back to article G7 countries outgun UK in worldwide broadband speed test

The UK is second worst in the G7 league of industrial nations – only pipping Italy (61st) in terms of broadband speed, according to a report published today by Cable.co.uk. Canada (24th), France (19th), Germany (36th), Japan (13th) and the US (14th) all out-performed the UK (43rd), according to the numbers. Countries ranking …

  1. Roger Kynaston Silver badge
    Unhappy

    I'm not surprised

    They built a block of flats behind our house. Openreach ran a load of fibre for them and put the hole in the pavement at the bottom of our path but we do not qualify for it and still have to rely on a bit of copper from a telegraph pole as do the rest of the houses. Some company dug up the neighbouring road early this year but no word on when they will dig up our road or when it will be connected.

    1. Roger Greenwood

      Re: I'm not surprised

      No surprise that they go for the easy wins. The small villages, cul-de-sacs and other dead ends will be at the back of the queue, digging roads is expensive. It doesn't stop the publicity machine though, once the fibre arrives within a mile or two the local news is all over it even though that bit is the problem.

      My local town is all fibred up but unless you are on a trunk/through road it's hurry up and wait.

      1. Electronics'R'Us Silver badge
        Happy

        Re: I'm not surprised

        Up until just under 2 weeks ago, my 'broadband' ADSL link struggled to break 500kb/s in either direction.

        The village now has FTTC and VDSL so I now get about 9Mb/s up and around 34 - 36 Mb/sec down. Not bad really - does the job I need it to do and as the article notes, the upgrade came at no extra cost.

        Note that although I am in a rural area it is really not far from medium size towns (or even a city - Plymouth is only about 16 miles away).

        1. Mike 137 Silver badge

          Re: I'm not surprised

          @Electronics'R'Us

          Good speeds. We're not remotely rural and get about 8 Mb/s down over FTTC from a cabinet about 300 yards away.

          1. Vometia has insomnia. Again.

            Re: I'm not surprised

            I suppose I don't feel too hard done by with my 13/1 Mbit DSL connection in that case, even though it's a bit shit for a suburb of a supposedly high-tech city. I forget what it's supposed to be "up to" but it's only ever a small fraction and there's the risk of a punitive call-out fee if I want Openreach to come and see if there's a fault and they say "nah, looks fine to me".

            As for slightly less low-tech alternatives... well there's Openreach, or rather there isn't because it has no plans for FTTP in this area for the foreseeable future. We admittedly have Virgin available in some capacity (dunno if they do FTTP or if it's still just coax) but I haven't used them in years because of their lamentable customer support which is relevant as they're down as often as they're up, so, er... well, lagging behind it is.

            1. Lunatic Looking For Asylum
              Pint

              Re: I'm not surprised

              Have a beer on me - I think you might be me in a parallel universe because that's exactly what I was going to write.

              Still stuck with ADSL2 here and because NTBloodyHell rolled cable down the close there is no way BT/OpenReach are going to bother too much as we have an alternative.

              I like beer in this universe, I hope I like it in the alternative one. NTBllodyHell/Virgin will be sh*t in whatever alternative universes there are.

              1. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge

                Re: I'm not surprised

                Strange.... I'm on vermin media cable and get 80 down 10 up... just set the vermin media router to cable modem mode and buy your own decent router/wifi box.(the vermin media wifi can barely reach upstairs, and the router has the habit of stopping all connections to have a think every 30 mins or so)

                Customer service is shit, the basic price aint too bad(compared to what you get around here on openretch based products for the same speed)

                Take your chance and drink your poison.... saying that though.... 4G signal aint too bad but the ping sucks.....

                1. werdsmith Silver badge

                  Re: I'm not surprised

                  I use VM too, but I don’t recognise your description of their kit, generally it’s solid.

                  However, I do resent the fact that they have an entry level service (tests at 110/10 mbps) which costs for so much speed I don’t need or use. 20mbps would be more than enough for my requirements, and should be priced according. I would pay half the price for one fifth speed. Brag about gigabit fibre, what would I do with that? It’s like supplying me with 500 apples per day when I only eat one or two.

                  1. juice Silver badge

                    Re: I'm not surprised

                    > I use VM too, but I don’t recognise your description of their kit, generally it’s solid.

                    For me, the router has been ok; it's needed rebooting two or three times in the last year, which is fairly acceptable.

                    The TV box is a bit more shonky though; the first one had to be replaced a week after installation, due (I think) to a dodgy HDD. The second one seems ok, but makes a lot of physical noise which makes me suspect the HDD is potentially as fragile as the first.

                    Though TBH, I keep it switched off most of the time anyway; once the novelty of watching the 90s dance channel wore off, there wasn't really much to keep me interested.

                    > However, I do resent the fact that they have an entry level service (tests at 110/10 mbps) which costs for so much speed I don’t need or use. 20mbps would be more than enough for my requirements, and should be priced according

                    The underlying infrastructure costs are the same, and more pricing tiers = more billing complexity and management costs. So I'm not too surprised that they've elected to keep things simple.

                    > Brag about gigabit fibre, what would I do with that? It’s like supplying me with 500 apples per day when I only eat one or two.

                    And therein lies the issue for me: how many people actually need gigabit fibre?

                    I mean, with video streaming having become the standard, the era of people downloading All The Things via bittorrent have mostly come to an end.

                    And with a 1080p stream generally taking around 5mbps, even a family with 2.2 kids will generally find it difficult to saturate the standard 100Mbps Virgin offering; even if everyone decides to watch a 4K video stream at 20mbps, there should still be just enough bandwidth left for the family dog to have a video chat with the neighbour's cat.

                    I'm guessing that there are cases where higher bandwidths are needed, especially for businesses and/or where upload speeds are important (i.e. TikTok/Twitch/etc, for all those wannabe influencers and the like).

                    But for the most part, this is feeling like the "media wars", where we went from VHS and Betamax (ADSL/ISDN) to DVD (fibre) and then to blu-ray (gigabit fibre).

                    And in much the same way as the jump from analog 288i to digital 720p was welcomed by consumers, the jump to digital 1080p was mostly met with indifference, as 720p was generally Good Enough for most use cases.

                    In fact, to stretch this already strained analogy even further, the arrival of streaming - even though it's generally lower quality - put paid to blu-ray's hopes of media dominance, since it turned out that once again, Good Enough + Convenience was preferable to Better Quality.

                    And in much the same way, the fact that people can now stream video to their phones via 4G has somewhat further reduced the need for high-speed broadband. Hell, given that 4G streaming is offering that magic Good Enough + Convenience balance, it's arguably making it hard to justify the push to 5G...

                    1. Martin an gof Silver badge
                      Happy

                      Re: I'm not surprised

                      even a family with 2.2 kids

                      Slight aside, but the "average" family in the UK has been below two children for some time. Among women who have "completed their families" (i.e. reached 45 years according to the Office for National Statistics) the rate in 2019 was 1.92 children, up slightly from a low of 1.89 the previous year.

                      ONS data on fertility rates.

                      In part this seems to be due to women delaying when they start a family, so having less time to have children before they simply can't. This effect is also apparent in less-developed countries, where women are now better educated and as a result can often have careers other than "childbearing".

                      As I said, bit of an aside, but I find the "2.2 children" thing trotted out time and again, and in the case of the UK and (many/all?) other developed nations it is simply not true any more.

                      Oh, and DVD wasn't 720p, it was 576i (PAL/SECAM countries) or 480i (backwaters).

                      M.

      2. elsergiovolador Silver badge

        Re: I'm not surprised

        Something that could be perfect for a small local business to pick up. But I assume the big players got enough regulatory capture, so that anyone other than them (or with stuffed pockets) can't actually become a provider.

  2. devin3782

    I'm in city which now has gig-fibre, that said I'm yet to upgrade mostly because the ISP's who can serve it to me are utter garbage tier one being talktalk, and I'm waiting to see if some other decide to pull their finger out and provide the service.

    1. DrewWyatt

      Please wait for a short time

      We had CitiFibre dig up our roads at the start of March. The service still isn't available to me, 6 months later. How long does it take to switch it on?

  3. Oddlegs

    A Virgin Media O2 spokesperson said: "Our average download speed is 195Mbps – nearly four times faster than the UK average – meaning if Virgin Media O2 was a country it would be the third fastest on the planet."

    I'm sure the rest of the UK's broadband suppliers would be equally fast if they could heavily cherry pick which areas they supplied and didn't go near anyone even remotely rural.

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      I'm surprised that the USA does so well - unless they are only counting broadband speeds among those who CAN get broadband - and not counting big bits away from the coasts.

      Same for Canada, since the whole population live in downtown Toronto/Montreal/Vancouver it's easy to run fibre to them. But a small town of a 1000 people, an hour outside one of those cities we got cable 3 years ago - before that we had 6mbs ADSL

      1. SImon Hobson Silver badge
        FAIL

        I'm surprised that the USA does so well

        Their figures are "well fudged".

        They have a system rigged to make the numbers look good. If a single premises in a block can get a high speed service then the whole block is counted as having that speed available - even though they can't have it. If you search this site, you should find some articles about it.

        Tests/research has proven that the official figures are about as real as ... OK, I can't think of a simile for how rubbish they are.

    2. john.jones.name
      WTF?

      Virgin media averages 53.85 over 1,512,184 tests - where are their numbers ?

      I would love to know where they are getting those numbers from because the public tests of their network show 53.85 Log Avg (Mbps) over 1,512,184 tests.

      wondering if they make false advertising about their speeds then can they be fined ?

      1. werdsmith Silver badge

        Re: Virgin media averages 53.85 over 1,512,184 tests - where are their numbers ?

        “I would love to know where they are getting those numbers from because the public tests of their network show 53.85 Log Avg (Mbps) over 1,512,184 tests.”

        People tend to use those tests more when they have a problem, so results are skewed. Also, over what time period is that? Some of the earlier tests can be from days gone by when they didn’t offer the service speeds they do now.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I'm sure the virgin media engineer who ran the bandwidth tests did manage 195Mbps average, but I bet they weren't using the virgin media router to perform the test.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      The only way we'll get Virgin Media to our little village is by doubling it in size - something that the local Authoritl seem intent on doing anyway...

    5. Francis King

      Now all they have to do is to attach us to their network, which runs about 30 metres away.

      Still waiting, and waiting...

      I even did the customer survey for them. I don't know how to make it easier for them.

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "A Virgin Media O2 spokesperson said: "Our average download speed is 195Mbps""

      They close their eyes to areas where you pay for 150Mbps and get below 40Mbs, with over 30mS latency. They offered me a free upgrade to a faster service but I declined as that would presumably have become sub-80Mbps with over 30mS latency.

      And don't get me started on their customer circus department.

  4. Amblyopius

    "Specialist" Dan is a bit clueless

    His whole FTTP vs FTTC thing is definitely only half of the story. See VMO2 in that story. Not exactly FTTP/FTTC related is it? Now I can immediately name 2 countries in Europe that do a lot better than the UK regardless of FTTP roll out: Belgium and Netherlands. In both cases cable TV is in over 90% of the houses and cable internet has been what has pushed up average bandwidth for 2 decades already and at a far more significant rate than FTTP.

  5. Tempest 3K

    Actually connecting premises might help.....

    I'm betting OFCOM count my property as having access to FTTP, despite Cityfibre not bothering to run fibre to my entire street and just going across the end of it.

    I suspect there are thousands across the UK in the same position.

  6. john.jones.name
    Go

    real numbers - Performance - Log Avg Throughput in UK (Mbps)

    across 7,301,264 tests in the UK

    the Log Avg download speed was 24.1 Mbps

    the Log Avg upload speed was 7.21 Mbps

    these are from https://speed.measurementlab.net/

    which is what the USA used for their updated broadband map... why does the UK not have a broadband map?

    go measure your own speed and contribute to the data set. https://speed.measurementlab.net/

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    A Virgin Media O2 spokesperson said: "Our average download speed is 195Mbps

    I fart in the general direction of Virgin spokesperson's 195Mbps, and my 30-days notice's in the post, just had enough of being ripped off with Virgin yearly price hikes. And we hardly use (4 people, including 2 teens) about 20% of our bandwidth anyway.

    p.s. and I fart in the general direction of Okla, etc, as that speed has not relevance whatsoever to what real-life speed we actually _need_.

  8. Anonymous Coward Silver badge
    Paris Hilton

    Methodology?

    Did they take aggregate speed divided by number of connections, or aggregate speed divided by the number of households in the country?

    Also, were the speeds real-world, or 'capable'?

    Those can make a big difference. The UK approach of "give as many as possible a reasonably fast connection" is very different to the US "cherry pick the places we can deliver a really fast service to and ignore anywhere else"

  9. hoola Silver badge

    Gigabit Broadband?

    Having been working at home since last March with at times last year two teenagers running school/university stuff and my wife delivering Primary School lessons from home all video, Teams or Zoom, our FTTC has been more than adequate. Even with loads of streaming going on it was perfectly

    Maybe I am missing something but for most users having something at the 50Mb to 70Mb that FTTC delivers is surely enough. If everyone has gigabit what exactly is going to happen when it is all aggregated at the upstream equipment?

    It is much like claiming your car can do 155mph or 230mph unlimited. There is only a very limited use-case.

    1. Commswonk Silver badge

      Re: Gigabit Broadband?

      Maybe I am missing something but for most users having something at the 50Mb to 70Mb that FTTC delivers is surely enough.

      Careful; in some places opinions like that are seen as heresy. Somebody somewhere will be heating up the tar and collecting feathers...

      FWIW I agree with you...

    2. Vometia has insomnia. Again.

      Re: Gigabit Broadband?

      "Maybe I am missing something but for most users having something at the 50Mb to 70Mb that FTTC delivers is surely enough."

      It'd be enough if I got anything like that figure, but as much as Openreach makes a big deal about FTTC speeds, the "up to" actually translates to a max of around 13 Mbits for me, which is just about adequate but not that great, especially when Steam decides I need a 32 GB update for something I haven't played in yonks.

      And that's for a cabinet about 500 yards down the street; seems I'm doing okay compared to many.

    3. AW-S

      Re: Gigabit Broadband?

      "for most users having something at the 50Mb to 70Mb that FTTC delivers is surely enough"

      That's download. For many upload is the issue with FTTC/ADSL/VDSL.

      I've just had 1Gbps FTTP installed recently and so far so fast (£25.00 per month). Upload and download measured at around 950Mbps is really useful for all those Nest cams (all 9 of them) in HD.

      1. Roland6 Silver badge

        Re: Gigabit Broadband?

        >Upload and download measured at around 950Mbps is really useful for all those Nest cams (all 9 of them) in HD.

        Thanks for the update, I suspect this braindead implementation is common to consumer IoT stuff as developers think Internet bandwidth is the same as LAN bandwidth and so can be misused.

        Just saying, as over a decade back the feed into the central control centre for 50+ HD CCTV cameras all with pan-tilt-zoom and continuous record was significantly less than 1Gbps, but then the cameras were more expensive...

    4. Martin an gof Silver badge

      Re: Gigabit Broadband?

      Maybe I am missing something but for most users having something at the 50Mb to 70Mb that FTTC delivers is surely enough.

      As others have said, for remote working on an asymmetrical connection, it's upload speed that is the limiting factor, but like you I survived last year quite well with what many would regard as inadequate speeds. It's not a popular thing to point out though, and I get downvotes every time I mention it on El Reg.

      Our ADSL2 connects at around 7½/1 and at times last year I had three schoolchildren at home - two on Google, one on Teams - and a wife, remote-desktopping into her machine at work. Yes, I also have a 4G modem plugged into the router (did have before lockdowns), but it is set to come up only in "emergencies", and rarely did so for more than a few minutes every couple of days.

      Upload speed was potentially a bottleneck, but in practice the schools did most teaching with children's cameras off so data leaving the house was mostly text chat, connections to Google Docs and whatever is required for remote desktop - hardly anything in other words. Piano lessons, ballet, church, family chats and so on worked perfectly well.

      Look, it wasn't ideal, and frankly a 35/10 connection would have been easier but we didn't upgrade then, and haven't now. For a start, it wasn't even possible to book an installation until well into the pandemic - a point many of those moaning about the delays getting internet connections to schoolchildren without last year ignore* - by which time schools were finishing for the summer, and it looked as if teaching would be at least partly in-person by the autumn. For another thing, as someone else has pointed out, it doesn't come for free. Oh, and until the autumn, our phoneline terminated in a "shed" in the front garden - a temporary arrangement I had put in place myself (don't tell BT) when our house was being rebuilt. Until I had repositioned the line to look as if it had never been touched, I didn't really want a BT engineer on site :-)

      I suppose what I'm saying is that many people find ADSL2 "good enough"**. So long as you get something in excess of 6Mb/1Mb it's good for an HD video stream (BBC recommends 3.2 - 5Mb/s, it often seems to be less than that in reality), and a couple of two-way video calls.

      While ADSL is still available, good enough for most uses and faster options are more expensive, there will be a lot of people who don't see the need to upgrade. The UK's place in the rankings won't improve until ADSL is withdrawn and people are forced to upgrade.

      Us? Well, I do have a use for faster upload speeds - and not just video calls - so now that our master socket looks as if it has never been touched by non-BT hands again, maybe it's time to upgrade.

      M.

      *in many cases this was solved in reality by handing out 4G modems and Chromebooks, but mobile is not a panacea - coverage, contention and reliability can all be issues

      **worth noting here that more and more "normal" people (that is, not us!) - certainly up until last year, but I reckon that is a blip - were ditching, or simply not replacing, desktop and laptop computers, even tablets, and "doing internet" purely via their phones, partly driven by also ditching landlines

  10. TeeCee Gold badge

    "could have faster" I can agree with.

    "could have faster at no extra cost" is, I'm afraid, a pile of porkies.

    Unless, of course, you include the "minimum term 48 months, price rockets after 18 months and you must take our hideously overpriced TV package as well to qualify" deals, which is comparing apples with turds.

  11. Tron

    Why bother?

    It won't be long before the UK internet ends at Dover. Everything beyond that will be banned on the grounds of morality, privacy, national security, public health, 'harms', interference in politics, tax or for not complying with UK-specific legislation. It will just be a different way to get your TV, most of which will be repeats on Netflix. The move to distributed computing, which faster speeds would support, is being unwisely blocked by GAFA sitting on patents, not realising that the status quo - a centralised topology - makes them vulnerable, and as a result, they are living on borrowed time.

    The net is getting faster, but every day, search engines deliver fewer results, less is accessible, more is banned, and the punters are being scared off by daily news reports - 'woman reduced to tears by net, we must end this madness now', 'children sold to evil foreigners on social media' etc.

    They may as well save the investment and effort by reverting everyone back to dial-up, using the high cost and low speed as a cheap, effective censorship mechanism.

    1. Peter D

      Re: Why bother?

      The EU will ban data originating from the UK because the fibre it flowed through had come into contact with British soil. "Welcome to the Brexit" as the smug Dutch sandwich thief said.

  12. Roland6 Silver badge

    Flawed comparison methodology

    Bet even with universal FTTP the UK will still be outgunned by other countries...

    I wonder if the universal entry-level service offering was 100Mbps up and down, whether it could be profitably sold for £10 pcm. (*)

    (*) This was the target of one of the alt's ten plus years back.

  13. anthonyhegedus

    Average speed is irrelevant

    By “average” I assume they mean ‘mean”. What would be more useful would be the median or the mode. It’s sort of irrelevant that 80% or the country can get ‘superfast” when of that 80%, some of them can’t because the cabinet is full up, and 10% of the country can only get ‘super slow’.

    We supply IT services to around 60 or so small businesses, and that includes the broadband. Out of that, around 20% don’t get what I would call fast broadband. The lowest 4 or 5 get 500kbps. What’s poor is that three of our customers got such appallingly slow speeds that they were forced to pay for a leased line, and they’re paying over £300 for 100Mbps. And what makes it worse is that two of them are in reasonably built-up areas, or on fairly new industrial estates. The speeds they could get just weren’t enough to be able to run their business properly.

    One of them even contemplated moving to a site in London but weren’t able to because the broadband there was no FTTC let alone FTTP.

  14. mark l 2 Silver badge

    "Superfast broadband is available to the vast majority of UK homes, but millions of people are yet to take this up. Many customers might be surprised to learn they can upgrade to faster speeds, for no extra cost,”

    I agree that not everyone takes the fastest service. I pay £20 pm for a 38Mb/s VDSL service but its not the fastest I can potentially get, I could pay £40 pm to get 516Mb/s with Virgin media, but id rather keep the £20pm id pay to upgrade to the faster speeds as I personally haven't the need for the additional speed.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Who's that with?

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    G7 countries outgun UK in worldwide broadband speed test, again.

    TFTFY

  16. greenwood-IT

    What about the other 15%...

    Who comes up with this stuff?

    So the target is to get "high speed" to 85% of the population. That means those who live in cities or already have decent infrastructure will get even fast broadband, while those 10million who live on the end of a bit of wet string in the country will be left behind, forgotten and ignored.

    I bet the "Tax break" is targeted at new technology, ie, subsidised 5G or FTTP, rather than providing a reliable 50Mbps to home & business users via DSL or a strong 3G/4G signal.

    Anyone seen the UK plans for how to run 6 office phones off of a 0.25Mbps ADSL link in 2025 when there's no mobile coverage in the area?

    Thanks UK planners and Government regulations.

  17. taxman

    For no extra cost?

    Could someone in El Reg contact this spokesperson again and find out where these "deals" are available? I think that there would be a big rush if we knew! Or do they mean all these "Special Deals" where you pay a small amount for a set period then have your pockets and wallet ripped apart by the huge hike to the "normal" charge plus the obligatory 3.*% annual increase in charges that now exist.

    But just had to have the wire from pole to house replaced (free through EE/OpenReach as there was a fault, as in old 1960's cable broke and was exposed to the elements). Chatting to the engineer about cable developments and he mentioned that they are now undertaking quite a number of FTTP bits of work where by the fibre goes from pole to house.

  18. Big_Boomer Silver badge

    1st Rural World problems

    I keep hearing about these poor people who are forced to live in remote rural communities not having access to high speed broadband. You also don't have to suffer the stress caused by the noise generated by the 30+ neighbours who are within earshot in an urban housing estate, nor the traffic noise from the 3 dual carriageways within 2 miles, nor the pollution, traffic jams, crime, etc. Just rejoice that you don't have to live in the urban environment and your only negatives are living a long way from the nearest supermarket and slow internet access. If you really need fast internet then you can either pay for fibre to be laid to your premises (it's only £1000 per metre <LOL>) or move somewhere that has decent broadband. Personally, I'd be moving the other way and enjoying the peace and quiet, but then I can't afford to live in the country due to my job and due to the price of property in the wilds of rural Britain.

    I live in one of the above crowded noisy housing estates but one of the few advantages it has is fast broadband. I have Virgin and get 356Mb/s download and 36Mb/s upload. Do I need that fast a connection 99% of the time? No. It is really useful when I am downloading huge installs and videos for work and personal use? Yes. Does it cost a fair bit? Yes, £106 including every TV channel except Sky Sports and including landline phone with 1000 international call minutes. During the last 18 months it has been a godsend as my better half has also been WFH and the broadband has coped admirably with 2 people WFH and both also streaming different internet radios. Yes, I have the Virgin supplied router, no it has not had any problems in over 2 years of use. YEMV. :-)

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Update

    BT/Openreach supply 36MB/8MB across copper from the green box 200 yards away.

    *

    The Virgin network is 50 yards away, just across the street, but Virgin say they can't install (no reason given).

    *

    When I phoned BT the other day to ask when they will install fibre I was told that our street "was not yet on the schedule".

    *

    So.....I guess that 200MB/20MB is in my distant future.....and I live in the Metropolis........good luck to anyone living in the rural elsewhere!!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Update

      "but Virgin say they can't install (no reason given)." They're doing you a favour.

      Apparently (may depend on market area but where I am anyway) FTTC counts as Boris's super-hyper-megafast broadband for the Britain of the future so we can forget about FTTP this decade.

  20. Chris Evans

    South Korea, Singapore & full list

    I'm surprised South Korea or Singapore aren't mentioned they normally do well on speed!

    The full list is here: https://www.cable.co.uk/broadband/speed/worldwide-speed-league/

    South Korea is 35th!

    & Singapore 11th

  21. Licenced_Radio_Nerd
    Facepalm

    Had to downgrade

    A couple of months ago, I downgraded my Openreach POTS line to 40/10 via my ISP, Uno. They are offering a new all-in-one calls/DSL package that is half the price of the BT Wholesale packages (had to have two: one for DSL, one for line-rental/calls). It does mean the back-haul is now via Talk Talk LLU, and I had to change my public IP address, but I am saving money by not paying for something I cannot achieve. When I first started using VDSL, I was one of the few, so my sync and throughput speeds were close to the 80/20 I was paying for. As more people piled onto the DSLAM, and cross-talk increased, my speeds plummeted. Sync speeds were also unstable and often re-training. I also had to have Openreach out earlier this year (2021) to fix the age-old problem of water in the head-end in the street. They fixed me and managed to knock one of my neighbours off. They came out to fix that, and knocked another neighbour off. Thankfully he noticed before they left and politely yelled at them.

    Yes, we have Vermin Media in this area. Had CableTel in the early days - before NTHell. Would not touch that again!!!

    So bring on fibre to the home. I'm not fussed if it's only 100 Mb/s. I just want something to work at the level I pay for!

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Openreach plans

    So have they published any details of where & when they are planning to start to provide FTTP? I've not been able to find any for several years.

  23. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    the US in 15th place (92.4Mbps)

    Sure. If you live in a big city, on the coast, and are prepared to pay through the nose. The other 80% of the population can't get anything close to this.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021