Virgin Media: 100Mbps access across entire network next year
geek.com
geek.com
Not game-changing... I never tax my 50Mbps connection because without a decent upstream I cannot take advantage of what I have.
I imagine I'll downgrade my package when they bump me up so that I just continue with what I have for less cost.
"Trials of faster upstream speeds, including up to 20Mbps, are also underway as they prepare for increasing demand for faster broadband."
I just closed my broadband account with Virgin Cable due to breach of contract on their part. Their equipment at the exchange was overloaded with too many subscribers in the area, leading to about 90% packet loss at peak, and 20-50% loss at other times. 2 months after reporting the issue and they hadn't upgraded their network, so I left.
10 -> 20Mbps
20 -> 50Mbps
50 -> 100Mbps
And unlike DSL you don't get some fraction of this dependant on your location, you basically get what's advertised, consistently.
I seem to get about 3 - 4Mbps max download speed, which is what I got before. Maybe there is something wrong with my setup, but I have one box connected directly to the modem with 100Mbps ethernet and I have never seen it go even close to 20Mbps unfortunately.
Anecdotally, any time I've measured I've got almost bang on what I'm paying for (at several speed rates and in three different houses over several years, though all in one general area).
More scientifically the Ofcom report about the poor performance of ADSL compared to advertised speed noted that it didn't really apply to cable based systems.
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/features/broadbandspeedsjy
They got a table there that shows on ADSL you're getting 50% of the 8MB they advertise on average, on Virgin Media you're getting 85% of the 10MB advertised speed.
Obviously if some folk are getting 100% then other's can be on 70% and it'll still average out but I'd say it's worth getting your line checked if you're only getting 20% of what you're paying for.
I am still running one of the really old grey modems though. They sent me a new black one ages ago, but I have not activated it as yet. Maybe I should give that a try (have held back for fear of it knocking out my broadband for a few days if things go wrong!) and see if things get better.
My speed is pretty good, but I have never been able to push it toward even 10Mbps no matter how many downloads I have going.
And, finally, maybe one day people will understand that 'wireless' is not a kind of internet, and it does not even necessarily correlate to fast internet. (For a few years everyone I spent time with used 'wireless' to refer to any fast internet, and also presumed if it was wireless it was as fast as money could buy. GAHRGH!)
edit: hell, it's already an issue- Virgin offers 50Mbps, and wifi only offers it's (theoretical!) max of 54 when you've got excellent signal strength.
That kind of competition is exactly what we don't have today.
Their network coverage, being made up of piecemeal local networks built in the '80s and '90s that have slowly merged and been taken over until they eventually became one company, is rather sporadic. They cover some towns and not others, and I even know of some people who have Virgin cable access down one side of the street and not the other!
They don't appear to have any plans to cable any further areas on top of their existing coverage. So while it's fantastic competition in cabled areas, in much of the country BT still have carte blanche to continue their half-arsed "let's perpetually do a trial here and a pilot there and never actually launch anything" approach to fast broadband.