trial closure 5 December 2022
Even on this trial exchange the stop sell will not be exchange wide but at an individual property level.
https://www.scribd.com/document/428870779/New-Openreach-Industry-Consultation-FTTP-Exchange-Upgrade-and-Single-Order-1
When OpenReach talk about the WLR/PSTN switch off they cite SOTAP as 1 of the alternatives.
6) What are you going to do about voice only customers who don’t want broadband?
The introduction of the SOTAP product will ensure that end customers that cannot get fibre (coverage) can access an ADSL broadband service over which voice can be provided and a low speed fibre option is be considered for voice only customers. CPs that buy the Openreach MPF service and provide voice only services to end customers will not be impacted by WLR withdrawal.
That requires the copper exchange to stay where it is, until such a time there's full GEA coverage.
-
j0hn, out of curiosity - what do you do for a living?
-
Hi j0hn
Not being briefed, specifically ... just what is available to read on our communal 'boards'.
I am certainly not the oracle on all things BTOR related, and always apply a caveat that things can and do change from initial plans. :)
-
In no way questioning you BS :hat:
Just very interested in how it can be done, particularly without alternative landline services.
I'm all for it happening tomorrow if the alternatives are in place.
-
j0hn, out of curiosity - what do you do for a living?
6 years in the telecoms industry, though not xDSL related in the slightest.
Last 10 years in the Events sector.
Career change coming shortly I think.
-
In no way questioning you BS :hat:
Just very interested in how it can be done, particularly without alternative landline services.
I'm all for it happening tomorrow if the alternatives are in place.
Ha ha ..... I didn't think for one minute you was j0hn. :drink:
The problem with what I can see is they very rarely have a time/date stamp on them ... ergo the info could indeed be flawed somewhat ??. Alas, it's the best I can offer. :blush:
-
In no way questioning you BS :hat:
Just very interested in how it can be done, particularly without alternative landline services.
I'm all for it happening tomorrow if the alternatives are in place.
for voice the future is wireless
-
for voice the future is wireless
That's your opinion.
I'm sure a fixed line operator like OpenReach would disagree though.
They wouldn't be developing their VOIP/VoB solution if they thought mobile networks were going to do all this in future.
May as well just close PSTN now and not bother working on alternatives.
-
They are going to develop as its their business to try and keep a market there as long as possible. I would do the same.
I dont think wired voice services are going to completely die but they will shrink significantly in the residential sector.
-
I would also argue in the business sector to, we've gone over to VOIP, and I know quite a few of our suppliers have.
-
Most of us don't even have phones on our desks... I do only so I can contact the old school world. (Admittedly, it's all VoIP :))
-
Voip does not equate to wireless.
I know of major commercial organisations who have ‘gone VoIP’ for telephony, but that would be VoIP over their whatever blend of fibre and copper delivers their internet access.
I know of no major organisations that have ‘gone wireless’ for internet access, regardless of whether just data, or VoIP too.
-
Most of us don't even have phones on our desks...
Would you please quantify both the "most" and the "us". I would be most interested to see those figures that relate to the U.K.
-
Voip does not equate to wireless.
Yes but it does equate to not requiring a phone line for telephony as in the traditional sense.
-
I know going mobile seems to be quite high in some european countries. I'm not sure if that is the case in the UK, yet. But it wouldnt surprise me if it was coming soon. It might be a generational thing, as we know all the kids use mobiles 24/7, so the landline, I would guess, will be nearly dead by the time they get in to their 30s and 40s i.e. around 2030 to 2040.
I was interested to see on one of the twitters I'm following that tv channels are now being broadcast over full fibre connections in some countries, I think as a test. In my opinion this will eventually happen for competition reasons against VM. But also if tv channels were broadcast over "landlines" then it would free up even more space in broadcast frequencies.
-
Would you please quantify both the "most" and the "us". I would be most interested to see those figures that relate to the U.K.
Sorry, should probably have qualified that with - at work - the vast majority of people do not have physical telephones on their desks.
We can make phone calls with a soft VoIP phone. How phone calls get off VoIP and out into the PSTN - that's handled by a 3rd party supplier
-
Sorry, should probably have qualified that with - at work - the vast majority of people do not have physical telephones on their desks.
Ah, I see. Thank you. :)
-
I'm just over 50 year's old and simply don't see the point of a landline, I can take my mobile any where I go, where as with a land line it stays at home. My oldest daughter is at uni, everybody can still get hold of her on her mobile, my wife and other daughter also have their own mobiles, so we all have our own independent phones. Bowden is right, many youngsters would have grown up without or barely using a landline.
-
It seems to me, one difference with the landline is it is seen as serving the house, not the individual. When it rings, it is generally the case that whoever is nearest will answer it. And if, for example, it’s cousin George calling to invite us for dinner, he won’t care who answers as long as somebody does.
In contrast, I would not dream of answering other half’s mobile, or even looking to see who was calling. Nor would I look at her text messages. A mobile is, to me, a very private thing. George’s call might thus go unanswered, even though somebody was available to talk to him, just because he called the ‘wrong’ mobile.
When calling others, I always prefer to call their landlines rather than mobile. I know how embarrassing/annoying it can be when a phone starts ringing, say, at a supermarket checkout, or on crowded public transport. I don’t like to feel I might be contributing to such a nuisance.
Thus, since I feel mobiles and landlines serve quite different purposes, I want one of each. :)
-
The only person who calls our landline is my mother-in-law. That's it. Despite her and my wife both owning mobiles, they often call each other on the landline. Odd, that.
-
It seems to me, one difference with the landline is it is seen as serving the house, not the individual. When it rings, it is generally the case that whoever is nearest will answer it. And if, for example, it’s cousin George calling to invite us for dinner, he won’t care who answers as long as somebody does.
In contrast, I would not dream of answering other half’s mobile, or even looking to see who was calling. Nor would I look at her text messages. A mobile is, to me, a very private thing. George’s call might thus go unanswered, even though somebody was available to talk to him, just because he called the ‘wrong’ mobile.
When calling others, I always prefer to call their landlines rather than mobile. I know how embarrassing/annoying it can be when a phone starts ringing, say, at a supermarket checkout, or on crowded public transport. I don’t like to feel I might be contributing to such a nuisance.
Thus, since I feel mobiles and landlines serve quite different purposes, I want one of each. :)
It is probably a generational thing 7LM. I know what you mean about bothering people if they might be out in public. I'm the same. But a lot of the younger generation don't seem to bother. I think they also text message using apps these days. I can never stand to be typing on the mobile phone too much though :)
I think in your example Georges unanswered call would usually go to a voice recording service (something that is standard on all mobiles, but not on landlines) and your wife would get a notification that she missed a call and tell her to call the answer service to hear the message.
I'm sure the landline will remain. But I suspect the priority will change from voice to data.
-
I'm just over 50 year's old and simply don't see the point of a landline,
Not wanting to pick a fight/argument - but when mobile reception in the UK is actually universal inside then I will agree with you as another mid 50's person.
As it is, at home my mobile will, when inside the house, usually ring if it is left on my bedside table where I won't hear it: so it is the open.
Whereas if it is with me in my back pocket for example inside the house then that is enough of a restriction to the signal getting though that it does not ring. I do though get the text which tells me I've just missed a call and that there is a message on my voice mail. So if I really really do want to receive a call I have to carry it round in the house but not put in inside any jacket/trouser pocket but leave it out on a table next to me and not forget to pick it up each time.
Likewise I know that ringing a person in a nearby village from my landline to their mobile if they are at home is pointless as invariably the call will fail - use landline is the answer.
I'm not even in a modern steel and foil insulation house - just a 1930's one - those who do live in a modern square box say they have pretty well zero mobile reception inside.
This in rural southern UK and not half way up a welsh mountain were actually there is often good reception due to the number of masts in direct line of sight unlike a welsh valley where the villages are where there is in many cases no reception at all from any network.
If I am staying over in such places I will pick up your call to my mobile when I venture into a reception area - which might be days.
Motto as ever - use landline.
-
7LM, Georges call would be logged as a missed call, he may also leave a message as Bowdon said, so your wife could then phone back at her convenience once she's aware. My wife often leaves her phone in the kitchen, if it rings or she gets a text and I hear it I'll take her phone to her, very rarely I will answer it if it's an family or extended family member as it may be an emergency but only if I'm unlikely to get the phone to her quick enough.
c6em, yes some very valid points there, its very easy to forget that not every one has excellent reception, we are very lucky that we have excellent reception at home on all networks. I deliberately keep the the wife's mobile on a different network to mine so if we are out and about and need to make an emergency call one of us is likely to have reception.
-
I'm just over 50 year's old and simply don't see the point of a landline, I can take my mobile any where I go, where as with a land line it stays at home. My oldest daughter is at uni, everybody can still get hold of her on her mobile, my wife and other daughter also have their own mobiles, so we all have our own independent phones. Bowden is right, many youngsters would have grown up without or barely using a landline.
You said it in a nutshell, hence my feeling that for consumer use wireless is the future. On aaisp my line is a broadband only line, no voice service. My sister on VM has no phone line at all. Most of my friends also dont bother with a landline, but they do for their business, as a fair few of my friends are business owners, they still have them on their business properties, but for personal use they all use mobile phones only.
At home, and also at all family and friend's houses I have great signal on phone. But I know from sites like digitalspy, here and tbb that there is some people who get no signal in their home. That is fixable with a mobile USO. Some people may still need some kind of amplifier near window or something, but a USO should at least mean there is a signal to that point in every home.
-
. . . but a USO should at least mean there is a signal to that point in every home.
You mean like the USO that mandates BT to supply a fixed line service . . . . unless it would be too expensive to do so and the customer won't pay the excess costs (as per https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0021/34266/statement.pdf (https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0021/34266/statement.pdf)).
-
Quick reality check. This thread is about FTTP, and “copper switch off”, whatever that means. The only party to benefit from copper switch off, if it means the demise of copper exchange lines, is BT, by the massively profitable expedient of rendering hundreds of exchanges redundant.
Comparison has been made to DTV switchover. But that was a necessary evil, as the old analogue transmitters were causing interference with the planned digital transmitters. With such a “copper switch off” there is no such public benefit, legacy ADSL does not slow users of FTTP.
Copper switch off BT cost saving must simply not be allowed to happen imho, until it can be proven there will be no ‘losers’. None at all, not even a fraction of a percent of population.
On that, sorry, I am not negotiable. Plain ridiculous, that people on these forums should even contemplate it.
-
7LM, if they actually manage to cover every property with fttp then that could be used for voice even if not for broadband. Its a very big if though.
-
Times and technology changes, copper (and silver copper ;) ) as has been pointed out on this and other forums many times, is now outdated, ergo why would any business not capitalise on its demise ??
I've read in various forms of communique's, that the recovery of E-side cables will part fund the roll-out of FTTP and that bringing Exchanges 'together' to free up buildings has been looked at ... again, as a business model, why wouldn't you ??
As with the politics of today, it's an interesting time in the comms industry. :)
-
I’m not blaming BT, they have a legal responsibility to act in the best interests their shareholders (of which I am one). Their shareholders (*99% of them) will no doubt be happy with an arrangement where there is a big cost saving *99% of the population have a boost up to FTTP, and the other 1% who (most of them) previously had some form of ADSL, or even FTTC, have that service taken away completely.
I really don’t think BT are nasty enough to want to do that. In my career, I met folks from BT from time to time, they were decent people. But if politicians, and the media, keep harping on about “copper switch off” as if it is a worthy goal, BT will probably have no choice but to buy into it.
*My 99%/1% balance, for those who’ll eventually have FTTP, is a figure I have made up for the sake of illustration. If anybody can enlighten me as to a more accurate prediction, I’d be interested. Bear in mind though, 1% is 600,000 people.
-
7lm, the removal (and selling) of copper is a big part of the economics of rolling out FTTP.
-
. . . the other 1% who (most of them) previously had some form of ADSL, or even FTTC, have that service taken away completely.
Do we know how many of your putative 1% could actually be serviced through a 4G or future 5G mobile connection. From the router onwards there is little practical difference to the end user experience and VoIP services will ensure that those who can benefit that way can still have a conventional style telephone in the corner of the living room. After that how many could be serviced from a satellite connection? Expensive, but would probably be subsidised as the costs for that small number would be far outweighed by the benefits of stripping out all of the copper.
I also seem to be rather more cynical than you; I have worked with some extremely nice people in business in my time, but if the edict from on high is that a course will be followed then I'm afraid niceness goes out of the window in favour of self-preservation.
-
but if the edict from on high is that a course will be followed then I'm afraid niceness goes out of the window in favour of self-preservation.
What's the self preservation of OpenReach to rip up copper without a viable alternative.
Not everyone who will have had an OpenReach copper line and is suddenly told tough you need to use 2g/4g/5g (some 3g spectrum will likely be refarmed to 4g) will use EE.
BT Group may want to close rural exchanges to save money but they don't want any revenue generated to go to competitors.
Fixed line services will continue to play a huge part. Even for very rural customers.
Common sense dictates not every single rural home in the country will get full fibre but that doesn't mean they will all be thrown on mobile networks either.
I reckon the amount of properties that will be left with no fixed line when copper is shut off (NOT the PSTN shutdown) will be a relatively small number.
-
What's the self preservation of OpenReach to rip up copper without a viable alternative.
I was referring to the individual not the corporate body. No matter how nice a guy you are when the boss says "do it" even if it goes against your sense of what is the correct thing to do, then most nice guys do it. Not many tell the boss that it is wrong and that you can stick your job.
-
There were a number of occasions in my own career when I decided that what was best for a customer, and best for the company, differed from what a manager from higher up the food chain, was telling me to do.
I then contrived to do what was best for the customer and the company, whilst allowing said manager to believe he’d got his way, even though he hadn’t. It’s a skill, and quite satisfying to do, just don’t expect any thanks for it. ;D
-
The only party to benefit from copper switch off, if it means the demise of copper exchange lines, is BT, by the massively profitable expedient of rendering hundreds of exchanges redundant.
Just a reminder that BT sold off most of their exchanges long ago. From memory the first lot was way back in 2001, then some more about 10 years ago.. and even more recently they even sold off some of their operating based buildings.
It has been a long term plan dating back years that recovery of copper would fund fibre. There's even been problems with a couple of exchanges where they expected to be out long before now. The leases which were negotiated at the time of sale have expired.. and the leaseholder has either refused to renew or held Openreach to ransom causing them to have to shift locations for a couple of quite large exchanges.
The original plans which date back to 2001 have been scuppered along the way - even the 21CN PTSN switch over which was due to go ahead in 2007/8 got dropped possibly related to the fact they were in between time forced to open up the exchanges for LLU. It's no big secret either that BT wanted to put more fibre in the field way back towards the end of the last century but that was also scuppered by the government at the time. I sometimes wonder if we would have had a far more advanced network already if it wasn't for the likes of regulators and certain politicians. Who knows, but it is what it is and technology continues to progress sooner or later.
I do kind of get what you are saying though about the total switch off. The really ironic thing is that whilst copper has become useless for broadband ironically it is on the whole extremely reliable for voice - more so than some of the alternatives - which is what it was invented for. There is always the chance that for someone somewhere in a remote location where that string of copper could be a lifesaver.
-
There were a number of occasions in my own career when I decided that what was best for a customer, and best for the company, differed from what a manager from higher up the food chain, was telling me to do.
I then contrived to do what was best for the customer and the company, whilst allowing said manager to believe he’d got his way, even though he hadn’t. It’s a skill, and quite satisfying to do, just don’t expect any thanks for it. ;D
Then you are not as cynical as I am and and are an outlier from the way that most "nice guys" behave. Your reward will come in heaven but it won't stop the removal of copper if there is enough money at stake and there are enough senior people who have bonuses hanging on the result.
-
. Your reward will come in heaven.
Now that’s a first. Nobody has ever told me that, at least nobody who knows me well. :D
More seriously, I get what you are saying. :)