> Meanwhile, in rural England, people desperate for internet access are bundling four DSL lines at 1.4 MBit/s downstream each.
Then they should move out of rural England. BT, etc, aren't stupid. If people in rural England could pay enough to offset the cost of running cable or fiber out to rural England, then BT would build that infrastructure. But that's clearly not the case.
Rural has a very different meaning in the UK than in the US. Anywhere in the UK that is actually rural would be described as isolated.
We're not talking about small villages nestled in the Welsh hillsides hundres of miles from the nearest city. We're talking about towns of tens of thousands of people, close to major cities, close to major rail and road networks.
It'd be really nice if the UK had strategic plans to increase the amount of fibre in the ground. People building new housing estates or roads or etc should be strongly encouraged to install fibre optic cabling, and more than is needed.
Alas, rural is pretty much anywhere outside a few city centers, and even in London there are parts where you can get stuck with an unstable 4 MBit/s DSL link (from personal experience).
I live in Bethnal Green (just down the road from "Tech City") and our entire apartment block can't get fibre, just a measly 4Mb/s. I don't know if BT is to blame, or the building itself, but it sure makes finding a flat to rent a bit of a lottery...
Then they should move out of rural England. BT, etc, aren't stupid. If people in rural England could pay enough to offset the cost of running cable or fiber out to rural England, then BT would build that infrastructure. But that's clearly not the case.