On 08/12/2022 14:28, charles wrote:
> In article <b3o3phpdv023rikr8sf1oilgij9p0vtpo7@4ax.com>,
> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>> No, my point was that people without broadband may have invested in a
>> large screen television. Without wishing to be ageist in any way, I
>> believe there are some pensioners who don't even have a computer in
>> their home.
>
> The large screen tv almost certainly has an internet connection, though.

There is the added problem that the mechanism (eg underlying protocols)
may change over time, leading to older internet-capable TVs not being
able to receive programmes from some catchup sites. I believe there have
already been cases, though since they don't affect platforms I use, I've
not noted any examples.

If internet became the only means of "broadcasting", there would need to
be a *much* greater commitment to backward compatibility so a TV that
could once receive (for example) iPlayer can always receive it, even if
new features are added. But then that goes hand-in-hand with the policy
(which is becoming rarer these days) of "only ever add features; never
remove legacy features" which applies to anything computer-related such
as versions of Windows or features in application programs.

On 08/12/2022 15:02, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 08/12/2022 14:52, Jeff Layman wrote:
>> On 08/12/2022 14:12, Andy Burns wrote:
>>> Woody wrote:
>>>
>>>> (supposedly) by the end of 2025 <everyone> should have FTTP
>>>
>>> That's not what's promised.
>>>
>>> By 2025 nobody should have POTS, what they will have instead is be
>>> VoIP, but
>>> that might be over ADSL/VDSL/carrier-pigeon ...
>>
>> I await to see what it will happen here, as there's no FTTP on the
>> horizon. Fortunately FTTC has sufficient speed for my needs.
>>
>> It does amuse me though, that living in a small village with about 250
>> houses, we are being surrounded by new estates under construction
>> totalling about 3000 houses. They will all have FTTP and cable TV as a
>> matter of course, as the underground pipes are in the infrastructure
>> plans. We, of course, have telephone poles...
>>
> If you currently have copper from a pole feeding your house, eventually
> you'll almost certainly have fibre fed from that pole (or a replacement
> pole)
>
> Consider that A Good Thing, because if you're currently underground fed,
> but without a duct, you'll have your front garden dug up to provide FTTP.

Do they retain the copper wire to act as a support for the fibre, or
does it have enough tensile strength to support itself? It's about 30
metres from the pole to the house connection at the top of a gable-end wall.

--

Jeff

In article <tmr5mt$lr47$1@dont-email.me>,
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>BBC preparing to go online-only over next decade, says director general

At which point it will be impossible to watch any program without
the broadcaster knowing that you have.

-- Richard

On 08/12/2022 15:25, Richard Tobin wrote:
> In article <tmr5mt$lr47$1@dont-email.me>,
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> BBC preparing to go online-only over next decade, says director general
> At which point it will be impossible to watch any program without
> the broadcaster knowing that you have.
>
They might be in for a shock when it comes to some shows !

On Thursday, 8 December 2022 at 11:32:19 UTC, Scott wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 03:07:11 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
> <notya...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Thursday, 8 December 2022 at 08:13:16 UTC, Roderick Stewart wrote:
> >> On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 22:56:27 +0000, Java Jive <ja...@evij.com.invalid>
> >> wrote:
> >> >On 07/12/2022 22:28, SH wrote:
> >> >> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/12/07/bbc-must-ready-end-terrestrial-tv-broadcasts-decade-says-tim/
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I assume this applies to Freeview only so I assume Freesat will still be
> >> >> going for those who have boradband that is not viable for TV streaming
> >> >> or even no broadband at all.
> >> >
> >> >Also:
> >> >
> >> >BBC preparing to go online-only over next decade, says director general
> >> >https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/dec/07/bbc-will-go-online-only-by-2030s-says-director-general
> >> They can do it tomorrow if they like, as far as I'm concerned. I
> >> haven't watched Freeview for more than a year now.
> >>
> >> Curiously, no particular reason is given for wanting to switch it off.
> >> "Imagine a world that is internet-only" - but why? He doesn't say. He
> >> just wants to switch it off. The fundamental reason isn't hard to
> >> guess though, as the internet already has the mechanisms that would be
> >> necessary for a paywall whereas traditional broacasting hasn't. As
> >> long as a paywall is implemented *instead of* and not *as well as* the
> >> licence fee, and we don't have to pay the BBC to watch other
> >> broadcasters' programmes, I'd be quite happy with that. It works for
> >> the likes of Amazon and Netflix, so I don't see why it couldn't work
> >> for the BBC too, though they'd have to learn very quickly how to run a
> >> business and provide what their viewers want.
> >>
> >> Of course the entire population isn't equipped for internet TV yet,
> >> but then the entire population wasn't equipped for broadcasting itself
> >> when that started. It spread gradually over many years, and an
> >> internet based BBC could do the same.
> >
> >Maybe not, but I would reckon a majority now have some equipment that can watch video over the internet - PC, laptop, mobile phone, tablet, Smart TV...
> >
> A prospect that I suspect would not impress anyone who has invested in
> a large-screen television.

Certainly impresses me [see another thread], but the BBC has been putting its world cup games on iPlayer at 4k - super quality, although fast movement can sometimes get a bit jumpy.

ITV - CBA...

On 08/12/2022 15:26, Jeff Layman wrote:
> Do they retain the copper wire to act as a support for the fibre, or
> does it have enough tensile strength to support itself? It's about 30
> metres from the pole to the house connection at the top of a gable-end
> wall.

I wonder whether it is cheaper to wind the fibre around an existing
copper cable (which is no longer connected electrically) or to remove
the copper and replace it with a fibre cable (fibre pre-wound round a
support).

How will a damaged fibre will be replaced - eg if a car hits a pole or a
tall vehicle hits a cable, or if someone strims an underground fibre at
the point where it comes out of the ground? Will each pole have fan-out
points to all the cables that radiate from it, and will BTOR engineers
be able to splice in a new fibre, making good the connections at the
pole and the fibre termination point in the house?

In article <tmsvmf$r4o7$2@dont-email.me>, Jeff Layman
<Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 08/12/2022 15:02, Mark Carver wrote:
> > On 08/12/2022 14:52, Jeff Layman wrote:
> >> On 08/12/2022 14:12, Andy Burns wrote:
> >>> Woody wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> (supposedly) by the end of 2025 <everyone> should have FTTP
> >>>
> >>> That's not what's promised.
> >>>
> >>> By 2025 nobody should have POTS, what they will have instead is be
> >>> VoIP, but that might be over ADSL/VDSL/carrier-pigeon ...
> >>
> >> I await to see what it will happen here, as there's no FTTP on the
> >> horizon. Fortunately FTTC has sufficient speed for my needs.
> >>
> >> It does amuse me though, that living in a small village with about 250
> >> houses, we are being surrounded by new estates under construction
> >> totalling about 3000 houses. They will all have FTTP and cable TV as a
> >> matter of course, as the underground pipes are in the infrastructure
> >> plans. We, of course, have telephone poles...
> >>
> > If you currently have copper from a pole feeding your house, eventually
> > you'll almost certainly have fibre fed from that pole (or a replacement
> > pole)
> >
> > Consider that A Good Thing, because if you're currently underground
> > fed, but without a duct, you'll have your front garden dug up to
> > provide FTTP.

> Do they retain the copper wire to act as a support for the fibre, or
> does it have enough tensile strength to support itself? It's about 30
> metres from the pole to the house connection at the top of a gable-end
> wall.

My copper wire is completely separate from the fible - although they both
start from the same pole. The brackets on the hose are about 18" apart.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 08/12/2022 15:26, Jeff Layman wrote:
> On 08/12/2022 15:02, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 08/12/2022 14:52, Jeff Layman wrote:
>>> On 08/12/2022 14:12, Andy Burns wrote:
>>>> Woody wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> (supposedly) by the end of 2025 <everyone> should have FTTP
>>>>
>>>> That's not what's promised.
>>>>
>>>> By 2025 nobody should have POTS, what they will have instead is be
>>>> VoIP, but
>>>> that might be over ADSL/VDSL/carrier-pigeon ...
>>>
>>> I await to see what it will happen here, as there's no FTTP on the
>>> horizon. Fortunately FTTC has sufficient speed for my needs.
>>>
>>> It does amuse me though, that living in a small village with about 250
>>> houses, we are being surrounded by new estates under construction
>>> totalling about 3000 houses. They will all have FTTP and cable TV as a
>>> matter of course, as the underground pipes are in the infrastructure
>>> plans. We, of course, have telephone poles...
>>>
>> If you currently have copper from a pole feeding your house, eventually
>> you'll almost certainly have fibre fed from that pole (or a replacement
>> pole)
>>
>> Consider that A Good Thing, because if you're currently underground fed,
>> but without a duct, you'll have your front garden dug up to provide
>> FTTP.
>
> Do they retain the copper wire to act as a support for the fibre, or
> does it have enough tensile strength to support itself? It's about 30
> metres from the pole to the house connection at the top of a gable-end
> wall.
>
It's entirely self supporting (like the copper cable, that has steel
bearers inside). They will take the copper away, (if you are having FTTP
as an upgrade, rather than an extra service) I think the maximum run
spec for BT overhead cables (copper or  fibre) is 78 metres  ?

On Thursday, 8 December 2022 at 13:04:46 UTC, Scott wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 11:48:42 +0000, Mark Carver
> <mark....@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
> >based BBC could do the same.
> >>> Maybe not, but I would reckon a majority now have some equipment that can watch video over the internet - PC, laptop, mobile phone, tablet, Smart TV...
> >>>
> >> A prospect that I suspect would not impress anyone who has invested in
> >> a large-screen television.
> >BBC iplayer HD streams are every bit as good as 'broadcast' HD, and UHD
> >streams are the only source of UHD content from the BBC (and it'll
> >probably remain so)
> No, my point was that people without broadband may have invested in a
> large screen television. Without wishing to be ageist in any way, I
> believe there are some pensioners who don't even have a computer in
> their home.

Even my old "dumb" flat screen TV could display the output of a [free] BT TV [Sport] box, which of course came over the internet. A stand-alone box to do this is £30 or less.

On 08/12/2022 15:43, NY wrote:
> On 08/12/2022 15:26, Jeff Layman wrote:
>> Do they retain the copper wire to act as a support for the fibre, or
>> does it have enough tensile strength to support itself? It's about 30
>> metres from the pole to the house connection at the top of a
>> gable-end wall.
>
> I wonder whether it is cheaper to wind the fibre around an existing
> copper cable (which is no longer connected electrically) or to remove
> the copper and replace it with a fibre cable (fibre pre-wound round a
> support).
>
> How will a damaged fibre will be replaced - eg if a car hits a pole or
> a tall vehicle hits a cable, or if someone strims an underground fibre
> at the point where it comes out of the ground? Will each pole have
> fan-out points to all the cables that radiate from it, and will BTOR
> engineers be able to splice in a new fibre, making good the
> connections at the pole and the fibre termination point in the house?
Shit happens

Took Openreach 6 days (and a lot of engineers) to splice everything back
together

https://www.itv.com/news/meridian/2022-06-09/around-4000-homes-without-internet-after-builders-cut-through-fibre-cables

On Thursday, 8 December 2022 at 13:09:24 UTC, Scott wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Dec 2022 12:35:55 +0000, Roderick Stewart
> <rj...@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 08 Dec 2022 11:32:16 +0000, Scott
> ><newsg...@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >>>> Of course the entire population isn't equipped for internet TV yet,
> >>>> but then the entire population wasn't equipped for broadcasting itself
> >>>> when that started. It spread gradually over many years, and an
> >>>> internet based BBC could do the same.
> >>>
> >>>Maybe not, but I would reckon a majority now have some equipment that can watch video over the internet - PC, laptop, mobile phone, tablet, Smart TV...
> >>>
> >>A prospect that I suspect would not impress anyone who has invested in
> >>a large-screen television.
> >
> >Why not? Practically anything you can watch on a computer you can also
> >watch on a TV. They both have the same kind of input connections
> >(HDMI) and will display whatever you care to plug into them.
> >
> Assuming broadband connection and IT capability, that is. Will the
> BBC be providing free broadband, free router, installation, set up and
> training for all citizens who require it? Otherwise, I can see this
> being a vote-loser in an election.

Like switching off 405 lines?

Where I lived sixty years ago there was no trunk exchange in the small town, so six pairs of cables ran over the hills to somewhere else on poles. Most have gone now, but you can still see them in places with what is probably a PCM trunk slung between them https://goo.gl/maps/qJ21PwDn6QskVFdDA

On Thu 08/12/2022 15:20, Scott wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Dec 2022 14:28:34 +0000 (GMT), charles
> <charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> In article <b3o3phpdv023rikr8sf1oilgij9p0vtpo7@4ax.com>,
>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 11:48:42 +0000, Mark Carver
>>> <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>> based BBC could do the same.
>>>>>> Maybe not, but I would reckon a majority now have some equipment that can watch video over the internet - PC, laptop, mobile phone, tablet, Smart TV...
>>>>>>
>>>>> A prospect that I suspect would not impress anyone who has invested in
>>>>> a large-screen television.
>>>> BBC iplayer HD streams are every bit as good as 'broadcast' HD, and UHD
>>>> streams are the only source of UHD content from the BBC (and it'll
>>>> probably remain so)
>>
>>> No, my point was that people without broadband may have invested in a
>>> large screen television. Without wishing to be ageist in any way, I
>>> believe there are some pensioners who don't even have a computer in
>>> their home.
>>
>> The large screnn tv almost certainly has an internet connection, though.
>
> Almost certainly. All pensioners have high speed broadband into the
> home, especially those on the BT Basic package.

NOT.

On 08/12/2022 15:34, charles wrote:
> In article <tmsvmf$r4o7$2@dont-email.me>, Jeff Layman
> <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 08/12/2022 15:02, Mark Carver wrote:
>>> On 08/12/2022 14:52, Jeff Layman wrote:
>>>> On 08/12/2022 14:12, Andy Burns wrote:
>>>>> Woody wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> (supposedly) by the end of 2025 <everyone> should have FTTP
>>>>>
>>>>> That's not what's promised.
>>>>>
>>>>> By 2025 nobody should have POTS, what they will have instead is be
>>>>> VoIP, but that might be over ADSL/VDSL/carrier-pigeon ...
>>>>
>>>> I await to see what it will happen here, as there's no FTTP on the
>>>> horizon. Fortunately FTTC has sufficient speed for my needs.
>>>>
>>>> It does amuse me though, that living in a small village with about 250
>>>> houses, we are being surrounded by new estates under construction
>>>> totalling about 3000 houses. They will all have FTTP and cable TV as a
>>>> matter of course, as the underground pipes are in the infrastructure
>>>> plans. We, of course, have telephone poles...
>>>>
>>> If you currently have copper from a pole feeding your house, eventually
>>> you'll almost certainly have fibre fed from that pole (or a replacement
>>> pole)
>>>
>>> Consider that A Good Thing, because if you're currently underground
>>> fed, but without a duct, you'll have your front garden dug up to
>>> provide FTTP.
>
>> Do they retain the copper wire to act as a support for the fibre, or
>> does it have enough tensile strength to support itself? It's about 30
>> metres from the pole to the house connection at the top of a gable-end
>> wall.
>
> My copper wire is completely separate from the fible - although they both
> start from the same pole. The brackets on the hose are about 18" apart.

Don't they have to run the fibre outside down the wall to wherever it
will enter the house? At present, the copper wire enters the house
through the gable-end wall and runs internally across the the loft to
where it descends internally to the the
phone socket. Conveniently there is a double mains power socket close to
the current phone socket. I assume they would try to keep the position
of any new socket relatively close to the current one if there's power
available.

--

Jeff

On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 07:46:48 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
<notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, 8 December 2022 at 13:04:46 UTC, Scott wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 11:48:42 +0000, Mark Carver
>> <mark....@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >based BBC could do the same.
>> >>> Maybe not, but I would reckon a majority now have some equipment that can watch video over the internet - PC, laptop, mobile phone, tablet, Smart TV...
>> >>>
>> >> A prospect that I suspect would not impress anyone who has invested in
>> >> a large-screen television.
>> >BBC iplayer HD streams are every bit as good as 'broadcast' HD, and UHD
>> >streams are the only source of UHD content from the BBC (and it'll
>> >probably remain so)
>> No, my point was that people without broadband may have invested in a
>> large screen television. Without wishing to be ageist in any way, I
>> believe there are some pensioners who don't even have a computer in
>> their home.
>
>Even my old "dumb" flat screen TV could display the output of a [free] BT TV [Sport] box, which of course came over the internet. A stand-alone box to do this is £30 or less.

At the risk of repetition, my point is that not everyone has - or
wants - the Internet.

On Thu 08/12/2022 16:26, Scott wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 07:46:48 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
> <notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, 8 December 2022 at 13:04:46 UTC, Scott wrote:
>>> On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 11:48:42 +0000, Mark Carver
>>> <mark....@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> based BBC could do the same.
>>>>>> Maybe not, but I would reckon a majority now have some equipment that can watch video over the internet - PC, laptop, mobile phone, tablet, Smart TV...
>>>>>>
>>>>> A prospect that I suspect would not impress anyone who has invested in
>>>>> a large-screen television.
>>>> BBC iplayer HD streams are every bit as good as 'broadcast' HD, and UHD
>>>> streams are the only source of UHD content from the BBC (and it'll
>>>> probably remain so)
>>> No, my point was that people without broadband may have invested in a
>>> large screen television. Without wishing to be ageist in any way, I
>>> believe there are some pensioners who don't even have a computer in
>>> their home.
>>
>> Even my old "dumb" flat screen TV could display the output of a [free] BT TV [Sport] box, which of course came over the internet. A stand-alone box to do this is £30 or less.
>
> At the risk of repetition, my point is that not everyone has - or
> wants - the Internet.

That would be my wife then?

On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 07:56:38 -0800 (PST), "R. Mark Clayton"
<notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, 8 December 2022 at 13:09:24 UTC, Scott wrote:
>> On Thu, 08 Dec 2022 12:35:55 +0000, Roderick Stewart
>> <rj...@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >On Thu, 08 Dec 2022 11:32:16 +0000, Scott
>> ><newsg...@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> >>>> Of course the entire population isn't equipped for internet TV yet,
>> >>>> but then the entire population wasn't equipped for broadcasting itself
>> >>>> when that started. It spread gradually over many years, and an
>> >>>> internet based BBC could do the same.
>> >>>
>> >>>Maybe not, but I would reckon a majority now have some equipment that can watch video over the internet - PC, laptop, mobile phone, tablet, Smart TV...
>> >>>
>> >>A prospect that I suspect would not impress anyone who has invested in
>> >>a large-screen television.
>> >
>> >Why not? Practically anything you can watch on a computer you can also
>> >watch on a TV. They both have the same kind of input connections
>> >(HDMI) and will display whatever you care to plug into them.
>> >
>> Assuming broadband connection and IT capability, that is. Will the
>> BBC be providing free broadband, free router, installation, set up and
>> training for all citizens who require it? Otherwise, I can see this
>> being a vote-loser in an election.
>
>Like switching off 405 lines?

No, not like that at all. As I recall, the main channels became
available on UHF colour in 1969 and VHF continued to be transmitted
until 1985, when there were very few users indeed. This is not my
understanding of what the BBC proposal involves.
>
>Where I lived sixty years ago there was no trunk exchange in the small town, so six pairs of cables ran over the hills to somewhere else on poles. Most have gone now, but you can still see them in places with what is probably a PCM trunk slung between them https://goo.gl/maps/qJ21PwDn6QskVFdDA

On 08/12/2022 15:55, Mark Carver wrote:
>
> On 08/12/2022 15:43, NY wrote:
>>
>> How will a damaged fibre will be replaced - eg if a car hits a pole or
>> a tall vehicle hits a cable, or if someone strims an underground fibre
>> at the point where it comes out of the ground? Will each pole have
>> fan-out points to all the cables that radiate from it, and will BTOR
>> engineers be able to splice in a new fibre, making good the
>> connections at the pole and the fibre termination point in the house?
>
> Shit happens
>
> Took Openreach 6 days (and a lot of engineers) to splice everything back
> together
>
> https://www.itv.com/news/meridian/2022-06-09/around-4000-homes-without-internet-after-builders-cut-through-fibre-cables

Machinery photo looks a little like a posthole borer used on farms, but
AFAIAA they don't usually have toothed edges to the auger, and of course
would normally be vertical, not horizontal. Some sort of duct
tunnelling device perhaps? Anyone know?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 16:18:37 +0000, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

>On 08/12/2022 15:34, charles wrote:
>> In article <tmsvmf$r4o7$2@dont-email.me>, Jeff Layman
>> <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 08/12/2022 15:02, Mark Carver wrote:
>>>> On 08/12/2022 14:52, Jeff Layman wrote:
>>>>> On 08/12/2022 14:12, Andy Burns wrote:
>>>>>> Woody wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (supposedly) by the end of 2025 <everyone> should have FTTP
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's not what's promised.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> By 2025 nobody should have POTS, what they will have instead is be
>>>>>> VoIP, but that might be over ADSL/VDSL/carrier-pigeon ...
>>>>>
>>>>> I await to see what it will happen here, as there's no FTTP on the
>>>>> horizon. Fortunately FTTC has sufficient speed for my needs.
>>>>>
>>>>> It does amuse me though, that living in a small village with about 250
>>>>> houses, we are being surrounded by new estates under construction
>>>>> totalling about 3000 houses. They will all have FTTP and cable TV as a
>>>>> matter of course, as the underground pipes are in the infrastructure
>>>>> plans. We, of course, have telephone poles...
>>>>>
>>>> If you currently have copper from a pole feeding your house, eventually
>>>> you'll almost certainly have fibre fed from that pole (or a replacement
>>>> pole)
>>>>
>>>> Consider that A Good Thing, because if you're currently underground
>>>> fed, but without a duct, you'll have your front garden dug up to
>>>> provide FTTP.
>>
>>> Do they retain the copper wire to act as a support for the fibre, or
>>> does it have enough tensile strength to support itself? It's about 30
>>> metres from the pole to the house connection at the top of a gable-end
>>> wall.
>>
>> My copper wire is completely separate from the fible - although they both
>> start from the same pole. The brackets on the hose are about 18" apart.
>
>Don't they have to run the fibre outside down the wall to wherever it
>will enter the house?

If so, is there some form of wayleave or is the consent of the
property owners needed? I live in a flat. Can I be compelled to have
someone else's cable running down my outside wall? I will object
until the neighbours agree to essential repairs.

>At present, the copper wire enters the house
>through the gable-end wall and runs internally across the the loft to
>where it descends internally to the the
>phone socket. Conveniently there is a double mains power socket close to
>the current phone socket. I assume they would try to keep the position
>of any new socket relatively close to the current one if there's power
>available.

On 08/12/2022 15:55, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 08/12/2022 15:43, NY wrote:
>> How will a damaged fibre will be replaced - eg if a car hits a pole or
>> a tall vehicle hits a cable, or if someone strims an underground fibre
>> at the point where it comes out of the ground? Will each pole have
>> fan-out points to all the cables that radiate from it, and will BTOR
>> engineers be able to splice in a new fibre, making good the
>> connections at the pole and the fibre termination point in the house?

> Shit happens
>
> Took Openreach 6 days (and a lot of engineers) to splice everything back
> together
>
> https://www.itv.com/news/meridian/2022-06-09/around-4000-homes-without-internet-after-builders-cut-through-fibre-cables

Yes. I wasn't talking about how long or short the time will be before
service is restored.

I was talking about how it is physically restored, given that joining a
replacement fibre to the truncated part of the existing fibre is a *lot*
more difficult than joining copper wires.

I presume each pole has a single fibre to it from the "network" end, and
that this fans out (*) into separate fibres to all the houses that the
pole serves. Or is there a separate fibre for each house back to a
remote fanout point such as kerbside cabinet? In either case, how is a
damaged fibre replaced, given that splicing (at the fibre level) will be
needed somewhere?

(*) With suitable encryption so one house has no realistic chance of
being able to eavesdrop on a neighbour's traffic, no matter what device
they may connect in place of the BTOR fibre-to-Ethernet converter.

In article <rUudnY_U85PyYgz-nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, NY
<me@privacy.net> wrote:
> On 08/12/2022 14:08, Scott wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Dec 2022 13:54:11 +0000, Mark Carver
> > <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> On 08/12/2022 13:51, Scott wrote:
> >>>
> >>> How may people would you say have broadband connection without
> >>> knowing it?
> >>>
> >> My mum has a PC and a Smart Telly in her house (And 40 Mb/s FTTC
> >> because it is now cheaper than 17 Mb/s ADSL she used to have). She
> >> can't operate either of them, I do it for her when I visit.
> >
> > Some people value their independence and I tend to think it is
> > insulting to think it can be taken away. If she can't operate the
> > telly I expect she is pretty p**sed off about it.

> My parents, who are in their 80s,

What has being "in their 80s" have to do with anything. I'm in my 80s.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

In article <RLadnds0Rvqsmw_-nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>,
NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
> On 08/12/2022 15:26, Jeff Layman wrote:
> > Do they retain the copper wire to act as a support for the fibre, or
> > does it have enough tensile strength to support itself? It's about 30
> > metres from the pole to the house connection at the top of a gable-end
> > wall.

> I wonder whether it is cheaper to wind the fibre around an existing
> copper cable (which is no longer connected electrically) or to remove
> the copper and replace it with a fibre cable (fibre pre-wound round a
> support).

> How will a damaged fibre will be replaced - eg if a car hits a pole or a
> tall vehicle hits a cable, or if someone strims an underground fibre at
> the point where it comes out of the ground? Will each pole have fan-out
> points to all the cables that radiate from it, and will BTOR engineers
> be able to splice in a new fibre, making good the connections at the
> pole and the fibre termination point in the house?

The fibre is self supporting.

The posts appear to have a fan-out facility. My copper has been there since
the Great Storm (1987) without either it or the pole having been hit. We
live on a fairly busy mail road..

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 08/12/2022 08:13 am, Roderick Stewart wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 22:56:27 +0000, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On 07/12/2022 22:28, SH wrote:
>>> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/12/07/bbc-must-ready-end-terrestrial-tv-broadcasts-decade-says-tim/
>>>
>>>
>>> I assume this applies to Freeview only so I assume Freesat will still be
>>> going for those who have  boradband that is not viable for TV streaming
>>> or even no broadband at all.
>>
>> Also:
>>
>> BBC preparing to go online-only over next decade, says director general
>> https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/dec/07/bbc-will-go-online-only-by-2030s-says-director-general
>
> They can do it tomorrow if they like, as far as I'm concerned. I
> haven't watched Freeview for more than a year now.
>
> Curiously, no particular reason is given for wanting to switch it off.
> "Imagine a world that is internet-only" - but why? He doesn't say. He
> just wants to switch it off. The fundamental reason isn't hard to
> guess though, as the internet already has the mechanisms that would be
> necessary for a paywall whereas traditional broacasting hasn't. As
> long as a paywall is implemented *instead of* and not *as well as* the
> licence fee, and we don't have to pay the BBC to watch other
> broadcasters' programmes, I'd be quite happy with that. It works for
> the likes of Amazon and Netflix, so I don't see why it couldn't work
> for the BBC too, though they'd have to learn very quickly how to run a
> business and provide what their viewers want.
>
> Of course the entire population isn't equipped for internet TV yet,
> but then the entire population wasn't equipped for broadcasting itself
> when that started.

And as extra TV channels became available (principally ITV and BBC2, but
also Channel 5*), potential viewers had to buy new equipment, if not a
completely new set.

[* C4 was an exception to that. If you could get BBC1, BBC2 and ITV, you
could get C4. Channel 5 wasn't available on ATT in some area and
required installation of a satellite dish or a delay until DTT arrived.]

> It spread gradually over many years, and an
> internet based BBC could do the same.
>
> Rod.

+1.

On 08/12/2022 09:48 am, Phil_M wrote:
> On 08/12/2022 08:13, Roderick Stewart wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 22:56:27 +0000, Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 07/12/2022 22:28, SH wrote:
>>>> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/12/07/bbc-must-ready-end-terrestrial-tv-broadcasts-decade-says-tim/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I assume this applies to Freeview only so I assume Freesat will
>>>> still be
>>>> going for those who have  boradband that is not viable for TV streaming
>>>> or even no broadband at all.
>>>
>>> Also:
>>>
>>> BBC preparing to go online-only over next decade, says director general
>>> https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/dec/07/bbc-will-go-online-only-by-2030s-says-director-general
>>>
>>
>> They can do it tomorrow if they like, as far as I'm concerned. I
>> haven't watched Freeview for more than a year now.
>>
>> Curiously, no particular reason is given for wanting to switch it off.
>> "Imagine a world that is internet-only" - but why? He doesn't say. He
>> just wants to switch it off. The fundamental reason isn't hard to
>> guess though, as the internet already has the mechanisms that would be
>> necessary for a paywall whereas traditional broacasting hasn't. As
>> long as a paywall is implemented *instead of* and not *as well as* the
>> licence fee, and we don't have to pay the BBC to watch other
>> broadcasters' programmes, I'd be quite happy with that. It works for
>> the likes of Amazon and Netflix, so I don't see why it couldn't work
>> for the BBC too, though they'd have to learn very quickly how to run a
>> business and provide what their viewers want.
>>
>> Of course the entire population isn't equipped for internet TV yet,
>> but then the entire population wasn't equipped for broadcasting itself
>> when that started. It spread gradually over many years, and an
>> internet based BBC could do the same.
>>
>> Rod.
>
> How do you record streaming to watch later?  I've just started watching
> Blue Planet 2 which I recorded ages ago.  How long will the streamed
> programmes be available for?

You download them onto a Sky+ hard-drive.

That's if they are available via Sky.

> Phil M
>

NY wrote:

> I wonder whether it is cheaper to wind the fibre around an existing copper cable
> (which is no longer connected electrically) or to remove the copper and replace
> it with a fibre cable (fibre pre-wound round a support).

I suspect the copper would be replaced, they did/do have a dropwire that was
fibre, with two copper pairs, and "strength members" wich might be steel or
kevlar to do the lifting.

> How will a damaged fibre will be replaced - eg if a car hits a pole or a tall
> vehicle hits a cable, or if someone strims an underground fibre at the point
> where it comes out of the ground?

Not sure if it's universal, but I notice a lot of telegraph poles (out in the
sticks, rathr than in towns) where there's a rather untidy loop of cable
coiled-up towards the top of the pole, I've assumed this is a bit of slack to
allow repairs?

Jeff Layman wrote:

> Don't they have to run the fibre outside down the wall to wherever it will enter
> the house?

I think the official line is that the drop-cable has to come down to ground
level, get spliced and then if necessary go back up to e.g. first floor level,
so that in future they can do tests from outside, without ladders; but I've
heard of a handful of cases where the engineer on the day takes a pragmatic
approach and *will* route the fibre inside at eaves level ...