"MB" wrote in message news
On 02/05/2018 13:36, NY wrote:
How much of the download speed is a function of the ISP, and how much is
due to appalling quality of BT Openreach lines over which most ISPs'
broadband runs? In other words, what is the point of changing from a
"slow" ISP to a "faster" one if the rate-limiting step is that you are 5
miles from the exchange over wire that has wet, corroded joints?
I would think most if the responsibility of the ISP.
I use BT Internet and have no problem with speed or service.
I would think there is no opportunity for an ISP to cuts costs by asking
BT for an unreliable or poor quality line but they will possibly be able
to choose a lower response time to faults. The big savings will be once
it connects to their own equipment, they will be able to use cheaper
equipment, lower capacity circuits in their own network and fiddle with
The temporary house where we are living at the moment (between selling our
house and buying another) is probably about 5 miles from the exchange in a
tiny hamlet of two farms and ten houses. The broadband is very slow: it
varies a little at different times of day, but at best it's about 1.8 Mbps D
/ 0.2 U. The BT line checker gives "1-2 Mbps" as the estimated speed. The
router syncs at around 2 / 0.4 Mbps.
I don't think any of that can be attributed to the ISP. The miracle is that
we get broadband at all (*). I understand that our speed is typical of the
whole village, so it's not just a bad line to our house.
It's a bit different going from 18/6 FTTC at our previous house down to
If the line allowed a higher sync speed, then other factors (in the ISP's
control) may become the rate-limiting step, but for people like us, it's the
line itself that sets the pace, and so it's unfair for the ISP to be blamed
in our situation.
New lines to the village may well improve things, but I can't imagine that
(or an FTTC green cabinet) happening any time this millennium. When a phone
line was first installed at the house (about 30 years ago) most of the
village was still fed from a small number of lines which were multiplexed
using DACS modulators. Until that was removed about 10 years ago, broadband
was out of the question. I presume when the DACSes were removed, additional
lines were installed from the nearest cabinet to compensate for not being
able to frequency-multiplex any more.
(*) At lest we get uninterrupted broadband at a usable speed. I've been to
houses even further from their exchange where the router keeps losing sync,
possibly because it tries to sync at an unsustainable speed instead of
dropping back to a slower but 100% reliable speed. To put things into
context, when broadband was first introduced at my previous house (which was
about 100 yards from the exchange) ISPs were offering various speed tariffs:
0.5 U/D was cheap and you had to pay a premium for 2 U / 0.5 D. How times