According to elReg, BT are coming up with some new technology (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/15/bt_bet_trials/) to boost Broadband speeds in rural areas. Not sure how this would work but at first sight the costs look fairly prohibitive although businesses might find it OK.
It sounds promising, I note BT are asking for local authorities to help with cost, even though its BT's network in the first place and they really should provide good speeds to all without asking for more cash >:(
Mmm. BT wants local authorities to subsidise its business. You can't get much more cheeky can you? :shake:
Quote from: Rik on Sep 15, 2009, 16:49:00
Mmm. BT wants local authorities to subsidise its business. You can't get much more cheeky can you? :shake:
No you can't Rik :shake: but they will get away with it
Quote from: Rik on Sep 15, 2009, 16:49:00
Mmm. BT wants local authorities to subsidise its business. You can't get much more cheeky can you? :shake:
Nothing new, Rik. For example, they long since disowned phone boxes they perceived as loss making, and asked local councils to pay or face removal.
Last year they claimed our local rural phone box was unprofitable and threatened removal unless the local parish council took it on. I emailed Ian Livingston and told him it was unprofitable because there was no means of paying -it didn't take coins or credit cards. BT promptly came and cleaned out the box and installed a method of paying by card.
BT is a privatisation that went badly wrong and we have all been suffering ever since. :(
The privatisation was fine, John. It was the running of the firm afterwards which was the problem. ;)
Sorry Rik, we have to differ on this one. ;)
The structure of the privatisation has led to, for example, the awful situation of having to gamble that you won't have to pay BT when you call them out for a broadband fault which might be your internal wiring or not. The parameter of BT's responsibility up to the front door was set when the privatisation rules were drawn up.
I was pulling your leg, John. Mind you, the charges are more down to Ofcom, imo. Until we had Openreach, they simply didn't happen that way.
I can't remember before how it is now. Did BT just turn up and fix the fault with no charge?
To a great extent, yes. There were some charges for some jobs, but getting an extension fitted cost £28, not £200, more charges were absorbed within BT.
The good old days. :( :sigh:
Indeed. Ofcom are not our friends. :(
Surely amplifying an already noisy signal can't be that good? I must be missing something. :)
No, I think you have a good point, Seb. The only two answers I can think of are that, maybe, an amplified poor signal will just reach further as a poor signal, or that the amp will be back far enough to push a passable signal further. Of course, if the wires weren't carrying voice as well, they could do more.
True.