It was approved a week or so ago, nothing will change on the mobile side as VM signed a deal with Vodafone a while back for MVNO access. Wholesale access to the VM cable network is potentially interesting though.
Virgin Media Discussion Thread
- Thread starter macca40
- Start date
It was approved a week or so ago, nothing will change on the mobile side as VM signed a deal with Vodafone a while back for MVNO access. Wholesale access to the VM cable network is potentially interesting though.
Speculation is it may be the newer fibre sections, HFC isn’t the issue, the fragmented infrastructure and messed up approach inherited from individual franchises using a non standard approach decades ago. I would wait and see what comes out in the next 6-24 months.
They've had plenty of time to fix that.
To be fair, from what (little) I know new owners Liberty Global seem a bit better at this sort of thing. They've pushed forward a lot of infrastructure upgrades, rolled out gigabit, expanded Project Lightning etc. Certainly for Liverpool, they've taken the network from globally congested to almost completely breathable. I've gone from massive utilisation issues on 350 and 500Mbps to hammering gigabit 24/7 without consequence. The outlaws live in a different part of the city and report the same, even on a lower tier (500Mbps iirc) they've gone from low speeds and hopelessly congested to being able to max their line consistently.
Hopefully the housekeeping continues, but I've still got one eye on a dedicated line tbh as it doesn't seem like our area would get FTTP any time this century.
You presumably have a background in migrating HFC networks over multiple different operating standards? I mean the last time anything even remotely close to this was done was Liverpool, that was street by street and took years and cost an absolute fortune, the plans to do parts of London using sewer tunnels failed, if you had a quicker and more efficient method to migrate, then your skill set and experience would have been in high demand.
NTL and Telewest merged in 2006. Are you saying that fifteen years isn't long enough to deal with the issues from the various cable companies they subsumed even before that date? In fact, VM made cuts in order to make the company more attractive for sale, and even seven years after Liberty took over, they still have many issues they are only just beginning to address.
Like most telecoms companies, they are more interested in raking in as much money as possible, whilst spending the least they can on the network.
So that would be a no? You’re talking about a system that took decades and an obscene amount of money (debt) to build but was done in such a way that lacked standardisation due to the highly fragmented and short term view ‘franchise’ approach. Even today with massively improved technology and government throwing billions of funding/tax/planning reforms look at what OR are predicting to spend to roll out fibre and how many years they predict it will take. Then again everyone else could be an idiot and you should have been put in charge of everything and had it sorted a week on Tuesday after the merger. In the real world, that’s unfortunately how things work.
So apparently VM is special and can't build the kinds of high speed networks they manage in different countries all over the world, despite the billions of investment they could have made any time in the last 20 years, but didn't?
The customer doesn't care about VM's poor infrastructure due to a lack of investment - they just care that unfixed over-subscription and underpowered backbone doesn't give them the service they pay for.
Do you by any chance work for VM in their network planning department and can give us an insight into the lack of upgrading other than "it's too much money and we don't want to spend it"?
Oh what a simple outlook on business you have
So for the third time, that’s a no on the HFC migration experience? I’d guess finance/tax/history aren’t areas of expertise either?Network build historically is an utter money pit, especially upto the recent code reforms that were brought in to make it easier (and cheaper), the potential ROI was initially estimated in decades and for the most part the closest anyone got to making money from those early investments was is if they were lucky enough to have the debt repaid in a subsequent sale/refinancing exercise and that relied on finding someone dumb enough to front the money, which got progressively harder as the markets understood they wouldn’t see repayment due to the low RGU per customer and % of market penetration. Generally investors/financiers lost money or got screwed when the operators had to be sold at a loss and did debt to equity. Strangely enough the list of finance providers got a little thin on high risk investments, especially when things crashed globally. Anyway, despite your opinion, investors weren’t queueing up to throw billions at re-building existing network, at least not on terms that made financial sense, so you had minimal build other than the easy fill-in or where a developer was picking up the bill.
Then LG came along, they have a proven track record in other markets and unlike many before them have a better understanding of how the company should work. You’ll have seen that in the form of standardised CPE and the move for new build to move to RFoG where it’s viable. They have also done a nunber of back end improvements/standardisation which has been ongoing - all be it at a slower pace - for decades prior, but they prioritised them.
That still doesn’t alter the fundamental issues:
Network build is expensive.
Expense is easier to justify when you get something, even if that something is only potential.
It’s therefore easier to justify new build passing new premises (remember that’s what our government has focused on) than it is to justify similar expense to re-cable existing areas. New premises are also potentially a pathway to government subsidy, so what exactly do you think is going to be given priority?
Oh what a simple outlook on business you have
So you are sticking with "the network has problems because it's old and fragmented, and we haven't fixed it in 20 years because we don't want to spend the money"? I guess you do work for VM's network planning department! That's pretty much the excuse I've been hearing from VM/Telewest/NTL for the last 20 years every time a fundamental issue shows up.
At the same time we see other countries build better, faster, cheaper high-speed networks.
Soldato
Just got up and my SH4 has a red light (no internet) restarted the router, come back red, checked on the phone app and status is showing all is well? Anything else I can try?
Im in Hertfordshire, Letchworth
Im in Hertfordshire, Letchworth
I'd give it half an hour in case they are working on something, then phone it in as a fault. It's possible you might get more info specific to your area/fault when you go through the phone system, or you might be the first person on your street to call in and log it as a fault, and you'll need someone to come out and have a look.
Someone might have cut a cable, hit a surface cab, a part of your local network equipment might have failed, or an installation team might have nicked your connection for someone else so they can claim they completed a job.
Soldato
Thanks for the reply
Got the sms whilst I was at work
Hi this is Virgin Media. We've fixed the network issue affecting your services. Please restart your equipment and wait 30 mins. Still stuck? Reply with HELP.
All back online now!
EDIT - I spoke too fast, my unifi network was showing "no internet connection" and when I did an ipconfig it showed my local IP as 86.***.***.*** so not in the 192.168.0.* range, so I reset the SH4 again and that cleared the issue, are the any pro's/Con's to just disabling the 2.4/5G wireless channels on the SH4 or does "Modem Mode" have some other benefits?
Thanks in advance
Last edited:
Seriously what is the deal with the Hub 4's? Don't have as fast or as stable a wifi connection as I did with the previous gen and this one seems to like connecting and disconnecting my wired connections several times a day.
Looking for a recommendation of a good wifi router with a few LAN ports on the back.
Looking for a recommendation of a good wifi router with a few LAN ports on the back.
Low end, high volume, built-by-the-cheapest-bidder equipment in not being very good shocker...
If I recall correctly, the Hubs cost VM around $15 each (I may be thinking of the SH3 in particular?), so your expectations should be set accordingly. It's a shame they won't let us buy our own proper DOCSIS 3.1 modems. Just stick the wretched things in modem mode and put something proper at the edge of your network. The SH4 is, at least, a step up from the previous ones in various metrics.Any suggestions on a router, I live in a small 3 bedroom 1920's terraced house so very thick stone/brick walls, currently got most devices connected wirelessly which isn't great. Watching netflix, youtube, gaming etc all has to be done via ethernet or it's buffering city and drives me nuts.
Soldato
Really depends on how much you want to spend. I would suggest with thick walls if you can run ethernet for some access points would be best. If not then a simple mesh system would do the job. You can go TP link with powerline backbone if on the same ring main. Or spend more and go for a higher end solution from netgear such as orbi. I would probably try amazon for the tp link powerline mesh system or the new eeros as with them being super easy to return if they dont work its a good starting point.