Virgin Media hints at TiVo via Fibre phone lines

Advertisements

I don't get why it should be restricted to Virgin. Many ISPs are promoting fibre optic connection on the back of the BT Openworld trials, including Sky. The idea of an exclusive deal between BT and Virgin wouldn't go down well with Ofcom, nor other ISPs.

 

I know it's dodgy ground to quote yourself but think of this as more of a bump......does anyone else but me think that VM shouldn't be allowed to say what they have said. Oh & Pete77, please don't bother to answer if all you're going to do is give me a patronising lecture about telecoms infrastructure that you've learned from speaking to to a few call centre operators, the odd engineer & a bit of googling!

Martin

 

Actually I have been in dialogue by email on a number of occasions with BT's Head of Superfast Broadband, Mr Johnny McQuoid, regarding their plans for BT Infinity. Would you still rate him as being a call centre operator?

Why should VM not be allowed to say what they are saying? At the moment they operate Fibre To The Cabinet with coax to your living room from the cabinet in their own Virgin Media cable area which they describe as a fibre optic connection. Under BT Infinity they will be operating Fibre To The Cabinet with copper to your living room from the cabinet. What exactly is the big difference in that apart from who owns the fibre cable to the cabinet?

And on the 10 new Race To Infinity exchanges that won the competition run by BT Retail over 50% of homes will have FTTP - Fibre To The Premises. So Virgin Media will be supplying fibre to the front door in those cases.

 

That seems to support my point, that Sky aren't really interested in being an ISP and see themselves as being available on all platforms.

They got forced to take that view, but ironically it was the better plan.

 

Advertisements

Adding some facts to the discussion. Virgin's proposed partnerhip is with Fujitsu, not BT:

http://www.iptv-news.com/iptv_news/...lines_delivery_of_cable_tv_over_fujitsu_fibre

 

Spoilsport.

 

Lucky him! I'm sure he remebers your exchanges with great fondness. I love your name dropping.

No, but I would class him as an engineer. The point I was making that you failed to get, as usual, is that you spout off on every topic known to man as though you are an expert in all of them. In doing this you end up patronising people who actually do know what they are talking about. This is info you have gleaned, not earned so stop pretending

It's self explanatory, as you have so eloquently described yourself below.

'Fibre Optic Broadband' is not & cannot be delivered over copper cabling of any sort. Fibre Optic Broadband needs to be fibre from headend to home (FTTH). What they are describing is fibre to the curb (FTTC) also called fibre to the cabinet. Just because they describe it as 'Fibre Optic Broadband' doesn't mean it is. It's a breach of a number of consumer & advertising regs & a clear case of misrepresentation.

You might say it doesn't matter but the reason they are doing it is because fibre is much misunderstood & has a certain cachet. A true FTTH service will offer up to 1GPS (1,000mbps) which is so far removed from the 50mbps that VM offer as to be plainly misleading.

I would have no problem with them calling it 'Superfast Broadband' which it is considering the current state of broadband provision in the UK but they don't because 'Fibre Optic Broadband' sounds more glamourous & I'm sure they are using it because they believe it will help them to sell more subs.

Martin

 

Sorry but you are just making things up again based on the kind of fibre optic network they have in places like Korea.

My local exchange, which was one of the winners of BT's Race To Infinity, will have around 60% of addresses enable with FTTP (Fibre To The Premises) where there is only a fairly short run from the cabinet to the home. But the expected broadband speed resulting from this is 80Mbps compared to ADSL2+ with a maximum speed of 24Mbps. 1000Mbps is only possible with a massively high capacity fibre optic backbone network which BT simply just doesn't have in place yet.

Whilst you choose to make a big deal of whether people get FTTC rather than FTTP at present the speed difference is 80Mbps versus up to 48Mbps. So that is why at this stage FTTC is considered more or less the same thing. As and when FTTP can deliver speeds of up to several hundred megabytes then your current deliberate nitpicking may have a sounder basis.

Regarding the Virgin and Fujitsu deal I read the press release and have concluded its just PR puff and won't happen because anyone with half a brain will be able to see it is not economically sound to try and compete with BT's forthcoming fibre optic network in thousands of low density rural exchanges.

Anyhow clearly the Virgin Tivo won't after all be arriving at my or my relative's address any time soon so Sky can take their expensive Sky Sports HD F1 coverage and stick it where the sun don't shine while I carry on with my AltEPG Tivo for the races the BBC do decide to show. Unless BT can offer some massively attractive deal to watch it in HD on BT Vision.....

You would be wrong. He is quite clearly a senior BT marketing person.

 

I really don't know why I bother replying but someone has to call you. Please read my post carefully, quote the offending section in your reply & tell me exactly what I am making up.

Then please tell me why you feel so qualified to spout off on all subjects. Please start with telecoms backbone infrastructure.

Hopefully you cannot fudge these very simple requests & deflect them by attacking or changing the subject.

Martin

 

As they can't currently offer ANY deal to watch live broadcasts in HD that sounds unlikely!

 

Then why you don't post your own CV first since you quite clearly see yourself as eminently qualified to post on most technical matters and also seem to feel that very few other people are as well qualified as you to do so.

I would also remind you of forum rules about bullying and insulting other members since at the moment you seem to be intent on overstepping the mark.

 

Oh well, there's another thread closed. Well done Pete.

 

You accused me of making things up, so in my post I asked you to point out what exactly I had made up. It is so typical of you not to answer when there is ANY possibility of you being wrong. I ask you again. What did I make up?

You accused me of lying & have then been unable to back it up. Where in any of my posts about have I said anything that I can't or won't back up? Or is that another question you will conveniently ignore?

I will listen & abide by the moderators, not you, the person who has placed more personal attacks on this forum over the years than all the other posters put together. Go on, challenge me to produce 10 personal attacks you have made. It will be easy *** ******** ********* (self censored).

As for my cv, I trained & studied as an electrical/electronic engineer & then moved into sales firstly in motorsport (telemetry equipment) & then starting a telecoms business with three colleagues that was based around fibre management, longhaul backbone equipment & network design at headend level where I was responsible for sales. As a matter of interest, we consulted & supplied equipment for the trials of BT's 21CN (21st Century Network), their first real foray into an integrated modern network that didn't rely on legacy copper.

After we sold out to a major American/Belgian/Bahamian comglomerate I took a couple of years off to look after my young son & support my wife in her first love, wedding dress design, allowing her to leave the pharmaceutical industry.

I have subsequently worked in sponsorship acquisition in the telecoms & financial industries (conferences). After the credit crunch I have stepped back to work with my wife on our wedding business which takes up all our time but gives us the opportunity to work together & to maximise our free time. My major hobby is home cinema, centred now on HTPC's & maintaining & upgrading my multiroom entertainment system & stretching it's capabilities in ways that it wasn't exactly designed for. I have spun this into a small business where I set-up peoples tv's as I have all the equipment but I certainly don't make a living from it.

I feel qualified to post on motorsport, telecoms (re fibre), qualified to contradict people who make stupid & untrue comments on HD in general although I bow to Sneals2000, I have an opinion on HTPC's although I will also bow to Stuart & others regarding their full capabilities. I will comment on matters regarding the financial industry having worked in it & recently I have posted regarding solar water heating as we have that. Oh, & I have also had a number of quite decent perfromance cars down the years such as Porsches, a TVR Tuscan, Lancia's & Audi's & although I am now stuck with a Clio & a Kangoo van I reserve the right to have an opinion about cars that have more power than an anaemic, effette, italian, hairdressers rustbucket manufactured for women that never had the power to get out of it's own way.

I also respect the vast majority of people on here & respect anybody who's opinion isn't dressed up as fact & rammed down my throat.

Now Pete77. Your turn!!!!!!!!!!!! Answer or go away & never darken my door again!

Martin

 

I'm sensing a great empathy with these fabulous cars..

 

Bet you that's the bit he answers.

 

He won't answer any of it. He's a classic wum/troll - delete as applicable without the courage of his own convictions.

I wish he would reply & answer the questions put to him, but I'm not holding my breath. If he does reply he'll fudge & obfuscate the point or launch another attack from a different angle. Anything but having to say "You know what, you were right. Sorry"

Martin

 

Talk about bigging yourself up.

1. I think VM have previously mentioned that they might be looking into doing this themselves; though maybe not exactly like this.

There you go!

2. It's hardly rocket science to think that they may do this at some pont anyway.

3. If it never happend, you would probably get away with not mentioning that you said they'd do it in the first place

 

Point of order! It is indeed not "rocket science" - you don't science rockets you engineer them. So, altogether - "It's not rocket engineering".

OK, rant over - I will go and lie down.

 

But is engineering a science or an art?

Answer it is a science.

Since this analogy has been in use for many years now you seem to be trying to push water up hill to have it suddenly changed to "rocket engineering".

 

Point of order. No-one likes a smart-arse

Either that or he was being entirely sarcastic and not-at-all serious. I know which my money's on