Kitz Forum
Broadband Related => ISPs => Topic started by: mywifeshusband on August 21, 2009, 09:57:03 PM
-
If umpteen ISPs can provide a service with varying degrees of success over BT wires, why then can't other ISP's offer a service using Virgin cables?
Surely what' source for the goose must be source for the gander? ???
-
I guess because Virgin own the cables and can offer them to as many or as few other ISPs as they wish.
If you want to use Virgin cables, sign up with Virgin.
-
I guess because Virgin own the cables and can offer them to as many or as few other ISPs as they wish.
If you want to use Virgin cables, sign up with Virgin.
Thats if you have access to the cable network............ ;)
-
The phone lines are owned by BT Wholesale who rent them to the telecoms providers and the various ISPs such as Tiscali and even BT Broadband.........this by agreement with OFCOM, (or possibly duress is a better word) I understand.
Virgin are not under the same pressure to rent out their cables to other providers
-
I'm not sure of what I am about to say, (so please don't shout at me too loudly if it's wrong) but here goes......
Didn't tax payers originally pay for "GPO" cables to be installed, changing the name to BT does not alter that.
Whereas virgin paid for their cable installation (with the help of grants, no-doubt)
So why shouldn't other companies have the rite to use of BT cables albeit at a cost.
-
I'm certainly not going to shout at you (or anyone else) but I think it's fair to say that BT's shareholders bought the BT assets from the taxpayer, so who originally paid for those cables doesn't make any difference. The price may have been too low, but you can blame the government of the day for that, not BT or its shareholders.
The reason that BT was forced to make its network available to other companies was that BT was effectively a monopoly, and still is in many areas. My personal view, though, is that OFCOM have tipped the balance too far in favour of the cable companies, and the question asked at the start of this thread is a fair question.
-
I agree with Eric and that we have got ourselves into quite a muddle.
It also shouldn't be forgotten that NTL (and possibly Telewest?) both found themselves in commercial difficulties and required restructuring - no doubt with some shareholders loosing out.
BT also seem to have got into some difficulties with their global operations.
Kind regards,
Walter
-
The thinking behind my original question was, if BT as a ISP, is only half way or so up the league table of perceived ISP excellence, when seeing it owns much of the infrastructure that all (wire delivery) ISPs have to use; would not the fibre optic cable performance be improved, if Virgin's ISP near monopoly of cable delivered BB, were similarly opened up to competition, for other service providers to exploit, and possibly enhance, in much the same way as BT's compeditors have apparently managed to provide a better wired service than BT itself.
No doubt surrendering Virgin's present 'virginity' would come at a price, as perhaps it should, but overall, is not the service, and the overall cable facility likely to be be improved?
Despite its cable service speed advantage I note that its perceived IPS performance rating is not as high as one might expect, and can't help but wonder if others, given the opportunity, might be able to give us a bettter deal! ::)
-
Hi
quote : BT as a ISP, is only half way or so up the league table of perceived ISP excellence, when seeing it owns much of the infrastructure that all (wire delivery)
BT ISP does NOT own the cables etc . It is an ISP in its own right It rents the cables and bandwidth exactly the same as any other ISP . In fact it would be illegal for BTW to show any favouritism.
Regards Jeff
-
The biggest problem with BT(and a lot more big isp's) is their technical help is usually out sourced to India,which tbh is an absolute waste of time.
-
Which is one reason I often suggest cheapest is most certainly not the best, particularly if there is a local history of problems.
I am reasonably sure that some ISPs use such call centres just to make the problem more difficult (even impossible?) to solve so they have disgruntled customers who have to stay for the length of the contract and just suffer in seething silence, then leave to get some other ISP to solve the problem. Now of course if we had FTTH as in developing countries such as Slovakia much of this would be irrelevant.
Kind rergards,
Walter
-
My only real comment on this topic is:
"HANDS OF VIRGIN MEDIA'S LINES"
Both cable and fibre optic lines can still only handle so much traffic, so the more that is passed over to the likes of VM's lines then the slower or speeds will become.
Don't forget that even some of VM's lines are now outdated and need to be upgraded to be able to supply the new "Up-To 50mb connection"