UK ISPs have to stop lying about broadband speeds
1–10 of 112 posts
Re: UK ISPs have to stop lying about broadband speeds
#2Wow, we should totally pass a law like that in the U.S.
Re: UK ISPs have to stop lying about broadband speeds
#3Not sure if that's going to change something. The main problem was never peak-time congestion (I've never experienced it personally), it's just the fact that 1) the infrastructure is shit and 2) everyone sells DSL as "fibre".
The infrastructure is a mess. Unless you've got actual fibre to the home, you're stuck with DSL, aka rust. The problem is that it's impossible to tell just how rusty it is without subscribing to service and running a speed test (at which point you've either entered into a year-long contract or paid install fees). Even the ISP can't know. What Openreach (company mandated by the government to manage the actual phone lines) should do is leave a DSLAM connected to all lines, to allow people to connect a modem and see the sync speeds (and possibly run a speedtest from a server provided by Openreach) before they sign up to anything.
The second issue is that everyone is falsely advertising DSL (and other garbage like coax cable, also called HFC) as "fibre" and consumers are confused as to which "fibre" is the better one. This also makes it much harder for companies that sell real fibre.
As it stands, this change will just make telco scammers sell "fibre" "up to 11mbps" instead of "up to 30mbps" or whatever they were selling before. As far as the consumer is concerned it's still a lottery whether you'll actually get the advertised speeds, with no way to know beforehand.
Re: UK ISPs have to stop lying about broadband speeds
#4Not sure if that's going to change something. The main problem was never peak-time congestion (I've never experienced it personally), it's just the fact that 1) the infrastructure is shit and 2) everyone sells DSL as "fibre". The infrastructure is a mess. Unless you've got actual fibre to the home, you're stuck with DSL, aka rust. The problem is that it's impossible to tell just how rusty it is without subscribing to…
For Virgin Broadband, peak-time congestion is definitely a major issue. I have indeed had better experiences with DSL in that regard, but lower overall speeds.
Re: UK ISPs have to stop lying about broadband speeds
#5What fraction of the US has fiber to the home? It must be far, far smaller than Lativa's 50%!
Re: UK ISPs have to stop lying about broadband speeds
#6> The UK’s fibre to the home infrastructure is so poor it’s out-performed by almost every other country in Europe (Latvia, with 50.6 per cent fibre coverage, ranks first in terms of market penetration).
The reason the UK is on a mix of copper and fiber is because the entrenched monopoly, BT, didn't think fiber to the home (FTTH) was worth investing in. To protect their investment in their existing copper network, they pushed tech like VDSL/FTTC (up to 80Mbps) and now G.Fast (up to 500Mbps), which are "fiber to the cabinet" but the last mile is copper. The problem is, speeds fall off depending on how far your home is from the cabinet. I've seen many non-technical consumers be disappointed and say "the ISP said I can only get 11Mbps but they advertise up to 80Mbps".
BT have now been told by the telecoms regulator to prioritize deploying fiber to the home. Also, serious money is now pouring into alternative network providers. CityFibre, which is installing its own gigabit-grade fiber network in about 30 UK cities (so home users in all these cities can be offered FTTH), was recently acquired by a consortium with fairly deep pockets. BT, which historically was the entrenched monopoly, is no longer the sole arbiter of the UK's broadband future.
Re: UK ISPs have to stop lying about broadband speeds
#7Not sure if that's going to change something. The main problem was never peak-time congestion (I've never experienced it personally), it's just the fact that 1) the infrastructure is shit and 2) everyone sells DSL as "fibre". The infrastructure is a mess. Unless you've got actual fibre to the home, you're stuck with DSL, aka rust. The problem is that it's impossible to tell just how rusty it is without subscribing to…
The rationale is that the path end-to-end, measured in miles, is mostly fibre. But of course that is neither here nor there; if you do dialup with a 14.4 modem then actually that will be mostly fibre too because that’s what the trunks are!
What physically goes into your house is what the vendors should be required to describe it as.
Re: UK ISPs have to stop lying about broadband speeds
#8The UK could have had world leading broadband were it not for Mrs T. She decided BT's late 1980s decision to rollout fibre was anti-competitive and killed it in 1990 when we were pretty much leading the world [0].
So the grindingly slow reality of ADSL isn't especially surprising sadly.
[0] https://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/how-the-uk-lost...
Re: UK ISPs have to stop lying about broadband speeds
#9The UK could have had world leading broadband were it not for Mrs T. She decided BT's late 1980s decision to rollout fibre was anti-competitive and killed it in 1990 when we were pretty much leading the world [0]. So the grindingly slow reality of ADSL isn't especially surprising sadly. [0] https://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/how-the-uk-lost...
Yes, and gave a private company the right to roll out its own infrastructure. Said private company put infrastructure in a few very high concentration areas during the 90s and did nothing since. It's almost as if natural monopolies actually exist.
Re: UK ISPs have to stop lying about broadband speeds
#10> The UK’s fibre to the home infrastructure is so poor it’s out-performed by almost every other country in Europe (Latvia, with 50.6 per cent fibre coverage, ranks first in terms of market penetration). The reason the UK is on a mix of copper and fiber is because the entrenched monopoly, BT, didn't think fiber to the home (FTTH) was worth investing in. To protect their investment in their existing copper network, the…
Buying a house in a rural area is a nightmare as you don't really know in advance what speed you will get and the speeds quoted on sites like Rightmove are for entire postcodes - not the property in question.
We bought a house last year in a rural area in Scotland - not far from Edinburgh and were appalled at the broadband options. We get 20Mbps down and 1 up which is enough for most things (barely) but that was one of the fastest speeds we saw (apart from one house in the wilds of Perthshire that had 400Mpbs....).