4 ms·
Having lived in the UK and the US, I think a strong reason is that the copper wire is literally entrenched. There seems to be a strong (legislative? legal? poli
by reedf1 6y ago
Having lived in the UK and the US, I think a strong reason is that the copper wire is literally entrenched. There seems to be a strong (legislative? legal? political?) aversion to easily replaceable overhead wires. Underground cable is the strong preference here. At the moment I live in the city centre of Manchester (the second or third biggest city depending on who you ask) and am stuck with VDSL.
There are other problems as well - arguably there is no functional market for internet here. The UK is quite a small and centralised but for whatever reason cannot deliver infrastructure to "rural" areas that are only 50 or so miles from the largest cities in the UK, e.g. Wales.
I have co-workers who have moved into new builds with only copper to the building.
- ath92 6y agoUnderground wires are the preferred choice for most of the EU as far as I know (at least in western Europe). There are also much smaller countries in the EU that provide far better internet than what's available in the UK, apparently. There must be some other reason.
- robjan 6y agoThose entrenched cables are mostly DOCSIS 3 cables over which broadband speeds can be achieved. BT has traditionally provided telephony through overhead wires and those are where the problems usually lie.
- MagnumOpus 6y ago> There seems to be a strong (legislative? legal? political?) aversion to easily replaceable overhead wires I live in the UK with only overhead wires on my street (probably 60-80 years old copper wiring). Those wires are eyesores, and also break regularly since tree branches cut them in storms. Given Openreach's incentives, forget about these wires ever being replaced by fibre.