There is new technology like g.fast for 100+mbit speeds over a copper pair. Yes it is not as fast as either fiber or co-ax, and it is short sighted, but 100mbit is a huge improvement over legacy DSL speeds.
And no, they cannot upgrade FttN to G.fast, no matter what they tell you. That requires shorter copper lengths than all but the closest handful of houses to the node have. Plus you need everyone on the same technology so that the vectoring (like active noise cancellation) can work.
Gfast drops off a cliff after a few hundred metres, and they have houses connected to nodes a kilometre away. Gfast and Xgfast are only appropriate for Fibre-to-the-curb.
FttN can never be meaningfully upgraded.
G.fast extends the fibre closer to the house but I suspect it's not very cost-effective unless the take-up is high, so perhaps it will mainly cater to rich people in suburbia.
We've know that fibre (FTTH) was the answer since the 1980s but all British governments have been too short-sighted and stupid to finance it.
Of course, they dug up the streets to install new pipes for the short-term benefits of North Sea gas, and they can find £50 billion for HS2, when they could have FTTH for less.
Yet.
640K ought to be enough for anybody.
What reasonable use has a consumer sub for more than 10-20 Mbs? if your running a business from home get a business line and stop expecting Pensioners to subsidize your business
2 different people watching high definition video at a high bit rate.
Going from dial-up to 2Mbps ADSL was a huge jump, and ADSL2 also made a big difference. However, for a single user, there's not really that much difference between 20Mbps, 40Mpbs and 80Mbps. You have a faster connection to the exchange, but you're still limited by the speed of the net and the speed of the servers you connect to.