I would say the main difference is politics - the SNCF is seen in France as an integral part of the 'service public'. This changes the approach to delivering the railway and public perception of this is more important than many other European countries, particularly the UK. You'll only have to look at the redevelopment plans of Paris Nord. It's desperately needed in terms of capacity, ensuring the station is ready for Brexit-necessary queuing/arrival procedures and it seems to aim for a hint of St Pancras, but there is outrage in the media and amongst rail unions/locals as it's seen to 'privatise' the station, given Auchan's involvement. I cannot remember a similar UK station redevelopment being so contentious.
A few examples also demonstrate this balance of power - the numerous TGV stations in the middle of nowhere so that politicians can say they are 'on the TGV network', the solitary TGV return trip to/from Le Havre despite the fact it takes longer than changing from a Gare de Lyon TGV, crossing Paris on the métro and taking a regional train from St Lazare and its poor reliability just so the region receives TGV traffic despite the operational impact it has, the disparity of TER services on the border of regions as each region has the power to prioritse its own interests etc.
I agree with the comments that high-speed long-distance seems to be the priority (even if that's not actually true) and the centralised nature of France means that Paris is a focus - Bordeaux to Lyon is quickest via Massy for example. But I wouldn't say that clockface timetables and the need to have regular intervals and stopping patterns to 'draw in passengers' is necessary - France just does not work like that, on some lines morning peak, lunchtime, 4pm-7pm and a late night train will do. On Sundays, most non-leisure businesses are closed and supermarkets even in big cities only open for 3 hours or so unlike many countries where Sunday has become just as busy as Saturday (the big exception to this is TGV where there is a definite peak on Sunday evenings). Look at the recent 3 months of striking, another network would have ground to a halt, SNCF put on what it could and the public got a decent service considering events. Largely, the SNCF is just 'very French' and because that may not fit the perceived success of the very different UK, NL or Swiss networks, it should not be written off as poor overall.
Whilst the French network is miles ahead in operational and technical advancements - their trains are generally excellent machines, LGVs are well engineered etc, I would say the overall passenger experience is poorer than its neighbouring networks. Stations in France are very often run down and have incoherent signage, the numbering of platforms follows the operational numbering and not something which would make sense to customers - Strasbourg, Lille Europe, Rouen come to mind and step-free access is often a clear after-thought. Timetables are very hard to get/read unless you are a regular TER user and know how to negotiate them, journey planners shouldn't replace timetables as they have for TGV. Brand names are not clear (Paris suburbs - trains on RER C referred to as RER on signage, Transilien Ligne C on onboard posters and station literature, 'train' in announcements?) and what is TGV inOUI? Surely just newer TGVs and a few rip-off extras that all TGVs will eventually have? And cleanliness and train presentation is generally poor. 1st class is also not worth shouting about despite cheaper fares.
SNCF of course is changing and a significant part of its portfolio does come from private companies it runs in France and abroad, such as Keolis companies - perhaps they ought to remind the French public of this more often. It will be interesting to see how the opening of the rail market in France turns out, personally I think it's a good thing and if it seems to have grown the market like the coach industry has done in France and similar rail examples in Italy and Germany, it's worth a try. Overall I would reiterate that whilst the passenger experience is relatively poor, the overall state of affairs isn't - it's just very French... spend a few months in France and you'll get it, it does work!
A few examples also demonstrate this balance of power - the numerous TGV stations in the middle of nowhere so that politicians can say they are 'on the TGV network', the solitary TGV return trip to/from Le Havre despite the fact it takes longer than changing from a Gare de Lyon TGV, crossing Paris on the métro and taking a regional train from St Lazare and its poor reliability just so the region receives TGV traffic despite the operational impact it has, the disparity of TER services on the border of regions as each region has the power to prioritse its own interests etc.
I agree with the comments that high-speed long-distance seems to be the priority (even if that's not actually true) and the centralised nature of France means that Paris is a focus - Bordeaux to Lyon is quickest via Massy for example. But I wouldn't say that clockface timetables and the need to have regular intervals and stopping patterns to 'draw in passengers' is necessary - France just does not work like that, on some lines morning peak, lunchtime, 4pm-7pm and a late night train will do. On Sundays, most non-leisure businesses are closed and supermarkets even in big cities only open for 3 hours or so unlike many countries where Sunday has become just as busy as Saturday (the big exception to this is TGV where there is a definite peak on Sunday evenings). Look at the recent 3 months of striking, another network would have ground to a halt, SNCF put on what it could and the public got a decent service considering events. Largely, the SNCF is just 'very French' and because that may not fit the perceived success of the very different UK, NL or Swiss networks, it should not be written off as poor overall.
Whilst the French network is miles ahead in operational and technical advancements - their trains are generally excellent machines, LGVs are well engineered etc, I would say the overall passenger experience is poorer than its neighbouring networks. Stations in France are very often run down and have incoherent signage, the numbering of platforms follows the operational numbering and not something which would make sense to customers - Strasbourg, Lille Europe, Rouen come to mind and step-free access is often a clear after-thought. Timetables are very hard to get/read unless you are a regular TER user and know how to negotiate them, journey planners shouldn't replace timetables as they have for TGV. Brand names are not clear (Paris suburbs - trains on RER C referred to as RER on signage, Transilien Ligne C on onboard posters and station literature, 'train' in announcements?) and what is TGV inOUI? Surely just newer TGVs and a few rip-off extras that all TGVs will eventually have? And cleanliness and train presentation is generally poor. 1st class is also not worth shouting about despite cheaper fares.
SNCF of course is changing and a significant part of its portfolio does come from private companies it runs in France and abroad, such as Keolis companies - perhaps they ought to remind the French public of this more often. It will be interesting to see how the opening of the rail market in France turns out, personally I think it's a good thing and if it seems to have grown the market like the coach industry has done in France and similar rail examples in Italy and Germany, it's worth a try. Overall I would reiterate that whilst the passenger experience is relatively poor, the overall state of affairs isn't - it's just very French... spend a few months in France and you'll get it, it does work!
