BT and Alcatel-Lucent achieve 5 gigabits per second speeds over copper broadband

bealtine

http://www.btplc.com/News/#/pressreleases/bt-and-alcatel-lucent-achieve-5-gigabits-per-second-speeds-over-copper-broadband-1238350

bk

This is the important point:

It delivered aggregate speeds of 5.6Gbps over 35 metres of BT cable ... The technology also performed well over longer distances, with aggregate speeds of 1.8Gbps over 100 metres;

So realistically this is just an implementation detail for FTTH, I suppose we should call it FTTB (Building/Basement).

From what I've heard in general, G.Fast isn't really cheaper then full on FTTH, due to the extra cost of the G.Fast gear. It only make financial sense for particularly difficult FTTH installs (where you would otherwise need to dig a new trench), if you can push the fiber through an existing duct or string overhead, then full FTTH is cheaper.

However it is a handy technology to have in the bag during FTTH role out for difficult cases. I could see it being used a lot in apartment buildings where you might want to avoid dragging new Fibre drops to each apartment. So good to see them pushing the speeds up.

But it shouldn't be seen as a cheap alternative to FTTH in the way FTTC was.

clohamon

Mike Galvin, managing director of next generation access for BT’s Technology Service & Operations division, has spoken.

"Already we can see with some of the new technologies coming up over copper, they're actually much higher bandwidth than fibre to the premises."

https://www.cable.co.uk/news/bt-boss-dont-get-attached-to-fibre-even-that-could-be-obsolete-one-day-700001160/

rob808

clohamon wrote: »

Mike Galvin, managing director of next generation access for BT’s Technology Service & Operations division, has spoken.



https://www.cable.co.uk/news/bt-boss-dont-get-attached-to-fibre-even-that-could-be-obsolete-one-day-700001160/

I Wonder would eir do gfast for the houses close to rural ftth houses.

bealtine

bk wrote: »

This is the important point:



So realistically this is just an implementation detail for FTTH, I suppose we should call it FTTB (Building/Basement).

From what I've heard in general, G.Fast isn't really cheaper then full on FTTH, due to the extra cost of the G.Fast gear. It only make financial sense for particularly difficult FTTH installs (where you would otherwise need to dig a new trench), if you can push the fiber through an existing duct or string overhead, then full FTTH is cheaper.

However it is a handy technology to have in the bag during FTTH role out for difficult cases. I could see it being used a lot in apartment buildings where you might want to avoid dragging new Fibre drops to each apartment. So good to see them pushing the speeds up.

But it shouldn't be seen as a cheap alternative to FTTH in the way FTTC was.

The various G-Fast technologies are really only the lazy way of delivering "broadband", if you are going to run fibre to the pole nearest the house why not just go the full way now, you'll have to do it eventually anyway.

oscarBravo

clohamon wrote: »

Mike Galvin, managing director of next generation access for BT’s Technology Service & Operations division, has spoken.

"Already we can see with some of the new technologies coming up over copper, they're actually much higher bandwidth than fibre to the premises."

https://www.cable.co.uk/news/bt-boss-dont-get-attached-to-fibre-even-that-could-be-obsolete-one-day-700001160/

I really hope for his sake that the article is misquoting him, because otherwise that's a breathtakingly stupid thing to say.

clohamon

oscarBravo wrote: »

I really hope for his sake that the article is misquoting him, because otherwise that's a breathtakingly stupid thing to say.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Upton_Sinclair