[cat666]

I'm researching leaving the shower that is Virgin Media and I have a BT cabinet about 100 metres from my house with "fibre optic is here" all over it but I am a bit confused about how this works.

It seems to me that BT Infinity is a fibre optic service but it still requires a BT line, and people are needing MAC codes to change from previous providers. Surely if it is fibre optic, then it shouldn't actually require a phone line (other than BT trying to sell you one). Don't get me wrong, it seems I that close to the cabinet I will get lightning fast ADSL but I've been burned by it before and don't really trust anything other than fibre optic.

Virgin are fine 95% of the time it's just the 5% of the time I do have bad latency and speeds is there axact time I actually wish to use the service.

[dannylau]

You only need a mac code if you're changing from a provider that uses BT's exchange, virgin have their own boxes and exchanges so it doesn't apply

[Ernie_C]

You still use the landline cable to bring the Infinity service to your home and hence need and pay for the landline.

[chrisjr]

Originally Posted by cat666

I'm researching leaving the shower that is Virgin Media and I have a BT cabinet about 100 metres from my house with "fibre optic is here" all over it but I am a bit confused about how this works.

It seems to me that BT Infinity is a fibre optic service but it still requires a BT line, and people are needing MAC codes to change from previous providers. Surely if it is fibre optic, then it shouldn't actually require a phone line (other than BT trying to sell you one). Don't get me wrong, it seems I that close to the cabinet I will get lightning fast ADSL but I've been burned by it before and don't really trust anything other than fibre optic.

Virgin are fine 95% of the time it's just the 5% of the time I do have bad latency and speeds is there axact time I actually wish to use the service.

Infinity is Fibre to the Cabinet, not Fibre to the Premises.

The fibre part of the link terminates at the cabinet. The remainder of the link is via copper wires into your home. If you had an existing phone line it would be connected up to the new cabinet to provide the Infinity service.

In very crude terms the Infinity service is like having the kit usually placed in an exchange moved to the roadside nearer your home.

[cat666]

Thanks Chris, you made it makes sense.

Got to get out of my Virgin contract first, and then make a decision on the TV.

[d'@ve]

Originally Posted by chrisjr

In very crude terms the Infinity service is like having the kit usually placed in an exchange moved to the roadside nearer your home.

... with the adsl+ upper speed limits replaced by 4 or 5x higher fibre upper speed limits, and a guaranteed minimum speed close to the fastest adsl+ speeds.

[johnboy726]

I got confused when I got BT Infinity, I was like you I had Virgin Media but had to leave them, (Not by choice), I just don't have cable in my area.

basically BT tell you it's fibre optic to the cabinet, but from the cabinet to your home, it's copper wire .

I am a BT Infinity customer believe me Virgin has got nothing on the Speed BT Give you.

Give it a try !!

[bamindy]

VM cable broadband is also fibre to the cabinet. Let us know how it goes, I have been considering possibly going with BT.

[cat666]

Originally Posted by bamindy

VM cable broadband is also fibre to the cabinet. Let us know how it goes, I have been considering possibly going with BT.

VM do cable to the house. It might go via a cabinet, but it's cable all the way.

BT Infinity does the last little bit by standard copper cables, but as it isn't that far, you don't experience much, if any, of the signal degradation if it was copper all the way.

[stuntmaster]

lets clear this up a bit.

With Bt infinity, it is fibre to the cabinet. and from there you have a copper phoneline to the house as before.

the faceplate has a bt socket on the removable half below. and an RJ11 in the non removable upper half.

the ADSL Filter as once known is now in the faceplate.

an RJ11 ADSL cable goes from the faceplate to an OpenReach Modem, this then dishes out an RJ45 ethernet that then plugs into the back on the homehub 3.

from there though, the rest is how it is.

the only difference is Virgin use thick Coax cable whereas BT use twisted copper pair. I am not sure you can use your own router with BT either.

[stuntmaster]

http://www.productsandservices.bt.co...aster-internet

interesting read!

Virgin now need to keep up big time.

[cat666]

Originally Posted by stuntmaster

http://www.productsandservices.bt.co...aster-internet

interesting read!

Virgin now need to keep up big time.

It's worrying in honesty.

It is clear that Virgin's network simply cannot cope with it's current customers usage, and the whole "double speed" PR stunt has given them more customers which was the aim (as it was done to entice customers from BT). I'm concered VM will suddenley decide that it's a good idea to give all customers 60MB as standard in order to keep up with BT, who are already offering the base customers 38MB via Infinity. If VM do, then the already struggling network will get progressivley worse.

What would you need a 160MB connection for anyway?

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by bamindy

VM cable broadband is also fibre to the cabinet. Let us know how it goes, I have been considering possibly going with BT.

I thought VM's cable BB was fibre to the node not the cabinet.

[BKM]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

I thought VM's cable BB was fibre to the node not the cabinet.

Its Fibre to the nearest "big green box with mains power" and not the small street ones (if that's what you mean by "node" ) - and then coax from then on.

VM adverts try very hard to make it sound like its fibre to the home (without actually saying this!)

[stuntmaster]

Originally Posted by BKM

Its Fibre to the nearest "big green box with mains power" and not the small street ones (if that's what you mean by "node" ) - and then coax from then on.

VM adverts try very hard to make it sound like its fibre to the home (without actually saying this!)

yep, supercabinets effectively.

massive big industrial boxes, in our area either army green in colour or light grey.

[t33v33]

Originally Posted by cat666

What would you need a 160MB connection for anyway?

Exactly. When I recently wanted to drop my TV service they offered me a good package allowing me to keep Tivo on TVM but I had to drop broadband from 60MB to 30MB broadband. We often have 2x online gamers and Sky OnDemand HD streaming at the same time and don't have any problems. I'm sure there are some heavy gamers who need extra MB, but standard users don't need very high speed.

Trouble is VM have got themselves into a willy-war over speed, when it's reliabilty and availability that users want.

[cat666]

Originally Posted by t33v33

Exactly. When I recently wanted to drop my TV service they offered me a good package allowing me to keep Tivo on TVM but I had to drop broadband from 60MB to 30MB broadband. We often have 2x online gamers and Sky OnDemand HD streaming at the same time and don't have any problems. I'm sure there are some heavy gamers who need extra MB, but standard users don't need very high speed.

Trouble is VM have got themselves into a willy-war over speed, when it's reliabilty and availability that users want.

I agree.

Gaming doesn't actually use that much data. If I have a non-download week then casual surfing on 2 smartphones, a laptop and online gaming on 1 PC uses roughly 1GB. I'll admit it's nice to download a Steam game or an Amazon MP3 album fast, but it is hardly a necessicty. Hell I remember buying November Rain when I still had dial up and cursing as it didn't come down in the 2 hours before the redial and I had to start over.

Reliability and availability are more important than speed. Your car may be able to go 30mph, but you can't do that if the road ahead is congested.

[bamindy]

Originally Posted by cat666

What would you need a 160MB connection for anyway?

People used to say that about 10MB downloads a while ago! ;-)

I get your point though. We're definitely moving toward streaming, as opposed to downloading. For example, Netflix new SuperHD service only requires a 5-7MB connection, so even multiply that up to 3 or 4 users on the home network, that's still quite a low requirement in comparison with what VM are selling as a high end product.

I can see there will be heavy users who will no doubt make the use of 160MB, but I can't see it being worth the cost to the majority. I'm on 100MB, soon to be 120MB and I'm seriously considering drop back to around 30MB, which was absolutely fit for purpose - PC, Laptop, iPad, mobiles, PS3, Wii...

[cat666]

Originally Posted by bamindy

People used to say that about 10MB downloads a while ago! ;-)

I get your point though. We're definitely moving toward streaming, as opposed to downloading. For example, Netflix new SuperHD service only requires a 5-7MB connection, so even multiply that up to 3 or 4 users on the home network, that's still quite a low requirement in comparison with what VM are selling as a high end product.

I can see there will be heavy users who will no doubt make the use of 160MB, but I can't see it being worth the cost to the majority. I'm on 100MB, soon to be 120MB and I'm seriously considering drop back to around 30MB, which was absolutely fit for purpose - PC, Laptop, iPad, mobiles, PS3, Wii...

Exactly my point. A 10MB connection is fine for most tasks. The only need for more is to either decrease download time or to use the connection for multiple bandwidth consuming activites at the same time. In both these cases people should be paying for the increased bandwidth and not expecting it for free. If you feed a family of 4 then you buy a bigger pie, you don't expect the standard pie to stretch.

I understand technology moves on, and that speeds will get faster, however in it's current form the VM network is not able to cope with the extra demand the doubling has caused. If you can't give the people paying for a service a quality service then you shouldn't be taking on more customers promising them a quality service.

[The Installer]

Originally Posted by cat666

Exactly my point. A 10MB connection is fine for most tasks. The only need for more is to either decrease download time or to use the connection for multiple bandwidth consuming activites at the same time. In both these cases people should be paying for the increased bandwidth and not expecting it for free. If you feed a family of 4 then you buy a bigger pie, you don't expect the standard pie to stretch.

Err correct me if i'm wrong here, BUT Virgin Media provide three tiers of service. The largest oddly enough costs more than the smallest, so people ARE already paying more for extra bandwidth ......

Maybe you should look at the Virgin Media website. To help you out here is a link which will take you right to the page you clearly need to read http://store.virginmedia.com/broadba...and/index.html

Originally Posted by cat666

I understand technology moves on, and that speeds will get faster, however in it's current form the VM network is not able to cope with the extra demand the doubling has caused. If you can't give the people paying for a service a quality service then you shouldn't be taking on more customers promising them a quality service.

How Virgin Media operate their network and sell their products is a different argument altogether.

[Jez_Gafys]

More speed the merrier. I am on 100mb and fair enough I don't need that speed all the time. My online games play virtually as they did when I was on VM 2mb (yes 2). It's simply down to the fact I am in impatient man and like the fact I can download items fast when I need them. I would though sacrifice 50% of my download speed if they could increase the upload to be 1:1 this is where any noticeable difference is when gaming etc.

ps in reply to people talking about 60mb becoming a standard and saturating their already saturated network this will not be the case. Those that are not currently on 60 are not so simply because they don't need/want that kind of speed. Just because you upgrade them doesn't mean 24/7 they will be using full bandwidth.

[cat666]

Originally Posted by The Installer

Err correct me if i'm wrong here, BUT Virgin Media provide three tiers of service. The largest oddly enough costs more than the smallest, so people ARE already paying more for extra bandwidth ......

Maybe you should look at the Virgin Media website. To help you out here is a link which will take you right to the page you clearly need to read http://store.virginmedia.com/broadba...and/index.html

Again your missing my point altogether. I'm not making a dig at individuals, but the Virgin service and the tiers as a whole.

30MB is too high to be the basic package. Your average user only needs 10MB, I believe the current UK average is 9MB.In giving everyone 30MB, Virgin have choked there own network, and also appealed to more new customers which has made the strain worse. How many of the people who have been freely upgraded to 30MB would have had that service if there was a cost involved? They would have sufficed, and have been more than happy with, a solid 10MB connection.

[Jez_Gafys]

Originally Posted by cat666

Again your missing my point altogether. I'm not making a dig at individuals, but the Virgin service and the tiers as a whole.

30MB is too high to be the basic package. Your average user only needs 10MB, I believe the current UK average is 9MB.In giving everyone 30MB, Virgin have choked there own network, and also appealed to more new customers which has made the strain worse. How many of the people who have been freely upgraded to 30MB would have had that service if there was a cost involved? They would have sufficed, and have been more than happy with, a solid 10MB connection.

But if the "average user" is only really using 10mb ish then its not gunna matter if they can achieve "upto" because the sort of the tasks they are doing won't really utilise this additional speed on offer to them anyways so how would it choke the VM network. It's not as if they "average user" was using all 10mb every hour of every day now all of a sudden they are using 30mb every hour of every day.

[cat666]

Originally Posted by Jez_Gafys

But if the "average user" is only really using 10mb ish then its not gunna matter if they can achieve "upto" because the sort of the tasks they are doing won't really utilise this additional speed on offer to them anyways so how would it choke the VM network. It's not as if they "average user" was using all 10mb every hour of every day now all of a sudden they are using 30mb every hour of every day.

I'm going to use the connection of a file sharer for this example as it's easier.

So Mr F Sharer wants something for nothing or the cheapest possible price. He takes up VM's 10MB broadband and downloads / streams all day long. The computer is never off. He is never in a million years going to upgrade, as he gets what he wants by leaving his PC on 24/7. Previously, he was only able to use the connection to download at 1.25mbs and even then was subject to some pretty strict traffic management at peak times. Now he is able to use his connection to get 3.75mbs and has a more leniant traffic management system.

So Mr F Sharer is putting more of a strain onto the network, and paying nothing more for it. Don't get me wrong this isn't Mr Sharer's fault, it is VM's for upgrading everyone without first having the required infastructure in place.

[mossy2103]

Originally Posted by cat666

IPreviously, he was only able to use the connection to download at 1.25mbs and even then was subject to some pretty strict traffic management at peak times. Now he is able to use his connection to get 3.75mbs and has a more leniant traffic management system.

And he gets traffic-managed to 50% for 5 hours.

So Mr F Sharer is putting more of a strain onto the network, and paying nothing more for it.

Except that he will be traffic-managed for 5 hours at a time, halving his speeds for the duration, and again when he next triggers STM


And not every user is going to be a relative of Mr F Sharer.