Print

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

[Alex Atkin UK]

Personally I fear for when it goes self install as both times I went with a none-BT network ISP on self install, things have ended badly.  The last time was VDSL on the Digital Region network.

I was left without a phone line for five days as the documentation the engineer was given telling him where my D side was in the cabinet, was wrong.  Then when I complained that my line was dead to my ISP, they were unable to get Openreach to accept there was a problem on their end, instead claiming "the problem must be in the Digital Region cabinet". 

Despite the fact at least two Digital Region engineers came out at different times on the activation day to confirm everything was fine their side, nothing happened.  It was only thanks to my ISP calling my land line number that they found out the next day that my E side was now connected to someone else.  I called my land line and talked to the person who it was connected in order to fill them in on what happened.

Three days with no phone line and I get a call from the person who had my line crossed with theirs, TalkTalk had arranged an engineer and "fixed" their line.  No surprise, mine was still dead, thanks Openreach. 

Come Monday when I FINALLY got an engineer actually come to my house (it seems I was lucky, they sent a voice engineer) I told him the saga and he stuck a tone generator on my D side so he could figure out what went wrong.  What really had me flabbergasted was that the engineer who had "fixed" the other persons line had left my E side loose in the cabinet as obviously his job did not include fixing my line.  I think that says all you need to know really about how stupidly inefficient and just plain mental the job allocation system is at Openreach.  You would think knowing that was an active E side the job would include figuring out where it came from and putting it back where it belongs.

It just really annoyed me because THEY at least had the use of a phone line for calls AND reported the fault at least a day later than me.  Yet I was left with no line and theirs got repaired first.  Where is the logic there?  Surely a dead line is a higher priority than a crossed line, but it seems where I went wrong was it being raised by my ISP rather than my telco.  But I was afraid to raise it as a voice fault in case that in turn ended up with my broadband being disconnected to "repair" the voice line and having to get ANOTHER engineer to fix that, who might again break the E side if the documentation hadn't been updated.

Had this been an engineer install however, none of this would have happened as they would have checked my line was working before leaving.  (sorry for the long post, I wanted to link to this story but I cannot find where I originally posted it and wanted to make clear why I dislike self install)

[Black Sheep]

The 'Self install' that is definitely being introduced, is only an option for the EU. The other being a 'Managed Install' option, whereby the engineer will still attend site. As the old saying goes, 'You gets what you pays for'. 

[renluop]

There again, you might get an 'only just trained' numpty from, say, M J Quinn . . . 

BS should claim tuition fees in that case, 

[Black Sheep]

There again, you might get an 'only just trained' numpty from, say, M J Quinn . . . 

BS should claim tuition fees in that case, 

  There are lots of good engineers out there. Unfortunately, in the contracting game, money talks, and as I stated above ............... you gets what you pays for. Thanks renluop for your comment.  

[waltergmw]

@ BS,

Given the case that some, but not all, lines are of sub-optimum quality and could be improved, I hope that a self install will allow the EU to observe the full modem stats in an unlocked modem. If not, then the managed install must include a requirement to test the line with an appropriate test instrument,  whether or not subcontractors are being used. How we achieve that requirement is another matter entirely - something about shooting the messenger comes to mind !

Assuming that a self-install does detect an anomaly, I trust there will be an option to initiate a SFI with a cost to the EU only if a NFF is agreed.


Kind regards,
Walter

[smurfuk]

Was my theory wrong then: I couldn't work out why BT bothered almost a couple of years ago with FTTC to my village, it couldn't be anything to do with the 8x uplift from ADSL predicted, and achieved; must have been the presence of OR engineers living in the village was my theory, anyway? Take up is still poor though; we seem to have long memories.

[Black Sheep]

@ BS,

Given the case that some, but not all, lines are of sub-optimum quality and could be improved, I hope that a self install will allow the EU to observe the full modem stats in an unlocked modem. If not, then the managed install must include a requirement to test the line with an appropriate test instrument,  whether or not subcontractors are being used. How we achieve that requirement is another matter entirely - something about shooting the messenger comes to mind !

Assuming that a self-install does detect an anomaly, I trust there will be an option to initiate a SFI with a cost to the EU only if a NFF is agreed.


Kind regards,
Walter

The communique we received was that ISP's were in the process of bringing their very own combined modem/router to market, thus negating the need for unlocked modems. The stats, I'm guessing, would be then viewable by the EU on a self-install ?? the only part Openreach would play is in the cabinet connections.

I agree with you (always have), that ALL 'Managed Installs' should carry the full basket of tests. Especially as it would be a greater premium than the self-install. We will see how that progresses ??

Regarding the 'Fault found' anomaly ?? Again it's purely my thoughts, but it surely has to be business as usual on that front ?? 

[Black Sheep]

Was my theory wrong then: I couldn't work out why BT bothered almost a couple of years ago with FTTC to my village, it couldn't be anything to do with the 8x uplift from ADSL predicted, and achieved; must have been the presence of OR engineers living in the village was my theory, anyway? Take up is still poor though; we seem to have long memories.

Sorry smurf ??I don't quite understand your post ?? Are you saying 'they' predicted there would be a pick-up of 8 times the ADSL customers, on VDSL ?? You then say it was achieved anyway ?? What the 'long memories' bit is about has me totally baffled, I'm afraid

[waltergmw]

@ BS & Smurf,

Re FTTC demand and take-up.

I don't think it's rocket science to suggest there are two major markets; then plus all the exceptions such as the "Not a chance brigade" being valiantly solved e.g. by B4RN at significantly higher symmetric rates and at a far faster pace than anybody else could do. There are a few other small commercial fibre players such as e.g. Gigaclear too.

But back to the main two:-

1.  Where BT is playing catch up to Virgin Media due to the laws of coaxial and twisted pair cabling physics for the actual infrastructure. Those that have been using VM for years are hardly likely to gallop in droves towards a solution which is almost bound to be inferior and less reliable (disregarding contention which in most cases should be a relatively simple matter to upgrade at least up to current limits). BT Wholesale etc. are probably left with the transfer a fraction of their existing ADSL clients which I believe is the reason for the relatively low uptake figures published, as they have had to concentrate on these VM areas.

2.  Where BT have a monopoly in lower density small urban and rural areas take up is bound to be much higher as it's hobsons choice, even if the result is quite appalling e.g. many with sub 10 Mbps on VDSL. (These speed-poverty-stricken folk might actually be far better off just taking advantage of the shorter D-side distances BUT ONLY IF the incumbent had the common sense to implement a dual ADSL & VDSL solution.) In our Ewhurst case, given we had whipped up enthusiasm and had designed a solution with capacity for EVERY line to obtain ADSL / VDSL solutions, interest was always going to be much higher. Along comes the "Concrete-crushing behemoth" who destroys our project and in their gross stupidity just puts 3 + 1** all of the smallest capacity FTTCs and then ONLY installs single ducts throughout. Surprise surprise the two largest FTTCs have run out of capacity within 3 months of installation and one of them is already planned for remedial works to dig up the pavement yet again. (One reason for the very rapid take up is I had warned everybody of the significant shortfall. Another reason is that those who had jumped first retained their broadband when most of the rest lost their entire services due to cable theft. The others saw what they were missing, ignoring the fact that the fibre cables use the same ducts but the thieves this time left them undamaged.) ** The fourth cabinet is utterly useless for Ewhurst as the D side cable involved is too long and in too poor a condition to provide any VDSL service at all.

[Black Sheep]

@ BS & Smurf,

Re FTTC demand and take-up.

I don't think it's rocket science to suggest there are two major markets; then plus all the exceptions such as the "Not a chance brigade" being valiantly solved e.g. by B4RN at significantly higher symmetric rates and at a far faster pace than anybody else could do. There are a few other small commercial fibre players such as e.g. Gigaclear too.

But back to the main two:-

1.  Where BT is playing catch up to Virgin Media due to the laws of coaxial and twisted pair cabling physics for the actual infrastructure. Those that have been using VM for years are hardly likely to gallop in droves towards a solution which is almost bound to be inferior and less reliable (disregarding contention which in most cases should be a relatively simple matter to upgrade at least up to current limits). BT Wholesale etc. are probably left with the transfer a fraction of their existing ADSL clients which I believe is the reason for the relatively low uptake figures published, as they have had to concentrate on these VM areas.

2.  Where BT have a monopoly in lower density small urban and rural areas take up is bound to be much higher as it's hobsons choice, even if the result is quite appalling e.g. many with sub 10 Mbps on VDSL. (These speed-poverty-stricken folk might actually be far better off just taking advantage of the shorter D-side distances BUT ONLY IF the incumbent had the common sense to implement a dual ADSL & VDSL solution.) In our Ewhurst case, given we had whipped up enthusiasm and had designed a solution with capacity for EVERY line to obtain ADSL / VDSL solutions, interest was always going to be much higher. Along comes the "Concrete-crushing behemoth" who destroys our project and in their gross stupidity just puts 3 + 1** all of the smallest capacity FTTCs and then ONLY installs single ducts throughout. Surprise surprise the two largest FTTCs have run out of capacity within 3 months of installation and one of them is already planned for remedial works to dig up the pavement yet again. (One reason for the very rapid take up is I had warned everybody of the significant shortfall. Another reason is that those who had jumped first retained their broadband when most of the rest lost their entire services due to cable theft. The others saw what they were missing, ignoring the fact that the fibre cables use the same ducts but the thieves this time left them undamaged.) ** The fourth cabinet is utterly useless for Ewhurst as the D side cable involved is too long and in too poor a condition to provide any VDSL service at all.

1) VM's extremely limited-reach network (Originally NYNEX), has only been around circa 15 years (approx.). Great if you live on a council estate, not so good if you are a suburb-dweller. BT's infrastructure, which is all-reaching, has been around far, far longer. The 'Relatively simple matter' of enhancing their backhaul services, has still to this date, not been achieved, hence VM's 'average' EU speeds being far lower than BT's Infinity EU's. I can't put my finger on it straightaway, but there are numerous internal comms sent to us, stating that the take-up of Openreach's Infinity services is better than expected.

2) If I 've said this once, I've said it a thousand times ........ BT are a shareholding company (Go tell Maggie .... oops, you can't now). As such, they are a profit-making industry, therefore if the balance sheet quite clearly states it is not commercially viable to throw money at 'Lovely View Village', then they wont. When I say they wont, I mean as the sole investor. BT have said they will work with partners prepared to invest, and shoulder some of the cash burden, but they will not run at a loss. They can't. Just like any other business really. There is no way on God's earth they have the resources or budgets, to 'plan' jobs as finitely as you mention, Walter.

I know you have a particular dis-like of the giant that is BT. But there are a heck of a lot of satisfied EU's out there, I see them daily. 

[waltergmw]

@ BS

I think they've been down here a bit longer and do cover most, but certainly not all, of the major conurbations. I agree there's no way they will ever provide coax everywhere. In fact were they to start that route, and I don't believe there's any intention of so doing, logic says it would be a brand new network and common sense says it would be fibre. The fact that they have a single coax using address techniques rather than individual twisted pairs, and that their joint pods mean most of the coax isn't disturbed at all, probably give them a reliability advantage too. Where they are, the line distance doesn't seem to affect them so much, but they aren't trying to run probably more than about a km before they provide another active cabinet. I do know at one stage they increased the transmit power and then added attenuators for the closer EUs. If they ever want to upgrade their network, again it would be fibre in their existing ductwork.

Kind regards,
Walter

[kitz]

I do so hope that install day will have the required bacon butties - who ever the installer may be 
I also hope that if it cant be specially -cough- allocated, then you are there to oversee the process?

[smurfuk]

Oops sorry Black Sheep, too much of a "Quick Reply". The 8x uplift predicted was on speeds, and I've no criticism of BT locally.

I'm just baffled that take up after 18 months on FTTC is so poor, still only 2 out of 18 dwellings in the street, both activated in the first month, and was similar in other streets within the village that I checked on Ofcom's postcode data. I was just surmising that perhaps part of the reason is that BT's network had a poor reputation, well locally, in the distant past and people have long memories. More importantly I still think most people don't feel the need for more than the 3.5Mbps they can get locally on ADSL. I know that I hesitated for 12 months before taking up ADSL originally, as it followed a couple of years in which my voice phone line had an intermittent fault which left it out of action 25% of the time despite all BT's many efforts to solve it. In the ten years since I've so far had no faults on the local loop that I'm aware of at all, so all the efforts were worthwhile, but at the time it drove me nuts. (And I wasn't alone).

[Black Sheep]

Thanks smurf, that has my full understanding now. 

I am in total agreement with you regarding the 'need for speed'. If VDSL wasn't free for employees, there's no way I'd be shelling out for it, as 9Meg is fine for what me and the missus want. I think therein lies one of the reasons for perceived low take-up.

I genuinely don't think EU's (Generally) wont have VDSL, because of some line fault they may have had months/years ago. TBH, Mr Average has no idea what the term 'Line plant' means or even is !! They aren't interested in the intracacies of AC Balance, Leg Resistance, capacitance, SNR ............ a heck of a lot don't even know what there speed is. They just want a stable connection and one that is quick enough for what the use it for.

Also, I find a lot of EU's are unaware that VDSL even exists on their Cabinet. Some EU's get cold called to inform them it is, others don't. I even had what is termed a 'High profile celeb' (Coronation St actor), that lives out in the sticks who wasn't aware until I told him. He wouldn't have got massive speeds, but a damn site better than he was getting on ADSL.

All in all, I was at a meeting today that informed us that our flagship product (FTTC/P) is ahead of schedule by some margin, and take up is more than predicted. There's a video I'm supposed to watch about it, but won't be doing.

Anyhows, cheers for the clarification of the post, and take it from me, BT as a whole are not this big bad wolf that some would have you believe. Since privitisation, they have to act as a profit-making business, and some scenario's simply won't fit that description. I see the mistakes they make, and where budget cuts play their part, but look at UK Ltd, the whole country's running at a deficit. But, they DO put the EU above anything else ( barring safety), as they are our bread and butter at the end of the day. The general public won't ever see this side of BT, but believe me it is our main focus.

Add to that all the charitable work BT do and fork out to (Lets not go down the tax relief route, please), and they're not allllllll bad. 

[kitz]

In BTs defence, yes there are worse CPs...   tbh i think i'd rather be with BT than say Sky.   I think a lot of their bad rep re adsl comes from their Indian call centre