Push for faster net 'premature'

Gary · Dec 03, 2007, 09:06:02

Sadly and by no means a surprise BT and offcom see no need for a fibre network, it is seen as premature! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7114642.stm

Rik · Dec 03, 2007, 09:29:57

They'll think about it when the need is desperate.

They would have said there was no need for ADSL five years ago. Useless bunch.

Gary · Dec 03, 2007, 12:33:13

I so agree, it will be years before we get anything done and by then the current system will be operating at dial up speeds

Rik · Dec 03, 2007, 12:38:03

Though the industry and regulator will consider this 'acceptable'.

I understand why BT don't want to spend the money without some guarantees on a return from the investment, but what Ofcom is about puzzles me. Though, to be fair, most of their decisions puzzle me.

Lance · Dec 03, 2007, 13:50:12

Typical. They are reactive rather than proactive.

Maybe there isn't a need at the moment, but that is because it's not possible anyway. For example, what is the point in developing TV over internet, if the ability to stream it doesn't exist. If we had the high bandwidth connections, then technology such as this would become common place.

Rik · Dec 03, 2007, 14:52:32

I agree, Lance. People didn't send text messages until the mobile networks were in place. Now they send them in huge quantity. Not many people bought a TV licence, for that matter, until there was a service to watch. Clearly, Ofcom is not strong on history.

Lance · Dec 03, 2007, 20:33:05

or communications...

MoHux · Dec 03, 2007, 21:23:56

I should think Ofcom is between a rock and a hard place!!

They have to say that, or say how it's going to be paid for.

Privatisation of what should be Public Services ....... YUK!!

Lance · Dec 03, 2007, 22:40:41

I believe that it should only be for ofcom to identify if there there is a need, not who should provide any required funding. That should lay with a government department who would produce a 500 page report which doesn't give any answers!

Rik · Dec 04, 2007, 00:06:01

Why Lance, you're as cynical as us old codgers. Must be working for local government that does it.

MoHux · Dec 04, 2007, 00:57:43

Quote from: Lance on Dec 03, 2007, 22:40:41
I believe that it should only be for ofcom to identify if there there is a need, not who should provide any required funding. That should lay with a government department who would produce a 500 page report which doesn't give any answers!

It can't say there is a need, being itself a Government appointment, without causing acute embarrassment over funding!

That's what I meant by "rock and a hard place".

Rik · Dec 04, 2007, 00:59:12

Which, I suppose, demonstrates how useless Ofcom is to consumer, Government and industry, Mo.

MoHux · Dec 04, 2007, 01:02:03

True.

ducky22 · Dec 04, 2007, 13:32:39

There aren't the services for 100mbit lines at the moment. They are coming tho - and if there is the network, they'll come faster. Sky could then offer a real 'on demand' service instead of this Sky Anytime junk they won't let you turn off on the HD box to get more space!

The problem BT faces is that its going to cost them billions to upgrade a network that hasn't been heavily invested in for the last 60 years. BT doesn't like laying up huge amounts of money for a long term investment.

Rik · Dec 04, 2007, 14:58:11

So what would your solution be, Ducky? I favour the Govt putting the money up and leasing the lines back to telcos.

Lance · Dec 04, 2007, 22:14:19

I think that could be a good solution, maybe with BT providing some funding as well.

Rik · Dec 05, 2007, 00:33:48

It depends on whether LLU operators would get equal access, Lance. If they would, why should BT pay for their infrastructure? I guess what I'm proposing is nationalising Openreach, to a status similar to Network Rail.

Lance · Dec 05, 2007, 13:50:11

I was thinking that BT would be able to charge others for access to the infrastructure, but charge BT openworld a lower amount in order to reoup some of the investment.

No doubt this would fall foul of the anti-competitiveness rules.

Rik · Dec 05, 2007, 14:23:03

Almost certainly. Ofcom would want 'equivalance' and that would leave BT out of pocket. Ofcom wants shooting, imo.

Azazel · Dec 05, 2007, 15:25:45

some freinds of mine recently moved back to the UK from france where they were paying 20 euros for 20mb connection and they actually get full 20mb down 4mb up all the time regardless of peak or offpeak demands, its amazing what you get with a proper communications network which is mainly fibre!

Rik · Dec 05, 2007, 15:28:47

Quote from: Azazel on Dec 05, 2007, 15:25:45
full 20mb down 4mb up all the time regardless of peak or offpeak demands

You're only trying to make me jealous now, aren't you.

Azazel · Dec 05, 2007, 16:02:34

working on it working on it, hows the progress??

Rik · Dec 05, 2007, 16:03:26

You're doing just fine.

Lance · Dec 05, 2007, 20:32:46

Maybe we could run a long length of fibre across the channel?

ducky22 · Dec 05, 2007, 22:28:37

Quote from: Rik on Dec 04, 2007, 14:58:11
So what would your solution be, Ducky? I favour the Govt putting the money up and leasing the lines back to telcos.

I think the solution is to nationalise BT Openreach. OFCOM have screwed it up anyway, so the government might as well take it on, invest and make some money out of it in 20 years.

Of course that'll never happen. What our dear Labour government needs to realise is that fibre optics are like roads now a days...... It will take years for BT to upgrade most of the last mile to fibre and one day slow broadband is going to start affecting the economy. Not tomorrow, but in the coming years.