Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Current Events' started by edesignuk, Sep 19, 2007.
Good! 100Mbps by 2012 will do me nicely thank you.
Yeah, but we'll still be ripped off on the price...
the cheek of it!
No, that's good. There is quite enough antiquated stuff here.
I'd settle for a 3mb connection at this stage.
512kbps for the past 5 years. And there are no plans to upgrade us. Damn you, Saddleworth!
This is the problem most are not paying a viable price.
just a bit crap that in 2012, 100mbps will be even further behind some countries than we are now...
if that's 40% by 2012, the figure should be nearer 512mbps, or even a gig. this is just too low to compete by that stage.
I'm on 24meg right now, its good, but too expensive. For now, it would be nicer to have cheaper prices than faster broadband...
If someone offered a high speed link for between £50 - 60 a month I'd be all over it. At the moment I think the fastest we can go is 24Mbps which when combined with the problems that ADSL suffers (i.e not getting the full 24Mbps) it just is not worth it.
Fibre really is the best option and the country would lose out a lot if it fails to take up the technology.
If memory serves me correctly, in the 90's BT had asked the government to allow them to overhaul the infrastructure to bring fiber-optic cabling into every home in the country, which would have given people 100mbs connections (at a time when most of us were stuck at 33kbs).
The government refused and insisted they utilise the copper cabling already in place.
I can get 20Mb cable at my term time house, and it runs surprisingly high to its full capacity.
At home the maximum we can get is 1Mb, which doesn't even run close.