|
||||||||
BT HomeHub 6? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,633
|
I love how the usual people have come out of the woodwork to criticise me. As I say, you're free to avoid my posts or put me in your ignore lists if you only wish to see glowing pro-BT posts. I would suggest that it goes both ways - if you choose to engage me in conversation or throw some bait, you can hardly complain when I choose to reply ![]() Quote:
For FTTP you still have to have engineers running fibre from dp to the home and then organise appointments and suffer missed appointments, unlike with G.FAST. And BT have said recently that G.FAST self-install will hopefully be doable. FTTP will cost more to roll out and will therefore be slower to roll out.
If G.FAST actually turns out to need a professional install, then the gap between the technologies closes further - and you'll get all the issues you raise. No difference. I don't think BT is worried about rollout speed - this is the company that *still* has people on ancient DSL equipment (that BT admits is end of life) that can't even do ADSL2+, and only follows in the path of others in terms of innovation You seem to really enjoy drinking BT's koolaid. They'll say it'll clean the house and make tea if that's what's needed to make it sound like the best thing ever. Quote:
Makes no significant difference to the costs though because contractors don't come free. For any given annual budget, FTTP would take longer to roll out because it costs more to roll out.
Installation speed might be decreased with FTTP, but this isn't an insurmountable obstacle - as every other telco with a substantial FTTP rollout is finding ways to speed it up and make it cheaper. Even BT themselves is in on the game, with the announcement of an FTTP trial in Swindon to see how costs could be brought down. As for XG-FAST... will that need a whole new set of pole mounted DSLAMs? More e-waste for the landfills? The G.FAST DSLAMs will be a fixed configuration, not like the VDSL cabinets or exchange equipment where cards can be replaced to change technologies. Quote:
He sings the same song every time, very bitter towards BT. He overlooks the fact BT is a multinational, what they are more concerned about is the return on investment. Nothing he or anyone else says is going to change BT's plans in respect of rolling out G.Fast. Even if BT was to roll out true FTTP everywhere, that would likely result in a bill well over £10bn if you believe the optimistic estimates.
The government, quite rightly, shouldn't hand £billions to a private firm to do what they can do, but choose not to (handing billions over for the VDSL dud was bad enough). If we ever got government-funded FTTP I'd hope it was state owned. Quote:
That said I do think moox is correct, it would cost less money over the longterm rolling out FTTP as opposed to FTTDP, BT won't stump up the money for that, I doubt the government will either.
I think I'm going to end my so-called "broken record" here, because the resident BT employees and shareholders don't seem to like it. It must be a capital offence to say anything other than VDSL and G.FAST are the best things ever. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Darn Sarf
Posts: 28,724
|
Quote:
... it costs just as much to get fibre to a DP, whether you plonk a G.FAST DSLAM on it or a splitter. That is the bulk of the rollout cost, and G.FAST won't avoid it. After that, it's considering whether installing expensive G.FAST equipment and maintain it, or a not-so-expensive (but will cost a bit more in labour) set of fibre optic cables with much lower maintenance and an unlimited upgrade path.
It's the next bit where all the extra costs, and rollout slowdowns, would occur and claiming that the bulk of the cost is getting it to the dp doesn't alter that fact. FTTP is more expensive to roll out and would take longer to complete, fact. No private company is going to do that on the back of hard to determine maintenance costs 10 to 20 years into the future - that's a job for Government to fund or force and Government just ain't gonna do it because they don't plan 10 to 20 years into the future either except for a few National Security matters. Sometimes, pragmatism is hard to accept but it's how the World goes round. G.Fast is what's going to happen, consumers don't care how they get their 300+ Mbps, and that's really all there is to it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North West
Posts: 4,881
|
Quote:
I think I'm going to end my so-called "broken record" here, because the resident BT employees and shareholders don't seem to like it. It must be a capital offence to say anything other than VDSL and G.FAST are the best things ever.
Even if Openreach is separated it still has the problem of meeting the costs of G.Fast and FTTP, on its own it wouldn't be able to sustain that either because it would be a small entity. Being part of BT Group PLC allows them access to the bigger balance sheetm thus in theory able to borrow to fund rollout. I don't think the current situation is ideal nor do I think Openreach being hived off would make a difference either. Openreach is separated by a firewall from the rest of the group, they aren't allowed to trade directly. When an order is placed for any connection using Openreach equipment, it is done so blindly so any operator is unable to see who the ISP is. That has been the case for about 9 years or so now. I don't think FTTP is going to arrived in the next 5 years universally. That said once G.Fast is pushed and rolled out I suspect true mass FTTP will be pushed from 2020. Even at the rate BT is going, come 2020 we will have amongst the fastest domestic broadband speends in Europe, only bettered by Belgium. At the moment there isn't a pressing need faster broadband 80Mbps vis Openreach and 300/200Mbps via Virgin will sustain enough for now. I do think that will change in 12 months or so as 4K content becomes mainstream. I am disappointed Openreach aren't rolling out Vectoring, that would have been a nice short term boost till G.Fast availability. |
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 532
|
All parties score points on this discussion but when it comes down to the basics it is cost. If the government won't pay the cost then it is down to the private companies. They will only invest in what they can see a relatively quick return on which will be based on what they see the private punter will be prepared to pay for a broadband service, so without government intervention the experts and purists will never be satisfied. The average consumer isn't interested in how they get their broadband only if it works.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: S6 1SW WTID UTO FTB
Posts: 6,326
|
Quote:
Can't comment, but bear in mind you aren't restricted to using the Home Hub. There are plenty of very capable routers out there, for not much money (IMO more capable and reliable than the HH)
Clearly a 3rd party router is going to have vastly more features to mess and tweak with but the HH5 is a rock solid easy to use great performing bit of kit. |
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,099
|
Quote:
I have bought a number of "better" routers to replace my HH5 over the last couple of years and always ended up sending them back, they have been no more reliable and in each case they had worse WiFi range and performance.
Clearly a 3rd party router is going to have vastly more features to mess and tweak with but the HH5 is a rock solid easy to use great performing bit of kit. 5.0 Ghz both Home Hub 5 and Airport Extreme basically max out the speed available to me. Sky's routers also outperform Home Hub 5 on 2.4 Ghz with at least twice the speed. The Sky router also maxes out on 5.0 Ghz. |
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 280
|
Quote:
In my experience, the Airport Extreme from Apple is the best. 2.4 GHz WiFi on a Home Hub 5 could only manage 11mb whereas I get 44-50mb from the Airport Extreme. Both on the same wireless channel positioned identically for the test.
5.0 Ghz both Home Hub 5 and Airport Extreme basically max out the speed available to me. Sky's routers also outperform Home Hub 5 on 2.4 Ghz with at least twice the speed. The Sky router also maxes out on 5.0 Ghz. Neither of the Sky Hubs (SR101 or 102) are dual band. Not to mention, they're utter junk. |
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,099
|
Quote:
So what Sky router do you have that does 5GHz?
Neither of the Sky Hubs (SR101 or 102) are dual band. Not to mention, they're utter junk. |
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 280
|
Quote:
Sky Q Hub
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,099
|
Quote:
And you've been able to extensively test it against a HH5 and AE in the 5 minutes you must of had it. Wow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 280
|
Quote:
Where did I say I tested it extensively? You seem to have invented that criteria because your lousy Home Hub didn't match up in my tests.
But I can spot BS a mile off. |
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,099
|
Quote:
Sorry to dissapoint, but i don't use a HH. I don't have your typical home network or use ISP supplied tat.
But I can spot BS a mile off. I see you're an Android user. That explains everything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: S6 1SW WTID UTO FTB
Posts: 6,326
|
Quote:
In my experience, the Airport Extreme from Apple is the best. 2.4 GHz WiFi on a Home Hub 5 could only manage 11mb whereas I get 44-50mb from the Airport Extreme. Both on the same wireless channel positioned identically for the test.
5.0 Ghz both Home Hub 5 and Airport Extreme basically max out the speed available to me. Sky's routers also outperform Home Hub 5 on 2.4 Ghz with at least twice the speed. The Sky router also maxes out on 5.0 Ghz. This is my HH5 on 2.4GHz http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/5113270098 this is my HH5 on 5GHz http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/5113275964 |
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 176
|
FYI - I realise this thread has died but I thought it would be worth mentioning for anyone reading it.
There's a slight inaccuracy here - that is if you have BT Vision or BT Youview the HH must remain plugged in with the Vision/Youview box connected directly to it. I've yet to find a 3rd party router which will allow the Vision/Youview box's "internet channels" to function. |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,091
|
Quote:
FYI - I realise this thread has died but I thought it would be worth mentioning for anyone reading it.
There's a slight inaccuracy here - that is if you have BT Vision or BT Youview the HH must remain plugged in with the Vision/Youview box connected directly to it. I've yet to find a 3rd party router which will allow the Vision/Youview box's "internet channels" to function. |
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 532
|
I have replaced my HH5 with the TP-Link Archer VR 900. It works straight out of the box with my BT Youview box and all the internet channels. I am on Infinity 1 and it gives me an increase in speed from 28 to 38 Mbps over the HH5. Wifi coverage is better throughout the house. It has been rock solid and is yet to drop the Internet connection something which happened fairly often at peak times with the HH5. All wifi devices, and they are numerous, connect without any problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: S6 1SW WTID UTO FTB
Posts: 6,326
|
Quote:
FYI - I realise this thread has died but I thought it would be worth mentioning for anyone reading it.
There's a slight inaccuracy here - that is if you have BT Vision or BT Youview the HH must remain plugged in with the Vision/Youview box connected directly to it. I've yet to find a 3rd party router which will allow the Vision/Youview box's "internet channels" to function. |
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 8,097
|
I would truly have been disappointed if Moox hadn't used yet another thread to bang the FTTP drum he brings out at every opportunity.
The thing he fails to realise is there simply isn't the demand for super super fast speeds to warrant such a huge investment. |
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 8,097
|
Quote:
In my experience, the Airport Extreme from Apple is the best. 2.4 GHz WiFi on a Home Hub 5 could only manage 11mb whereas I get 44-50mb from the Airport Extreme. Both on the same wireless channel positioned identically for the test.
5.0 Ghz both Home Hub 5 and Airport Extreme basically max out the speed available to me. Sky's routers also outperform Home Hub 5 on 2.4 Ghz with at least twice the speed. The Sky router also maxes out on 5.0 Ghz. |
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: too close to Hell, Londonistan
Posts: 4,566
|
Most Asus Routers work great with as an IGMP proxy AKA, BT vision, youview. My home hub 5 is at the opposite end of the house as an access point/ethernet hub, HH5's are soo cheap on ebay I can't think of a cheaper better way to extend your wifi.
If BT ever get past VDSL, their might be the need for a PFsense router and religating a BT home hub 5 or other decent wifi router to access point duty. Hopefully by that time they'll be somthing powerful enough you can put a powerful enough computer inside a tiny box without turning it into a mini toaster to actually be able to have a fully fledged firewall at full gigabit speeds. |
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: South Wales
Posts: 9,884
|
had this in a email today ....
Get priority access to our brand new, best ever Hub: Packed full of intelligent features, it gives a super-powerful wi-fi signal. Jump the queue and be one of the first to get it when you register before 2 June 2016. |
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,099
|
Quote:
had this in a email today ....
Get priority access to our brand new, best ever Hub: Packed full of intelligent features, it gives a super-powerful wi-fi signal. Jump the queue and be one of the first to get it when you register before 2 June 2016. I put an airport extreme at my parents and it has maintained a connection for over 60 days with the HG 612. Apple aren't exactly renowned for their networking and especially not networking gear, but it is doing a supremely better job than the Hub 5 that was dropping connections every 8 days (and no power saving options, etc. were enabled on the Hub 5). I think it says everything about rubbish the Home Hub truly is. From what I've seen on all Hubs they are prone to locking up and that causes the broadband connection to drop as the CPU maxes out for no good reason. I doubt the Airport has anything particular brilliant inside it, but I bet the software that powers it is the key difference to the BT junk. |
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 597
|
Never had a problem with my BT Hub, never dropped connection, always been solid and the wifi signal been grest all round the house.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 5,099
|
Quote:
Never had a problem with my BT Hub, never dropped connection, always been solid and the wifi signal been grest all round the house.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 232
|
I got the email for the HH6 - I'm be interested to know what it actually is - although I doubt I would swap out my ASUS RT68u.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:42.





