BT extends trials of boondocks broadband BT has announced plans to extend trials of technology to allow more homes and businesses in remote locations to receive stable broadband. Openreach's "Broadband Enabling Technology" (BET) - which amplifies signals - will be deployed in eight more rural exchanges from September 30, BT said today. During successful trials in …
According to linked article: "The price for the Openreach installation could be £1,000 - £3,000, which is in addition to the current SMPF connection fee".
Since the SMPF connection fee (connection to the "shared metallic path") is per line (per subscriber), that would imply to me that the "Openreach installation" is also per subscriber. Which would make it a bit on the expensive side...
"Openreach is hoping local authorities will be interested in subsidising wider rollout of the technology, which it's estimated will cost between £1,000 and £3,000 per exchange"
BT are the epitome of why private sector public services in the UK are a shambles. They combine everything bad about state-owned public services, and throw in the worst elements of capitalism for good measure.
At the end of the day, BT are in a monopolistic position when it comes to delivering national telecoms infrastructure. They should be obligated to maintain a half-decent network without subsidies from local authorities.
I wonder if the people to benefit from this new technology will be put into yet a lower sub-class of Internet user, and be forced to pay even more for their IPStream packages than rural users presently do.
"BT would make that back in a few months with their high BB rates."
From their website:
"The price for the Openreach installation could be £1,000 - £3,000, which is in addition to the current SMPF connection fee and includes the items outlined above.".
Given that the items above include EU equipment it could be a per install cost. In that case it'd probably take several years for BT to claw it back.
From the linked article:
"....plus installation of a remote unit and an NTE, which requires a 240v power supply. All of these components would be installed by Openreach."
That's in addition to the card/shelf mods at the Exchange itself and very much implies to me that this kit is on site with the user and thus the fee would be per connection. I'm guessing that the 1 to 3 grand bit is 3 for the first one needing the Exchange mods and 1 for additional connections to the modded Exchange needing only the on site kit.
Still, those affected won't be paying for it, the rest of us will courtesy of some "Digital Britain" bung funded by the taxpayer.
Utterly pointless. 1Mbps is paltry now and will be even more useless by the time BT get this rolled out to a significant number of people. And there'll still be 'not-spots', despite what the press release says.
If BT and the local authorities really want to help, forget BET and pump the £3000 per line into laying fibre to the home (FTTH), which will future-proof speeds for decades, and get BT to drop their backhaul prices to something that will enable community broadband projects to become more viable. Thy're not helping us get broadband, they're hindering us!
And if you need any more help dismissing this load of shareholder-pleasing hype, note that John Small, MD of Openreach, actually states that the UK "already boasts world leading broadband availability."
Yeah, right. If the world is Mars.
I live in Horsham - somewhat Urban since we live amongst plans to develop it into a suburb of Crawley!
BT recently updated the exchanges and I currently get just better than 1Mb (rubbish compared to other similar towns)
I would expect BT to be upgrading the area's broadband services to circa 8Mb rather than downgrading it with BET!
Catch up BT
This post has been deleted by its author
Don't know them all, but I'm sure a number of those places are big enough to have their own exchanges and thus won't be 12km from any exchange. Eg: Wigton and Leyland are small towns or is this for the few hamlets etc surrounding these towns? If so, theres no way on earth anyone is going to give grants for 1MB broadband.
Surely the big problem is that BT won't upgrade the copper-wire infrastructure - I'm 15 miles outside Norwich and I have to use a satellite link - the dish cost £1500 (its about the size of Jodrell Bank) and I pay £200 a month for a 1Mb link with usage constraints (ie I my service gets throttled every time I have to download software upgrades & patches) - and an intermittent service. Oh, yes, and my Google searches come back in German. Welcome to the Digital Age.
Horsham may be "urban" but it's just a market town in the middle of no where (I live there as well) - but what about Billinghshurst or other villages just outside that are part of "Horsham District"? They are all served by the Horsham exchange and I'm sure they'd appreciate better broadband.
Jeeze Christian, you are with the wrong service. Avonline "Tooway" costs half that for installation and equipment, gives "up to" 3.6Mbps speed at subs starting from 30 quid a month (you will probably want to pay 50 though, for 6Gb per month instead of 2.4).
I don't think you can get the satellite service (downlink only) that I use anymore. Their website has been under construction for 18 months and they haven't responded to email. I also tend to get German webpages and was recently banned from William Hill for "being a German". I only get 2Mbps and 3Gb/month, but am currently not paying anything. I think they are going out of business but haven't turned off the servers yet.
That's just the sort of limited thinking that's holding us back. And you're completely wrong about the available options.
Doesn't have to be 12km. Nearest exchange to me is closer than that and the connection doesn't necessarily have to be to an exchange in any case. We don't need the government or BT to lay fibre, that's a huge misconception. With the necessary permission from landowners you can lay it yourself for a fraction of the cost BT quote.
JS didn't say we have "high broadband availability", he said the UK "...already boasts world leading broadband availability." which is a pitiful comment to make to those 3 million households who aren't getting it.
I'm betting you work for an incumbent telco. This is the usual view they peddle.
Erm - Billingshurst does have an exchange. As does Southwater, Coolham, Rudgwick, Lower Beeding, Cowfold and pretty much every other town in mid-Sussex. Even Graffham and Sutton have exchanges - Sutton has a population of less than 200.
Where there's a gap is in the villages or smaller dwellings that surround Horsham - Manning's Heath, Copsale - places like that.
This is a reach enabling technology, it doesn't do anything for people in reach of 'normal' ADSL.
I do not know why BT are asking for funding for fiber as they are the people who are going to benifit as i do not see them paying the money back or a monthly fee for having the UK people paying for it again and again over and over. Not like they reduce the cost for it BT should be taken back and let the country benefit, but only put people in charge that know what they are doing not the idiots that ran it before, so they can still make a profit and put it back into the expansion of the Telephone system in the UK not some third rate system because BT do not want to update it because they would not have big bonuses for the top management.
Maybe while BT are asking for funding for fibre, you could add in a request for some public funding for some punctuation?
This technology isn't about fibre, but the fibre argument goes something like this as I understand it - laying fibre will cost a ton of money - meanwhile people want faster broadband and they expect to pay less for it. If BT have to Wholesale it to other ISPs they'll get paid even less for it. That means that a company laying fibre won't make their money back very quickly, if ever (cough *all the cable companies in the UK ever*). Given that background banks won't lend BT or anyone else the money to actually lay the fibre because they won't get it back quickly enough and they'll invest in things that have a quicker and better return.
No company is going to spend £2000 to provide you with a service that you then expect to pay £10 a month for.
Ok. let me get this straight......
BT want people / businesses / local authorities to pay £3k per line to broadband enable people who cannot currently get broadband - this part I get.
in 2012 BT hope to be switched over / switching over to their "21CN" which essentialy means they expect everyone to have a broadband line down which they intend to deliver their normal telephone services digitally?
So - if I am understanding this all correctly.....
BT want to introduce the UK to their new "all singing, all dancing" next generation digital network, but expect someone else will pay £3k per line to add the other 2-3 million lines to it??
if they actually succeed with this one - they may just be about as successful as another large company that charges people a monthly fee to record & playback television programmes
In which case....... FAIL!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
