Gloria wrote:Mine is 0.918 down and 0.565 up------how bad is that??? Dreadful???? We have pigeons sat on the wires passing letters from one to another to make up messages.
Seems the same as at my friends house... he lives off the main road opposite Whitemoor approaching Foulridge.
My parents address has always had 16mbps, and it seems okay. Latency is very minimal, I never have any issues unless I had a few friends over. Swapping my router to a RT-N66U sorted all issues, however fibre is soon going to be needed as IPTV and IPPhones are cheaper and will take over. Also the UK are pushing for the fastest broadband speeds, that is why schemes such as superfast lancashire have been established. I praise them, as the internet is the future. Mobile connections are becoming increasingly faster, with 4G due in Barlick before the end of the year, however the redundancy and speeds between cable and wireless are unmatched.
When streaming 1080p as advertised on sites such as YouTube, it is seriously compressed and the bitrate is heavily impacted. Rates of Bluray (True HD) approach 40mbps. As 3D (Dual stream) and 4K increase in popularity over the next few years, the demand for bandwidth will greatly increase.
I like how the UK government are pushing for FTTC (80/100mbps) technology, with most houses within a suitable distance from the exchange (Exchange only lines) able to access FTTP (300mbps). This is because it is much easier to run fibre from a cabinet into a property therefore using the existing network infrastructure reducing costs when speeds over 80mbps are required. This is offered at few cabinets as standard, however anyone can purchase FTTPoD and pay for fibre to be rolled into their property.
This is where Virgin Media are failing, and where most cable companies across the pond in america are going to struggle with. They are able to achieve speeds well over 150mbps over coax, however to roll out higher speeds when required they must bond connections. To have the capability of delivering more speeds efficiently they must roll out a new backbone, with this costing thousands / (more realistically) millions of £££.
Over here in the UK we should be grateful of companies such as BT and ISP"s using this network. It is fantastic for competition as we know that we get the same service, so we go for the lowest price. The difference is that we have a national provider, they use the same technology across the country. Smaller companies that use wireless and cable connections do have their own networks, but there are very few places in this country where you can't get access, if you can't its £70 a month for an unlimited 20mbps satellite connection with government grants available. Few countries have a central communications provider, (I'll use the states as having personal experience). Access isn't mandatory. Companies simply provide access in locations they choose. DSL broadband isn't widely used and isn't always supported by local exchanges. If your not in the city, you will have a slow DSL connection. Upstate New York, broadband access isn't even available. To enable access we had to use an expensive satellite connection and we were about a 3hr drive outside the city. America has super fast broadband in certain locations, but in others has none available. People complain about BT and other ISP's with slow connections, but the UK rolls out new technologies across the country at once. Although a slow process, it avoids issues such as the example I gave.