"Peter Scott" wrote in message
om...
This is not OT. Comms is a DIY matter when, like me, you are trying to
improve lamentable speed by filters, wiring etc. The government has
proposed three levels of improvement to the broadband system. Only one
level would help in rural areas. Up to now I have been resigned to poor
speeds. Now that urban speeds are set to rocket, services will change to
use them and soon rural users will be right out in the cold. Wouldn't be
so bad if I paid a lot less!

It costs more to give you any sort of communications..
think yourself lucky we are subsidising you.
You wouldn't want to pay what it costs.


I have written to Ofcom and attach the text below. Is anyone else
interested in offering an opinion to Ofcom?

Text of letter...

"I live in the country and have very poor broadband speed, at around 750
kbit/s. Each time I do a speed test I see what speed people get who live
in the towns and cities. I have done all of the recommended things to
improve it, but it is clear that it is simply distance from the exchange
over copper cables that is the problem.

You can buy a fibre connection or a satellite connection.
There is nothing stopping you and some other locals clubbing together to get
a faster link to share.


"Doing a speed test today set me thinking about what should be done. The
speed I get is just about acceptable for the uses to which I put the
Internet. I won't be able to use any of the new services, but I am
resigned to that. However what really annoys me is that I pay exactly the
same as people who get 4 Mbit/s or better.

Even though it costs a lot more to give you your connection.
I agree with you you shouldn't get it at the same cost.
I think double or more would be about right.


"The government talks about action to improve speeds. I note that of the
three proposals the one that would improve rural speeds is the last option
and, of course, costs the most. The hardened cynic in me knows that this
is put in as a sop, to make it appear that it is being considered. You and
I know there is no intention of this being done.

"So what is to be done? The only way that things change in the business
world is for there to be a threat to income. At the moment there is no
commercial pressure to spend and improve. In fact ISPs and BT benefit from
the situation because their cables have to carry less data but they get
the same money. Creative solutions are needed and money is the driver of
these things.

Longer cables cost more to maintain, you don't pay any extra.


"I think that anyone who gets regularly poor speeds should get a refund of
subscription in the same way that railway companies have to compensate
lateness. Even better, they should get a much lower rate to start to start
with. You really do have to do something and this is one simple and
effective tactic. If it meant that ISPs refused to accept rural
connections then the situation would be out in the open!"

So you want rural dwellers not to have broadband just because you get less
for your money?


Peter Scott