Government wants universal, super-fast broadband by 2015

**Chris** · 06-12-2010, 09:32

Quote:

Every community in the UK will gain access to super-fast broadband by 2015 under plans outlined today.
The private sector is to deliver broadband to two thirds of the UK. Other, mainly rural, areas will receive public funds to build a "digital hub" with a fibre optic internet connection.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11922424

Huzzah!

**Hugh** · 06-12-2010, 09:49

For clarity, "super-fast broadband" is undefined in the initiative, but mentioned elsewhere as 24Mb/s.....

**Chris** · 06-12-2010, 11:45

Anything more than 2Mb would be fine by me, however if they're talking about putting a fibre node in each 'community' I would hope to get rather better than that, as I get 2Mb most of the time anyway - even though I'm on the end of about 4 miles of highly exposed, pole-mounted copper.

The homes and businesses are fairly well strung out along here, but wherever they eventually decide to site the fibre cabinet it's going to be closer to me than the exchange currently is.

Incidentally, I'm pleased to see Jeremy Hunt agreeing with the argument I've been making in various threads on CF for some time now. Investment in rural broadband is a good idea because, in his words: "The reason we want to do this is very simple -- it's about jobs."

Taf · 06-12-2010, 12:28

"Wants" is not "gets".

Unless they subsidise it all.

With our money.

chris9991 · 06-12-2010, 12:36

Isn't the intention to take the money from the BBC and it's licence fee?

**Chris** · 06-12-2010, 13:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taf

"Wants" is not "gets".

Unless they subsidise it all.

With our money.

I believe they intend to use the digital switchover element of the licence fee, and then top it up from general taxation.

Yes, it is 'your' money, but in exactly the same sense that the road past my house is also built with 'your' money. The government rightly sees fast broadband as a national infrastructure project whose completion is for the betterment of the economy as a whole.

06-12-2010, 13:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

I believe they intend to use the digital switchover element of the licence fee, and then top it up from general taxation.

Yes, it is 'your' money, but in exactly the same sense that the road past my house is also built with 'your' money. The government rightly sees fast broadband as a national infrastructure project whose completion is for the betterment of the economy as a whole.

This should have all been done years ago. You gotta laugh though really that El Gov decide to do it when the country is in the poop and not when its booming

**Chris** · 06-12-2010, 14:21

Investment in projects like this is a means of getting a country out of the plop and booming again.

06-12-2010, 14:39

still say it should have been done years ago. El Gov should have invested when the likes of cable and wireless and Comtel and the rest of the cable companies were laying cable

martyh · 06-12-2010, 14:41

I think it's great news and i think Chris is spot on .How many more people will be able work from home even during bad weather such as we have had .Broardband should be looked at as a vital service such as gas, electric and water .Is it too much to hope that with wider availability the price will come down ?

06-12-2010, 14:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

I think it's great news and i think Chris is spot on .How many more people will be able work from home even during bad weather such as we have had .Broardband should be looked at as a vital service such as gas, electric and water .Is it too much to hope that with wider availability the price will come down ?

yes but anyone with a brain back in 2001/2002/2003 should have seen the same thing but they didnt so we have a position where a lot of areas have lower speeds or no BB at all and have had while the majority have for quite a number of years. Spose at least some of the horses are safe after the doors closed late lol

martyh · 06-12-2010, 14:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by ooogemaflop

yes but anyone with a brain back in 2001/2002/2003 should have seen the same thing but they didnt so we have a position where a lot of areas have lower speeds or no BB at all and have had while the majority have for quite a number of years. Spose at least some of the horses are safe after the doors closed late lol

I agree with you aswell ,what seemed to have happened when BB first got layed was the various cable companies cherry picked the areas ,mainly for cost ,obviously laying cable in city centers is much more cost effective than laying cable in rural areas.without any government funding there was no way any cable company was ever going to touch those areas.
I wonder how much the government have been quoted per km for laying cable in rural areas ,i bet the cost has been grossly exagerated because the government is paying ..if they have even thought about yet

Ignitionnet · 06-12-2010, 19:35

"Superfast: Is it worth a subsidy" - http://www.commcham.com/publications

The most likely course of events is that BT will get a fair whack of this cash - http://www.btplc.com/News/Articles/S...E-74DDA5DF27AD

And that it won't help you much Chris, as far as I'm aware you have no street cabinet and are at the end of an enormous pole-mounted copper run. The level of subsidy required to serve you and the few homes near you with fibre would be phenomenal and you're probably in that last few %.

I suspect you've a future of satellite ahead of you for higher download speeds sadly. Maybe point to multi-point wireless if in line of site of microwave!

---------- Post added at 19:35 ---------- Previous post was at 19:31 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

I think it's great news and i think Chris is spot on .How many more people will be able work from home even during bad weather such as we have had .Broardband should be looked at as a vital service such as gas, electric and water .Is it too much to hope that with wider availability the price will come down ?

This isn't about wider availability of service per se, availability is already in the high 90%s. It's more about getting higher speed services to more people.

I hope the price doesn't come down, it's already extremely low at the cost of service quality and there's no reason why wider deployment of FTTC to rural areas will reduce costs anywhere.

stu2007 · 06-12-2010, 19:36

Aren't BT supposed to gain the most from this? That would be the same BT which has been saying that it was going to change to fibre optic since I was at a BT presentation in 1975!
What they really meant was that they would do it when the government (taxpayer) coughed up for the job.

Ignitionnet · 06-12-2010, 19:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by ooogemaflop

yes but anyone with a brain back in 2001/2002/2003 should have seen the same thing but they didnt so we have a position where a lot of areas have lower speeds or no BB at all and have had while the majority have for quite a number of years. Spose at least some of the horses are safe after the doors closed late lol

'A lot of areas?'

We have a good average speed and great availability. It's actually our urban areas that are poorest compared with our peers.

---------- Post added at 19:39 ---------- Previous post was at 19:37 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by stu2007

Aren't BT supposed to gain the most from this? That would be the same BT which has been saying that it was going to change to fibre optic since I was at a BT presentation in 1975!
What they really meant was that they would do it when the government (taxpayer) coughed up for the job.

Correct. BT need to make money. They and other operators need a little bribery in order to make it worth their while to deploy to some areas.

BT did offer to do it in the 70s but were prevented from doing so to encourage the cable companies. This is well documented.