Sadly we don't have a picture of a fibre cable, but you get the general idea.
Openreach, the it's-a-separate-company-honest technical arm of dominant UK telco BT, has announced that it is to begin trials of fibre-to-the-home broadband connectivity in August of this year. Don't get too excited, though: the trial is only for a limited geographical area.
The company plans to run fibre-optic cabling to 10,000 new homes being built at Ebbsfleet in Kent in order to offer lucky home buyers 100Mb/s Internet connectivity. The top-end packages are expected to wholesale for £52 per month, meaning retail prices are likely to top out at £70 per month for a 100Mb/s downstream and 2Mb/s upstream connection.
There's no news yet of any suppliers actually offering such a package, and it's rather more likely that the property management companies would buy the top-end guaranteed bandwidth package and then sell shared access to tenants. Openreach has also announced several other speed points, including 30Mb/s, 10Mb/s, and the rather unimpressive 500Kb/s and 135Kb/s packages.
For those who think uncontended fibre would be a good way to escape from the often false 'up-to' claims of ADSL offerings, there's bad news. The only packages with 'assured' bandwidth are those up to and including 10Mb/s – everything else comes with the proviso 'speeds up to'.
Something else missing from the documentation provided by Openreach is any mention of data transfer caps – 100Mb/s is all well and good, but it's pretty useless if you get kicked off after you hit 5GB like with some of the ADSL packages offered by parent company BT.
Still, faster broadband is always welcome – especially in the form of noise and interference-free fibre-optics.
Fancy buying a house in Kent just to get quicker downloads, or does ADSL2+ serve your needs nicely? Let us know via
the forums.
As for the upstream, they dont want home users starting up their own datacenters in thier house...
Obviously its going to be expensive at this initial stage...
Yeah but thats not the way BT thinks.
That's pathetic. I hate this country. I'm moving to Sweden. I hope all at BT, who make these types of decisions, die a horrible excrement based death. They are flat out halting technical and creative progress. That's what the nazi's did.
100mbit up and down with.. no caps.. no packet shaping and port blocking... and no "peak time" based slow downs .. no "fair use" bollocks.... for £30 a month or less...
That is what is required of BT (for at least 50% of the population) in order to keep the UK competitive over the next five years. Will that happen?? Like **** it will.
Love this part since I'm currently getting about 135Kb/s with my BT option 3 for £25, so if I was to get any improvement I would be happy, but typical BT ripping you off by the looks of that. Plus they would more than likely cap them users severley.
i mean something like a 100/20 Mbit down / up connection would be really nice to have....
As a web developer, and a file sharer*, that's just nuts.
*- legal open source files only of course.
Sam
Except for FiOS. I'm on a 20Mbps/5Mbps connection right now and I love it, since unlike cable I get the bandwidth any time of the day. Only problem is that it's not available everywhere, but it is in most big cities and in a total of 16 states, I think.
Then again I only get 20GB a month. Wouldn't mind a 100Mbit connection though, as long as theres no caps.
And if you can complain about that price, I need to switch countries. At that price/speed ratio, I would get 20 mb/s for what I'm paying now for 8 mb/s. I'm also a big fan of the guaranteed speeds on the lower packages - I think 'up to' speed advertising is completely evil.
For the price (£24 a month and that includes Sky TV) it's not to bad.
Although faster downloads would always be welcome, they have to be matched by resonable prices and no monthly caps.
Slingbox?
Hell even if i had 10 down i wouldnt care, but the current upload speeds are a bit sucky
On the other hand... wtf do you need more than 2mb Upstream for? I can think only of 1 thing and that ain't quite leagal in most European countries (if not in all of em by now). I have ADSL2+ 16.000 @ 14.500 ~ 15.500 Down with like 1.100 Up somewhat around 35 euros and that does me just freakin fine... there are 5 comps connected and there are actually like no problems.. only with the provider (but thats a different story) and for people wanting to host Webserver and so on.. get a feckin Business Plan from yer local Provider!
Thats obviously the main reason they don't hand out Symetric DSL lines just like that...
for sending mails... filesharing (illegal or not)... Gaming the current available lines are just fine....
But..!!! I wouldn't complain if the Fibre crap would be available and prolly would jump on the train...(at a reasonable price that is)
To the poor sods livin in the US of A : <politicalparanoia>bet the RIAA have their fingers in! </politicalparanoia>
Wouldn't suprise me tho....
Im more concerned about the needed Hardware...dunno bout other countries, here in germany you usually get a crappy router/modem from yer provider and either you're happy with it... or you gotta buy yer own... and with crappy i mean C R A P P Y
So where can you like get a Fibreoptic NIC ? Or is this like with DSL? ya need 10.000 boxed to split the data etc? I have never heard of a fibre Modem.. so i take it will be a NIC but those are like.. geez unpayable? The cheapest i've seen was like 200 Euros
But wtf, 100/2?!? Are they going out of their way to make something so potentially awesome suck, or is this their approach for Bit-torrent throttling (and therefore making something so potentially awesome suck)?
Of course, there are more legit uses for the upstream bandwidth too. I'm constantly remoting into my home machines from the road, and VNC is somewhat less than fun to use at that speed. If I make sure it's the only network activity at the time it's usable, but generally pretty crap.
I quite recently moved away from my parents house to my own apartment, and now I have "Up to 100Mbit" down and 10Mbit up. I've reaced speeds of 5MB/s down and 1.7MB/s up, so I guess it's about 40/10Mbit. I only pay 20£/month though, so I must say I'm really happy with that deal. I could easily host my own page and FTP. All ports are open, and there's no caps or limits afaik ;)
i work from home quite a bit VPN'd into the office, theres about 1.5mbit up on either end
its not enough, its ok for accesssing intranet and editing code on the office servers but working with word documents and the like? sucks :\
subversion is bloody slow over that link too :p
the point there being: not Private
I see it more like: If ya need it for work.. its business if not.. its for private use.. and c'mon.. lets be real.. No one needs more than there is atm (for real private use!).
but yeah ffs... i would love a OC192.. or whatever is better just for the sake of it...
i totally agree that the 2mbit upstram is hilarious @ 100 down.
I'd just like to see where all this is going with 100mb down available and so on.. coz i think its quite idiotic to just have certain areas covered with "High-Speed" connections while others still are on blimmin dial-up.
Here (germany) they don't even have like 70% DSL coverage. sure the great citys like Berlin,Munich,Cologne and some smaller ones like Dortmund etc. but even there... if you are livin in a "suburb?" the problems begin.. either not available... or its a joke what ya get... like 384/64kbs.
right now im copying some stuff over to my fileserver on 100mbit ethernet im looking at 11MB/s up and ~220k/s down
thats pushing it for 2mbit :\
Anyway, why shouldn't home users be able to run a webserver, teamspeak server, or game server?
Hell, maybe you would like to be able to keep your documents at home and access them on the move
Or even VNC into your home computer
Although quite a few home users might not need high uploads, some do, and by the time your talking about a 100mbit Internet connection, we are starting to talk about people who really use their Internet