PDA

View Full Version : Oftel: What is Broadband?


MovedGoalPosts
21-06-2003, 00:11
Oftel are consulting on a re-definition of broadband:

Review of the Wholesale Broadband Access Market (http://www.oftel.gov.uk/publications/eu_directives/2003/eu_dsl/dsl.pdf)

The new draft broadband definition is:
Asymmetric broadband internet access has a number of characteristics that individually or as a group distinguish it as a higher quality service than narrowband internet access:
†¢ it provides higher speeds, in excess of 256kbit/s downstream capacity;
†¢ it offers an always-on service, or at least has an ability to establish rapidly a connection to the internet;
†¢ it allows use of the exchange line for voice telephony and internet access at the same time; and
†¢ it allows content delivery which is not practical on narrowband internet access such as real time video content.

Therefore ntl's 150k service is not broadband (the Advertising Standards Authority have already said as much in one of thier adjudications).

The question is, does this definition go far enough?

Should Oftel not say what they mean i.e. broadband has to be over 500k downstream so you can actually use media streaming even if the service is contended?

Should there be an upstream speed mentioned, is 128k (ntl's speed) adequate, or should a minimum be 256k?

Should "it allows an always on service" be clarified to mean "no limits on data uploads / downloads"?

Anyone want to send their observations to Oftel, the closing dat is early July.

Steve H
21-06-2003, 00:17
To be Honest - The Average User wouldnt Care less about it being defined broadband or not.. Its alot faster than 56k (Usually), and its always on (usually), So the only people really bothered are the tee total politicians.

Sociable
21-06-2003, 00:46
Originally posted by Steve_NTL
To be Honest - The Average User wouldnt Care less about it being defined broadband or not.. Its alot faster than 56k (Usually), and its always on (usually), So the only people really bothered are the tee total politicians.

Not true the reason Oftel and the ASA have both taken a stand on this is that both have a duty to protect the public from abuse.

The reason for this is that "Joe Public" tends to hear a word like "Broadband" and assumes this means things like streaming video and other high data transfer applications will be available.

Even the very latest adverts for NTL on TV this evening give the impression the 150k service is true "Broadband" as it is "High Speed" this is clearly bending the acceptable use of the term.

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" BUT.......

It would be a dam site harder to market!

darkone338
21-06-2003, 03:14
didn't the term "broadband" come from the actual frequency that the signal is transmitted across the wire?

Out Of Band frequencies are used to provide ADSL over a standard phone line and I was under the impression this is where the term "broadband" came from, its the marketing numbnuts who dont understand technology that have caused all the confusion.

Speed shouldn't be the defining factor, its the technology, not the speed that defined the name.....


From Dictionary.com (http://www.dictionary.com)

broad·b and (brÃÃâ€*’´dbnd)
adj.
Of, relating to, or having a wide band of electromagnetic frequencies: a broadband network

Ignition
21-06-2003, 22:33
Aside from the dictionary definitions and Oftel's definition which changes daily to please the Government the definition that I liked best was a connection of equal to or greater than 2Mbits per second bandwidth in both directions.

To be honest the technologies being distributed to homes at the moment are nothing more than stopgaps, DSL more than cable but nonetheless both are equally guilty and to be honest the only step forward really is fibre to the home.

MovedGoalPosts
22-06-2003, 00:23
I think Oftel want their new defintion to last for about 2 years, which is as long as the current one has. When the current one was launched services of 150k and 256k did not exists hence their current definition of bb being in excess of 128k (so ntls 128k service never was bb to Oftel)

Much of the confusion comes from Oftel wanting to make the UK look good for European statistics and the governments online britain strategies. So for statistics Oftel still count ntls 128 - now 150k - service as bb.

Naturally the public are confused. Enlightened users will understand many of the differences. Many "punters" that ntl aim the 150k service at probably do not understandthese subtleties and will believe the sales pitch (hence the ASA agreeing the 128 service was not boradband in view of the publice perception, not industry view). This is potentially a misdescription of service and a risk of disappointed customers (nothing new there then for ntl).

To reduce confusion I believe a robust defintion of what bb means is essential. This then becomes the standard to be used by all government agencies, Oftel, ASA, etc.

scrotnig
22-06-2003, 01:21
Well 150k to most people is not narrowband and not dialup, therefore most people are happy to consider it broadband.

In all my work at ntl: I have not once heard of anyone with a genuine grievance about this issue.

matty4donna
22-06-2003, 02:33
ive never really understood why ntl dont just put the 150k up to 256k - thats what it is/was in ex-cwc area's via the STB anyway. It would sort out all this confusion and save any hassle from Oftel.

DannyA
22-06-2003, 11:25
you must off seen on el reg and the inq, that thing about sweeden?


They have had fantastic speeds for years.

My Danish friends translated for me - I believe it was about £30 a month for 10Mbits <> symetrical.

Yup - both ways.
Lovelly Bostream!


Check out this new mother crusher ->


http://www.bonet.se/page.php?xml=swe/pages/private/scream.xml&context=private

26Mbit a month costs - 398 Sweedish Kronor a month.

398.00 SEK
Sweden Kronor = 30.5434 GBP
United Kingdom Pounds (Cheers XE)

Sociable
22-06-2003, 11:57
Originally posted by matty4donna
ive never really understood why ntl dont just put the 150k up to 256k - thats what it is/was in ex-cwc area's via the STB anyway. It would sort out all this confusion and save any hassle from Oftel.

Simple answer is that the majority of the network is not set up to handle that level of demand. It could be but that would require additional capital expenditure.

My guess is even jumping them from 128 to 150 was at least one aspect of the decison about changing the AUP to limit the use to maxing a 128 connection.

NTL's philosophy has always been to "Hook" new users with a "We are best" tag. 150 gives an edge on any 128 service without placing too high a demand on the infrastructure.

Maybe a better solution would be to start using some new wording to clarify diferent levels of "Broadband" along these lines.

"Browsing-BroadBand" = always on services that are limited to speeds below 512k. Ideal for dial-up users only wishing to experience the same baisc web content slightly faster and also free up a phone line.

"Normal-BroadBand" = always on services that allow medium quality streaming and are limited to speeds over 512 and below 1000. Ideal for users wishing to expand their use of the web not just in speed but also in terms of content and applications.

"High-Speed-BroadBand" = always on services that allow high quality streaming and have speeds of at least 1000. Ideal for those wishing to gain the maximum experience both in terms of speed and content.

It should also be mandatory to include a reference to any limitations as to use should they apply and such reference must be in the advertising and not hidden in any AUP.

Adding such examples of what each level of service is best used for helps give real meaning to the term broadband and allows informed choices to be made by prospective customers.

distortal
22-06-2003, 13:13
IIRC 128/150 isn't considered Broadband by the ASA, but the Government DOES include those users in order to produce a higher figure for 'Broadband' users in the UK - so who's right?

bigitup_j
22-06-2003, 16:25
i can't see why ntl just have 256k instead of 150k. it would be fair to the customers without set-top-box broadband and ntl would have no more trouble with the ASA or oftel.

and keep the price at £17.99 (super value)

MovedGoalPosts
27-06-2003, 22:46
The current Oftel broadband defintion, if my recollection is correct, is for a connection where downstream speed exceeds 128kbps.

This definition has been present for 2 years or so, but is now due for revision, hence my original post.

I think, quite simply, ntl's reason for the upgrade of 128k to the 150k service was simply so that their services are all technically broadband within the meaning of the current defintion.

The reality is however that the 150k speed is woefully inadequate to enable the user to take advantage of the opportunities available to proper speed broadband, which includes decent videao streaming. The ASA in their judgments against ntl have recognised this, following the principle that the average joe public will not understand what speeds mean, but probably do understand the concepts of what broadband services ought to be able to do. In my opinion it's time the Oftel definition (and indeed all government quangos) used the same yardsticks, so a properly drafted definition is vital.

Ignition
28-06-2003, 15:58
To be honest I care little for any definition of what broadband is as I don't consider any product available in the UK, apart from 2Mbit SDSL which is priced well out of residential customers reach, to be broadband.
Our 'top end' speeds are laughable, 2048/256 mostly, which is apparently making Telewest's network suffer somewhat and is minimum £65 from nearly all other decent providers. (Not counting people like Internet Central who made a complete cock-up of the rollout and whose networks can't actually support it reliably anyway). Quite scary that the absolute fastest you can get is 8192/768 @ £300 per month, not including VAT :(
I remember BT saying they were going to have 5Mbit out and about by 2005. Erm, well with services 5 times faster downstream already available elsewhere, nice one BT, stop obsessing about lost revenue on the leased lines, take the hit and supply what the people want. No excuses, backbone is cheap, the copper is already there to homes, and the technology is there already. Pure greed that's stopping it. At least in ntl's case the limitations are those of DOCSIS which not that much can be done about without huge expense, which is, I'm sure, being done bit by bit.

Shaun
28-06-2003, 18:41
Originally posted by bigitup_j
i can't see why ntl just have 256k instead of 150k. it would be fair to the customers without set-top-box broadband and ntl would have no more trouble with the ASA or oftel.

and keep the price at £17.99 (super value)

Then we would have a Telco company to be proud of, come on Ntl: make us proud!:)

Rojo Habe
28-06-2003, 18:42
I've said this before (on the old site) but I really can't believe that Oftel have taken it upon themselves to redeifne sonething they patently have no understanding of.

The term "broadband" refers to the system by which our services are delivered. We receive our TV pictures over a broadband system. We receive our FM hook-up over a broadband system. We receive our Internet connection over a broadband system. The correct term is Broadband Internet Access, i.e. Internet access over a broadband connection.

Broadband is the system whereby we receive our radio and off-air TV signals. Before digital telephony, it was the system used to transmit thousands of calls between Trunk exchanges. It's a big fat pipe you can shove lots of things down, simple as that.

BT are just as bad - They don't sell broadband Internet access at all. They sell ADSL (Asymmetrical Digital Subscriber Line). It's delivered over a pair of copper wires. You can squeeze a phone line and a half-meg Internet connection down it and that's about yer lot. This is not broadband.

"Narrowband", by the way, refers to a single channel out of many on a broadband system (a single analogue TV channel, for instance, or a single downstream channel, which can itself serve many Internet connections).

Anyway, it appears that's not what the word means any more. It's now just a marketing buzzword that rolls off the tongue nicely and sounds suitably impressive to the buying public.

I'm now going to redefine the phrase "two-litre" to mean "any engine having between 120 and 150 Brake Horse Power". I just pulled these figures out of thin air because I felt like it. Now my car is no longer a two-litre, as it's 167BHP. I'm going to call it a two-and-a-half-litre because I've just decided that means "between 150 and 200 BHP".

Rant over. Think I should go and lie down now... :erm:

Ignition
28-06-2003, 18:46
I mostly agree, however it's quite a popular definition, in this Internet age of faster and faster connections, that 2Mbit up and downstream is the lower limit for connections that can consider themselves broadband. Would you agree with that one?

Rojo Habe
28-06-2003, 18:51
No. Doesn't matter how much bandwidth you're delivering, it's the delivery system itself that's broadband, not the service itself.

You could have 8Mb Internet access, and it still would only be a narrowband service that may or may not be delivered via a broadband carrier.

Shaun
28-06-2003, 18:54
Originally posted by JustAnotherN00b
At least in ntl's case the limitations are those of DOCSIS which not that much can be done about without huge expense, which is, I'm sure, being done bit by bit.

This is the problem with buying up cable companies, they all had their idea of which was the best network to run, maybe it is time to look toward the scandinavian countries, if we Ntl: could supply services like that (just to the streets they cover) for the prices they do in Sweden than they would obliterate the competition. They need to stop feeling sorry for them selves and get a good proposition of expansion and upgrade together, and with the help of a few investors they could have the best network in the world. The money is there, and corporate companies are willing to invest, this is NOT a recession Ntl:, pack this messing around in ad lets get things sorted.

Less time spent buying, funding, supporting and closing websites dedicated to to your mishaps and more energy time and enthusiasm spent on proving us wrong. I'm sure there wouldn't be a member of any of these "support" sites that wouldn't be delighted if you made an announcement of expansion and upgrade and then went thorough with it. You wouldn't need to buy these sites they would be here full of your customer praising you for being the number one, forward thinking company that you CAN be with a little effort, and a few inspiring board members!:) :) :) :) :)

Sociable
28-06-2003, 19:10
Originally posted by Rojo Habe
No. Doesn't matter how much bandwidth you're delivering, it's the delivery system itself that's broadband, not the service itself.

You could have 8Mb Internet access, and it still would only be a narrowband service that may or may not be delivered via a broadband carrier.

You seem to be forgetting why Oftel and the ASA are making decisons about what is and is not "Broadband".

The point made by the ASA was that it matters not what the dictionary deffinition of the word broadband is but what the "average" punter would perceive it to mean i.e. "Common Useage" has given the word a new meaning in the context of comparing services.

The logic being along these lines:

Person A hears his friends each saying "I have broadband its great I can watch high quality movies direct off the net without waiting and play music without having to wait for it to download"

or-- Maybe he watches programes on tv saying how good broadband is. These references are actually about broadband at 512k or better and the TV is refering to all the special things you can do with "Broadband" based on the term meaning 500k or faster.

He then sees an advert that says "Broadband only £17.99" and thinks, "great I will have some of that", but only later finds that he can't do what he thought he could do based on his perception of what broadband means.

This is why the ASA upheld the complaint it was based on the perception of what the term "Broadband" is for the "average" person not on technical deffinitions.

Hope this clarifies the basis of the ASA decision in the context of how it relates to this thread.

The point I'm making is the ASA and Oftel are standing up for the inevitable proportion of the public that don't now a bite from a byte and rely on what "they" understand words mean.

They did not say NTL are deliberately misleading or "Conning" but that for many who saw the ads it was possible and even likely the use of the word "Broadband" could give a false expectation in the mind of a significant number of people using the ad as part of the decision process. To that extent and only that extent the use of the word "BroadBand" "cons" those specific individuals.

The English language is a wonderful "Living" thing as words gain subtle new meanings which change over time. Companies like NTL pay advertising agencies millions each year to take advantage of the language to paint a picture of their services without the warts.

"A Rose by any other name would smell as sweet..........





But would be far harder to market.

Rojo Habe
28-06-2003, 19:31
I take your point, but what they should really be doing is steering the marketing people away from the word "Broadband". BT had the right idea with "Home Highway", because nobody knew what ISDN was. A nice non-technical term that fitted in with the (at the time) well-used phrase "Information Superhighway".

I Never thought I'd find myself having an opinion on anything to do with the Government, but it's Tony Blair's fault. He coined the phrase "Broadband Britain".

Shaun
28-06-2003, 19:37
Originally posted by Rojo Habe
I Never thought I'd find myself having an opinion on anything to do with the Government, but it's Tony Blair's fault. He coined the phrase "Broadband Britain".

I don't think thats far, now come on, the government can be blamed for somethings but not this, I think the door yo should be knocking on is the marketing companies, if you feel the need to blame anyone!

They are the ones that use phrases like this as they roll off the tongue nicely!

Rojo Habe
28-06-2003, 19:53
OK, maybe my last comment needed a smiley at the end of it, to show I wasn't being entirely serious.

Here it is...

:erm:

Ignition
29-06-2003, 16:22
Originally posted by Rojo Habe
No. Doesn't matter how much bandwidth you're delivering, it's the delivery system itself that's broadband, not the service itself.

You could have 8Mb Internet access, and it still would only be a narrowband service that may or may not be delivered via a broadband carrier.

I'm aware of the difference frequency wise between broadband and narrowband, but wasn't referring to the technicality of it just perceptions.
I'm also aware that a multi-channel E1 despite being 2mbit/s in both directions is, if you want to be pedantic, narrowband, as it's a series of ISDN circuits.
I wasn't talking about the technical side hence use of 'popular definition'.

Rojo Habe
04-03-2004, 15:53
I'm aware of the difference frequency wise between broadband and narrowband, but wasn't referring to the technicality of it just perceptions.
I'm also aware that a multi-channel E1 despite being 2mbit/s in both directions is, if you want to be pedantic, narrowband, as it's a series of ISDN circuits.
I wasn't talking about the technical side hence use of 'popular definition'.
Apologies for the late reply. I went off for that lie down I mentioned... :sleep:

OK, if you want to get "pedantic":
An E1 circuit is a two megabit pipe. It is not "a series if ISDN circuits". A Primary Rate ISDN is thirty 64k ccts carried in an E1 pipe. In this instance, an E1 could be considered broadband, because it's the container, not the service itself.
There is no "popular definition" at issue here. It is what it is. You can't redefine it, in the same way that I can't just suddenly redefine my telly as a sherbert lemon. :disturbd:

andygrif
04-03-2004, 16:13
Blimey....that was some lie down....are you taking NyQil over there?

I think the solution is simple. Define various aspects of broadband. For example:

<300k - Low speed broadband
300-600k - mid range broadband
600-999k - standard broadband
1mb-9mb - high speed broadband

Anything over 10mb...well it ain't gonna happen for a long time in this country, but how about something like ultraband.

Then when we get to 100mb - terraband

Then when it's 1gb - uberband

OK...I'll stop now, it's getting silly.

Stuart
04-03-2004, 17:03
There is no "popular definition" at issue here. It is what it is. You can't redefine it, in the same way that I can't just suddenly redefine my telly as a sherbert lemon. :disturbd:
Actuallu, being even more pedantic, the American Heritage Dictionary defines Broadband as

Of, relating to, or having a wide band of electromagnetic frequencies: a broadband network.
The Free OnLine Dictionary Of Computing (FOLDOC) defines it as

<communications> A transmission medium capable of supporting a
wide range of frequencies, typically from audio up to video
frequencies. It can carry multiple signals by dividing the
total capacity of the medium into multiple, independent
bandwidth channels, where each channel operates only on a
specific range of frequencies.

No mention of data rates in any of those. So, by saying that Broadband is any particular data rate, you are already redefining it.

andygrif
04-03-2004, 18:25
Well someone needs to redefine it...so it may as well be me! Personally I'm not really bothered, although I really would like to say hey I had uberband installed yesterday!!!

It is unfair from a marketing perspective for ntl to be saying that they have x many 'broadband' customers, but then refuse to break down how many of those are on the 160k service.

But then the flip side is that BT can launch a lower speed service any time they like.

I guess it's all academic, becuase I would hope that no-one would still be on something so miniscule as 160k in a few years from now.

MovedGoalPosts
04-03-2004, 18:45
It may be that trying to relate speed of service is not the way to do it. What the punter wants to know is whether the service allows them to do something worthwhile. Most punters are not going to be aware enough of the differences to know that the 150k services wont allow streaming media, but the 512/600 services might.

ISPs frequently provide a comparison table, showing what facilities their various services offer. They should also provide a comparision table showing what you can do with it.

As for "high speed", few in the know would attempt to claim that 150k meets that criteria, yet just this morning I swear I heard a Tiscali radio ad that was taking of prices from £15.99 (i.e. their 150 service) and which mutterred high speed in the same breath. True, realtive to dial up any "Broadband" is "high speed". One day the ASA and Oftel / Ofcom will get together and get rid of the ambiguity and misleading definitions.

andygrif
05-03-2004, 11:02
I think you're right, to most average users they do not know the difference between a 150k line and 500k line (apart from the price). I guess it's all relative, they can say high speed in relation to 150k services becuase compared to their old dial up account it is high speed.

The problem with marketing and advertising is that the whole business is based on ambiguity - they're only going to tell you the good bits.

Rojo Habe
05-03-2004, 11:04
Now I really am in danger of becoming a pedant, but.....

Regardless of your bandwidth, the actual data rate is either 10Mbps for a set-top box, or 100 Mbps for a Standalone cable modem (this is oversimplifying it; it's the data rate between modem and PC. I'm not sure of the exact downstream data rate, but I think it tops out at about 34Mbps). The only difference is how much you're allowed to download per second. If you download a file of about 16kbytes, the download time will be the same irrespective of which service you have.

So (and I know I may be splitting hairs here) they can all be described as "high speed" compared to dial-up, which typically runs at little more than one-tenth of the above quoted data rate.

I am going to shut up after this post, but I just wanted to point out that it's not quite as simple as the 150 vs 600 vs 1024 argument. While download speeds in general will be capped at these rates, at 34Mbps (or thereabouts), browsing will be vastly quicker than dial-up whichever broadband service you go for.

MovedGoalPosts
05-03-2004, 13:37
er sorry, I don't think that's right.

Yes the connection between your PC and the STB or modem may run at 10Mbps or 100Mbps. Thus your internal LAN can transmit at those high speeds and if you have other PCs (probably using a switch or router) on that internal LAN they can communicate at that high speed between themselves.

However the STB or Modem is able only to communicate to the WAN or internet at the rated broadband service bandwith i.e. 150kbps, 600kbps or 1Mbps. It is that service bandwidth that dictates the speed at which you can browse, not your internal LAN speed. Everything can only go at the pace of the slowest component.

In simple terms the faster your internet connection service the quicker the download will be. That the ISPs backbone network is capable of running a higher speed - perhaps your 34Mbps - is irrelevant if the local last mile bit between the exchange / UBR and your modem / STB can only do the 150/600kbps/1Mbps speeds

Rillington
06-03-2004, 03:15
I consider broadband to be 512K or above with anything lower (such as TW's forthcoming 256 and ntl's 150) to be narrowband in the same way that dial-up is.

Therefore, when I refer to 150/256 I use the phrase 'always-on' and NOT broadband.

Rojo Habe
06-03-2004, 11:21
However the STB or Modem is able only to communicate to the WAN or internet at the rated broadband service bandwith i.e. 150kbps, 600kbps or 1Mbps. It is that service bandwidth that dictates the speed at which you can browse, not your internal LAN speed. Everything can only go at the pace of the slowest component.
No, I'm afraid not. Everybody's sharing the same downstream, so everything has to go at the same rate or it wouldn't work. The 150, 600 0r 1024 services are purely and simply caps, to stop you downloading any faster. The actual data packets all travel at the same speed; the uBR just sends fewer of them per second depending on which service you're paying for. I'm not staing an opinion here, these are facts.

Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned 10 or 100 meg; that may have confused the issue.

MovedGoalPosts
06-03-2004, 11:56
No, I'm afraid not. Everybody's sharing the same downstream, so everything has to go at the same rate or it wouldn't work. The 150, 600 0r 1024 services are purely and simply caps, to stop you downloading any faster. The actual data packets all travel at the same speed; the uBR just sends fewer of them per second depending on which service you're paying for. I'm not staing an opinion here, these are facts.

Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned 10 or 100 meg; that may have confused the issue.

Ok, I see where you are coming from.

To return then to your earlier post, which is waht confused me:

The only difference is how much you're allowed to download per second. If you download a file of about 16kbytes, the download time will be the same irrespective of which service you have.

If your speed is being capped or throttled to 150, 600 or whatever, desp[ite there being a higher network bandwidth, it will be the trhrottle speed that dictates how long it takes for the file to get to the user, irrespective of size. Slower throttled speed = slower download.

zaax
06-03-2004, 20:21
How do you complain about Ofcom?
Ofcom comes up with this:
What is broadband?
Broadband is different to standard dial-up Internet access in several ways:
broadband offers faster access to the Internet (typically ten times faster than narrowband). This means that web pages will appear on your screen much more quickly;broadband services are `always on' so there's no need to dial up to the Internet or to log off and you can receive e-mails immediately;
broadband access is unmetered. You pay a flat fee each month (or in some cases each year) and there are no call fees to pay; and broadband splits your telephone line into two channels. This means using the Internet doesn't tie up your existing phone line. So you can surf the Internet and talk on the phone at the same time without needing a second fixed line in your home.
There are different ways of accessing the Internet using a broadband connection. Most people use a connection that involves upgrading their existing telephone or cable line (known as an ADSL or cable modem connection). An engineer from your telephone company or ISP will fit new equipment in your home (in most cases just a small box) to speed up your existing phone line and give you faster access. This involves fitting a new modem to your computer to speed up your existing phone line and give you faster access. Increasingly, you will have the option of installing the equipment yourself (known as `self-install' or `plug and play'). In some cases, your provider will send an engineer to your home. Broadband services are also available over new networks, for example satellite and fixed wireless. ISPs will be able to tell you what networks they can use and what equipment you need in each case. Broadband access may be limited ? contact your telephone or cable company, or your ISP, for information about what's available in your area.

Googling comes up with
transmission facility having a bandwidth sufficient to carry multiple voice, video or data channels simultaneously. Each channel occupies (is modulated to) a different frequency bandwidth on the transmission medium and is demodulated to its original frequency at the receiving end. Channels are separated by ÃÃâ€*’¬guardban dsÃÃâ€*’® (empty spaces) to ensure that each channel wonÃÃâ€*’ÂÂÂÂ*t interfere with its neighboring channels. This technique is used to provide 50 CATV channels on one coaxial cable. http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=define:BROADBAND

So who is correct the industry or civil servents? :banghead:

handyman
06-03-2004, 20:50
Ntl should re-instate the £14.99 broadband product IMHO. I think It was a superb niche product and easily sold. It worked well and those that wanted to check emails and browse a bit had a very usable product. They did not care that is was not 'proper' broadband it was just the product for the job.

Bad marketing ploy for me I would have prefered to see another level [256k] introduced instead.

FFS the cable modem they use costs £10 most will normally have ntl service already so its a real money spinner and uses very little bandwidth as the people that use it [128k] where low users anyway.

Rojo Habe
10-03-2004, 21:02
Ok, I see where you are coming from.

If your speed is being capped or throttled to 150, 600 or whatever, desp[ite there being a higher network bandwidth, it will be the trhrottle speed that dictates how long it takes for the file to get to the user, irrespective of size. Slower throttled speed = slower download.

16kbytes=128kbits Allowing for network overheads, with a 150kbps connection it would take approximately one second to download this. Assuming an arbitrary network data rate of 40Mbps (as I said, I don't know what the actual figure is), you would actually be downloading it in .004 seconds. Any more than 16kB and the throttle kicks in.

A purely textual web page would fit a lot of text into 16k, therefore for browsing purposes you would gain no significant advantage with a higher bandwidth connection. The argument starts to fall down when web pages become more graphical, but for most web sites designed with dial-up users in mind you would be hard pushed the tell the difference between the three services.

...except maybe at busy times when the network is taking a hammering.

Damn, I did it again. I said I was going to shut up, and I didn't. :shocked:

Rojo Habe
10-03-2004, 21:13
How do you complain about Ofcom?
So who is correct the industry or civil servents? :banghead:

My point in a nutshell. The only 'true' broadband internet service is an internet service delivered over a broadband network.

The google quote is a little outdated, and appears to have been written before digital TV and broadband Internet came along, but it's essentially what I've been banging on about in this thread (put rather more succinctly I might add).

Broadband is almost as old as the automatic telephone exchange; most likely older than the bureaucrats who want to redefine it without understanding what it means.

OH no, I've done it again! How do you shut me up?? :Yikes:

rdhw
11-03-2004, 12:50
16kbytes=128kbits Allowing for network overheads, with a 150kbps connection it would take approximately one second to download this. Assuming an arbitrary network data rate of 40Mbps (as I said, I don't know what the actual figure is), you would actually be downloading it in .004 seconds. Any more than 16kB and the throttle kicks in.You seem to be assuming that there is no throttle until after the first 128 kilobits has got through at fulll speed. I don't know of a reason to assume that. Only the first packet (up to 1500 bytes) would arrive at full line speed: each and every subsequent packet of 1500 bytes could in principle be delayed by the CMTS to achieve the throttled data rate.

Rojo Habe
15-03-2004, 19:44
Point taken (and I'll admit I hadn't thought of that :dunce: ), although it could equally be argued that there's no reason to assume that the speed is throttled on a per-packet basis. I'll need to speak to one of our tech support guys now, if only to satisfy my own curiosity :erm:.

My point still stands, however, that it can still correctly be called "high-speed", and it is most definitely broadband by its very nature, regardless of the bandwidth.

themelon
15-03-2004, 22:22
Well sure no ADSL Product is broadband.....

Its not always on, certainally all of the ADSL Products i have seen require Dial Up Connections to be made on each boot up, so its not always on unless you turn it on!!

Chrysalis
16-03-2004, 00:08
Aside from the dictionary definitions and Oftel's definition which changes daily to please the Government the definition that I liked best was a connection of equal to or greater than 2Mbits per second bandwidth in both directions.

To be honest the technologies being distributed to homes at the moment are nothing more than stopgaps, DSL more than cable but nonetheless both are equally guilty and to be honest the only step forward really is fibre to the home.


I appreciate your honesty in your post and you are smack bang on, alot of people particurly technically minded people earmark 2mbit as the line to draw broadband on and I agree with that, what we are seeing at the moment from both adsl and cable is something of a in between, ADSL as far as I know without repeaters will really struggle to provide true broadband, while cable technology is better equiped ntl just havent got the infrastructure behind to cope with a mass influx of 2mbit customers, plus why provide 2mbit as standard when the competition is much less?

MovedGoalPosts
16-03-2004, 02:52
I appreciate your honesty in your post and you are smack bang on, alot of people particurly technically minded people earmark 2mbit as the line to draw broadband on and I agree with that, what we are seeing at the moment from both adsl and cable is something of a in between, ADSL as far as I know without repeaters will really struggle to provide true broadband, while cable technology is better equiped ntl just havent got the infrastructure behind to cope with a mass influx of 2mbit customers, plus why provide 2mbit as standard when the competition is much less?

So that they are the market leader, with a service that is envied by all other ISPs, and really started to demonstrate the full potential of cable infrastructure proving to all why we went through the aggro of having our streets dug up?