Isn't virgin media fibre?

[internetguy]

Hi

Just wondering if anyone can help me? I've read that H2O Networks is laying fibre through sewers now, isn't virgin media already using fibre?

If so, why are H2O networks doing it? Whats the difference?

Sorry if this is posted in the wrong section, wasn't sure where to put it.

Cheers,
Bob

[TraxData]

No, VirginMedia is coax to your house.

H2o is FTTH (fibre to the house)

H2o is also offering much higher down/up speeds (100mbit both ways) where as VM can barely manage 50./1.5

[internetguy]

I got a leaflet from VM a few weeks ago, that said fibre in it? :/

--Confused

[TraxData]

I got a leaflet from VM a few weeks ago, that said fibre in it? :/

--Confused

It's only fibre upto a local point then its coax the rest of the way, thus why some people are slightly annoyed that VM are calling it "fibre optic" broadband.

[ruddock08]

if they done it all the way with fibre optic, could it handle faster speeds? if yes, why the hell dont vm do it. higher speeds, more customers, more money.

[bigcats30]

I read sky and other providers complained about this to higher!! VM claim Fibre but its only fibre up to the exchange but from there its cable....someone in higher said that this is not misleading!!! because the main part of the cabling is fibre......its another rip off britain item if you ask me......surely VM must think everyone is a idiot....tho i suppose we are because we use their stuff!!! trust me if there was another cable provider i would be gone

[cablestrider]

H2o is also offering much higher down/up speeds (100mbit both ways) where as VM can barely manage 50./1.5

wow that's incredible. Though i've never heard of this h2o company... Is it another way to get VM product or is it something seperate?

Imagine 100 up !! I do a lot of uploading and this would be superb for me :D

[WHISTLED]

Different company and only in one city so far I think

[Paul]

VM claim Fibre but its only fibre up to the exchange but from there its cable....VM is fibre upto the local cabs afaik, not the exchange. Only the last bit from the cab to the houses is coax.

[TraxData]

Different company and only in one city so far I think

Other companies use the H2o network though.

It's currently bournemouth doing 100/100 to show the councils and govt that it works.

After that i'm 100% certain we'll start seeing bigger roll outs.

[Chrysalis]

I always had thought VM was like a fibre to the cabinet achitecture but people on thinkbroadband are saying thats not even true.

[Toto]

I always had thought VM was like a fibre to the cabinet achitecture but people on thinkbroadband are saying thats not even true.

Its definitely fibre to the street cabinet, then coaxial to each home, just as Paul M said.

[duffman]

So the future does look bright if H2O keep the prices good.

[Toto]

So the future does look bright if H2O keep the prices good.

Absolutely!

On paper it looks a bang on service, and if they can deliver and sustain it for residential users, there's gonna be some well connected towns in the UK.

[broadbandbug]

I read sky and other providers complained about this to higher!! VM claim Fibre but its only fibre up to the exchange but from there its cable....someone in higher said that this is not misleading!!! because the main part of the cabling is fibre......its another rip off britain item if you ask me......surely VM must think everyone is a idiot....tho i suppose we are because we use their stuff!!! trust me if there was another cable provider i would be gone

It is fibre to the curb, therefore it is only the last few meters that are coax.. Fibre to the exchange would mean the last Kilometers would be copper/coax.
So it is not misleading as there is the ability to offer Gigabit Ethernet over the Coax Cable if needed so they actually would not need to go Fibre to the Home to offer the same speeds as H2O, however they would need to change out the kit in all of the street cabinets so not cheap by any means!:D

[TraxData]

It is fibre to the curb, therefore it is only the last few meters that are coax.. Fibre to the exchange would mean the last Kilometers would be copper/coax.
So it is not misleading as there is the ability to offer Gigabit Ethernet over the Coax Cable if needed so they actually would not need to go Fibre to the Home to offer the same speeds as H2O, however they would need to change out the kit in all of the street cabinets so not cheap by any means!:D

Err no, as Paul M said it's to the local cab, i can assure you there is NO fibre upto the curb with VM.

Also, VM could never offer the sort of down/up ratio that H2o are providing, they cant afford that sort of hardware upgrade.

And VM's idea of 100mbit is 100/5 down/up ratio, no thankyou.

[Stuart]

if they done it all the way with fibre optic, could it handle faster speeds? if yes, why the hell dont vm do it. higher speeds, more customers, more money.

Cost. To provide the same service to all (or at least most) their customers, Virgin would have to re-lay 1,000s of miles of cable. This would take years and would cost £billions.

It aint gonna happen.

As for the running it through the sewers idea, that will work for a while, but I suspect if the idea takes off, the water companies will charge a lot for rental of space in their sewer pipes.

Our government, of course, will do nothing to prevent this.

[whydoIneedatech]

It is Glass Fibre Optic Cable to the Cabinet then it is Twin Hybrid Fibre Coax to your property and the thickness of those cables may vary depending on the distance from the cabinet.

The cable is of a Twin Siamese design as one side carries the Broadband Signal with the Digital Television Signal piggybacked onto it and the other side is for the Telephone Line.

[Toto]

Err no, as Paul M said it's to the local cab, i can assure you there is NO fibre upto the curb with VM.

Also, VM could never offer the sort of down/up ratio that H2o are providing, they cant afford that sort of hardware upgrade.

And VM's idea of 100mbit is 100/5 down/up ratio, no thankyou.

Didn't ntl/telewest business trial a fibre-to-the-curb system?

[mart44]

Sections of sewer pipe need replacement from time to time, so a fibre cable might end up with a good number of joins after a while. I hope they use good quality duct tape :)

[broadbandbug]

Err no, as Paul M said it's to the local cab, i can assure you there is NO fibre upto the curb with VM.

Also, VM could never offer the sort of down/up ratio that H2o are providing, they cant afford that sort of hardware upgrade.

And VM's idea of 100mbit is 100/5 down/up ratio, no thankyou.

Definition of Fibre to the Curb is fibre to the local cabinet.. i.e. Where does the local cabinet sit? So if your definition differs from mine.. Fine.. I am happy with that. Fibre to the Exchange in the VM world is incorrect though. You would at least agree that?
So what do you think the length of coax is from cabinet to home? Max 120 Meters? Drops over that distance would struggle to hit correct power/slope etc at the box. .no?

As for GigE over HFC.. It is not out of the question down the line.. Cost today may be prohibitive, but beyond DoCSIS 3.0.. It is possible. Below taken from published quotes from Patrick Harshman from Harmonic.

Today's HFC networks usually combine modulated analog video and Data-Over-Cable-Service Interface Specification (DOCSIS) Internet traffic, leaving the headend on a single fiber to be sent downstream. But by mining the optical bandwidth and adding a second wavelength riding in parallel with the DOCSIS and QAM video, operators can deliver high-speed Gigabit Ethernet down to the node level to an Ethernet switch. From the node, fiber is run out to the customer via coax, CAT 5 cable, or singlemode or multimode fiber. (The distance limitations of Ethernet over copper are a factor here.) Potential customers include power residential users (telecommuters, home offices, home offices with Web sites, etc.) and businesses.

From a high capacity router at the headend, the two streams, one Gigabit Ethernet, the other the DOCSIS data, which is combined with video at the cable modem termination system and modulated, are fed into optical transmitters. The Ethernet stream, says Harshman, can be fed into the transmitters that serve specific nodes that serve customers most likely to buy Ethernet service.

[TraxData]

Definition of Fibre to the Curb is fibre to the local cabinet.. i.e. Where does the local cabinet sit? So if your definition differs from mine.. Fine.. I am happy with that. Fibre to the Exchange in the VM world is incorrect though. You would at least agree that?
So what do you think the length of coax is from cabinet to home? Max 120 Meters? Drops over that distance would struggle to hit correct power/slope etc at the box. .no?

As for GigE over HFC.. It is not out of the question down the line.. Cost today may be prohibitive, but beyond DoCSIS 3.0.. It is possible. Below taken from published quotes from Patrick Harshman from Harmonic.

Today's HFC networks usually combine modulated analog video and Data-Over-Cable-Service Interface Specification (DOCSIS) Internet traffic, leaving the headend on a single fiber to be sent downstream. But by mining the optical bandwidth and adding a second wavelength riding in parallel with the DOCSIS and QAM video, operators can deliver high-speed Gigabit Ethernet down to the node level to an Ethernet switch. From the node, fiber is run out to the customer via coax, CAT 5 cable, or singlemode or multimode fiber. (The distance limitations of Ethernet over copper are a factor here.) Potential customers include power residential users (telecommuters, home offices, home offices with Web sites, etc.) and businesses.

From a high capacity router at the headend, the two streams, one Gigabit Ethernet, the other the DOCSIS data, which is combined with video at the cable modem termination system and modulated, are fed into optical transmitters. The Ethernet stream, says Harshman, can be fed into the transmitters that serve specific nodes that serve customers most likely to buy Ethernet service.

Yes our definition is different, tis all, but i agree it's not to the exchange.

It varies from area to area, for instance in sheffield its a good 500M in some areas, less than 50 in others, VM had weird ways of doing things.

I agree about your quote but as i have said before it wouldnt work with VM, the network just isnt in good shape and it needs a complete overhaul, not abit of segment splitting here and there, few card upgrades etc, the whole lot pretty much needs ripping out and doing all again because as i'm sure you know when it was all done it was done on the cheap compared to what it should of cost, they did a crap job and now they are paying for it.

VM cant afford a complete network overhaul and will struggle in the future.

As you say, beyond DocSis3, problem is, by the time VM can get themself's together (if they ever do, sorry but neil is a right *aherm* who has no idea which way to take the company) it'll be too little too late, they are in the same situation as BT rolling out FTTH as a trial, to do the whole of the Uk it'll take 6-12 years, by that time again everyone will be way ahead of us.

Whether VM like it or not they aint gonna be really going places in the future and i have a weird feeling they'll be sold off eventually.

[Ignitionnet]

Definition of Fibre to the Curb is fibre to the local cabinet.. i.e. Where does the local cabinet sit? So if your definition differs from mine.. Fine.. I am happy with that. Fibre to the Exchange in the VM world is incorrect though. You would at least agree that?
So what do you think the length of coax is from cabinet to home? Max 120 Meters? Drops over that distance would struggle to hit correct power/slope etc at the box. .no?

That reads a lot to me like you're saying every cabinet has fibre, and there's no amplifiers needed in the network apart from the launch amp as the coax run is max 120m.

I don't think so, and I'm sure that vast majority of people who don't hang off a nodal cabinet wouldn't think so either.

I'm sure the network engineers would be extremely happy if it were the case as there'd be no need for trunk or bridge amps, and line extenders would be a thing of the past too. Sadly it's not. The max drop length is a function of the tap and amplifier or otherwise in the local cabinet, nothing to do with the presence of fibre in the cabinet. I would hope you know that.

Even Virgin in their submission to the ASA catagorically stated the nature of their network, fibre nodes, fibre to the neighbourhood/node, feeding a coaxial cascade of amplifiers, split between anything from 250-ish to 1000+ homes passed by the coaxial network.

It's perfectly feasible for a customer to be hundreds of metres and a number of amplifiers from fibre, hence why cable is referred to as FTTN, neighbourhood/node, but never apart from apparently in Virgin's case, as Fibre To The Curb. Yes the cabinets with fibre can sit on curbs, just the curb of someone several streets away feeding your cabinet through amplified coax.

Quick reminder for you from http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/Public/TF_ADJ_43928.htm the ASA adjudication which approved said ads...

Virgin explained that they did not use copper wire to deliver broadband to their customers, but used aluminium or steel wire with a copper coating instead. They said the copper coating was used to shield their signals from interference and not to transmit the signals. Virgin explained that their backbone network was a "hybrid fibre co-axial" network, which used fibre-optic cables all the way to within approximately 500 metres of their customers' homes. They said from there it passed over high quality copper-coated aluminium co-axial cables to within 150 metres of the home. They said the final connection to the customer was made from the street cabinet over high quality copper-coated steel co-axial cables.

Virgin said that, while distance had a noticeable effect on customer speeds, that was not an issue for cable broadband. They said they were not limited by distance because they distributed active signal amplifiers throughout their network to ensure that the necessary signal level was delivered to the customer. They said the design of the network ensured that all customers received sufficient signal level to operate their cable broadband service at its maximum advertised speed, and that all customers would receive approximately the same signal level regardless of where they lived.

And another adjudication, specifically mentioning node.

We understood that Virgin's broadband speed was not dependent on distance, unlike Sky's DSL network, but also understood that Virgin's cable network became slower the more customers used the service at the same time, because of sharing band-width on the same node before the local cable joined the main fibre optic network.

Quick reminder also of HFC architecture:

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2009/09/35.png

[Noggo]

here's the webby, for those in Bournemouth who which to register for updates.
http://www.fibrecity.eu/contact-us-register.htm

Lucky so and so's

Wait more lucky so and so's, Dundee.
http://www.fibrecity.eu/fibrecity-scotland.htm

[broadbandbug]

That reads a lot to me like you're saying every cabinet has fibre, and there's no amplifiers needed in the network apart from the launch amp as the coax run is max 120m.

I don't think so, and I'm sure that vast majority of people who don't hang off a nodal cabinet wouldn't think so either.

I'm sure the network engineers would be extremely happy if it were the case as there'd be no need for trunk or bridge amps, and line extenders would be a thing of the past too. Sadly it's not. The max drop length is a function of the tap and amplifier or otherwise in the local cabinet, nothing to do with the presence of fibre in the cabinet. I would hope you know that.

Even Virgin in their submission to the ASA catagorically stated the nature of their network, fibre nodes, fibre to the neighbourhood/node, feeding a coaxial cascade of amplifiers, split between anything from 250-ish to 1000+ homes passed by the coaxial network.

It's perfectly feasible for a customer to be hundreds of metres and a number of amplifiers from fibre, hence why cable is referred to as FTTN, neighbourhood/node, but never apart from apparently in Virgin's case, as Fibre To The Curb. Yes the cabinets with fibre can sit on curbs, just the curb of someone several streets away feeding your cabinet through amplified coax.

Quick reminder for you from http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/Public/TF_ADJ_43928.htm the ASA adjudication which approved said ads...





And another adjudication, specifically mentioning node.



Quick reminder also of HFC architecture:

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2009/09/35.png

Always willing to learn from those more informed than I:)

[Ignitionnet]

A pleasure, excuse my tone having a bad day...

[Chrysalis]

interesting thanks. Makes you wonder why BT dont use amplifiers or is that not possible on a dsl type signal?

Also do analogue areas that cannot have broadband have no amplifiers? I am curious as to whats stopping broadband working in some cabled areas.

[whydoIneedatech]

interesting thanks. Makes you wonder why BT dont use amplifiers or is that not possible on a dsl type signal?

Also do analogue areas that cannot have broadband have no amplifiers? I am curious as to whats stopping broadband working in some cabled areas.

You could not use amplifiers on the creaking BT copper based network because unlike Virginmedia cable which is separate from the phone line, BT have to send telephony and various companies broadband all down the same copper cable.

I must admit it would probably be quite funny if they tried, imagine all the BT phone lines being jammed by amplified broadband.

[saabmania2]

Err no, as Paul M said it's to the local cab, i can assure you there is NO fibre upto the curb with VM.

Also, VM could never offer the sort of down/up ratio that H2o are providing, they cant afford that sort of hardware upgrade.

And VM's idea of 100mbit is 100/5 down/up ratio, no thankyou.

trax is that 100kb's down and 5kb's up :D:rofl:

[Ignitionnet]

You could not use amplifiers on the creaking BT copper based network because unlike Virginmedia cable which is separate from the phone line, BT have to send telephony and various companies broadband all down the same copper cable.

I must admit it would probably be quite funny if they tried, imagine all the BT phone lines being jammed by amplified broadband.

Rrright.

1) Yes you could use amplifiers on the copper network, but there's no real point. It would increase crosstalk, and it's more feasible to introduce fibre into the loop and deliver fibre to the cabinet to shorten loop lengths and increase speeds, as is being done in places by BT right now.
2) No BT don't have to send 'various companies' broadband down the same copper cable. It's a single DSL single either up to 1.1 or 2.2MHz in the case of ADSL2+ regardless of the company using it. If it's a company buying BT Wholesale services, regardless of the company, they attach to the same equipment at BT.
3) It would not affect telephony, they operate on different frequencies with a guard band in between.

So

4) It's no more to do with broadband and telephony going on the same copper pair than Virgin putting CATV and broadband on the same cable.

[whydoIneedatech]

Rrright.

1) Yes you could use amplifiers on the copper network, but there's no real point. It would increase crosstalk, and it's more feasible to introduce fibre into the loop and deliver fibre to the cabinet to shorten loop lengths and increase speeds, as is being done in places by BT right now.
2) No BT don't have to send 'various companies' broadband down the same copper cable. It's a single DSL single either up to 1.1 or 2.2MHz in the case of ADSL2+ regardless of the company using it. If it's a company buying BT Wholesale services, regardless of the company, they attach to the same equipment at BT.
3) It would not affect telephony, they operate on different frequencies with a guard band in between.

So

4) It's no more to do with broadband and telephony going on the same copper pair than Virgin putting CATV and broadband on the same cable.



The likelihood of the money being made available to run Fibre cables to the BT street cabinets, is a pipe dream.

In my area the options I have are:

Up to 20Mb broadband from Virgin through Glass Fibre to the cabinet and Hybrid Fibre Coax run underground to my door.

Or 2.5Mb~from an Exchange that is 3500 metres from me run via underground copper cable and then from a Street cabinet up a telegraph pole and via a copper cable that is open to the elements suffering continual daily degradation to my connection.

Given the choice of the 2 options above which would you pick the fast modern option or the one that dates back to the 1890's

Also Virgin Broadband cable also piggybacks the Digital TV signal onto it and as the Phone line is completely separate in the twin cable alongside, the can be no possible interference to the phone line.

[pip08456]

The likelihood of the money being made available to run Fibre cables to the BT street cabinets, is a pipe dream.

In my area the options I have are:

Up to 20Mb broadband from Virgin through Glass Fibre to the cabinet and Hybrid Fibre Coax run underground to my door.

Or 2.5Mb~from an Exchange that is 3500 metres from me run via underground copper cable and then from a Street cabinet up a telegraph pole and via a copper cable that is open to the elements suffering continual daily degradation to my connection.

Given the choice of the 2 options above which would you pick the fast modern option or the one that dates back to the 1890's

Also Virgin Broadband cable also piggybacks the Digital TV signal onto it and as the Phone line is completely separate in the twin cable alongside, the can be no possible interference to the phone line.

No pipe dream really VM never delivered more than about 8Mbps as an XL customer. Now I get 16Mbps as a Be customer using BT's outdated, antiquated 1890's system

Given the choice of the two options above - GET RID OF VM! But that's only a personal view. I just like the 1-1 contention ratio which VM can't offer.

If VM offered XL users a contention ratio of 1-1 then there would be no need for STM would there? I've asked and have never been told what the contention ratio is with VM

Just to add there is talk of the government investing quite a few million to BT to upgrade the system to fiber optic.

[Ignitionnet]

Not sure of the relevance of all this to my post but no matter.

The likelihood of the money being made available to run Fibre cables to the BT street cabinets, is a pipe dream.

They already are.

In my area the options I have are:

Up to 20Mb broadband from Virgin through Glass Fibre to the cabinet and Hybrid Fibre Coax run underground to my door.

Or 2.5Mb~from an Exchange that is 3500 metres from me run via underground copper cable and then from a Street cabinet up a telegraph pole and via a copper cable that is open to the elements suffering continual daily degradation to my connection.

Given the choice of the 2 options above which would you pick the fast modern option or the one that dates back to the 1890's

Also Virgin Broadband cable also piggybacks the Digital TV signal onto it and as the Phone line is completely separate in the twin cable alongside, the can be no possible interference to the phone line.

That would be optical fibre to the node unless you are on a nodal cabinet. Cabinet != node.

That's you. On the other extreme if in a heavy overcongested Virgin area and close to an exchange which would you pick, 24Mbit down 2.5Mbit up delivered over this '1890's' infrastructure or 20Mbit that only gets near it at 3am and even if you do manage to download during the evening you get pulled down to 5Mbit maximum anyway?

Google frequency division multiplexing, same tech that means tv and bbi don't interact tha much is why DSL and POTS don't. Even less of an interaction with DSL due to subscriber side filtering.

Anyway this thread was about the nature of VM's network, not a willy waving exercise at BT. Of course Virgin's network is better but its' the products and services that matter. If people can get a service that better suits their needs through DSL that's the way it is.

[whydoIneedatech]

Not sure of the relevance of all this to my post but no matter.



They already are.



That would be optical fibre to the node unless you are on a nodal cabinet. Cabinet != node.

That's you. On the other extreme if in a heavy overcongested Virgin area and close to an exchange which would you pick, 24Mbit down 2.5Mbit up delivered over this '1890's' infrastructure or 20Mbit that only gets near it at 3am and even if you do manage to download during the evening you get pulled down to 5Mbit maximum anyway?

Google frequency division multiplexing, same tech that means tv and bbi don't interact tha much is why DSL and POTS don't. Even less of an interaction with DSL due to subscriber side filtering.

Anyway this thread was about the nature of VM's network, not a willy waving exercise at BT. Of course Virgin's network is better but its' the products and services that matter. If people can get a service that better suits their needs through DSL that's the way it is.

My Virgin connection is from the first Node on my estate which is also the biggest ( more through luck as the is a smaller one closer) and I am too far from the BT exchange to get speeds much above 2.5~

[Ignitionnet]

My Virgin connection is from the first Node on my estate which is also the biggest ( more through luck as the is a smaller one closer) and I am too far from the BT exchange to get speeds much above 2.5~

You do know that a 'smaller' node, with less homes passed, is a good thing, right?

EDIT: To clarify 'node' refers to the nodal cabinet where fibre hits the media converter then launch amp, and all the homes passed by the coaxial trunks that are fed by that node. You may hear people refer to a 500 home node, indicating that 500 homes are passed by the coaxial network branching from that node and fed by a single fibre pair. Smaller nodes are good as there are less homes sharing bandwidth and less sources of interference to be funnelled up the return path.

[nicke261192]

So it would be really easy to replace the coax with fibre then?

[whydoIneedatech]

You do know that a 'smaller' node, with less homes passed, is a good thing, right?

EDIT: To clarify 'node' refers to the nodal cabinet where fibre hits the media converter then launch amp, and all the homes passed by the coaxial trunks that are fed by that node. You may hear people refer to a 500 home node, indicating that 500 homes are passed by the coaxial network branching from that node and fed by a single fibre pair. Smaller nodes are good as there are less homes sharing bandwidth and less sources of interference to be funnelled up the return path.

Well I am on 20Mb and have no problems with bandwidth either on the downstream or the upstream also I get very little degradation of service.

I have not had a BT line attached to my property for 14 years and do not want an overhead copper wire coming into my property either much preferring the less visible option of an underground cable to my door.

[Ignitionnet]

As I said before great for you, but not really relevant to the subject in hand so I'll take it you weren't aware of what nodes are.

Hope this thread has been interesting anyways.

[Chrysalis]

Rrright.

1) Yes you could use amplifiers on the copper network, but there's no real point. It would increase crosstalk, and it's more feasible to introduce fibre into the loop and deliver fibre to the cabinet to shorten loop lengths and increase speeds, as is being done in places by BT right now.
2) No BT don't have to send 'various companies' broadband down the same copper cable. It's a single DSL single either up to 1.1 or 2.2MHz in the case of ADSL2+ regardless of the company using it. If it's a company buying BT Wholesale services, regardless of the company, they attach to the same equipment at BT.
3) It would not affect telephony, they operate on different frequencies with a guard band in between.

So

4) It's no more to do with broadband and telephony going on the same copper pair than Virgin putting CATV and broadband on the same cable.

Hmm so why arent VM suffering crosstalk with their amplifiers? maybe their cables further apart or cross talk protected somehow?

Which areas are BT putting fibre in the local loop? as the only instance I have heard of is that ebbsfleet trial.

---------- Post added at 17:27 ---------- Previous post was at 17:25 ----------

No pipe dream really VM never delivered more than about 8Mbps as an XL customer. Now I get 16Mbps as a Be customer using BT's outdated, antiquated 1890's system

Given the choice of the two options above - GET RID OF VM! But that's only a personal view. I just like the 1-1 contention ratio which VM can't offer.

If VM offered XL users a contention ratio of 1-1 then there would be no need for STM would there? I've asked and have never been told what the contention ratio is with VM

Just to add there is talk of the government investing quite a few million to BT to upgrade the system to fiber optic.

you one of the lucky 25% then? only 25% of lines on BTs network get that kind of performance. Change that millions to billions and it might mean something to BT.

[Ignitionnet]

Hmm so why arent VM suffering crosstalk with their amplifiers? maybe their cables further apart or cross talk protected somehow?

Which areas are BT putting fibre in the local loop? as the only instance I have heard of is that ebbsfleet trial.

Virgin use coax.

Northern Ireland and Scotland I am aware of, presently arguing with Ofcom though. Fibre is laid, cabinets built.

[Chrysalis]

yep I am aware of NI although thats different to england, scotland the same as I think both those countries are forcing the issue to get coverage, probably subsidies going to BT. Ofcom moaning due to their precious must have competition stuff?