ISPs pulling a fast one on broadband speeds: Ofcom
• Average speed 46% below that promised by ISPs
• Mandatory code and clear penalties vital, experts say
Millions of broadband users are being sold short by providers that are delivering speeds far below those advertised, according to research published today.
Data released by Ofcom, the communications regulator, shows that the gap between the headline broadband speeds customers sign up for and the connection they actually receive has widened sharply in the last 12 months. The average actual speed is now just 46% of what was promised, down from 56% a year ago.
Internet service providers are even advertising maximum speeds which in practice no customers receive, according to Ofcom, which is now pushing for tighter controls on selling broadband in the UK.
“There is a very big difference between the headline services that are advertised and the actual speeds that are delivered,” said Ed Richards, Ofcom’s chief executive.
Consumer groups said the research showed that many ISPs were letting their customers down.
“If consumers pay for a Ferrari-style internet service, they should not get pushbike speeds. Broadband users should get what they pay for,” said Robert Hammond, head of post and digital communications at Consumer Focus.
Peter Vicary-Smith, chief executive of Which?, demanded an end to “misleading claims” about broadband.
“Some internet service providers continue to advertise ever-increasing speeds that bear little resemblance to what most people can achieve in reality,” he said.
There is growing demand for faster broadband packages as more computer users watch television and play games online, or share their connection between several PCs. This has led ISPs to offer faster services – promising “up to” 20Mbps, for example, rather than the standard maximum speed of 8Mbps. However, the UK’s communications infrastructure appears incapable of supporting such services.
Ofcom reported that nearly a quarter of broadband users said they received a slower service than expected, and this was the most common complaint to ISPs.
The only ISP delivering close to the maximum speed advertised, according to Ofcom, was Virgin Media, with the advantage of a relatively new cable network in many urban areas. There was a stark difference between the performance of Virgin and the various ISPs such as AOL, BT, O2, Orange and Sky which all rely on BT’s ageing “last mile” local network.
While the average speed of an “up to 20Mbps” cable service is 15.7Mbps, this fell to just 6.5Mbps for a typical “20Mbps” DSL package, which uses copper phone lines.
Ofcom said that copper lines that connect homes and small firms to the local BT telephone exchange were being “stretched to the very edge of their capability” to support high-speed internet access. Longer phone lines can only support slower speeds.
An Orange spokesperson said Ofcom’s findings were “disappointing”, and questioned their accuracy as only a small fraction of its customers were tested.
Another issue is that many homes will effectively share a large broadband “pipe” in the local exchange, so average speeds fall at busy times.
John Petter, managing director of BT’s consumer division, insisted that the company “continues to invest heavily in our network, bringing speed improvements to customers nationwide”.
“Rip-offs must end”
ISPs typically offer broadband services promising speeds of “up to” 8Mbps, 20Mbps or 50Mbps. In a damning indictment of the current situation, Ofcom wants these advertising rules tightened up so that an ISP can only promise a maximum speed if “at least some” people can receive it.
“Our beef is that people were being offered up to 8mbps, and nobody actually got 8Mbps,” said Richards. He also wants broadband services to be advertised with a “typical speed range”, to give people a better idea of what they will get in practice.
Jon James, executive director of broadband at Virgin Media, agreed it was important that the way broadband is sold should be tightened up quickly.
“We need to ensure people are not being ripped off, as the lack of transparency in broadband advertising risks damaging consumer confidence in superfast broadband. The Advertising Standards Authority has announced a review into the way broadband is advertised and the need for change is now urgent,” he said.
Ofcom has also put together a new code of conduct for the industry. This would allow consumers to cancel their broadband service with no penalty within the first three months if the speed was significantly below what was promised. Richards said this would encourage ISPs to improve their service. Some experts argued a voluntary code was not enough.
“Simply strengthening it does not cut the mustard – we need a mandatory code with clear penalties for those that breach it,” said Matthew Wheeler, communications expert at uSwitch.com. Ofcom’s data also showed that Britain still suffers a significant Broadband Divide, ten years after the first high-speed services went on sale. Average download speeds of 5.8Mbps were recorded in urban areas, versus just 2.7Mbps in rural areas – where average line lengths are greater.
Richards warned that this gap was “likely to extend further before it narrows”, as BT starts to build a next-generation fibre-optic network in towns and cities that will offer speeds of up to 100Mbps in some locations.
BT plans to spend £2.5bn installing fibre-based broadband in two-thirds of the country by 2015. Richards said today’s data showed the importance of investment to bring fibre to as much of the country as possible.
The coalition government has said it expects the market to take the lead in delivering fibre across the UK, but BT has warned it cannot extend coverage further without some form of government support.
• This article was amended on 27 July 2010. We originally referred to “Virgin Mobile” in paragraph 11 – this has been changed to “Virgin Media”
Technology news, comment and analysis | guardian.co.uk
Police crack down on computer support phone scam
Nineteen websites offering fake computer support have been closed down by the Metropolitan police e-crime unit
Nineteen websites which were used to perpetrate a phone scam offering “computer support” that defrauded people across the English-speaking world have been closed down by police.
In the scam, reported by the Guardian today, teams at Indian call centres rang computer users claiming to be from tech support. The computer users were then told there were problems with their PC, which could be fixed.
After being told to download a programme that handed over remote control of their computer so the caller could install “fixes”, the PC users were told of the £185 charge for subscription to “the preventative service”. But the “fixed” computers never had any problems, and the value of the service was dubious.
The Metropolitan police e-crime unit acted in April to take such sites down. Among those shut was supportonclick.com, registered to Pecon Software, a firm based in Kolkata. The company has now opened another support website, called onlinepccare.com, which is the subject of numerous online complaints about cold calling, “bullying”, and claims that the caller is from Windows PC care.
But the police are unable to effect refunds for people who were scammed by the cold callers, though they do class the crime as “obtaining money by deception” – in other words, fraud. “Those who believe they have been mis-sold a product or service online should report the matter to trading standards, via its website (www.consumerdirect.gov.uk),” said the PCEU in a statement. “If a criminal offence has clearly been perpetrated the matter should be reported to the police.”
The Guardian spoke today to Pecon’s customer relationship manager, Vikas Gupta. He said the firm employed 400 people, of whom about 200 worked in telesales, cold calling to generate business for remote PC support. He would not say from where they derived the lists of names and insisted that none of the callers would say they were from Windows tech support. However he admitted there had been “a couple of instances” where “people [from Pecon] did try to influence the customer [to believe] that they were … from Microsoft”, and there was “some quality-related feedback” from agents.
Pecon set up its remote support scheme in April 2008, saying it had had an “overwhelming response” from customers in the UK, US, Canada and Australia, and used the supportonclick site – now closed by the e-crime unit – for the service.
Gupta denied knowing of supportonclick, though it was running before he says he joined and shut while he worked there. He said that, as part of a prepared script, the call-centre teams would show people details from the Windows Event Viewer, a program that can worry uninitiated PC owners. He said this was just to help people decide whether to take Pecon’s services.
Gupta said he was aware of sites and call centres in Kolkata operating a “support” scam. He said some pretended to call on behalf of onlinepccare.com. “I’d say 80% of the sites are using content stolen from us. They’ve copied spelling errors from us.”
Sources close to the Met e-crime unit said there was “clear evidence of criminality” from the sites taken down.
Technology news, comment and analysis | guardian.co.uk
Facebook facing lawsuit as New Yorker claims 84% of firm
Facebook is in court to defend yet another claim to ownership, this time from a web designer cum wood pellet distributor who says a previous contract entitles him to 84% of the company.
Filed in the Supreme Court in New York’s Allegany County last month, the lawsuit details how Paul Ceglia signed a contract with Facebook in April 2003 to design and develop the website TheFacebook.com for an agreed ,000 (£665) fee and a 50% stake in the site.
The contract stipulated, Ceglia claims, a further 1% stake for each day until the site was finished on 4 February 2004. Facebook is valued at an estimated .5bn, so an 84% share would be worth around .46bn.
Following Ceglia’s lawsuit, acting New York Supreme Court justice Thomas Brown issued a temporary restraining order that blocks Facebook from transfering assets. The case has now transferred to a federal court and Facebook is trying to have it annulled.
Facebook dimissed the case as “frivolous” and “outlandish”, said it will fight it vigorously and pointed out that a lawsuit over a contract broken in 2003 is “almost certainly barred” by the statute of limitation.
There are a number of reasons that success for Ceglia sounds unlikely – not least waiting until the site reaches 500 million global users before bringing his case, waiting until the outcome of the (successful) Winklevoss claim and the rather bizarre sidenote that a restraining order was granted against him in 2009 by an attorney who alleged Ceglia had defrauded customers of his wood-pellet fuel business to the tune of 0,000.
But imagine, for a minute, that Ceglia succeeded, and moved in to take 84% of Facebook. We might have a new entrant in the MediaGuardian 100…
Technology news, comment and analysis | guardian.co.uk
BBC websites cost users 67p per month
The BBC spent £199.3m on its BBC Online service in 2009/10, according to its annual report – 12% more than the previous year.
The outlay is 6% of the £142.50 annual licence fee, or the equivalent of £0.67 per month…
BBC Online spend breaks down as: £126.7m content budget, £22.3m on distribution and £50.3m on infrastructure and support.
Future media and technology director Erik Huggers’ salary totalled £407,000 – that’s £330,000 base pay, £15,000 in taxable benefits and £62,000 in cash-based pension supplements.
More stats…
• BBC Online reaches 37% of the population each week and therefore costs 8.9 pence per user hour.
• On a per user user basis, that makes it amongst the most costly of the BBC’s main services, with only BBC Alba costing more.
• More than 18m iPlayer requests per week.
• Monthly mobile users up from 4.4m to 7.8m.
• External suppliers received 26% of BBC Online spend – slightly more than its 25% quota.
Coinciding with the annual report, the BBC Trust has published its response to the BBC’s Putting Quality First strategic review proposals. Regarding online, it says: “The Trust endorses the Executive’s proposed 25% budget reduction, although it will want to understand and approve the editorial changes involved. In line with the Executive’s proposals, the BBC should sharpen online’s focus so that it is truly distinctive and has clearer editorial vision and control….
“The BBC needs to identify future tipping points where reassessment of the structure will become necessary, such as full digital switchover in 2012 and 50% of viewing on a non-linear basis.
“The case has not been made for the closure of 6 Music. The Executive should draw up an overarching strategy for digital radio.”
Meanwhile, BBC is now rolling out “BBC Fabric”, “a desktop-based digital production tool that allows content to be accessed, edited, and shared remotely across the entire BBC” and “will fundamentally change the way we make programmes”, according to the annual report.
Technology news, comment and analysis | guardian.co.uk
Canada’s copyright laws show Britain’s digital legislation is no exception
It’s not just our government that can be bullied into voting against the public interest by big content’s power-brokers
A few months ago, Britain’s archivists, educators, independent artists and technologists were up in arms over the digital economy bill, a dreadful piece of legislation that ignored all the independent experts’ views on how to improve Britain’s digital economy; instead, it further rewarded the slow-moving entertainment companies that refused to adapt to the changing marketplace and diverted even more public enforcement resources to shoring up their business-models.
The bill was passed despite enormous public outcry, without real parliamentary debate, in a largely empty house, hours before parliament dissolved for the election. Despite reassuring promises to their constituents, huge numbers of MPs just didn’t bother to show up for work that day, allowing the bill to slip through (my own MP, Meg Hillier, sent me a letter to tell me that she was “concerned” that the bill was up for a vote without debate, but she voted for it anyway).
Well, here’s some good news for Britons: you’re not the only country whose laws are for sale to oligarchs from the entertainment industry. In my native Canada, a farce worthy of the worst moments of the Digital Economy Act is playing out even as I type these words.
Some background: there have been two recent attempts to reform Canadian copyright law. Both failed, due in large part to an unwillingness on the part of lawmakers to conduct public review or consultation on their proposals (though they were happy to have closed-door meetings with lobbyists representing offshore entertainment giants). The minority Tory government is now fielding a third attempt, called Bill C32 (Canadian bills have much less interesting names than their UK counterparts; here, we’d probably call it The Enhancement of Digital Life Through Extreme Punishments for Naughty Pirates Bill of 2010).
C32 follows the widest-ever public consultation on Canadian copyright. More than 8,300 Canadians filed comments in the consultation, and they spoke with near unanimity: “We don’t want a US-style copyright regime.”
The US’s copyright law was last reformed in 1998, with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which provided for near-total protection for “digital locks” (also called “DRM,” “TPM,” “copy prevention,” “copy protection” – this explosion of names being the legacy of two decades’ worth of attempts to rebrand an unpopular idea in the hopes of making it stick). In the US version of the law, breaking a digital lock is itself a crime – even if you’re breaking it for a perfectly legitimate reason.
For example, Apple uses digital locks to make sure that the only programs you can run on your iPad and iPhone come from its own App Store. The App Store has lots of conditions on it that are ripe for competitive challenge – it scoops a hefty 30% commission from software creators, and imposes prudish conditions on the presentation of “adult” content (previously, Apple has rejected an ebook reader because it could be used to call up the Kama Sutra, a dictionary because it contained “naughty” words, the Pulitzer-winning political cartoons of Mark Fiore because they “ridiculed public figures” and a comic book adaptation of Joyce’s Ulysses because you could see the characters’ willies – in each case, they reversed themselves after public outcry).
But breaking the digital locks on your iPad so that you can buy apps from someone other than Apple is against the law – even though there is no copyright infringement taking place. Quite the contrary: marketplaces where creators exchange their works for money is the kind of thing you’d expect copyright law to encourage, rather than prohibit.
Nearly all of the respondents to the Canadian copyright consultation said that they didn’t want to repeat America’s 12-year-old mistake. Yes, they said, let us have protection for digital locks, but only if you’re breaking them in order to commit an act of actual copyright infringement. Protecting the locks themselves is bad policy.
I was one of those Canadians. As a Canadian author (my latest novel, For the Win, is presently on the Canadian bestseller lists), I believe that I should have the major say in the destiny of my copyrighted works.
If I want to authorise a reader to break a digital lock to move her copies of my books from a Kindle to a competing ebook reader, that should be my call. Certainly, the mere act of putting my works into a digital locker shouldn’t give a company the right to usurp my copyright: copyright protects authorship, not assembling electronics in Pacific Rim sweatshops.
Only 46 of the 8,306 commenters thought otherwise. These 46 commenters advocated replicating America’s failed experiment in Canada; everyone else thought the idea was daft. You’d think that with numbers like 46:8260, the government would go with the majority, right? Wrong.
When minister of industry Tony Clement, and minister of heritage James Moore, published the text of their long-awaited copyright bill, Canadians were floored to discover that the ministers had replicated the American approach to digital locks. Actually, they made it worse – the Americans conduct triennial hearings on proposed exemptions to the rule; Moore and Clement didn’t bother with even this tiny safeguard.
The ministers have been incapable of explaining the discrepancy. When confronted on it, they inevitably point to the fact that their bill also establishes numerous “user rights” for everyday Canadians (for example, the right to record a TV show in order to watch it later), and suggest that this is the “balance” that Canadians asked for. When critics say, “Yes, you’ve created some user rights, but if a digital lock prevents their exercise, it’s against the law to break the lock, right?” the ministers squirm and change the subject.
It’s enough to leave you wondering whether the ministers understand their own bill. Indeed, Clement recently appeared on the public broadcaster TVOntario show Search Engine and promised that his law allows journalists to break a digital lock for the purposes of investigative reporting (according to lawyers, scholars and everyone else who’s read the bill, he’s wrong).
If they don’t understand their bill, perhaps it’s because they weren’t really in charge of what went into it. According to the former head of staff for minister of foreign affairs Maxime Bernier: “The prime minister’s office’s position was, move quickly, satisfy the US; we don’t care what you do, as long as the US is satisfied.”
It’s clear the US government has made a top priority out of ensuring other countries cut their throats just as stupidly as America did with the DMCA’s digital locks rules. Last week, the Obama administration’s newly minted IP enforcement czar, Victoria Espinel, reiterated America’s priority to use its trade muscle to force countries into adopting US-style copyright rules.
American industry is pleased by this. A shadowy new Canadian “citizens’ group”, Balanced Copyright For Canada, looks to be the work of the big-four labels, with a membership composed of employees and executives of the labels’ Canadian subsidiaries (the membership lists were taken offline hastily after this was publicised).
Moore seems to be cracking under the strain of supporting the unsupportable. He has publicly denounced opponents of his bill as “radical extremists” (these “extremists” include the Canadian Bookseller Association, the Retail Council of Canada, the Canadian Library Association, the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada and MPs from all the other parties). He then denied having made the remarks, blocked voters from following him on Twitter when they asked him about it, and has remained silent on the subject since videos of him making the remarks surfaced.
So, Britain, rejoice. It’s not just our government that can be bullied into voting against the public interest by big content’s power-brokers – Canada’s just as weak and pitiful.
Technology news, comment and analysis | guardian.co.uk
Google’s new approach in China
Search giant ends automatic redirection to Hong Kong site for mainland web users in effort to placate Beijing authorities
Google today sought to placate the Chinese authorities by ending the automatic redirection of mainland users to its uncensored Hong Kong site, saying officials had warned they would otherwise refuse to renew the firm’s licence.
Several industry analysts suggested the last-ditch move – made only a day before Google’s permit to provide content expires – signalled the end for the google.cn service following the search giant’s battle with the censors.
The company began diverting users of the site to google.com.hk in March, having said it was no longer willing to censor search results as required under Chinese law.
Today, it said it had introduced an extra step, redirecting users to a landing page with a link to the Hong Kong site.
In a post on the Google blog, the company’s chief legal officer, David Drummond, wrote: “This redirect [to Hong Kong], which offers unfiltered search in simplified Chinese, has been working well for our users and for Google.
“However, it’s clear from conversations we have had with Chinese government officials that they find the redirect unacceptable – and that if we continue redirecting users, our internet content provider licence will not be renewed (it’s up for renewal on June 30).
“Without an ICP licence, we can’t operate a commercial website like Google.cn, so Google would effectively go dark in China.
“That’s a prospect dreaded by many of our Chinese users, who have been vocal about their desire to keep Google.cn alive.”
Drummond said some users were already being taken to the landing page and that, over the next few days, all users would be diverted that way.
He said the firm had resubmitted its licence renewal application on that basis.
Analysts said Google would be unable to use the google.cn domain and provide services such as music and mapping without a licence, analysts said.
Google spokesman Peter Barron said: “We have a choice. Keep the redirect, lose the licence and have .cn go dark, or look at a different option.
“We think this option stays true to our commitment not to censor, while also hopefully keeping .cn alive … We are hopeful that our licence will be renewed on this basis, but we’ll have to wait to hear from the Chinese authorities.”
The Chinese ministry of industry and information technology, which oversees licensing, declined to comment.
Although Hong Kong is part of China, it is governed under different laws, but users from the mainland are still unable to see uncensored search results on google.com.hk because the country’s firewall blocks sensitive terms.
Few expected Google’s attempt at a compromise to win favour with Chinese authorities.
“My guess is that, by taking it public, they have basically sealed their fate,” said the Beijing-based internet expert Bill Bishop, who blogs as Digicha.
“I have always been of the mind that the idea somehow Google had got through everything and now it was hunky-dory was a bit hopeful. People here have long memories.”
Bishop suggested the drawn-out nature of the dispute with officials was beginning to “chip away at [Google's] position of moral superiority” in some people’s eyes.
Paul Denlinger, an internet consultant specialising in the Chinese market, said: “I think what they want to do is keep the door open for being able to come back into China at some later date.
“Going out in a blaze of glory might make some people happy in the US and other parts of the world, but it would slam the door on China.”
But Denlinger said that, in the shorter term, it “looks very bad” for Google’s future in China.
Industry sources predicted an appreciable but not huge drop-off in traffic to google.com.hk if google.cn was turned off, because some mainland users were still not used to the google.com.hk domain.
A more important question may be whether Google is allowed to continue selling advertising in China in the long run. Denlinger also raised questions about Google’s ability to offer mapping services.
The real winner of today’s announcement is likely to be Baidu, the domestic search firm that had around two-thirds of the market even before Google moved its search services overseas.
Technology news, comment and analysis | guardian.co.uk
Shillington College
World class education needn’t take forever. It should be well structured, constantly evolving to reflect commercial practices and presented by passionate professionals. That’s what happens at Shillington College and we have the record to prove it. Our students are taught by outstanding graphic designers and are getting top design jobs. Starting with no prior knowledge they graduate with a professional design portfolio and an in-depth knowledge of the Adobe design programs.
But don’t take our word for it, you can browse samples of our student’s design work and hear what some of our graduates have to say about their experiences as designers.
We offer 3 month full-time and 1 year part-time courses in computer graphic design at our colleges in London, Manchester, Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and at Shillington School in New York, USA.
Highlander
As the UK’s only provider of true blended learning on the Adobe CS4 product range, we are able to maximise the amount of knowledge you gain for each pound spent.
Our Adobe training courses include not only classroom sessions but post class access to video tutorials, exercises & skills tests, as well as 6 months instructor support.
With courses on subjects including Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, Flash, ActionScript, DreamWeaver, HTML and CSS, we are well placed to help you join the experts.
Creative, Web & Marketing Training
London training centre: Highlander Ltd, Islington Business Design, 52 Upper Street, London, N1 0QH
http://www.highlander.co.uk/
Ubiq
Creative training courses in web development, coding, digital imaging, animation, page layout and graphics software at our London training centre or onsite.
Established in 1997, Ubiq is a unique home-based training company based in East Dulwich, London. We run our courses in a comfortable room with an adjoining lounge area. Our customers are made to feel at home, relaxed and at ease, and as a result, they learn more. We can also deliver training tailored to your own requirements, either here or on your own premises.
About our courses
We are a fully independant training company, and we design our own courses around real-world projects, concentrating on the most important skills and techniques you will need. We deliver courses in the Adobe Creative Suite and related coding languages for the web. We employ expert trainers who are also working industry professionals with proven teaching skills. See our Trainers page for more details. Our courses include certification, free technical support, course notes and supporting materials and last but not least, a really fantastic home-cooked lunch.
Small classes for a better learning experience
We believe in quality over quantity, so we train no more than four people in a group. Small groups allow for a much greater level of interaction between trainer and students. In many ways, this is even better than a one-to-one course, as you will generally find yourself with a small group of people with similar interests. If you’ve been disappointed in the past by typical classroom-based courses, then this will be a new and much better experience.
Creating HTML Emails
Responding to a significant demand, this course is aimed at people who want to create good looking and reliable HTML emails. You will learn how to create newsletters that work in the widest possible range of email applications.
Flash CS4 – Advanced Animation techniques
This course is aimed at Flash users who want to take their skills much further, and want to learn about the new and more advanced features in Flash CS4 – the latest release. We go into depth with the new Motion Tween Editor, Ease curves, Inverse Kinematics, Masks and 3D transformations.
New! Getting Started with Photoshop – (This course will get you up and running with Photoshop in a day…)
Aimed at anyone who wants to use Photoshop for tasks such as preparing graphics for the Web, for e-marketing or for presentations, this one day course cuts through the complexity, and teaches you the fundamental skills and techniques that will let you get the job done.
Drupal Courses
Drupal is a highly configurable open source content management system (CMS) for the web implemented with PHP and MySQL. Drupal can be easily configured via a user-friendly web interface and is widely used for a range of different web applications, from blogging to large-scale enterprise websites.
Ubiq is now one of just a few UK-based companies offering Drupal training courses both to administrators and developers.
UBIQ
18 St Francis Road
East Dulwich
London SE22 8DE
We are just by East Dulwich station. The quickest way to get to us is by rail – just 10 minutes from London Bridge or from Victoria station (goes to Denmark Hill, which is just up the road). Buses from central London and Victoria (176, 185) stop at the bottom of our street. Buses from Putney through Brixton (37) stop just up the road. East Dulwich is in Zone 2.
Note: If you are attending a course, we are open for refreshments from 9:00 in the morning. If you are really early, there’s a Starbucks in Sainsbury’s (next turning on the left, off Dog Kennel Hill).
+44 (0)20 77377523
Kingston University London
Web Development PgDip/MSc
Qualification PgDip/MSc
Duration Full time: 1 year
Part time: 2–3 years
January and September start dates)
Attendance 1 week per module
Assessment Coursework and/or exams; research project/dissertation (MSc).
Please note that this is an indicative list of modules and is not intended as a definitive list.
The full MSc consists of five core modules, three option modules and a dissertation project.
Core modules
Broadband and Mobile Networks
Building E-Business
Developing Object-Orientated Solutions
Research Methods
Web Development in Java
Project/Dissertation (MSc Only)
Option modules
Component-Based Software Engineering
Corporate Data and Database Management
Digital Communications
Electronic Commerce Technologies
Enterprise Networking
Geographical Information Fundamentals
Internet Map Services
Internet Wireless Networks
Knowledge Management
Location-Based Services, Applications and Technologies
Multimedia Communications
Network Design and Management
Network Operating Systems
Network Security
Programming in Java
Projects and Risk Management
Requirements Engineering and Management
Secure and Dependable Computing
Software Engineering Tools
Software Quality Assurance
Spatial Information Analysis and Modelling
Strategic Information Systems for E-Business
TCP/IP Networks
Usability Engineering
Visualisation and Image Processing
Wireless Communications
IT and Entrepreneurship
Postgraduate Admissions Coordinator
Tel: +44 (0)20 8417 2234
