We are lucky here I guess because we are well served by 5g/4g. We watch Netflix via our phone hotspot system to our UHD TV with no buffering.
So my question is why are there relatively few masts, I would have thought simple to erect and operate, compared to digging up the road and all the disruption that causes. I can understand some businesses might need very high info transfer, but for normal houses?
I’m no expert, but I would think that a household with a couple of teenagers playing online games plus streaming TV and video to multiple TVs, will use more online bandwidth than many businesses.
According to Ofcom data, average broadband usage per UK household was 456 GB/month in May 2022 . That’s the equivalent of 65 hours of UltraHD streaming on Netflix, or streaming more than 63 thousand 3 minute songs on Spotify.
OK rural France may not use as much as UK city dwellers, but I suspect that’s the reason fibre is being put in rather than lots of 4G / 5G - data usage is probably only going to increase.
Having to repair or replace the receivers on mobile masts periodically may also be a factor - once fibre is in the ground it’s going to last a long time I would think.
1 Like
… I bow …
No need! It’s a legitimate question! And yes they are putting up mobile masts to supply households in places where it’s impracticable to bury a fibre cable.
At least Europe doesn’t generally go in for the “throw all the cables up on poles” approach they use in America!
1 Like
Except in rural Normandie… 
Ah well, there had to be an exception… that’s why I carefully inserted the word “generally”. 
1 Like
Years ago, when we had copper wire, I noticed that every time it rained we lost access to the internet. I called out the engineer to locate the problem.
He checked everything and said it was fine. “The problem is” he said “every time it rains the teenagers go inside and play on the internet using all the bandwidth”
………. Then he sent me his bill.
7 Likes
I rest my case, m’lud!! 
It would be nice to be blest with underground cables…
1 Like
It would indeed…
Not only rural Normandy but all over France.
Certainly villages and towns generally have fibre below ground thanks to forward thinking when villages and towns have had their street scene renovated in the recent past but elsewhere cables string from pole to pole.
It amazes me seeing the new fibre fitted to poles that are well past their sell by often leaning at precarious angles.
I wonder how long it will be before a team of cable removers sweep across the country removing what will ultimately be obsolete copper telephone wires that pass along the same dilapidated poles as the new fibre?
2 Likes
Around us, they’ve been replacing (some) wooden poles with rather flimsy looking metal ones. The fibre is being carried higher up the pole than the copper. All of it looks a bit flimsy to be honest. It’s been like that for months but they haven’t connected up the fibre back at the exchange or wherever yet, as far as I can see.
1 Like
And in Lot et Garonne.
Why fibre? Because it’s way, way, way cheaper that putting up 4G/5G base stations that serve a few tens of people each.
And all those base stations require fibre or microwave links back to the boxes controlling the base station clusters anyway.
1 Like
One main section of cables that supply us is strung up on a forest of walnut trees at the edge of a busy main road. Another section is hanging in loops on a rocky cliff above a dangerous sharp bend in the same road. What could possibly go wrong !
1 Like
I agree entirely. Having suffered the slings and arrows of the Orange/SFR lousy copper service with finger pointing their only real skill, I wouldn’t have fibre in the house, even if it was available near us. With our 5g/4g router I’m in control, for example when it failed about a month ago after two visits and three phone calls to Orange over a couple of days I had a new router. I would have been still waiting for an Orange/SFR technician to come out and tell me it wasn’t his problem 
I also suspect a lot of people think they have fibre, but the last mile is actually copper or wireless.
Yep, this.
Plus all those masts are on somebody else’s land, which means having to negotiate access when things go wrong or need upgrading, which is often a ball ache to coordinate.
When I was a Vodaclone I used to sit near the team who were monitoring the base stations. Back then, Vodafone had a joint venture with O2 whereby they shared masts (but not the transceivers) and each company was responsible for maintaining only 50% of the masts… Pretty much split east vs west. Not sure if they still do this as I changed jobs a long time ago.
Horses for courses. I’ve used both considerably over the past 4 years whilst doing WFH. Ignoring the speed difference (although having 2gbps is awesome 
), I found tethering to a 4G hotspot to be less reliable. I spend half my time in Zoom calls, and often the connection would drop - only briefly, but enough to cause buffering. I don’t get that with fibre. My old ADSL line was horribly slow for downloading stuff but was at least reliable.
I’ve not used 5G. Maybe it’s more reliable 
Not in France. If you have fibre then there’s a sliver of glass that comes right into your modem.
3 Likes
Yes, you’re right it’s horses for courses. I’d like the speed (though unlike you, I don’t need it) but the potential mental torture of dealing with telco technicians (mostly subcontracted I suppose) outweighs the benefit.
Are you sure John? I’ve seen boxes on poles that look, to my untutored eye, like last mile distribution points.