Here's a little link to some of Ben Verwaayen's comments regarding the UK
compared to Japan broadband wise:

http://www.silicon.com/networks/broa...9118758,00.htm

See apparently 'liquid bandwidth' is where it's at. Fact Japan's takeup is
far higher and their incumbent telco can find time to install remote DSLAMs,
fibre to home, 26Mbit and higher vDSL is irrelevant. 'Liquid bandwidth' and
2Mbit is all you need. Ignoring what industry observers etc recommend, 8Mbit
for HDTV and other applications. 2Mbit is where it's at, and looks as though
that's all the UK will see from BT for some time.

Until 2006 when they've finished rolling out 'not very broadband' to every
city, town, village, hamlet, barn, public toilet in the UK, by which time
I think 512k won't just be obsolete (which it is now) but laughable.

Great plan Ben, am sure the Japanese economy enhanced by true broadband will
be enjoying the benefits while the UK Government bemoans losing billions
a year because the incumbent telco wanted to protect legacy revenues.

Ignition wrote:
What's liquid bandwidth? With regards to 2mb for everyone, didn't Bill
Gates say, a loooong time ago, that 64kb was enough for anyone? He was
wrong. And BT cocked up the 1mb trials by horribly under-estimating the
demand for it...

I do agree with him about the roll out, though, I would rather see more
people on broadband than fewer people on faster broadband - not that
roll out and speed are particularly closely related.

Btw, Bulldog have just launched PrimeTime500, another
not-really-broadband starter package :-(

Alex
--
Alexander Mann

"Alexander Mann" <usenet@almostinspired.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4043c82f$0$63621$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk.. .
I guess by liquid bandwidth he means the amount you can actually download
at. No good having a 1 billion gigabyte connection if you can only download
at 2mb.

64kb of ram (not internet bandwidth, this was well before the internet).
This is why all IBM PC's have 64kb base ram and the rest is extended ram. An
old design feature not yet changed but no reason to do so. Bill Gates didn't
make the comment, it was someone from IBM but the name escapes me.

I personally want faster broadband at a cheap price. Especially upload
speeds so I can run servers of various kinds. Those ppl will be the first to
uptake new technology. I'm personally hoping for 10mb services with around
1mb up speed in the future at the equivalent of £30-40 of today's money.

"tHatDudeUK" <randomcharacter4spammers@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:c20hge$1n7j2h$1@ID-158809.news.uni-berlin.de...

After reading the article it's obvious he's talking out of his arse and has
never been to Japan. He should try and make the services better than lame
reasons to justify crap services.

With bittorrent and a 45mb connection you'd expect to be downloading at at
least 36mb maxxed out.

I personally think the idea of getting slow broadband out everywhere is
wrong. People will want faster sooner or later and giving people yesterdays
technology today is a *BAD* idea when people will demand more later.
Although, no doubt, BT expect people will put up and shut up against their
monopolistic organisation.

tHatDudeUK wrote:
But it's what happens in every part of the technology market, every piece of
kit, every piece of software is already out of date by the time it hits the
shelf (the camera/TV/PC or whatever you bought yesterday is out of date
tomorrow, that's if it's not already out of date today). There is always
something waiting in the wings ready to push the latest release of the top
slot. If you don't like the concept then stop using any tech at all

1GB ?? That's ridiculous. I've been with Fast 4 for some months and there's
no limits what so ever which is the way it should be and it's sub £20,
£18.75 in fact...

"Dave" <no_one@home.here> wrote in message
news:40453a03@news.greennet.net...
And I have the fantastic 1mb service for less than £30. Makes me think f**k
BT they can stick their overpriced s***e!

"Kráftéé" <kraftee@spam_off_&_die_ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:do%0c.2582$wJ5.739@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net...
True. But unlike digital camera's, compare mpixels in cameras with mbps in
broadband. 1mp camera's are now extremely cheap. Used to be £200+ yes, now
under £100 and will get cheaper and cheaper untile they can't be bothered
making them anymore as they're so cheap they're unprofitable. This will
happen sooner than with 1mb broadband because BT exploits the customers and
fixes prices and will be unwilling to offer faster services in the future.

I don't see anyone in the UK having a domestic broadband service faster than
4/6mb until maybe after 2008 when prices will still be about £50/60 for 4mb,
£30 for 2mb (not much less than today's prices), 1mb for about £20 (again
not much less than todays prices) and maybe 512k for about £15 per month.
5mp cameras which are £300 today will most likely follow the 1mp cameras and
be well under £80. Which technology is following the most appropriate model
of new technology, prices and demand. If BT made a 50mb service with
appropriate upload speeds in a few years at £60/80 a month try and stop me
signing up.

The point I was making is BT want to force people to use old technology
through monopolistic processes. They currently think people will be
satisfied with 2mb and don't need any faster. I think this shows a big lack
of insight and poor planning. My point still stands. We, the UK people, are
paying twice the price for old technology that people in other countries are
paying for much faster and better services and we're expected to be pleased.
I should go to Sweden or somewhere and tell BT go **** themselves. Lol.

BT are completely retarded and need to go get a f***ing clue and start doing
things right at some point. Maybe in 10 years time when people start
breathing down their necks for better services they'll learn their mistakes
and do things properly, but based on their current behaviour I doubt it. No
wonder they're so messed up and billions in debt. It's called bad business
decions and poor market research and understanding. It could also be called
being greedy c**ts etc etc.

Ignition wrote:
Even if it's only 28k, if it's delivered over ADSL it's broadband.

tHatDudeUK wrote:
Just because a word ends in a vowel then a letter S, it doesn't mean you
need to put an apostrophe between them.

"oOoOoOo" <wibble@plop.plop> wrote in message
news:c27k92$nq$1@yarrow.open.ac.uk...
Correct. However, you fail to explain when, and how, an apostrophe is used.
This, unfortunately, renders the usefulness of your post null. The use of an
apostrophe with an S is to define possesiveness, the apostrophe comes after
the S for a plural possesiveness and before for a singular possesive. I am
in fact aware of this and don't make the mistake in my degree assignment
work :-P I personally don't classify a usenet posting as requiring 100%
perfect grammar and punctuation so don't spend the time drafting and
re-reading etc etc and just rush through typing it out.