VM admit that STM hours vary without notice

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by piggy

imo it would a very good move downloading whores should be banned no isp needs/wants them the only problem is what is a acceptable figure!! (ill get my coat )

Sorry but I dont accept this treatment for heavy downloaders.

If an isp sells a product described as unlimited then they have to accept some people will use their connection heavily, if the isp doesnt want this then they should sell a limited broadband service only.

As for thinking if they dump the heavy users it will fix things it wont, proven by plusnet and some other isps the heaviest users are an easy scapegoat but are not to blame, sheer customer numbers is.

---------- Post added at 13:40 ---------- Previous post was at 13:35 ----------

Originally Posted by Sirius

Well my next purchase will be 4 terabyte drives to replace the 500 gig ones. Will then move the 500 gig ones to a new server next to the existing one in the shed .

---------- Post added at 21:03 ---------- Previous post was at 20:56 ----------




Then maybe VM needs to start making people pay for there service instead of giving it away to everyone that says they are going to leave. I know one person who only pays 4.99 a month for 20 meg because they blagged a "i will leave" reduction.

Everyday you read on this forum how so and so got this reduction because they said they would leave, We all know its a blag just to get a reduction.

Virgin needs to make the blagger's pay the full price instead of playing to there lies.

So before you have a go at me who pays for his service, Start with the blaggers and cloner's.

I agree, the people VM should target first are cloners and people on discounts for non technical reasons. After that they should stop over subscribing areas, over subscription does not mean heavy downloaders it means over contention aka too many customers for the equipment. During peak hours heavy downloaders are likely only a minority of total traffic used.

[nemesis01]

mmm....well I don't agree heavy downloaders should be banned, aslong as they pay their bills each month as I do what's the problem? if they cause congestion then it's upto VM to update whatever they need to, to be able to cope with the traffic. personally, I don't pay £37 a month or whatever it is to download a few GB a week, for instance I DL around 60GB of stuff this morning, why, because I can, and I pay to be able to do that. I don't do that regular, however my GN sub runs out in a few days and I just felt the need to take advantage.

if I want a ****** service where I could only DL a few gb a month I would get some rubbish ADSL sub for 50p a month or whatever it is these days.

[TheNorm]

It might be more fair (and transparent) to charge for both speed AND total downloaded per month.

So, they could advertise a 20mb 1GB per month service (for example). Anything over 1GB would be charged at a published rate.

[moaningmags]

So, they could advertise a 20mb 1GB per month service (for example). Anything over 1GB would be charged at a published rate.

Extortionate!!!! Hopefully you don't give them any ideas if they're peeking :-)

[Zain]

i'll be honest, i constantly download tv episodes etc in roughly about a month ive downloaded 60-70gb as i leave my laptop on 24/7 downloading and uploading...however, i do stop my downloads during STM for smooth browsing.

[popper]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

It might be more fair (and transparent) to charge for both speed AND total downloaded per month.

So, they could advertise a 20mb 1GB per month service (for example). Anything over 1GB would be charged at a published rate.

it wouldnt work TN, i assume you typed 1 gigabyte in error?, as you get more than that on cr@ppy mobile broadband packages and even they are moving to the fix fee monthy model now as PBTMbD dosnt get you market share.

the reasons simple, once you reach the limit whatever that might be, your being asked to pay your provider so you can download that freely available not for profit data/content.

the web conduit provider makes a massive extra profit off free content, the original provider of the free content makes zero profit, that's wrong.

perhaps the free providers should take leaf out of this Phorm lessons, and also forbid PBTMbD charging for their content in a webpage notice?.

or in the case of the Original payed for content ,its even werse.

your being asked to pay twice, you pay the 'Original Payed For Content Provider' a fee, and again, your web conduit provider makes in some cases, even more profit than the Original PFCP.

No primary high data throughput wired PAYG PBTMbD ISPs (or any other kind of web conduit)can ever become a big market share.

your just killing the UK web growth and virtical markets if you try that old money grab with wide spread Pay As You Go Pay By The Mbit.

fix fee PAYG wireless might stand a reasonable chance though ,if you dont get greedy, and charge £30+ a month for 512Kbit.

to remove the STM/throttling, ISPs need to think far better than that to make reasonable profits we can all live with, or loose your customer base to those that will.

Wimax is almost here, or here already in the case of west manchester with somerfield ,
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communicatio...9353041,00.htm

watch as they drop their prices to get market share and build out their new networks if all goes to plan.

you might even eventually get symmetrical wireless (same speed both up and down) for a reasonable price.

and you can be sure they wont limit you to 1 wireless BB modem card per household, like VM do with cable, they want to make as much profit as they can after all

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by popper

...Wimax is almost here, or here already in the case of west manchester with somerfield...

Wimax looks very interesting - is this similar to The Cloud that my dad in Leicester has been telling me about?

I'm sure Wimax will be very wary of users like this:

Originally Posted by Zain

... i leave my laptop on 24/7 downloading and uploading.......

To use an analogy, the VM broadband at the moment is a bit like the water supply - you pay a fixed fee, but then can use what you like. However, if too many people leave their taps running, the whole area suffers a drop in water pressure. Shouldn't VM be using the gas/electricity/telephone model, where you pay a fixed fee, and are charged for what you use?

Originally Posted by moaningmags

...Extortionate!!!! Hopefully you don't give them any ideas if they're peeking :-)

I'm sure they have plenty of experienced and knowledgeable people working on this!

[piggy]

To use an analogy, the VM broadband at the moment is a bit like the water supply - you pay a fixed fee, but then can use what you like. However, if too many people leave their taps running, the whole area suffers a drop in water pressure. Shouldn't VM be using the gas/electricity/telephone model, where you pay a fixed fee, and are charged for what you use?



thats the way to go.

[Stouffer]

Yeah, that would work. But as has been said enough times, it's advertised as unlimited, which is the key point. The only reason we've stuck with VM is that fact alone.

And about the people on deals, I'm not surprised. We're on a half price one due to having to complain about something at least once a month. Not even petty things like only getting 17mb instead of the 20mb, but being over charged by £30 on our bills, or being sent a letter from debt colectors even though we've paid them already.

They should sort their end out before they continue to **** off the people who use the service, be it heavy or light usage.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by piggy

To use an analogy, the VM broadband at the moment is a bit like the water supply - you pay a fixed fee, but then can use what you like. However, if too many people leave their taps running, the whole area suffers a drop in water pressure. Shouldn't VM be using the gas/electricity/telephone model, where you pay a fixed fee, and are charged for what you use?



thats the way to go.

They were. At one point ntl was going to give everyone 10Mb and charge per useage. Even popped up in the internal staff handbooks, and training was given on how ntl were going to show people how much they had used etc.

Then everyone started focusing back on speed i.e. why did ntl only do up to 10Mb when others do up to 16Mb etc

[Kymmy]

And simply put if VM charged per usage then they'd lose well over half of thier clients to ADSL.

Instead of talking about what measures VM should put in place to prevent high bandwidth usage shouldn't VM instead be installing/upgrading the equipment to cope with the high bandwidth that attracts most of thier customers.

Kymmy

[Hugh]

And at the same time, offer discounts to people?

[popper]

as already pointed out, the cable modem UBR card prices are at an all time low, and infact, as an extra bonus, all the vendors are also supplying far more up and down ports on their current cards.

so its a win/win for everyone if Virgin Media were to put all their buying power to use right now.

---------- Post added at 14:53 ---------- Previous post was at 14:45 ----------

Originally Posted by foreverwar

And at the same time, offer discounts to people?

sure, why not, if VM buy 100% more UBR ports and related kit at the all time low prices now,and so pay far less, or get even more for the same money.

and at the same time, gain 50% more new users with a discount of some sort on a select few deals, then its all good right?.

[popper]

well as i said, just how many new UBR ports and kit did that cost....

i just got a VM email in my box pointing to the new advert..."
Psssst! Who's that guy in our new TV ad?"

what can i say, its in the 1990s Amiga Toaster style wipes effects but no were near as good...

and to think, some artistic PR type got payed to produce that

http://www.mixituptv.com/

[popper]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Wimax looks very interesting - is this similar to The Cloud that my dad in Leicester has been telling me about?

I'm sure Wimax will be very wary of users like this:

Yeah, in a fashion, theres two types, a fix mobile and the new mobile.

the average reported top speed is something like 70Mbit/s but just like cable Modems, you dont really want to run them at max to start with, allow growth and selling/leasing/renting more per household/account, unlike VM restricting you to only 1 for no good reason.

and being realisitic, they say 10Mbit/s is a good starting point, and that can be a symmetrical connection so its going to be a very good seller if they play and price it right.

you can add more base stations as the userbase grows so its vary much like the UBR model but without cables.

and apparently they allow Multicast .

remember im always thinking how might the provider make it better for me the customer, but being realistic i also realise they need to make it profitable or nothing will happen.

and VM can also do much of this if they chose to, buying some of the freed up analogue TV airwaves is the best long term option, but they could always rent/lease it off whoever buys it (such as sky,they might you know if their cleaver )

and useing the old Wireless Mesh DOCSIS2 kit or look at making the providers an offer to make a Wireless mesh DOCSIS3 unit....

place these on the VM cable edge or even your users premeses and you have an instant new Wimax network buildout....

didnt pick the right spot to cover the trial and grow the network?, simple..., move your portable Wimax Docsis kit to another area and trial again, once the MESH gets to 50% usage, put in a few new fibres to the new area to take the load off the wireless path.

Wimax or anyone else dont need to be wary of anything, all it takes is a little longer term thinking and being realistic about what your customers are going to do.

throttling is a valid short term option, not the long term option to let you massively over sell you capacity and it never will be.

your average high bandwidth users doesnt really care were they get their content.

thats a given, so how might you stop them ?, thats your first mistake, dont...

use it to your advantage, take your UK high speed data centre or co-location site, and install real virtual server space ISCSI farm kit , and include as standard in your basic userbase package a serverside set space,say 10 gigbytes of space to match your users 10Mb/s connection.

they learn to use the that internal/high speed peered space remotely instead of maxing out the last mile 24/7.

how will you stop the majority of expensive external P2p/Torrent traffic,already covered that, but also you can go one step more, make a so called general purpose walled garden for your users to use....

yes i did just say an internal/peered restricted small version of the whole web...

but that wont work as you cant get all the content you want, you might be thinking....

but it will when you reach 52% + UK coverage such as VM do, heres why i said general purpose, just like my tweaked DHT torrent code idea, your walled garden is doing 'best effort' to keep as much of the content inside the internal/high speed peered network connections.

your users are likeing the fast remote serverside speeds to get and give that content to other internal users.

anything thats not on the internal users walled garden network, soon will be placed there by the users, as you dont restrict that above keeping that section flowing smooth at the highest data throughput.

a Win/Win for your ISP and your users if you dont get greedy and charge loads for the basic connection or any extra virtual UK serverside space a user might pay for above the base package.

its in effect,a mini easten gigabit network, but only for your customers use ,and later your high speed peering other ISPs.

Originally Posted by TheNorm

To use an analogy, the VM broadband at the moment is a bit like the water supply - you pay a fixed fee, but then can use what you like. However, if too many people leave their taps running, the whole area suffers a drop in water pressure. Shouldn't VM be using the gas/electricity/telephone model, where you pay a fixed fee, and are charged for what you use?

well, they own the pipes/wires but in effect, not the content another party makes and feeds that conduit just like the interweb

they also do the calculations and set the price to in effect give you a fix fee per week/month/quarter/year.

if they get that wrong , they say sorry and put the price up, get slaged off for making massive profits for their shareholders and not feeding that profit back into the system or end users pockets, just like VM/BT/etc....

however, what it seems like your proposing, is infact just like the 1970s, although theres plenty of fual to feed the conduit, your going to go on strike and cut people off if you dont get your pay rise.

the devils in the details as it were.

Originally Posted by TheNorm

I'm sure they have plenty of experienced and knowledgeable people working on this!

apparently not, or at least they are not being listened too and the required actions being openly talked about to see the pitfalls and then taken.

its all about removing the STM/throttling and making a reasonable profit we can all live with, or it should be for real UK long term growth .