Virgin speeds up the broadband battle with promises of 50Mb - Telegraph
[Rep]

It's all nonsense really. Nobody will ever get the speeds advertised. First you have to be close enough to prevent attenuation of signal, then you must have a non-contended connection. A raw 1Mbps/mth costs about £20 in IP transit and £20 in network costs. BT wholesale charges even more, closer to £200. So you do the maths. 50Mbps for £11.50. Something gives somewhere along the line!

Ofcom is deregulating 65% of the market, but 35% is still uncompetitive and will remain so. Nobody is going to lay new cable. It can only be done wirelessly. So somebody give my company some money, damn it.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by harryaldridge:
It's all nonsense really. Nobody will ever get the speeds advertised. First you have to be close enough to prevent attenuation of signal, then you must have a non-contended connection. A raw 1Mbps/mth costs about £20 in IP transit and £20 in network costs. BT wholesale charges even more, closer to £200. So you do the maths. 50Mbps for £11.50. Something gives somewhere along the line!

Ofcom is deregulating 65% of the market, but 35% is still uncompetitive and will remain so. Nobody is going to lay new cable. It can only be done wirelessly. So somebody give my company some money, damn it.

I prefer wired, sorry. :-)
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Eurosceptic Atlanticist:
I prefer wired, sorry. :-)

Luddite :-) Might as well replace mobiles with cups and string :-)
[Rep]

Originally Posted by harryaldridge:
It's all nonsense really. Nobody will ever get the speeds advertised. First you have to be close enough to prevent attenuation of signal, then you must have a non-contended connection. A raw 1Mbps/mth costs about £20 in IP transit and £20 in network costs. BT wholesale charges even more, closer to £200. So you do the maths. 50Mbps for £11.50. Something gives somewhere along the line!

Ofcom is deregulating 65% of the market, but 35% is still uncompetitive and will remain so. Nobody is going to lay new cable. It can only be done wirelessly. So somebody give my company some money, damn it.

Gordon took about £20 billion out of the telecoms business when he flogged the 3G licenses; he could have been inventive and invested it back into the industry to help get more fibre to the kerb. But no - pays off the national debt to make his short term figures look good.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by harryaldridge:
Luddite :-) Might as well replace mobiles with cups and string :-)

In my experience it's more reliable and more secure. :-)
[Rep]

Be wary of cheapo broadband, which in my experience is notoriously unreliable and may not even work.
Once you've signed the contract and you are forced to pay extortionate amounts through their customer service lines, you really are screwed, and there's nothing you can do until the contract's end.....
[Rep]

Wireless is the way!
[Rep]

If I were within distance of my neighbours, no way I'd be using wireless. Too insecure.

But my wireless hot spot ends on my property, so someone would have to be physically trespassing to get into my network.
[Rep]

SSL encrypt EVERYTHING baby!
[Rep]