Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by bit-tech, 17 Jan 2018.
sooo... its £20 more than my Virgin that already offers the same speed constantly?
I consider that worth it to not have to use the Vrisgin hub any more
Call me when Virgin actually offers any connections down my street.
Although BT's new Ultrafast says it ain't here yet either, so I guess I'm sticking with 63Mb/s Infinity for the foreseeable. Bah!
I've yet to have a Virgin line that gives me the speed they say they will, maybe BT will be better?
I'd happily pay the extra for the increased upload speed. Think it's 50mb/s on the Ultrafast 2 package.
I returned from Sweden in 2003. Just prior to that the broadband companies began offering 1Gb connections at about £150pm. It's now down to £90 for 1Gb/1Gb connection, with some areas offering up to 10Gb.
It seriously depresses me that the word "fast" is even mentioned near an infrastructure 3 times slower than other European countries had 15 years ago.
Well I'm 53 years old, I wonder if I'll see this come to our village in West Somerset before I get to 63? As for Virgin cable, I've more chance of growing an extra leg.
Indeed. Where I live I can get 1Gbit down / 500Mbit up for 8-9 Eur.
It's not guaranteed bandwidth (those are much more expensive) but most of the time you really get close to those figures. And it's PPPoE and they pretty much say "if you don't have an i7 2.2GHz in your gateway machine, don't complain you aren't reaching the advertised bandwidth".
Virgin laid cables round here months ago, still not being offered.
Hey BT, and chance of 10mbit here? How about 5mbit for starters? I don't want to be greedy.
Don't worry though, HMG is giving you the right to [ask for] 10... in 2020...
Personally i have the opposite problem - I have Virgin cable, and *only* Virgin cable. Want anything else i'm relying on 4G and/or carrier pigeons.
By 2020 I don't doubt that 4G tariffs will be such that I'll no longer have a need for fixed line. I've just upped mine to the 200GB package today which should help matters, but still need to split traffic into slow and fast lanes to not run into it (and the vastly more expensive PAYG rates that go with that)
Tell me about it, just bought my first house, and I will be getting around 2mb down! WTF how is it that bad? I have a summer house in Sweden in the middle of no where and get 100mb down!
Yet my new house based in a housing estate a stones throw away from BT tower (suffolk) and 2mb, F**K YOU!
I can't believe BT got away with taking money out of Open reach into their own pockets, get found out and nobody bats an eyelid! That money should of gone towards better lines everywhere!
10 years ago I moved to my current address in South Yorkshire. The previous address had 8meg - we only moved 5 miles (my wife insisted it was important to be in the right catchment area for my son's school) - the new address had 2.5meg on a good day - usually around 2am.
Early last summer Virgin fitted a new cable system in our area and by October I was able to sign up, which I did - it was fitted and installed 2 days later. I'm getting at least 215meg currently - it's like a dream come true!
Myself and neighbours had pestered BT for years to do something, but they kept fobbing us off - not possible / not financially viable for them etc, etc.
Now that we have all switched to Virgin, BT have suddenly got it upgraded and are offering 64meg (funny that isn't it) - they can go shove it where the sun doesn't shine.
Comparing the UK (around 60M people) to Sweden (around 9M) people isn't really a fair comparison when it comes to internet speeds. Not all of Sweden is covered by fibre, and checking Telia's website it appears that for a 50 - 100Mbit connection you are paying about £29 a month but also if you don't have fibre you're paying the same for 12 - 30 Mbit ADSL. A gigabit line 500 - 1000Mbit is priced at around £90 per month. Taken the sizes of the main population areas in Sweden compared to the UK, it would not have cost anything like what it would here to replace copper with fibre. What we should be talking about is the pathetic performance of Ofcom and the Government when selling our mobile frequencies. There should have been explicit clauses insisting that 4G should cover 100% of the UK by 2016 (not 90% or 95% but 100%) as part of the bid requirement.
Every time they announce things, it still blows my mind how behind the UK is in terms of their infrastructure. I can get 330 Mbps down in the suburbs... 1Gbps connections are available if I move to the larger cities, albeit only a few of them that currently support it. It's just sad that they have such a difficult time upgrading their cabling when the country is so damn small.
Insufficient population density in most places for it to be economically viable.
And Nimbyism... Same re: mobile coverage in some places, the people compaining they get no signal are/were the same ones screaming 'eew no... we don;t want a mast here...'
I'm finally back in a VM area and glad to be rid of BT. They had me as an Infinity 2 customer for 4 years and the price just kept going up and up with no deals for resigning. I'm now paying £15 less with VM on a 350Mbit connection and actually receive 420Mbit. If I have the option, I'll never go back to BT.
Separate names with a comma.