View Full Version : *ALL* ntl Cap Discussion Here Please.
Alastair
19-12-2004, 13:52
hi everybody
I'm currently thinking of getting ntl broadband because the ISP i'm with now says that i cant get a 1mb account (something to do with the local BT exchange :confused: ). Anyways back to ntl, i've heard the cap limit is 1GB a day for the 750 account, i know downloading affects the limit (duh), but does uploading data affect this cap limitation? anyone care to shed some light on this
Uploading doesn't affect it and there is (currently) no hard cap. The only time you would be contacted is if you constantly go well over the limit.
Alastair
19-12-2004, 14:06
Thanks for the quick reply this clears things up a bit, btw whats a hard cap?
Uploading doesn't affect it and there is (currently) no hard cap. The only time you would be contacted is if you constantly go well over the limit.
AFAIK you have 1gb traffic per day - therefore upload and downloads are all in? I've been told that NTL have a top 200 list of people they contact/monitor each month
Thanks for the quick reply this clears things up a bit, btw whats a hard cap?
A hard cap would stop you transferring anything else on the network
BTW - Welcome to the site...
Alastair
19-12-2004, 14:14
Okay so let me get this straight, you means as in transfer files they didnt want you to like P2P programs?
quadplay
19-12-2004, 14:30
The guideline affects all downstream traffic - be it normal web browsing, program downloads, or P2P downloads. It does not currently include upstream traffic. The following is from the Acceptable Use Policy, available at http://www.home.ntl.com/page/userpolicy, which says that nobody may use the service in excess of the "Normal use" limit:
"Normal use" of the service is defined as up to 1 gigabyte downstream of data transfer daily (which equates to approximately 200 music tracks, 650 short videos, 10,000 pictures or around 100 large software programmes downloaded per day).
This is, though, a guideline only. A "hard cap", on the other hand, would mean that once you reached your limit (1GB/day, 30GB/month, or whatever), your access would be cut off, or you would be charged more. There is no such "hard cap" currently in effect on any ntl residential services.
At the moment, the 1Gb/day is a guideline - break it 3 times in a fortnight and they MAY be having words, but it seems unlikely unless you are putting an unacceptable strain on the network - that is what people usually mean by the "soft cap".
The NEW tariffs for 2005 - 1, 2 and 3 Megabit, come with 5Gb, 30 Gb and 40Gb monthly caps, and tighter enforcement ("hard cap") is expected - though what form it's likely to take is not yet known.
What was the "lite" tier at 300k, moves to 1Mbit, and since that is a throughput that cost £34.99 not so long ago, at £17.99 it gets a 5Gb cap to make it a "lite" service.
Anyway, uploads, they don't like, there is much less upload capacity than download, and from past reports, uploading more than 300Mb/day is considered unreasonable.
The current services are also 300k down / 64k up (128 up on STB)
750 down / 128 up
1.5Mbit down / 256k up
If you have 512k down/256k up ADSL on a no-cap provider at a decent price, then do not give NTL a second thought.
This is going to be a bit of a problem. P2P is really taking off, and has many legitimate uses that NTL is going to be hurting.
For example, next year the BBC will begin distributing programs via P2P. If you can only upload a fraction of what you download per day, due to capping, all NTL users will be forced to leech. Ditto with BitTorrent.
The whole point of broadband is not just to make web pages load faster - it's about media. Video and audio. Web TV and web radio. Now reasonable speeds are finally comming to the UK, and NTL are trying to retard it.
A friend of mine in Japan gets 100Mbit fiber to her flat for £23/month, uncapped. Of course, it doesn't operate that fast but she thinks it's quicker than Yahoo's 50Mbit ADSL. Thanks for holding the UK back, NTL.
if ntl are going to do this, i guarantee they will leave a very important feature out. usage tracking. if u cant see how much bandwidth youve already used in the month, how r u going to know how much to dload? if someone could see that they only have, say, 50mb left to use in 10 days, then they would dload less pics, videos etc and keep it basic, so they can still send email on the last day of the month!
just something to keep in mind, ntl ppl...
Oh good, another cap thread.......:zzz:
This is going to be a bit of a problem. P2P is really taking off, and has many legitimate uses that NTL is going to be hurting.
For example, next year the BBC will begin distributing programs via P2P. If you can only upload a fraction of what you download per day, due to capping, all NTL users will be forced to leech. Ditto with BitTorrent.
The whole point of broadband is not just to make web pages load faster - it's about media. Video and audio. Web TV and web radio. Now reasonable speeds are finally comming to the UK, and NTL are trying to retard it.
A friend of mine in Japan gets 100Mbit fiber to her flat for £23/month, uncapped. Of course, it doesn't operate that fast but she thinks it's quicker than Yahoo's 50Mbit ADSL. Thanks for holding the UK back, NTL.
mojo, have you ever considered thinking before posting? Maybe combined with a bit of reading around the subject?
For example, where on earth are NTL supposed to get the money to dig up roads in every major town in Britain to replace the coax cable with fibre? Hell, doing it the first time almost bankrupted them?
Likewise, there's not a lot they can do about the internation cable modem protocol, DOCSIS. The version currently used, (Euro)DOCSIS 1.1, is designed to be very very assymetric. That's why cable connections are very assymmetric. This isn't NTL's fault, it's the people who designed the protocol in the first place. There is an upgraded version, DOCSIS 2.0, with much better upstream capabilities, but the server equipment isn't readily available for it yet. But guess what: the modems NTL are giving out now can be flashed to DOCSIS 2.0 when the time comes.
(By the way, if we're going for useless examples, I have several friends living in UK who can plug their home computers straight into a 100Mbps internet connection -- and pay less than £100 a year for the privalege. Also, I notice you don't mention the many cable ISPs in the states where configurations like 8 meg down/128k up are not uncommon -- for exactly the same reasons as above.)
So you tell me, now that I've saved you the trouble of actually going out and learning for yourself: given the limits of the technology available to them at the present time, how should NTL proceed?
Oh good, another cap thread.......:zzz:
Neil
:D Send up the flags
I agree with you :LOL:
Thanks for holding the UK back, NTL.What planet are you on.
Are you saying that NTL are holding back the UK on there own. I think you should wake up and smell the coffee.
NTL are not the only ISP that are about to introduce caps. And they will not be the first to have metered broadband.
Is it Cable or Adsl that has increased speed this year and will be doing it again next year
If you are going to brand a company at least do it with a bit of knowledge first.
Ignition
21-12-2004, 00:10
mojo, have you ever considered thinking before posting? Maybe combined with a bit of reading around the subject?
Likewise, there's not a lot they can do about the internation cable modem protocol, DOCSIS. The version currently used, (Euro)DOCSIS 1.1, is designed to be very very assymetric. That's why cable connections are very assymmetric. This isn't NTL's fault, it's the people who designed the protocol in the first place. There is an upgraded version, DOCSIS 2.0, with much better upstream capabilities, but the server equipment isn't readily available for it yet. But guess what: the modems NTL are giving out now can be flashed to DOCSIS 2.0 when the time comes.
Really? 1 x 64QAM DOCSIS downstream, data bearing capacity just below 27Mbps and 6 3.2MHz QPSK upstreams, data bearing capacity 6 x 4Mbps. Not massively asymettrical main issue there is usage patterns.
If cable network were good enough :LOL: the downstream capacity could be increased over 33% and the upstream capacity 100%.
DOCSIS 2 compatible equipment is readily available from a number of vendors at this time.
Also, I notice you don't mention the many cable ISPs in the states where configurations like 8 meg down/128k up are not uncommon -- for exactly the same reasons as above.)
Who are these mythical ISPs? The best ISP for download I can see is Optimum Online whose upload is a mere 1Mbit to a 10Mbit download. Other North American examples are Cogeco with their DOCSIS 1.1 based 10Mbit/1Mbit premium package and 5.5Mbit/640kbit STANDARD package, Rogers and Shaw (using the mythical DOCSIS 2) also nowhere near as asymettrical as UK cable offering nearly 1Mbit uploads on 5Mbit services, Accessonline offer 9Mbit/1Mbit, etc, etc. Some US ISPs that are similar are Comcast who used to offer 3Mbit down 256k up but have uplifted to 3Mbit/384kbit, Roadrunner's 3Mbit/384kbit and 6Mbit/512kbit are in the ballpark as well.
Struggling to find that 8Mbit/128k up which is 'not uncommon' though sir.
As far as what ntl can do, well more proactive rather than reactive action would be nice, pushing the envelope would be great rather than sitting back and counting the pennies, however these things don't make money and regardless of the above ntl are there to make money and don't have quite the same attitude as Telewest towards innovation. I hope that the two of them benefit from each other when they merge and the combine company takes the leading edge - speed is the one thing that cable can make DSL bleed on.
mojo, have you ever considered thinking before posting? Maybe combined with a bit of reading around the subject?
Have you? I'll ignore the factual errors for now, since Ignition has kindly done the job of pointed them out for me.
You clearly didn't understand the thrust of my post, so I'll spell it out for you. The UK has very slow broadband compared to other similar countries. Part of the problem is BT not offering anything faster than 1MB in most areas. The other part is that cable companies, NTL included, are not pushing forward as much as they could.
I suppose it's hard to blame them in a way, since there is so little competition, but by introducing a cap (don't forget, they were the first broadband ISP to formally have a cap) they started a dangerious precident. It's often a problem with UK companies in general - they try and save money by having a sub-standard product and then wonder why things just get worse.
MysticKiller
21-12-2004, 01:05
(By the way, if we're going for useless examples, I have several friends living in UK who can plug their home computers straight into a 100Mbps internet connection -- and pay less than £100 a year for the privalege. Also, I notice you don't mention the many cable ISPs in the states where configurations like 8 meg down/128k up are not uncommon -- for exactly the same reasons as above.)
How's this possible plz? I wont mind abit of hassle for 100mb and for such a cheap price
:D
<snipped>
I suppose it's hard to blame them in a way, since there is so little competition, but by introducing a cap (don't forget, they were the first broadband ISP to formally have a cap) they started a dangerious precident. <snip>
Factual Error
Incorrect.
BT were the first in the UK, and the wording for NTL's 'soft guideline' currently in use and the nearest thing we NTL ers have to a CAP (at this moment in time) was lifted verbatim from the BT website.
DieDieMyDarling
21-12-2004, 10:45
I find it difficult to understand why Telewest can have a 4mb (upgrades completed early) UNCAPPED, yet ntl can't even have 3mb uncapped. Is the ntl infrastructure really just that bad compared to Telewest?
Does Telewest have the same problems with emails, news servers and complete loss of service as ntl do?
Also, would be interesting if any Telewest customers could let us know what the 4mb service is like, are you experiencing all the slowdowns that people claim would happen on an uncapped service? Are people suffering on the same UBR's, due to overuse?
ian@huth
21-12-2004, 11:11
I find it difficult to understand why Telewest can have a 4mb (upgrades completed early) UNCAPPED, yet ntl can't even have 3mb uncapped. Is the ntl infrastructure really just that bad compared to Telewest?
Does Telewest have the same problems with emails, news servers and complete loss of service as ntl do?
Also, would be interesting if any Telewest customers could let us know what the 4mb service is like, are you experiencing all the slowdowns that people claim would happen on an uncapped service? Are people suffering on the same UBR's, due to overuse?
Increasing speeds and staying with an uncapped service may only be problematic if users significantly alter the usage of their connection. One result that may be experienced is that users may not always get the maximum speed that their connection is rated at, but that is the result of contention which comes more into play the nearer the speed is to the overall capacity . What is better though, a 3Mb connection that at times only runs at 2 Mb or a 1.5 Mb connection?
How's this possible plz? I wont mind abit of hassle for 100mb and for such a cheap price
:D
Well, Tokyo is quite densely populated, so in some areas the telcos have laid in fibre optic cable to each block. Of course, you will probably never download at 100Mbit, that's just the theoretical maximum of the line.
If you live close to an exchange, you can get 50Mbit ADSL. More common is 12Mbit. This was in April though, when I was over there. Just about every street in Akihabara had a stall selling fast broadband. Loads of competition and low prices.
My suggestion to NTL would be this. Offer unlimited bandwidth overnight, when most people are in bed. That way, people won't have problems surfing during the day and at night people can download freely. Or, do like Bulldog do and have 1MBit during the day and 3MBit off-peak.
In the end, I don't think capping will help NTL out that much. Unlike an ADSL ISP, when someone leaves NTL they don't just loose £25/month, they loose out on TV and phone subscriptions as well. Sky has better but slightly more expensive TV, BT is about the same for phone lines and so really the only advantage NTL has is bandwidth.
DieDieMyDarling
21-12-2004, 15:45
Increasing speeds and staying with an uncapped service may only be problematic if users significantly alter the usage of their connection. One result that may be experienced is that users may not always get the maximum speed that their connection is rated at, but that is the result of contention which comes more into play the nearer the speed is to the overall capacity . What is better though, a 3Mb connection that at times only runs at 2 Mb or a 1.5 Mb connection?
To be honest, i'm very happy with the 1.5mb connection, but my point is, i bet that when ntl go capped (hard cap) and release the 3mb service etc, the same problems that have always existed, will STILL exist, the cap in my opinion is just an excuse to cover up the fact that they can't handle what they have, due to mis-management, low funding in area's that need it, and not actually caring about the customer (as proven by their choice to do some (for now) of their tech support in India!
A lot of the people i know on ntl are thinking of moving to ADSL, most don't even know much about caps, they're just fed up with all the other problems on the ntl networks.
Getting back to the original point of all this, you said that your I.S.P has told you that you can not get 1MB??
I think you may be suprised if you go back and ask them about it. I was told that I could not get 1MB on my phoneline but now I can.
If you head over to adslguide you will alos find that BT has been forced to let other companies use it's phonelines which will boost ADSL hugely in the coming year.
Within just a few weeks of other companies useing BT's lines there is a company out there offering an 8MB line for a mere £39.99 with a 4GB pre DAY cap on it...
This is also only the start as they plan to spread this to other parts of the country and Bulldog who are curently offering a 6MB are going to follow them.
You can bet your ass that many other I.S.P's will follow there lead. When this happens NTL may well find themselves in a spot of bother as people move for these services offering vastly faster connections and a much higher cap.
My advice to you would be to maybe wait a while to see what developes in the new year.
I am currently on the 1.5MB with NTL and will stay with them when they go to 3MB but as soon as they start to enforce a cap on me I will move onto another I.S.P that can offer me what I want. In my mind I would much rather have a 1MB or 2MB and download as much as I want than a 3MB with a low cap on it. :p:
Is it Cable or Adsl that has increased speed this year and will be doing it again next year
Both, although I can't wait for Bulldog to start 8mbit here in Leicester! :erm: Don't think Ntl will before 2006!
Or, do like Bulldog do and have 1MBit during the day and 3MBit off-peak.
Thats news to me as a long time 'dog customer :rolleyes: :erm:
Ignition
28-12-2004, 21:44
Earwig that's tripe, other companies have been using BT's lines 'unbundled' for years, the UKOnline deal is from Easynet who had unbundled BT's exchanges for years before they began to offer residential services under the UKOnline name over their unbundled network.
The change in 1Mbit availability you are alluding to probably came from BT's relaxing of the limits done a few months ago.
Last I checked Bulldog currently max at 4Mbit 'Bulldog 4' apart from business deals, although I can't see any mention of >4Mbit for businesses at the moment either... http://www.bulldogbroadband.com/residential/ http://www.bulldogbroadband.com/business/
Looks like when Cable and Wireless spread the love outside of London that 8Mbit will have to be awaited for a bit longer dellwear, at the moment BD have taken a step back in speeds, they used to offer 6Mbit but looks as though they don't anymore.
Of course the other minor detail is that you have to be VERY close to your exchange to receive the full 8Mbit service, I can receive it (if my exchange were ever unbundled) and I'm less than 800m (cable distance) away.
Bulldog's capping took a different approach though, they just let their network overload to hell so that 20:1 business line users such as myself ended up with ISDN speeds.
Or, do like Bulldog do and have 1MBit during the day and 3MBit off-peak.
Bulldog haven't done any Primetime services for a number of months now - they did however do this for 1 and 2Mbit Datastream users previously, there was a 'Primetime' service which was 512k during 'peak' times, 8am-6pm Mon-Fri, and either 1Mbit or 2Mbit outside of those times, and the Alltime service which was 1 or 2Mbit all the time.
Anyway a tad off topic here, apologies but rebutting.
4Mbit download and 512k upload for 52 + vat - where do i sign up?? Lol pity that only is the case if you happen to be in a major town that is wired for Bulldog otherwise you can only choose max 2mbit / 256, god dang.
What is the max Length of a CAT 5 cable by the way? Ignition - why not wire yourself stright in to the exchange :) Might involve some digging of roads but im sure people wont mind...
Earwig that's tripe, other companies have been using BT's lines 'unbundled' for years, the UKOnline deal is from Easynet who had unbundled BT's exchanges for years before they began to offer residential services under the UKOnline name over their unbundled network.
I was just going by the news that is posted on ADSLguide which comes direct from the BBC news. From what I read then it has only just been allowed to happen on a large scale and at VASTLY lower prices to those unbundling them. Maybe due to the extortionate prices they were charging prevented it from happening before?? The articles can be found here. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4100589.stm
And here... http://www.vnunet.com/news/1160168
Maybe I have read them and misunderstood them??
Anyways I do not claim to be right and you know far more about this than I may ever do, but if this is true then surely NTL must worry about it?? Surely they have to change their future plans or be left behind??
Still off topic.........Sorry ! ! :mad:
Ignition
29-12-2004, 13:13
Is ok, but UKOnline are using exchanges that were unbundled by Easynet to supply business customers already, not for residential customers.
I imagine NTL won't worry too much unless this starts to impact on the bottom line, this being the main concern for the company.
I imagine NTL won't worry too much unless this starts to impact on the bottom line, this being the main concern for the company.
Look at M&S to little to late.
enjoymarcus
03-01-2005, 02:13
LOL, whats next? Capping us on how much TV we are allowed to watch in a day?
I download about 10 gigs a day, and this will go upto 20 gigs when my connection is doubled, i have never had a letter or email...
Ignition
03-01-2005, 06:33
I download about 10 gigs a day, and this will go upto 20 gigs when my connection is doubled
Just a reminded though it's been done to death, when you order the upgrade you are agreeing to a transfer limit of 40GB a month. This isn't a guideline it's a fixed transfer allowance.
th'engineer
03-01-2005, 10:01
Is ok, but UKOnline are using exchanges that were unbundled by Easynet to supply business customers already, not for residential customers.
I imagine NTL won't worry too much unless this starts to impact on the bottom line, this being the main concern for the company.
Just two little questions.
1.How do AOL customers come out of this the ones on the network are they capped.
2.What happens with the new NTL ADSL service are they capped.
As both are advertised as un capped
Ignition
03-01-2005, 15:43
Just two little questions.
1.How do AOL customers come out of this the ones on the network are they capped.
2.What happens with the new NTL ADSL service are they capped.
As both are advertised as un capped
AOL are affected no more than Wanadoo, etc, are affected by BTBroadband capping customers. Have to remind you that the relationship with AOL is the same as the relationship between Pipex, PlusNet etc to BT Wholesale. I'm pretty sure AOL pay their way.
The ntl ADSL service is not described as uncapped: https://secure.ntlfreedom.com/broadband_512k.aspx see key features bottom right and the panel on the left. Pretty clear I hope!
LOL, whats next? Capping us on how much TV we are allowed to watch in a day?
I download about 10 gigs a day, and this will go upto 20 gigs when my connection is doubled, i have never had a letter or email...
I hope i am not on the same UBR as you :mad:
Chrysalis
03-01-2005, 17:29
I am just curious how ukonline can offer 500gig a month 8mbit for £3 a month more then what ntl charge for 3mbit 40 gig a month, telewest offer unmetered on the same type of network as ntl and we don't see their users complaining of poor performance, this in my opinion throws the argument uncapped=poor performance out of the window.
I am just curious how ukonline can offer 500gig a month 8mbit for £3 a month more then what ntl charge for 3mbit 40 gig a month, telewest offer unmetered on the same type of network as ntl and we don't see their users complaining of poor performance, this in my opinion throws the argument uncapped=poor performance out of the window.From what I can see there will always be an uncapped service available....
I have just found out that I may be able to get a 2MB connection on ADSL now and can get many uncapped services using it.
I will however stay with NTL and go to 3MB but as soon as they start asking about my download habits I will move on.
The way I see it is yes I download alot but with a faster connection you can download that amount at twice the speed so you would saturate the network/ubr or whatever for half the amount of time.......
I suppose the problem comes when you can download at twice the speed so you download twice as much, Hehehe.... ;)
But I think I would rather have a slower speed and no cap than a faster speed which I cannot use to it's full potential.
Instead of doing a 3MB capped, why not a 2MB uncapped or 2.5?? Or why not pay another £5P/m to get uncapped etc.....? Just adding this option would cater for a whole load more people!!!
Do not forget Telewest have a much smaller area than NTL though and so will find it easier to offer an uncapped service.
I just wonder what will happen when the 2 companies become 1?? Will NTL follow Telewest or vice versa?? Or will they stay as they are with differing services dependant on area but operate under the same name??
EDIT: The offer for ukonline is also capped at 4GB per day which is 112GB P/m and not 500GB. :) Would be nice if it was though eh?? :angel:
enjoymarcus
03-01-2005, 19:47
I hope i am not on the same UBR as you :mad:
Well i live in Warrington, so you might be out of luck, me and my mates download a hell of alot of stuff, and we all live close to each other.
Well i live in Warrington, so you might be out of luck, me and my mates download a hell of alot of stuff, and we all live close to each other.Will have to check the ubr stats then wont I :D ;)
Ignition
03-01-2005, 20:43
EDIT: The offer for ukonline is also capped at 4GB per day which is 112GB P/m and not 500GB. :) Would be nice if it was though eh?? :angel:
Nope it's 500GB/month, was briefly 4GB/day then was increased to current level - see http://www.ukonline.co.uk for more information.
Nope it's 500GB/month, was briefly 4GB/day then was increased to current level - see http://www.ukonline.co.uk (http://www.ukonline.co.uk/) for more information.
OMG!!!!
That is 80GB more than I currently have...Hehehe.
When I first saw it at 4GB I thought it was generous but 500GB?? Mmmm Hope I can get something like that soon in my area.....Please ignition...tell me I will?? ;)
Chrysalis
03-01-2005, 22:12
coming to my area in may :D , until that time ntl are on probation for me if I am satisfied I will stay where I am otherwise will goto ukonline.
ian@huth
03-01-2005, 22:33
I know a dial-up ISP that doesn't mind if you download up to 500 Gb a day, just shout if you want to know more. Think about it! ;)
Having got Cable and adsl in my house, i'm sticking with ntl until they tell me that one month i had too much.
I dont want to have to waste time monitoring my lads, or myself for that fact. Means the rest of the package going to, but then why should i be loyal to someone who is looking over my shoulder 24\7.
Must admit 8 meg adsl sounds tempting, but lets give ntl the benefit of the doubt until all this is definite.
ian@huth
04-01-2005, 12:10
Having got Cable and adsl in my house, i'm sticking with ntl until they tell me that one month i had too much.
I dont want to have to waste time monitoring my lads, or myself for that fact. Means the rest of the package going to, but then why should i be loyal to someone who is looking over my shoulder 24\7.
Must admit 8 meg adsl sounds tempting, but lets give ntl the benefit of the doubt until all this is definite.
8 Mb ADSL does sound tempting as does uncapped broadband but think about it. You are only able to get 8Mb if you live close to the exchange and it is only up to 8Mb, not a guaranteed 8Mb. If all the heavy users move from capped services to uncapped fast services then the chances are that you may get far less than the expected speed and maybe little more than dial-up speed. If you read through these forums and others you will notice that if customers are not getting full speed all the time then they say there is a problem. Cheap broadband, being a contended service, relies on customer usage not being heavy 24/7 usage and sooner rather than later some ISPs will suffer the consequences of attracting all those heavy users.
Just a reminded though it's been done to death, when you order the upgrade you are agreeing to a transfer limit of 40GB a month. This isn't a guideline it's a fixed transfer allowance.
just a reminder - no-one knows yet!, It does not say anywhere what will happen if you go over your monthly allowance depending on service your subscribed too when it comes into effect - just as with current 1gig a day guidelines contracts, so at present i would say its a guideline.
the moment they cap and its enfoced strictly i'll be off to AOL uncapped using the NTL service and going sky , this is what bugs me about NTL suggested capping their own users but allowing other services that use the NTL inferstructure unlimited use - bit of a kick in the teeth for loyal NTL users like me who have been with them since day1. I never signed for unlimted all those years ago, so don't intend to abide by new rules just to suit them
ian@huth
04-01-2005, 14:12
just a reminder - no-one knows yet!, It does not say anywhere what will happen if you go over your monthly allowance depending on service your subscribed too when it comes into effect - just as with current 1gig a day guidelines contracts, so at present i would say its a guideline.
I don't know why you are reminding us that no one knows yet when obviously people at NTL probably do know, including Ignition. The cap is not just a guideline but we have not yet been told what will happen if we exceed the cap. Time will tell.
the moment they cap and its enfoced strictly i'll be off to AOL uncapped using the NTL service and going sky , this is what bugs me about NTL suggested capping their own users but allowing other services that use the NTL inferstructure unlimited use - bit of a kick in the teeth for loyal NTL users like me who have been with them since day1. I never signed for unlimted all those years ago, so don't intend to abide by new rules just to suit them
Well if you are satisfied with AOL 512 kbps then move to them. NTL do not dictate what conditions AOL put on their customers AFAIK just as BT don't dictate to theirs. As for not abiding by the rules, you must suffer the consequences if you don't. All things change with time and rules are put there to protect the majority.
Ignition
04-01-2005, 14:48
this is what bugs me about NTL suggested capping their own users but allowing other services that use the NTL inferstructure unlimited use - bit of a kick in the teeth for loyal NTL users like me who have been with them since day1.
Best not go with BT Broadband if you want a change then, BT capping their own users while allowing other ISPs that use their infrastructure to supply unlimited packages, disgraceful! Of course if AOL are paying for said unlimited usage the issue is.... what? Slight difference between a probably multi million pound deal and 2 users both paying £38 a month, one using 30GB a month another 400. Equating userbase differences with wholesale differences doesn't work for me, sorry.
I never signed for unlimted all those years ago, so don't intend to abide by new rules just to suit them
Well if you never signed for unlimited then what's the issue? Sadly as has been pointed out to death you are supplied a service with an Acceptable Use Policy which is subject to change, you agree that this is the case. You agreed to abide by rules as they change (with the caveat that you may cancel if you don't like them).
Like most other things in life you pay your money for the product that best suits, and if you don't like what you have you generally change your choice of product, you can't expect the product to change to accomodate your needs, though this isn't unknown it's a rarity.
To avoid this becoming a drony same old cap thread I'm not in ntl retentions or customer service, and bluntly, succinctly if you have a problem with the service with those restrictions you should go somewhere else that suits your usage pattern and pocket. I'm sure that you'll have no trouble finding someone who'll match the service speed ntl are offering for that price (unless you don't live in one of the major metropolitan areas blessed with LLU DSL and are within 3.5 or so KM worth of cable of exchange).
th'engineer
04-01-2005, 18:04
AOL are affected no more than Wanadoo, etc, are affected by BTBroadband capping customers. Have to remind you that the relationship with AOL is the same as the relationship between Pipex, PlusNet etc to BT Wholesale. I'm pretty sure AOL pay their way.
The ntl ADSL service is not described as uncapped: https://secure.ntlfreedom.com/broadband_512k.aspx see key features bottom right and the panel on the left. Pretty clear I hope!
My apoligies it appears that the advert has changed to include a limit on NTL ADSL .
i wonder what would happen is NTL blocked access to all the P2P, warez and newsgroup offering copyrighted material if anyone would be able to go over the cap then
My apoligies it appears that the advert has changed to include a limit on NTL ADSL .
Not surprised you didn't notice it that link doesn't work for me.
Also that site says my phone number isn't a valid BT number, but I'm sure it is :erm:
Edit- Found one that does work, interesting:
https://secure.ntlfreedom.com/htmlfiles/5gb.htm
What are the allowances on Freedom Broadband?
Freedom Broadband Classic - £29.99
If you use the Internet a lot and keep your connection running throughout the day, Freedom Broadband Classic will help you get the most out of Broadband. You'll be able to surf at speed and download large music or video files.
Freedom Broadband 512K - £17.99
This service gives you a 5 GB per month download allowance, this is far more than the average user requires. So, if you want a really fast connection to the Internet to check your emails, download a few photos or listen to some music online, this is the right option for you.
Not cheap either £29.99 for 512k, I pay that for 2Mbit :erm:
Edit, Edit - I like their badly scanned in table from some computer mag!
Download Failed (1)
tomjleeds
05-01-2005, 18:00
But I think I would rather have a slower speed and no cap than a faster speed which I cannot use to it's full potential.
Instead of doing a 3MB capped, why not a 2MB uncapped or 2.5?? Or why not pay another £5P/m to get uncapped etc.....? Just adding this option would cater for a whole load more people!!!
I would much rather have an uncapped 1Mbps service than a low-capped 2Mbps one. Unfortunately, I don't think NTL are going to be as sensible as you suggest - for example, when the new packages appear, I'd happily pay £35 or even £40 per month for 2Mbps down and 1Mbps up uncapped. I really think that all this is going to do is lose NTL customers - I know that when I move out in about 18 months' time I'll most certainly not be getting capped NTL if I can at all help it.
Talking to guys in the US who pay £30/month for uncapped 4Mbps/1Mbps lines just makes me sick. Hopefully UKOnline will start advertising more - if people started hearing of 8Mbps broadband with 500GB transfer surely NTL would be forced to jump to 10Mbps in order to compete ;)
I would much rather have an uncapped 1Mbps service than a low-capped 2Mbps one. Unfortunately, I don't think NTL are going to be as sensible as you suggest - for example, when the new packages appear, I'd happily pay £35 or even £40 per month for 2Mbps down and 1Mbps up uncapped. I really think that all this is going to do is lose NTL customers - I know that when I move out in about 18 months' time I'll most certainly not be getting capped NTL if I can at all help it.
Talking to guys in the US who pay £30/month for uncapped 4Mbps/1Mbps lines just makes me sick. Hopefully UKOnline will start advertising more - if people started hearing of 8Mbps broadband with 500GB transfer surely NTL would be forced to jump to 10Mbps in order to compete ;)
Ntl won't be doing an upload anything like 1Mbit, I don't think they can.
UKonlines upload isn't half that, although it certanly is a better deal than NTL can put together, there's a list of their LLU exchanges here (http://www.ukonline.net/8000/llu_exchangelist.php).
Ignition
05-01-2005, 18:15
Find me an ISP in the US with uncapped 4/1 please?
Looking through the only ISP I can see in the US offering 1Mbps upload full stop is Optimum Online, and uploading too much results in a rather rapidly applied upload cap to 256kbit.
Congrats to Tom for completely missing the point though, the whole point of capping these services is to keep the prices decent, an extra £5 or £10 a month will not justify the expense to an ISP of an uncapped 2Mbps download, and certainly not a 1Mbps upload.
I really think that all this will do is trim off a section of high use users, and it will attract a far higher number of users who use closer to the UK average, which at the moment is 6GB a month....
ntl could certainly do a 1Mbps upload, the only real issue is that the same people demanding it are usually those who don't want to pay for it.
DUMeter report of what I've been doing on my completely uncapped 2Mbit service, including a fair bit of newsgroup usage (I have a paid for usenet service and search engine, I'm obviously just not greedy enough and don't download enough pointless crap that I don't actually want).
I thought there was an issue with providing higher upload speeds compared with the current ones.
Ignition
05-01-2005, 18:35
I thought there was an issue with providing higher upload speeds compared with the current ones.
Yes, it's expensive to do and 99.99% of customers won't be interested in paying for it.
Great news! UK Online Broadband 8000 is available in your area.
You can receive the service and should be able to achieve up to 8Mb download speeds.
Even as was suggested if everyone bails and joins UK online, even if the service is degraded by 50% to 4meg due to overloading, surely for £39 pm that has to be a good deal??
I would sooner go another few years with ntl, but they are pushing people into a corner.
enjoymarcus
05-01-2005, 19:02
http://forum.newzbin.com/viewtopic.php?t=3898
I hope everyone feels very inadequate now ;)
Just out of interest ignition, which I.S.P are you with??
Is there a specific reason you are not with NTL like a better deal with ADSL or perhaps you like the "Uncapped" you have at the moment?
If NTL or should I say "When" NTL impose the caps sometime this year I may well move to ADSL as I can now get a 2MB on my line instead of the previous 512k and I just wondered what you thought to your service........
Ignition
05-01-2005, 19:08
I feel inadequate in that the highest service I can see on that companies information is 10Mbit downstream and 8Mbit upstream. The fastest ISP in Sweden is Bredbandsbolaget http://www.bredbandsbolaget.se who offer a 100Mbit symettrical service, capped at 180GB/month if I remember right. Though Sweden is a bad comparison as Government money assisted, BBB are using Government paid for or subsidised fibre.
Earwig, there's no cable where I live, that's why I'm not with ntl, if there were I would be, and infact I've been trying to get the cable network extended VERY slightly so that I can get the service.
I'm with Hi-Velocity at the moment. http://www.hi-velocity.it I helped them out a while back and know the bosses personally.
Off-topic EDIT: Interesting how no-one is commenting on BT Wholesale's 2Mbit/256k absolute limit on services, and how slow that is compared to UKOnline and Bulldog LLU. I could receive 8Mbit on my phoneline if my exchange were LLU'd but it isn't and never will be, so I'm stuck on 2Mbit/256k. In ntl's case it's costs of provisioning upstream that hold the upstreams down, in BT's case it's being @rseholes and nothing to do with cost as the exchange backhaul is symettrical however I don't see anyone mentioning this minor detail when comparing existing services with LLU.
2nd EDIT: Sorry I couldn't give a more controversial reply when asked why I don't have ntl, the implication was in the question that you were looking for an interesting response rather than just 'because I can't' :)
tomjleeds
05-01-2005, 20:48
Ntl won't be doing an upload anything like 1Mbit, I don't think they can.
UKonlines upload isn't half that, although it certanly is a better deal than NTL can put together, there's a list of their LLU exchanges here (http://www.ukonline.net/8000/llu_exchangelist.php). Yeah, I'm aware that they won't go anywhere near that, but it's nice to dream ;) I can't see it even going above 256Kbps in the near future, which ****es me off rather a lot I have to say.
Find me an ISP in the US with uncapped 4/1 please?
Looking through the only ISP I can see in the US offering 1Mbps upload full stop is Optimum Online, and uploading too much results in a rather rapidly applied upload cap to 256kbit.
Congrats to Tom for completely missing the point though, the whole point of capping these services is to keep the prices decent, an extra £5 or £10 a month will not justify the expense to an ISP of an uncapped 2Mbps download, and certainly not a 1Mbps upload.
I really think that all this will do is trim off a section of high use users, and it will attract a far higher number of users who use closer to the UK average, which at the moment is 6GB a month....
ntl could certainly do a 1Mbps upload, the only real issue is that the same people demanding it are usually those who don't want to pay for it. Alright, keep your hair on! I wasn't voicing any expectation that NTL would offer such a package, I was merely suggesting something that would please a lot of people. Looking back, my price was stupid, say £50/month instead.
I understand that they're trying to keep the prices decent. However, I think they could gain a fair amnount of customers by offering more packages than they already do - a 2Mbps/512Kbps package would attract quite a lot of customers, especially if was capped at something a bit more sensible like 100GB/50GB.
In fact, now I've read through my post again, I don't suppose caps bother me all that much, so long as they're set as sensible levels. Offering 2Mbps download speed while only allowing 30GB of data transfer a month seems like madness to me - that's only just over an hour of maxing out per day. Now, if I'm experimenting with Linux distros and I want to get the full package, I'm looking at four or five discs. That's as much as 3.5GB - more than a tenth of my total monthly allowance. In my opinion, a 50GB cap on the 2Mbps package would be much more sensible, with a 75GB one on 3Mbps. But I know that's not going to happen.
Ignition
05-01-2005, 20:55
No worries, just interested in who this 4/1 ISP in the USA is.
<snip>I could receive 8Mbit on my phoneline if my exchange were LLU'd but it isn't and never will be, so I'm stuck on 2Mbit/256k. <snip>
From talking to you (I think) in the past, I got the impression that the only people likely to get 8Mbit from an LLU'd exchange via ADSL were those living almost next door to the exchange, and even then only with good luck...
:D
Well i'm about 2 miles away from the local exchange, in South Manchester, hardly next door, but probably closer than a lot. ;)
tomjleeds
05-01-2005, 21:29
No worries, just interested in who this 4/1 ISP in the USA is.
Well, I may have told a slighty porky, it's in Canada. And, it seems it's 4Mbps/0.8Mbps, which was not what I was led to believe. Anyhow, it's available through Bell (http://www.bell.ca/shop/application/commercewf?origin=noorigin.jsp&event=link(goto)&content=/jsp/content/personal/catalog/internet_access/highspeed_ultra/index.jsp&REF=IACCESS_HOME) for $59.95CAD/month, which is just under £26/month.
Of course, the business packages get stupidly fast for ridiculously low prices. A friend of mine has an $80US/month 10Mbps/2Mbps line.
@ Ignition.....
I honestly was not looking for a contraversial answer to my question, it was just honest curiosoty on my part........But having said that you kinda got me thinking......
What is your HONEST view on these caps that are to be introduced by NTL on a 3MB line?
Some of the things I would like your opinions on are as follows.....
1. Do you personally think the cap is to low?
2. With the way ADSL seems to be picking up in the last month and hopefully over the coming months (Bearing in mind many are offering "Uncapped" or vastly more usage than 40GB) do you think NTL will lose customers? As with faster speeds people will "find" more things they can do with it.
3. Dependant on your answers to 1+2 what do you feel would be a fair cap?
4. How can Telewest have "faster" download AND upload and STILL be "Uncapped"? Differing technology? Smaller area?
5. With a merger imminent (as in this year maybe) between the two companies, would NTL have to play catch up? I doubt very much that Telewest would drag there customers to a lower standard so would they offer different products north and south but under one name?
6. And lastly.......How much headroom is there in the NTL system for further upgrading?? Is it possible for NTL to keep up with these ADSL services that are coming about right now? Could they offer 8MB Down and 1Mb up on current systems? But then thinking about it by the time they do what will ADSL be offering? I think I read somewhere that 8Mb downstream and 1Mb up is the max for ADSL? I have also read about ADSL2 but cannot remeber much, but needless to say it will raise the bar higher still.
The reason I ask these is that I have been with NTL ever since I got into my PC about 2-3 years ago and have never had a problem to speak of. I would like to think that I never will have and will continue to be a valued customer to them. But like alot of people I want to be able to have the fastest speeds and the biggest download quota.....I just don't want to fall behind the compatition but that is what it seems is happening...............
Ignition
05-01-2005, 22:13
Good questions!
1. Do you personally think the cap is to low?
Nope, I think that the speed, 3Mbit is too low, but the cap is fine.
2. With the way ADSL seems to be picking up in the last month and hopefully over the coming months (Bearing in mind many are offering "Uncapped" or vastly more usage than 40GB) do you think NTL will lose customers? As with faster speeds people will "find" more things they can do with it.
No I don't, an ADSL ISP did something similar and quickly became the fastest growing ADSL ISP in the UK. I've little doubt that for the vast majority this will be a favourable deal and will attract many.
3. Dependant on your answers to 1+2 what do you feel would be a fair cap?
40GB is fine for me.
4. How can Telewest have "faster" download AND upload and STILL be "Uncapped"? Differing technology? Smaller area?
I could spin you a yarn but won't. Due to NDA I'm not at liberty to discuss this.
5. With a merger imminent (as in this year maybe) between the two companies, would NTL have to play catch up? I doubt very much that Telewest would drag there customers to a lower standard so would they offer different products north and south but under one name?
Sadly I haven't a clue how this would pan out, I'm not remotely qualified to answer this.
6. And lastly.......How much headroom is there in the NTL system for further upgrading?? Is it possible for NTL to keep up with these ADSL services that are coming about right now? Could they offer 8MB Down and 1Mb up on current systems? But then thinking about it by the time they do what will ADSL be offering? I think I read somewhere that 8Mb downstream and 1Mb up is the max for ADSL? I have also read about ADSL2 but cannot remeber much, but needless to say it will raise the bar higher still.
The fastest service running over a network similar to ntl's is 10Mbit downstream 1Mbit upstream as operated by Optimum Online in the states and Cogeco in Canada. Higher upload and download speeds are in theory possible. Again I'm not at liberty to discuss anything specific to the ntl network.
The reason I ask these is that I have been with NTL ever since I got into my PC about 2-3 years ago and have never had a problem to speak of. I would like to think that I never will have and will continue to be a valued customer to them. But like alot of people I want to be able to have the fastest speeds and the biggest download quota.....I just don't want to fall behind the compatition but that is what it seems is happening...............
The most diplomatic answer I can give is that ntl is a mainstream ISP, and isn't designed to cater to the enthusiast market. I would love to see a 10Mbit/1Mbit service however those who hold the purse strings may disagree until it's absolutely necessary.
Without any illusions of generosity these services are being implemented for the sole purpose of attracting more customers and increasing profitability on the service as a whole, simple as.
Ignition
05-01-2005, 22:54
From talking to you (I think) in the past, I got the impression that the only people likely to get 8Mbit from an LLU'd exchange via ADSL were those living almost next door to the exchange, and even then only with good luck...
:D
I'm 800 metres from my exchange and have a good quality all underground line :) UKOnline reckon anyone within 2KM 'should' be ok.
BTW Leeds chap ffs don't describe Canadians or Canadian things as being American, Canadians tend to get quite upset at such things :)
tomjleeds
05-01-2005, 23:06
I'm 800 metres from my exchange and have a good quality all underground line :) UKOnline reckon anyone within 2KM 'should' be ok.
BTW Leeds chap ffs don't describe Canadians or Canadian things as being American, Canadians tend to get quite upset at such things :)
Heh, yes I've experienced that in the past, won't make that mistake again ;) I think I'd be quite upset if someone called me American :P
Unfortunately UKOnline have chosen a frickin' weird set of exchanges to LLU in Leeds, so I don't think I'll be able to ge it at all, never mind at 8Mbps.
ian@huth
05-01-2005, 23:16
With all this talk of capping it's worth considering a few points.
NTL do not want to lose customers to the opposition so they will offer the highest speeds possible, both upload and download, that the infrastructure can cope with and which doesn't impact on customers performance.
Having said that, NTL would be glad to get rid of some customers and we all know why and what they do.
NTL want to ensure its customers get a good quality of service and will use capping to try to ensure that they do.
NTL infrastructure and development needs money spending on it which means they have to have a pricing structure which ensures this money is forthcoming.
The vast majority of NTL customers will get nowhere near the caps.
Doubling download speeds does not mean that customers must double the volume that they download. As an analagy, buying a new car that has a top speed double that of your current car doesn't mean that you have to travel twice as many miles.
Watching streaming video and listening to streaming audio may eat up bandwidth and make the caps easier to reach so why not try using those alternatives that give better quality and do not use any bandwidth. TV, radio, hifi, cd player, dvd player spring to mind but there are others besides.
BUT, these customers that NTL dont want, might ditch the phones and TV packages?
Or are they pretty worthless in the great scheme, ie they can afford to lose them?
Thing is as well, word of mouth can be a big influence, most people not on the net ask people in the know who is the "best" isp, and i used to answer ntl. Going to be impossible to say that in a while i fear. :(
i wonder if there is any way NTL or other ISPs for that matter could offer a sensible monitored CAP.
i.e if you download something from the MS website i.e SP2 then that shouldn't count towards your bandwidth for that period.
The same thing should apply for Linux distributions, AV updates, spyware updates etc.
This is maintenance on the machine that you have to download. if people aer being capped and have to download a 10 MB file from their AV each week how many would still keep doing this which would make virus and spyware worse.
From talking to you (I think) in the past, I got the impression that the only people likely to get 8Mbit from an LLU'd exchange via ADSL were those living almost next door to the exchange, and even then only with good luck...
:D
@Rone & Ianauth
The quote above is a joke based on a "conversation" Ignition and I had about the 8 Meg ADSL service being touted by UKOnline..
i wonder if there is any way NTL or other ISPs for that matter could offer a sensible monitored CAP.
i.e if you download something from the MS website i.e SP2 then that shouldn't count towards your bandwidth for that period.
The same thing should apply for Linux distributions, AV updates, spyware updates etc.
This is maintenance on the machine that you have to download. if people aer being capped and have to download a 10 MB file from their AV each week how many would still keep doing this which would make virus and spyware worse.
I think there would be privacy issues if NTL did this.
ian@huth
06-01-2005, 10:07
I think there would be privacy issues if NTL did this.
This could be got round by NTL having a mirror site for such items that is only available to NTL customers. It could be set so that customers could request a particular download which would be sent to their machine during night time hours when it should not affect other customers internet experience. Microsoft would be happy as it reduced the strain on its servers and NTL would keep all this traffic within its own infrastructure.
Whether such a scheme would be workable depends on how NTL measure bandwidth used and if exclusions can be made for certain sites.
yes that would be a good idea and faster to download from an NTL mirror than MS and Norten, AVG, etc.
The problem with that would be the cost of setting up the mirror and maintaining it with uptodate stuff plus the fact that all the windows OSs are configured to use the automatic updates from MS site..
Personally, I would be much happier with the idea of a cap, if it was not a hard cut-off. If exceeding the cap meant that you were restricted to 300K for the rest of the month, you could still carry on with "essential" surfing (buying birthday presents, paying bills, webmail, etc).
Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but there are so many threads on caps that I don't have time to read them all.
This could be got round by NTL having a mirror site for such items that is only available to NTL customers. It could be set so that customers could request a particular download which would be sent to their machine during night time hours when it should not affect other customers internet experience. Microsoft would be happy as it reduced the strain on its servers and NTL would keep all this traffic within its own infrastructure.
Whether such a scheme would be workable depends on how NTL measure bandwidth used and if exclusions can be made for certain sites.
True, but bearing in mind the problems NTL have with the News servers and email servers, could they be trusted to run a mirroring server?
enjoymarcus
06-01-2005, 10:34
Why dont NTL stop being tight arse capitalists, and give their customers what they deserve.
etccarmageddon
06-01-2005, 10:37
True, but bearing in mind the problems NTL have with the News servers and email servers, could they be trusted to run a mirroring server?
no and it's probably less work just to make the 'cap' or whatever only be enforced during peak hours. during off peak (perhaps 12am to 8am) users should be allowed unrestricted or less restricted downloading.
Electrolyte01
06-01-2005, 11:04
Why dont NTL stop being tight arse capitalists, and give their customers what they deserve.
Because that will cost them too much.
the thing with all these threads about the cap is that it's all well and good us discussing this and suggesting things NTL and do but unless these ideas are actually being sent onto NTL they won't take any notice
Electrolyte01
06-01-2005, 11:08
the thing with all these threads about the cap is that it's all well and good us discussing this and suggesting things NTL and do but unless these ideas are actually being sent onto NTL they won't take any notice
And they can cause arguements. As seen before :rolleyes:
ian@huth
06-01-2005, 11:30
the thing with all these threads about the cap is that it's all well and good us discussing this and suggesting things NTL and do but unless these ideas are actually being sent onto NTL they won't take any notice
We all know that some NTL employees actively post on here and these may pass ideas back to the company. NTL will have employees that monitor this and other sites and report back on the feelings of customers and anything of importance that can assist the company in its development. Many a time someone comes up with an idea that is so simple that everyone wonders why it has never come to light before. Such an idea may be posted on here and get picked up by NTL and implemented if it is for the benefit of the company. So post away with any ideas, however wild they may be as one of them could be implemented and help both the company and you yourself. Despite what has been said about NTL and its failings, they honestly want to provide what customers want to buy and give them an above average service level. NTL are not a company that wants to fleece its customers and give them shoddy products and shoddy service. Top executives know that there rewards will be much greater the more its customers are satisfied. Some, as in all companies, may have personal agendas for their own survival and advancement which can result in an adverse affect on customers but hopefully the others will see through them and take whatever action is needed.
Why dont NTL stop being tight arse capitalists, and give their customers what they deserve.
Because they are a business? Wether you agree with it or not, NTL do have a responsibility to pay their debts as well as having shareholders. Obviously they need to balance these up with keeping the customer happy. Also bear in mind that with heavy downloaders they do actually make quite a large loss on the account (so if you are a 1.5 Meg user and download 24/7, you are costing NTL far more than you are paying them).
Edit: Actually, although you are costing NTL more directly, they will pass that charge on to everyone else, so indirectly, you are costing everyone else more.
I know there is no official announcement, but if the rumours on this site are true, then these "caps" are not actually cut off points, but simply the point at which NTL will start charging extra for bandwidth usage. I may get flamed for this, but I think this is fair.
Personally, I would be much happier with the idea of a cap, if it was not a hard cut-off. If exceeding the cap meant that you were restricted to 300K for the rest of the month, you could still carry on with "essential" surfing (buying birthday presents, paying bills, webmail, etc).
Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but there are so many threads on caps that I don't have time to read them all.
And how do you know that is not the case. I have not seen anything from NTL on how this is going to be done. Before long with the way threads go someone somewhere will quote you and it will have come from NTL that is what happens with rumors. I don't know how they are going to do this, I have not been told and i have not seen anything released by NTL of how they are going to cap users other that the cap limits. Until i see them release more info i will wait and see. I am sure we will know more when the time comes to implement it. :D
Chrysalis
06-01-2005, 12:40
I thought the best question asked to ignition was why Telewest could offer higher download/upload and have no cap and no reduced performance its a shame he couldn't answer it, I have to assume its company greed. Fact is Telewest have made NTL look like idiots and shown it is quite easily possible to offer more. COX us cable isp has recently upgraded their customs to 4mbit/768kbit free its not announced on their website yet tho. Interesting tho look into these points.
1 - A good ISP actually caring about their users will upgrade them before they announce it or at least very soon after, NTL have gone the other way and announced it and we recieve the upgrades up to half a year or so later.
2 - NTL cant give without taking, the first upgrade seen the top tier have a price increase (some will claim its unrelated) and this upgrade see's a admin charge and a hard cap been added.
3 - We keep hearing again and again from the die hard supporters of a cap that if there is no cap we all suffer from horrible speeds, funny how telewesy have no such issue, pipex have no such issues, plusnet have no such issues, aol has no such issues, nildram has no such issues and they all offer unmetered.
4 - The top tier offers 40 gig a month, following NTL's tradition to shaft the highest paying customer's using the excuse we dont want people to download 24/7, well 24/7 on a 3mbit connection is 900 gig a month, so why not say a 150 gig limit which will do the same and no allow anything near 24/7 but give users a decent limit.
5 - A few people here seem to think price is everything, well it isn't quite a few people here have said they will pay more for a better product so why not offer it.
6 - The big question still unanswered, why cant NTL provide the same quality of service as telewest and yet they have more money to spend. They have a bigger network which is an "advantage" since contention is less visible on bigger pipes.
7 - Why do customers have to frequently goto their local managing director to get a decent resolution to their problems, whats up with customer services attitude lately.
8 - Its 6th january and no news of upgrades starting although I am not going to switch now, when do we expect to see it starting.
Some good questions I think.
scrotnig
06-01-2005, 12:56
Why dont NTL stop being tight arse capitalists, and give their customers what they deserve.
I'm afraid you need to realise that companies are not set up because the owners want to practice socialist idealism, they are set up becausde they want to make a profit.
That's how a free market economy. NTL, BT, Sky, and all other companies are not here to 'give people what they deserve' they are their to make money.
That's the harsh reality of the situation. I can handle the fact that people don't like that, but I won't stand by and allow it to be suggested that somehow ntl are the only ones with this attitude. ALL companies have that attitude. That's how the system works.
Chrysalis
06-01-2005, 13:07
Mark B, then how are other companies making money and offering more then NTL, the question is do they want to make a profit or do they want to make a obscene profit.
@Rone & Ianauth
The quote above is a joke based on a "conversation" Ignition and I had about the 8 Meg ADSL service being touted by UKOnline..
:D i c.
Well i am one of the lucky ones it seems.
Looks like i'm going to have to pick an adsl provider [an 8 meg one if needs be] and just leave the ntl box on the wall, just in case they realise they are going to alienate quite a few people, and might want to lure a few back.
I'm sure Sky wont turn another subscriber away either. ;)
I have a bt and ntl phone, but the ntl phone can go, loyalty needs to work both ways. ;)
This might sound like ner ner ner ner ner, but i havent time to monitor 3 children, and i dont want to ripped off for lots of cash if i go over, or be cut off.
ian@huth
06-01-2005, 13:28
snip>
6 - The big question still unanswered, why cant NTL provide the same quality of service as telewest and yet they have more money to spend. They have a bigger network which is an "advantage" since contention is less visible on bigger pipes.
<snip
Some thoughts on "the big question"
Quality of Service is quite different to what speeds are available and whether there is capping or not. NTL may have an higher QOS than Telewest, I don't know and guess that you don't either.
NTL will look at market conditions and infrastructure capabilities when deciding what speeds to offer and at what price. They will take an informed decision on the effects of capping or not capping on their business. They do not compete with Telewest and what Telewest do is less important to their decisions than other factors.
Who knows how much money NTL or Telewest have to spend or what they are actually spending at the moment. The banks and bondholders will have a very big say in that. I think that most broadband users will agree that their service has improved considerably over the pasy year or so and that is due to money being invested in the infrastructure by NTL
Contention on cable is felt most at UBR card level and no matter how big the network is or how fat the pipes are after that. It is what users on a specific UBR card do that affects service most and several 24/7 leechers on the same card can be a big problem. The solution would be to add extra UBRs which are very expensive or to cap the heavy users. Why should an ISP spend thousands of pounds on upgrading just so that a very small minority of customers can continue to download the entire internet 24/7.
I thought the best question asked to ignition was why Telewest could offer higher download/upload and have no cap and no reduced performance its a shame he couldn't answer it, I have to assume its company greed. Fact is Telewest have made NTL look like idiots and shown it is quite easily possible to offer more. COX us cable isp has recently upgraded their customs to 4mbit/768kbit free its not announced on their website yet tho. Interesting tho look into these points.
The other way to look at it is NTL is offering the upgrades to all parts of the network that can take broadband. Telewest don't.. Telewest have a smaller network to maintain (therefore lower costs). From what Neil has said in the past, they also have a habit of not upgrading areas that will be too expensive.
1 - A good ISP actually caring about their users will upgrade them before they announce it or at least very soon after, NTL have gone the other way and announced it and we recieve the upgrades up to half a year or so later.
2 - NTL cant give without taking, the first upgrade seen the top tier have a price increase (some will claim its unrelated) and this upgrade see's a admin charge and a hard cap been added.
Can't disagree there, although AFAIK NTL haven't actually introduced a "hard" cap (I take it you mean that downloads will cut off after that point).
3 - We keep hearing again and again from the die hard supporters of a cap that if there is no cap we all suffer from horrible speeds, funny how telewesy have no such issue, pipex have no such issues, plusnet have no such issues, aol has no such issues, nildram has no such issues and they all offer unmetered.
Do you know this? There could be thousands of Telewest users that get crap speeds. Same with all the ADSL providers. It's entirely possible people just don't complain. Remember, before becoming CableForum, this site did not really cater for other broadband users, and a lot probably don't know about it.
4 - The top tier offers 40 gig a month, following NTL's tradition to shaft the highest paying customer's using the excuse we dont want people to download 24/7, well 24/7 on a 3mbit connection is 900 gig a month, so why not say a 150 gig limit which will do the same and no allow anything near 24/7 but give users a decent limit.
When I said 24/7, I did not mean literally 24/7..
5 - A few people here seem to think price is everything, well it isn't quite a few people here have said they will pay more for a better product so why not offer it.
An arguement I have used many times with NTL..
6 - The big question still unanswered, why cant NTL provide the same quality of service as telewest and yet they have more money to spend. They have a bigger network which is an "advantage" since contention is less visible on bigger pipes.
NTL are larger, they do have more cash, BUT, they also have larger costs and a larger network. IIRC what Frank said on nthw.com, the bandwidth provided by NTL networks to NTL home is more than adequate for their current and anticipated needs, BUT NTL home have had to spend a lot of money (tens of millions of pounds) upgrading their own hardware to enable the faster speeds. Obviously the Venture Capitalist who provided this money will want it back with Interest.
7 - Why do customers have to frequently goto their local managing director to get a decent resolution to their problems, whats up with customer services attitude lately.
How do you know the customers frequently need to do this? Are you basing that on what you read on this site? Bear in mind that this site is not necessarily representative of people's experience of NTL (or any company) as a whole. It only has a few thousand users, and a lot of those may have joined specifically to complain about something.
8 - Its 6th january and no news of upgrades starting although I am not going to switch now, when do we expect to see it starting.
Some good questions I think.
It's only the first week of the year, NTL, like a lot of companies, has probably been running with a skeleton staff over Christmas. A lot of their staff probably only worked a three day week last week, then came back to work on Tuesday. This site was offline from Tuesday evening, and was fairly unreliable last night.
In short, I would be suprised if any company would schedule what is quite a major job for the first week in the year, and even if they did, the users may not have been able to post the fact to this site.
8 - Its 6th january and no news of upgrades starting although I am not going to switch now, when do we expect to see it starting.
If your are not switching to the higher speeds then why do you need to know.
8 - Its 6th january and no news of upgrades starting although I am not going to switch now, when do we expect to see it starting.
Better ask Centrica and British gas then, They might know more :LOL:
enjoymarcus
06-01-2005, 16:59
Because they are a business? Wether you agree with it or not, NTL do have a responsibility to pay their debts as well as having shareholders. Obviously they need to balance these up with keeping the customer happy. Also bear in mind that with heavy downloaders they do actually make quite a large loss on the account (so if you are a 1.5 Meg user and download 24/7, you are costing NTL far more than you are paying them).
Edit: Actually, although you are costing NTL more directly, they will pass that charge on to everyone else, so indirectly, you are costing everyone else more.
I know there is no official announcement, but if the rumours on this site are true, then these "caps" are not actually cut off points, but simply the point at which NTL will start charging extra for bandwidth usage. I may get flamed for this, but I think this is fair.
Hmm, me thinks that you and Mark B have shares in NTL.. ;)
Hmm, me thinks that you and Mark B have shares in NTL.. ;)
BTW luton ubr,s show some interesting usage ;)
enjoymarcus
06-01-2005, 17:06
BTW luton ubr,s show some interesting usage ;)
lol, Luton is in Bedfordshire, i thought my nearest UBR was Hatfield. Anyway, when will the hard caps be imposed? I only have 5 months left at my student residence in Nottingham, so im wondering if it will effect me. You will also be pleased to know that i have ran out of things to download...
orangebird
06-01-2005, 17:06
If your are not switching to the higher speeds then why do you need to know.
Better ask Centrica and British gas then, They might know more :LOL:
pmsl! :rofl:
lol, Luton is in Bedfordshire, i thought my nearest UBR was Hatfield. Anyway, when will the hard caps be imposed? I only have 5 months left at my student residence in Nottingham, so im wondering if it will effect me. You will also be pleased to know that i have ran out of things to download...
:LOL: what happend to Warrington. Dont tell me you have a personal transporter .:Peaceman:
Hmm, me thinks that you and Mark B have shares in NTL.. ;)
Nope... Just being realistic. Where I can see NTL is being bad, I'll say so. If I think they are being fair, I'll say so.
enjoymarcus
06-01-2005, 17:12
:LOL: what happend to Warrington. Dont tell me you have a personal transporter .:Peaceman:
I got bored of it, internet was too slow, damn leechers.
I got bored of it, internet was too slow, damn leechers.
LOL
enjoymarcus
06-01-2005, 17:15
Nope... Just being realistic. Where I can see NTL is being bad, I'll say so. If I think they are being fair, I'll say so.
Nah, in all honestly, you guys are right, people do actually really take the ****, if i was NTL i would do a similar thing, or charge more for unlimited usage, the ironic thing is, NTL (in the majority of cases) are paying for illegal activities. If this cap results in faster speeds in the future, then its a good thing.
Nope... Just being realistic. Where I can see NTL is being bad, I'll say so. If I think they are being fair, I'll say so.
:tu: :tu:
Its so good to see a balanced post much better than the very few that just prefer They are dammed if they do and dammed if they don't.
Nah, in all honestly, you guys are right, people do actually really take the ****, if i was NTL i would do a similar thing, or charge more for unlimited usage, the ironic thing is, NTL (in the majority of cases) are paying for illegal activities. If this cap results in faster speeds in the future, then its a good thing.
On a personal point and nothing to do with my work for NTL.
I would pay for a unlimited option myself. We will just have to wait and see if they are watching this site and if they take notice of the points customers have made here.
tomjleeds
06-01-2005, 17:33
Contention on cable is felt most at UBR card level and no matter how big the network is or how fat the pipes are after that. It is what users on a specific UBR card do that affects service most and several 24/7 leechers on the same card can be a big problem. The solution would be to add extra UBRs which are very expensive or to cap the heavy users. Why should an ISP spend thousands of pounds on upgrading just so that a very small minority of customers can continue to download the entire internet 24/7.
I do hope I haven't made myself out to be a leecher in the few posts I've made in this thread. In fact, I upload far more for my connection than I download (obviously I don't actually upload as much, but when you're uploading about 25GB per month on a 128Kbps upstream connection compared to a similar amount on a 750Kbps downstream connection, you get the impression that you're actually uploading more seeing as it's happening pretty much all the time). I guess I might be classed as an upstream leecher, I don't know.
I don't really have a problem with caps, and I think that GrahamD has quite a good idea (see below). I'd be happy with, say, a 50GB/month cap on a 2Mbps downstream connection, and when you hit it you'd drop to 300Kbps. What I'd really like is to have a 300Kbps upstream connection with the 2Mbps package and a 500Kbps upstream with the 3Mbps one.
Put it this way - I'd rather have a faster upstream and a downstream cap than a slower upstream and unlimited downstream transfer.
Personally, I would be much happier with the idea of a cap, if it was not a hard cut-off. If exceeding the cap meant that you were restricted to 300K for the rest of the month, you could still carry on with "essential" surfing (buying birthday presents, paying bills, webmail, etc).
Mark B, then how are other companies making money and offering more then NTL, the question is do they want to make a profit or do they want to make a obscene profit.
Try looking at it the other way around, why are NTL not offering as much as other companies. In my experience its because of poor management and people why work at NTL (especially call centre/billing staff) not doing their job right. :mad:
And before I get flamed, yes I know there are many people at NTL that do an excellent job, so put that flame thrower down Debs :p:
And before I get flamed, yes I know there are many people at NTL that do an excellent job, so put that flame thrower down Debs :p:
:LOL:
cookie_365
06-01-2005, 18:16
Why dont NTL stop being tight arse capitalists, and give their customers what they deserve.
How'll I cope with 32 bps ??? :Yikes:
I myself confess to being a pretty high user and probably download in excess of 10GB per day. Obviously not every day but a good 3-4 days from the 7.
This means that I would hit the cap in less than 1 week! ! !
Now all I have to say is that I am not "Flaming" NTL for their introduction of a cap. And think that it is a "Good" thing to help them keep the systems in check and maintain a healthy speed for ALL of their customers.
If however NTL are reading any of this ( I know some employees are!) then I would like to suggest an "Uncapped" service for those that need it.
Many people in this thread have said that they would be willing to pay for the service so how hard would it be to include this option??
The only problem I can see is that many ADSL companies already offer an "Uncapped" service for the price we pay for the capped one at the moment so a price increase may not be advisable to achieve the "Uncapped" service.
Perhaps what is in order would be a slight reduction on the slower speeds that are capped??
But then if the "Heavy" user is in fact a minority they would lose out on profits with most people opting for the lower tiers...... Kinda more difficult to think of a solution when you get into it eh?? Hehehe.
Ahh got it.........How about a price increase of £2 on the 3MB and make it uncapped which would bring them into the pricing for the current ADSL "Uncapped" services. (Yeah ok I know there are 8MB lines out there but it is unfair to include these as such a small % can actually get the damn service), then a price reduction of £2 on the lower tiers from their Proposed pricing and keep them "Capped" as they are.
Also as NTL will be offering a 3MB line as apposed to the most common 2MB line perhaps another couple of £ on top of the £39.99 (ADSL) would not be to much to ask for the service??
£42.99 for 3MB "uncapped".......Who would go for it??
£22.99 for 2MB "Capped at 30GBp/m" (I think this is correct?).....Who??
Also @ Ignition.
I thought you gave some good answers and thank you for the time it took you to answer them. Althoug I must admit 1 or 2 did surprise me, Especially when you said you thought the 3MB was to slow and would like to see it faster still!!! Hehehe.
I kinda like the odd small increases throughout the year......Gives us something to look forward to!! ;-)
tomjleeds
06-01-2005, 21:19
I'd definitely go for 3Mbps uncapped at £42.99, but it won't happen.
ian@huth
06-01-2005, 22:06
Caps are introduced for a reason and over 95% of NTL customers will come nowhere near the caps. That leaves a small minority of customers that will be affected, some very much so. Amongst that small minority you have customers saying either that the caps should be much higher or that uncapped tiers should be introduced at a couple of pounds per month extra on top of the capped tiers. Both these ideas are non starters because they would take away the benefits gained by capping and for either no or very little extra revenue. NTL are not introducing caps for the fun of it nor to p-iss off their customers. They are introducing caps because the business and the vast majority of its customers will benefit by having them. Yes, they will lose some customers because of the caps and these may take other services, TV and telephone, away too but NTL may find that this loss increases the overall profit they make. I know that we all would like to pay less for broadband, have faster download and upload speeds and no caps at all, but this is the real world.
I see it that the vast majority of customers are not going to know what the cap is or is about. At least until bandwidth capping is understood by all, something like aol's adverts but bigger and more understandable.
And while that hasn't happened from a business perspective i guess capping is the option to get rid of the users ntl can afford to lose. The few complaints here obviously aren't a concern to ntl of a userbase of 1m users.
scrotnig
06-01-2005, 23:28
Mark B, then how are other companies making money and offering more then NTL, the question is do they want to make a profit or do they want to make a obscene profit.
They'd probably settle for actually making a profit at all to start with, obscene can come later.
They'd probably settle for actually making a profit at all to start with, obscene can come later.
:rofl:
th'engineer
07-01-2005, 09:28
Find me an ISP in the US with uncapped 4/1 please?
Just in case you had not realised we are in the UK.:D
th'engineer
07-01-2005, 09:35
On a personal point and nothing to do with my work for NTL.
I would pay for a unlimited option myself.Well said Bill honesty
We will just have to wait and see if they are watching this site and if they take notice of the points customers have made here.:shrug: you are joking NTL chiefs taking not of customers refer my friend to MR Goodlands views on customers:LOL:
Having a quick look round it seems UK onlines cap limit is 500gig per month on the 8meg adsl, and the nearest in speed i can find is Nildram 2 meg, with no cap limits, and the young lady said they had no plans to introduce any.
Why you think would i pay £44 to Nildram for 2meg when i can have 8 meg for £39?
Not cos i'm rich [and i think 500gig pm is plenty] but because i dont want to have to monitor usage at all, i have 3 kids who all surf the net.
I would sooner go with somebody who i have heard good things about, unfortunately i dont know anybody on UK-online to give any feedback.
I just cancelled my ntl package today, so i can have adsl downstairs as my eldest lads upstairs line wont be free for a month or two.
Mainly cos i dont expect NTL to read this fine forum, nor do i think they will be bothered about losing a few customers, so i am keeping the cable broadband alone until the final outcome.
It would be nice to get an adsl service thats been as reliable and quick as ntl, ok its had small faults but on the whole its been a great service.
th'engineer
07-01-2005, 11:44
i dont want to have to monitor usage at all, i have 3 kids who all surf the net.
Well said rone echo your views:tu:
i dont want to have to monitor usage at all, i have 3 kids who all surf the net.
Then you need to switch your BB supplier to one that offers an uncapped service.
There are plenty to choose from on ADSL Guide (http://www.adslguide.org.uk/isps/compare.asp), the ones that spring to mind immediately are Pipex/Zen/Nildram/Bulldog/UkOnline.
HTH.
Well said rone echo your views:tu:
Same applies to you too! ;)
Hans Gruber
07-01-2005, 12:31
Then you need to switch your BB supplier to one that offers an uncapped service.
There are plenty to choose from on ADSL Guide (http://www.adslguide.org.uk/isps/compare.asp), the ones that spring to mind immediately are Pipex/Zen/Nildram/Bulldog/UkOnline.
HTH.
People realise that we're going to have to change ISPs. It's just a lot of hassle (and expense) getting sky and dsl installed, which I'm sure I speak for a lot of people when I say we could do without.
th'engineer
07-01-2005, 12:51
Same applies to you too! ;)
I know thats why i agree with rone :D
th'engineer
07-01-2005, 12:55
People realise that we're going to have to change ISPs. It's just a lot of hassle (and expense) getting sky and dsl installed, which I'm sure I speak for a lot of people when I say we could do without.
I have to say that Neil had no problems with switching, as with all things NTL we will have to see what happens.
Seems a bit daft upgrading everyones speed then capping them but thats the NTL we know and love.
I wish someone could explain the logic of NTL why not keep the original speed uncapped but have a better upload speed.
ian@huth
07-01-2005, 13:09
I have to say that Neil had no problems with switching, as with all things NTL we will have to see what happens.
Seems a bit daft upgrading everyones speed then capping them but thats the NTL we know and love.
I wish someone could explain the logic of NTL why not keep the original speed uncapped but have a better upload speed.
Have you ever thought that some people want to get a job done quicker and are not interested in doing more jobs. How many times do you click on a link in a post and then have to wait two or three minutes for whatever to download. It's much nicer to have twice the speed and only have to wait one minute or so to see the result.
I think that what NTL is doing is very logical and that the vast majority of customers will welcome the extra speed and see the benefit of having it whilst going nowhere near the caps.
"Have you ever thought that some people want to get a job done quicker and are not interested in doing more jobs. How many times do you click on a link in a post and then have to wait two or three minutes for whatever to download. It's much nicer to have twice the speed and only have to wait one minute or so to see the result."
If all you want to do is browse thats fantastic.
The internet should be more than that imo, first it was music companies letting you pay to download, soon it could be d\load your own dvds, then theres movie clips, software updates, streaming video, the list is endless, and then just as it all becomes within everyones reach at good speed, at a not unreasonable price, it comes to a point where i have to watch what i'm doing.
No offence ianathuth, you often make really good points, just that ntl's vision for the future seems a bit blind.
As for the comment its a load of aggro swapping packages, its now dead easy, BT are getting my old number transferred and inform ntl my phone package is being cancelled, Sky are on the way, boy are they eager, and Nildrams only clause is its a 1 month contract, now thats pretty fair.
They can activate the adsl within 10 days of getting a BT line.
Sorry to go off the cap bit, but theres lots of points need clearing up. ;)
Chrysalis
07-01-2005, 17:07
Bill C I see you have resorted to personal remarks against me as you know I have made valid points.
Contrary to what people might thing a bigger network results on LOWER costs as the cost per user is lower.
1 - Buying bandwidth in larger amounts = more purchasing power so less price paid per mbit.
2 - Having bigger pipes results in less visible contention, eg. try doing 20:1 contention on a 2mbit pipe for 512kbit users, you would be lucky to get 8 on there without seeing issues and thats only 2:1 contention so when you have smaller pipes you are forced to lower contention to maintain qos this means higher cost per user.
3 - Ntl use transperent proxies again reducing costs, most of the isp's I mentioned if not all dont do this so their costs will be higher.
So in short if ntl do all this and they have to cap to make a profit then something is f**ked up somewhere, they are either making a obscene profit for their shareholders (i think some of you posting here own shares :D ) or their directors need replacing because they should be making a large profit with all the above practices.
I keep saying it again and again, although ntl dont compete with telewest it doesnt mean we cant ask questions why telewest are able to provide so much more then ntl and expect a good answer instead of abusive remarks made against those who dont like it.
The isp's I mentioned do I know if they have issues?, well I read adslguide regurly following the latest adsl news and I know which isp's have problems and which dont, and the ones I mentioned do not have problems related to contention and speed, nildram is the best example of this their customers consist of lots of online gamers and their pings will be very sensitive to contention so I am sure I would know about it if there was any issues there.
Finally why wasnt any of the following idea implemented.
Time of day cap - have cap for peak time usage and then make it unmetered for say 1am to 8am.
Unmetered package - unmetered 24/7 but speeds reduced to 150kbit at peak time.
Sell static ip's and other extras - It is proven on many adsl isp's that people want these things and they can have a high profit margin for isp's and as such subsidise other parts of the operation.
Reintroduce install fee - This free install has gone on for year's now when is it going to come back.
Introduce support tiering - For those who are newbies and will need tech support add £5 to monthly fee and provide 0800 (150) support, the experienced ones of us use premium rate support.
In short there are many sides of the argument, some of you may say you subisidise my bandwidth usage, whilst I could argue I subsidise you having to ring up tech support every day when you get confused as to why your drivers broken etc..
Bill C I see you have resorted to personal remarks against me as you know I have made valid points.
Please quote the PERSONAL remark i made towards you. ?
But dont worry you will not get another so called PERSONAL remark from me.
Contrary to what people might thing a bigger network results on LOWER costs as the cost per user is lower.
1 - Buying bandwidth in larger amounts = more purchasing power so less price paid per mbit.
According to certain forum members, who would be in a position to know, the problem for NTL (and Telewest actually) is that they buy hardware in a niche market. A market small enough that economies of scale do not apply. As I understand it (and as I explained earlier) the bandwidth on NTL's backbone is fine. The problem comes at the UBRs, which may or may not be able to support the bandwidth required. Before you mention buying power again, bear in mind that (I believe) the only company that make UBRs & parts that NTL can use is Cisco. Cisco is far larger than NTL. Also, if Cisco is the only company that makes the upgrades needed, what are NTL going to say? "Reduce your prices or we won't upgrade"?.
2 - Having bigger pipes results in less visible contention, eg. try doing 20:1 contention on a 2mbit pipe for 512kbit users, you would be lucky to get 8 on there without seeing issues and thats only 2:1 contention so when you have smaller pipes you are forced to lower contention to maintain qos this means higher cost per user.
Are we using the same definition of contention here? As far as I know, contention is the ratio of users' max bandwidth requirement vs the amount of bandwidth available. Basically if NTL had a 2Mbit pipe and put 20 1Mbit users on there, the contentention would be 10:1. It is true, however, that to add more users and keep contention down, they may need to add bandwidth.
So in short if ntl do all this and they have to cap to make a profit then something is f**ked up somewhere, they are either making a obscene profit for their shareholders (i think some of you posting here own shares :D ) or their directors need replacing because they should be making a large profit with all the above practices.
Not sure they are making a large profit, but assuming they are, maybe they NEED to do this to keep the banks and venture capitalists who rescued the company a couple of years back happy? I have worked for a company financed by venture capitalists. If the VCs say you make a profit, you have to make a profit. If you don't, they pull their money out and you possibly fold.
The biggest mistake NTL made was taking out loans and buying loads of smaller cable companies then sitting back and watching while the whole comms market collapsed, but that's a topic for elsewhere.
I keep saying it again and again, although ntl dont compete with telewest it doesnt mean we cant ask questions why telewest are able to provide so much more then ntl and expect a good answer instead of abusive remarks made against those who dont like it.
True. I didn't think anyone was getting abusive though.
ian@huth
07-01-2005, 18:05
Chrysalis, Regarding point 2 that you have made in your post #125.
NTL may have a bigger network and big fat pipes all over the place but before you get to those big fat pipes you have to go through a UBR which has hundreds of customers using it and a relatively small amount of bandwidth available. The available bandwidth depends on the channel width, modulation type and modulation level in question. I am sure that one of the NTL peeps such as Ignition can tell you what bandwidth is available through a UBR card. You will see that it doesn't take many users maxing out their connections to bring all users on that card down to dial-up speeds.
Ignition
07-01-2005, 18:09
Blimey I wander off for a while and it all goes pearshaped.
Th'Eng, nice glib remark, I'm aware we're in the UK, a poster mentioned an unmetered 4/1 ISP in the US and I asked which one it was. Turned out he was referring to Bell / Sympatico in Canada, which I was already aware of (moving out there soon I need to know these things ;) )
Now then...
Contrary to what people might thing a bigger network results on LOWER costs as the cost per user is lower.
Doesn't do much for costs on local HFC network though.
1 - Buying bandwidth in larger amounts = more purchasing power so less price paid per mbit.
Doesn't do anything for the major cost, HFC upgrade, maintenance, resegmentation, etc.
2 - Having bigger pipes results in less visible contention, eg. try doing 20:1 contention on a 2mbit pipe for 512kbit users, you would be lucky to get 8 on there without seeing issues and thats only 2:1 contention so when you have smaller pipes you are forced to lower contention to maintain qos this means higher cost per user.
Statistical contention yes. Shame that on an HFC network one needs to either improve the quality of the HFC or split nodes in order to increase bandwidth.
3 - Ntl use transperent proxies again reducing costs, most of the isp's I mentioned if not all dont do this so their costs will be higher.
No idea what those beasties do for the bottom line, personally I'd get shot of them or use them for caching more bandwidth hungry traffic.
So in short if ntl do all this and they have to cap to make a profit then something is f**ked up somewhere, they are either making a obscene profit for their shareholders (i think some of you posting here own shares :D ) or their directors need replacing because they should be making a large profit with all the above practices.
Actually no, Telewest are much more profitable operating wise.
I keep saying it again and again, although ntl dont compete with telewest it doesnt mean we cant ask questions why telewest are able to provide so much more then ntl and expect a good answer instead of abusive remarks made against those who dont like it.
Oki doki. A while ago there was this cable company, the biggest in the UK in terms of homes passed, called Consumer Co. Owned by Cable and Wireless. At this time Telewest were number 2 and ntl were number 3. Consumer Co. was put up for sale and both ntl and Telewest bid obscene amounts but ntl won as more of their bid was cash and less shares compared to TW. Due to the slower than expected take up of CATV (Sky took a much higher share of market than satellite in North America and more homes use CATV for standard analogue channels there rather than terrestrial antennae and aerials) essentially both cable companies crashed and burned. ntl were running on fumes for a while and were restructuring debt a full year before Telewest did. While ntl were restructuring Telewest were doing extensive resegmentation and upgrades on their (smaller and with no Ex-Videotron, Bell Cablemedia instead IIRC) hybrid networks.
In a sentence it comes down to cash. Had Telewest won the bidding for CoCo positions would probably be reversed.
The isp's I mentioned do I know if they have issues?, well I read adslguide regurly following the latest adsl news and I know which isp's have problems and which dont, and the ones I mentioned do not have problems related to contention and speed, nildram is the best example of this their customers consist of lots of online gamers and their pings will be very sensitive to contention so I am sure I would know about it if there was any issues there.
Heh cba to read back + find said list. Nildram certainly aren't without issues though, Datastream customers complaining of poor pings / speeds, they traffic shaped at one point after running out of bandwidth amongst other things.
Time of day cap - have cap for peak time usage and then make it unmetered for say 1am to 8am.
Most consistent traffic is upstream, which doesn't drop much between those times. If it's getting caned overnight as people don't have to worry about limitation late night gamers, maybe playing clan matches in the USA, will moan like hell.
Unmetered package - unmetered 24/7 but speeds reduced to 150kbit at peak time.
Ummm. Because it's peak time, when people generally want to use their connections. People don't pay enough to be able to download @ 3Mbit for 18 hours a day all month either.
Sell static ip's and other extras - It is proven on many adsl isp's that people want these things and they can have a high profit margin for isp's and as such subsidise other parts of the operation.
Because cable IPs delivered via standard means cannot be static. Without a static IP there goes the extras like IP blocks, custom reverse DNS, etc. Can I point out to you that ntl is the biggest retail ISP. Do BTBroadband or Wanadoo offer these extras? ntl as a company cannot be everything to everyone and have to tend to the majority like every other huge ISP. Most people don't give a monkey's about a static IP or rDNS, that's where ISPs like Zen, Nildram, A+A etc have their niche offering these services.
Reintroduce install fee - This free install has gone on for year's now when is it going to come back.
Is that any of your business? Presumably if you change back to BT you'll complain that part of your line rental is subsidising someone in the Outer Hebrides whose phone line costs several hundred a month to operate.
Introduce support tiering - For those who are newbies and will need tech support add £5 to monthly fee and provide 0800 (150) support, the experienced ones of us use premium rate support.
Because 95% or more of customers *are* newbies and nearly all customers will have to call support at some point. Less 'newbies' will sign up due to the extra fiver a month on the headline price, less 'experienced' ones of you will sign up due to the premium rate support, or will be peeved when you have to ring.
In short there are many sides of the argument, some of you may say you subisidise my bandwidth usage, whilst I could argue I subsidise you having to ring up tech support every day when you get confused as to why your drivers broken etc..
In EVERY company without exception some customers subsidise others. I will happily argue that those using extreme amounts of bandwidth are being heavily subsidised by others, yes even those 'newbies' who ring tech support from time to time (also known as pretty much everyone). I rang tech support 3 times while working for ntl several levels above them because I needed and engineer and they are the people who sort it, presumably that makes me a newbie?
Try and engage brain before fingers, most of your arguments are fatally flawed and take no consideration of any viewpoint other than you own, which is highly polarised and not very well informed of either the business or technical side of cable and telecomms.
quadplay
07-01-2005, 18:10
Before you mention buying power again, bear in mind that (I believe) the only company that make UBRs & parts that NTL can use is Cisco. Cisco is far larger than NTL. Also, if Cisco is the only company that makes the upgrades needed, what are NTL going to say? "Reduce your prices or we won't upgrade"?.
Not quite - other companies do make UBRs (which are actually called CMTS - Cable Modem Termination Servers - uBR (Universal Broadband Router) is the Cisco term). In fact, ntl trialed a Juniper CMTS, but they didn't perform very well.
Ignition
07-01-2005, 18:19
Not quite - other companies do make UBRs (which are actually called CMTS - Cable Modem Termination Servers - uBR (Universal Broadband Router) is the Cisco term). In fact, ntl trialed a Juniper CMTS, but they didn't perform very well.
They did actually :p: there were other reasons why it was never deployed :)
Not quite - other companies do make UBRs (which are actually called CMTS - Cable Modem Termination Servers - uBR (Universal Broadband Router) is the Cisco term). In fact, ntl trialed a Juniper CMTS, but they didn't perform very well.
Fair enough... I was trying to make the point that it's a limited market though. Not many people or companies need Cable Modem Termination Servers.
quadplay
07-01-2005, 18:21
They did actually :p: there were other reasons why it was never deployed :)
I was trying to avoid that subject, and put it in the most diplomatic way possible! :p:
th'engineer
07-01-2005, 18:36
Have you ever thought that some people want to get a job done quicker and are not interested in doing more jobs. How many times do you click on a link in a post and then have to wait two or three minutes for whatever to download.
Only when the NTL proxy routing is up the creak :D
th'engineer
07-01-2005, 18:40
Blimey I wander off for a while and it all goes pearshaped.
Th'Eng, nice glib remark, I'm aware we're in the UK,
Thats good thought you was comparing lemons with apples lets only look at the UK please :D
Ignition
07-01-2005, 18:47
Thats good thought you was comparing lemons with apples lets only look at the UK please :D
I'll be thinking of you while surfing on my 10Mbit/1Mbit connection in Canada :)
Even if it does have a CAP
I'll be thinking of you while surfing on my 10Mbit/1Mbit connection in Canada :)
Even if it does have a CAP
:2up:
:erm: perchance does the impending move to CA have anything to do with your inate desires to be a lumberjack
http://www.mwscomp.com/sounds/mp3/lumberjk.mp3
:rolleyes:
Ignition
07-01-2005, 19:04
:2up:
:erm: perchance does the impending move to CA have anything to do with your inate desires to be a lumberjack
http://www.mwscomp.com/sounds/mp3/lumberjk.mp3
:rolleyes:
You wish daxx. :Sprint:
Chrysalis
07-01-2005, 19:43
Bill C I was reffering you to bringing up the british gas/centrica subject.
Ignition and others I take on your points about UBR contention and yes you are right that is a small choke point and as such is harder to manage contention level's, so you pointed out telewest are making more profit, could you perhaps point out why you think this is? Bad management from ntl perhaps or is it just Telewest's packages are more profitable.
To be quite frank I dont care if 95% of people want this and that its not all about the masses, your argument seems to be its ok if 5% subsidise the 95% but not ok the other way round and you conveniantly only compare to BT and wannadoo who are both a joke of an isp. 10mbit is overkill for surfing, if I was just surfing I would be on the 17.99 package and jumping for joy because the new tiers are awesome for web surfer's they have nothing to complain about, perhaps these are the people just been one sided? Its people who download large files who are shafted because they have no package available for them, and when I mentioned hard cap earlier I meant hard cap as in going over will not be ignored as it is now there will be some sort of action taken by the isp not necessarily been cut off.
The thing is going back to the 95% of users argument your point is also flawed, for example lets say 5% of users are using more traffic then NTL see as acceptable so the other 95% of users subsidise this, this cost is seperated between 95% of users and as such it will only be small per user maybe not even £1 on a monthly bill. However the other way round how much does it cost to provide weekly support for 95% if ntl's customer's??? this must be a fair amount and more then the extra bandwidth costs and only 5% of users are subsidising it to, so that cost split between 5% of users is a higher amount on each bill maybe £2 or £3 a month. So my argument is the bulk of users might be paying £1 to pay for my traffic (I use 30-50 gig a month) but I pay £2 to pay for them ringing up ntl on toll free lines.
Bill C I was reffering you to bringing up the british gas/centrica subject.
Well you started that subject. please go ahead and report me i dont care really care anymore.
Now now people, lets play nice please.
ian@huth
07-01-2005, 20:51
snip>
The thing is going back to the 95% of users argument your point is also flawed, for example lets say 5% of users are using more traffic then NTL see as acceptable so the other 95% of users subsidise this, this cost is seperated between 95% of users and as such it will only be small per user maybe not even £1 on a monthly bill. However the other way round how much does it cost to provide weekly support for 95% if ntl's customer's??? this must be a fair amount and more then the extra bandwidth costs and only 5% of users are subsidising it to, so that cost split between 5% of users is a higher amount on each bill maybe £2 or £3 a month. So my argument is the bulk of users might be paying £1 to pay for my traffic (I use 30-50 gig a month) but I pay £2 to pay for them ringing up ntl on toll free lines.
That argument is rather flawed in that it assumes that the 5% of heavy users are all experienced and never need support and the other 95% are inexperienced and are constantly ringing for support.
There are quite a few heavy users who are new to the internet, hear about P2P and dive straight in trying to download the whole internet overnight. You regularly see posts from them complaining about things like slow downloads which turn out to be caused by them maxing out their uploads instead of throttling them back to allow for download ACK packets to be sent. They have a new toy but don't know how to use it properly.
On the other side of the coin there are many users that are very experienced and never need support but have a usage well within the cap.
Can anybody tell me when the upgrade's are coming?
Ignition
07-01-2005, 21:35
*sigh*
The average usage for a broadband user in the UK is 6GB (This includes 'heavier' users).
5% of users are responsible for 65% of usage.
Remove that and the average drops below 5GB. I would hope that the caps make more sense. You can't please everyone all the time, however the majority that will be fine with 5GB along with the >95% that are fine with 30GB or 40GB will be pleased.
You can please some people all the time, all people some of the time, never everyone all the time.
With ADSL available to more than 96% of the population now according to BT and ntl being available in generally built up areas where there's also ADSL is there any reason to stay with ntl if the new services don't agree with your usage plans.
Conversation on this issue is futile, the facts are the caps are happening, on their way, if they don't appeal or suit usage do what you would do if your supermarket didn't suit you and use someone else. Nothing else to be said really. That's the way it is, like it or go elsewhere. When you cut through the PR, etc that's all that can be said.
That's all I have to say on it too, silly subject to debate (again) at depth, right or wrong it's happening, take it or go.
*sigh*
The average usage for a broadband user in the UK is 6GB (This includes 'heavier' users).
5% of users are responsible for 65% of usage.
Remove that and the average drops below 5GB. I would hope that the caps make more sense. You can't please everyone all the time, however the majority that will be fine with 5GB along with the >95% that are fine with 30GB or 40GB will be pleased.
You can please some people all the time, all people some of the time, never everyone all the time.
With ADSL available to more than 96% of the population now according to BT and ntl being available in generally built up areas where there's also ADSL is there any reason to stay with ntl if the new services don't agree with your usage plans.
Conversation on this issue is futile, the facts are the caps are happening, on their way, if they don't appeal or suit usage do what you would do if your supermarket didn't suit you and use someone else. Nothing else to be said really. That's the way it is, like it or go elsewhere. When you cut through the PR, etc that's all that can be said.
That's all I have to say on it too, silly subject to debate (again) at depth, right or wrong it's happening, take it or go.all i can say is sooooooo true and to the point. :tu:
What gets me about this is.
Just because you double you download speed does not mean you have to double the amount you download. Gee some heavy users must have very very big drives.
sits back and waits for the normal heavy users to say how small there drives are :D
I know thats why i agree with rone :D
So when you moving :Sprint:
tomjleeds
07-01-2005, 23:08
I'll be thinking of you while surfing on my 10Mbit/1Mbit connection in Canada :)
Even if it does have a CAP
Suggestion, check out the RoadRunner Business packages (available to residences). 10Mbit/2.5Mbit for $80/month ;)
I've increased my knowledge of the overall NTL network somewhat from reading this thread, so thanks to all for the good information that's been passed around :)
So, the consensus on the network seems to be that the UBRs/CTMSs are the problem, rather than the national backbone. I assume this is either due to hardware limitations, lack of dynamically provided bandwidth or just plain overloading of the systems?
What's classed as a 'heavy' user?
Hans Gruber
07-01-2005, 23:46
If it is down to the UBRs it's annoying that people in areas unaffected with oversubscription should be burdened with the same cap levels.
Ignition
08-01-2005, 00:02
Suggestion, check out the RoadRunner Business packages (available to residences). 10Mbit/2.5Mbit for $80/month ;)
Minor issues:
1) RoadRunner = TimeWarner Cable = USA
2) There's no 10Mbit/2.5Mbit package, top package is 4Mbit/2Mbit, not available in all areas (presumably relies on DOCSIS 2, to give out a 2Mbit upstream without DOCSIS 2 is suicidal).
It's also a mere $409.95 a month.
RoadRunner Premium is the closest one in pricing I think, 6Mbps downstream (soon moving to 8), 512k upstream, $84.95/month.
tomjleeds
08-01-2005, 09:43
Minor issues:
1) RoadRunner = TimeWarner Cable = USA
2) There's no 10Mbit/2.5Mbit package, top package is 4Mbit/2Mbit, not available in all areas (presumably relies on DOCSIS 2, to give out a 2Mbit upstream without DOCSIS 2 is suicidal).
It's also a mere $409.95 a month.
RoadRunner Premium is the closest one in pricing I think, 6Mbps downstream (soon moving to 8), 512k upstream, $84.95/month.
I guess the issue of it being USA only is kind of big ;) To be honest, I don't really see why anyone would need anything faster than 4Mbps/0.8Mbps, if I think about it.
Perhaps it's offered to businesses only - my friend gets it through his employer. That wasn't the impression which I got from him, but anyway, before this thread turns into a PM conversation...
What exactly is the main problem with the UBRs?
DieDieMyDarling
08-01-2005, 10:50
The average usage for a broadband user in the UK is 6GB (This includes 'heavier' users).
5% of users are responsible for 65% of usage.
Remove that and the average drops below 5GB. I would hope that the caps make more sense. You can't please everyone all the time, however the majority that will be fine with 5GB along with the >95% that are fine with 30GB or 40GB will be pleased.
I'm a bit shocked the averages use is that high, after you take heavy users out of the equation.
This figure is taken while most ntl users are on 300k, which isn't proper broadband, i recall people saying they can't even sign up to Broadband Plus on this speed, as it doesn't support many of the multimedia streams.
So ntl are upgrading everyone that's on 300k, to 1mb. All those people who couldn't sign up to Broadband Plus, and had a limited internet experience, will now be able to do things they couldn't do before, just as people who move from dial up to 300k, it opens up new ways to enjoy the internet.
Now, if those people (however many hundred thousand of them) all get 1mb speeds in the next few weeks/months, they ARE going to try downloading things they wouldn't have before, they're gonna start listening to internet radio, watching internet tv, downloading bigger movie clips, etc.
I've seen people mention that just because you get a faster speed, you don't have to download more, but in this case it does mean that, because the new, faster speed opens up new possibilities.
So, ntl in their infinite wisdom (teehee) have decided to impose a cap, based on current use, taking the 'less than 5gb' average use of non-heavy users, and at the same time give those very people a connection which is over 3 times the speed. You can't honestly expect someone not to change their internet habits, while changing to a speed so much faster than the old one. Ntl have only introduced this much faster speed to lure the public with misleading advertising (they won't mention the cap in the ads, just that they have the fastest lower teir). Simple reason for this is, they're desperate to offer the fastest speeds, and keep ahead of ADSL, but can't actually support it.
Same with the 3mb line, they introduced it to keep up there with ADSL, but to offer a speed like this with a 40GB cap, is just ludicrous. People who will pay for a 3mb line, are going to be heavy users, people who use the internet a lot, and want to download BIG files, fast. And to give them a service that can only be used less than an hour a day is just pointless.
Regardless of how we all feel about caps, i really do think ntl have made a big mistake. AOL are already playing on the 'uncapped' ads, and with other ADSL companies moving into new area's, it won't be long before ntl are left behind, and losing their customers by the hundreds, and possibly thousands, to other providers, who will undoubtably play on a lot peoples fears of going over the cap, most people won't know how much 5gb is, and the sheer fear of it, will be enough to make them think twice about where they go.
JohnHorb
08-01-2005, 11:10
I'm a bit shocked the averages use is that high, after you take heavy users out of the equation.
I think the point being made was that the average would drop BELOW the 5GB cap, not that it would be as high as 5GB.
Ignition
08-01-2005, 11:24
I guess the issue of it being USA only is kind of big ;)
Wheresas Canada is just plain big, bigger than the USA and the second largest country by land area in the world behind Russia ;)
The RoadRunner service you alluded to doesn't exist, RR are advertising and having checked that there's no 10Mbit, 6Mbit = max, your mates may have been telling slight porkies.
Hans Gruber
08-01-2005, 11:26
To be honest, I don't really see why anyone would need anything faster than 4Mbps/0.8Mbps, if I think about it.
I'm pretty sure I've heard that said about most thing, CPUs in particular, but as things get faster people find new things do with increase. It seems bandwidth will be an exception to that rule if the ISPs get their way. As long as they keep their profits, the growth of the internet will be restricted.
It seems a little odd how a few people in here are very interested in NTL's profits, and doing everything they can to convince people caps are good for all of us...
It seems a little odd how a few people in here are very interested in NTL's profits, and doing everything they can to convince people caps are good for all of us...
So let me get this straight you cannot make a convincing argument so you resort to accusations.
I would suggest you go read up on the subject and come back with good arguments instead of unsubstantiated accusations about members of this site.
It seems a little odd how a few people in here are very interested in NTL's profits, and doing everything they can to convince people caps are good for all of us...Why is it odd ? If ntl do not make a profit then they will go out of business, who exactly would that help. :dozey:
Hans Gruber
08-01-2005, 11:35
So let me get this straight you cannot make a convincing argument so you resort to accusations.
I would suggest you go read up on the subject and come back with good arguments instead of unsubstantiated accusations about members of this site.
:confused:
Hans Gruber
08-01-2005, 11:36
Why is it odd ? If ntl do not make a profit then they will go out of business, who exactly would that help. :dozey:
Well obviously.
If it is down to the UBRs it's annoying that people in areas unaffected with oversubscription should be burdened with the same cap levels.So you would be happy for ntl to reduce your cap as they added more people to your ubr :erm: I don't think so. :rolleyes:
:confused:
You see i have no problem with caps. Therefor if i read your post correctly i must therefor only be interested in profit.
Hans Gruber
08-01-2005, 11:39
So you would be happy for ntl to reduce your cap as they added more people to your ubr :erm: I don't think so. :rolleyes:
Firstly I said "If" and secondly I've never experienced any slowdown at all from my max download speed so there's no reason to think my UBR is anywhere near full, if I ever did experience slowdown I may start thinking capping extreme heavy user was good for all of us.
ian@huth
08-01-2005, 11:40
I'm a bit shocked the averages use is that high, after you take heavy users out of the equation.
This figure is taken while most ntl users are on 300k, which isn't proper broadband, i recall people saying they can't even sign up to Broadband Plus on this speed, as it doesn't support many of the multimedia streams.
Are those averages just of NTL users or are they of all broadband users in Britain?
Is the reason that they can't sign up for Broadband Plus because the lower tier connection is so slow or is it that NTL only provide it on the upper tiers in order to tempt those on the lowest tier to upgrade?
So ntl are upgrading everyone that's on 300k, to 1mb. All those people who couldn't sign up to Broadband Plus, and had a limited internet experience, will now be able to do things they couldn't do before, just as people who move from dial up to 300k, it opens up new ways to enjoy the internet.
Now, if those people (however many hundred thousand of them) all get 1mb speeds in the next few weeks/months, they ARE going to try downloading things they wouldn't have before, they're gonna start listening to internet radio, watching internet tv, downloading bigger movie clips, etc.
I've seen people mention that just because you get a faster speed, you don't have to download more, but in this case it does mean that, because the new, faster speed opens up new possibilities.
So, ntl in their infinite wisdom (teehee) have decided to impose a cap, based on current use, taking the 'less than 5gb' average use of non-heavy users, and at the same time give those very people a connection which is over 3 times the speed. You can't honestly expect someone not to change their internet habits, while changing to a speed so much faster than the old one.
Why would giving customers an upgrade from 300k to 1 Mb tempt them to start listening to internet radio, watch internet tv, downloadbigger movie clips, etc? The only time that I have listened to internet radio was when it was the only way to listen to a football match commentry. Sounded exactly the same whether you had a 300k or 1.5Mb connection. I use my radio , TV and hi-fi for audio visual pleasure of a better quality than the internet supplies. Streaming media is just one of the many things that the anti cap brigade say takes you quickly over the cap but how many actually use it for extended periods.
Ntl have only introduced this much faster speed to lure the public with misleading advertising (they won't mention the cap in the ads, just that they have the fastest lower teir). Simple reason for this is, they're desperate to offer the fastest speeds, and keep ahead of ADSL, but can't actually support it.
If you look at NTLs Media reports you will see that besides increasing current speeds 300k / 750k / 1.5Mb to 1Mb / 2 Mb / 3 Mb they are also introducing a lower tier of 300k priced at £15.99. Rather destroys part of your argument.
Same with the 3mb line, they introduced it to keep up there with ADSL, but to offer a speed like this with a 40GB cap, is just ludicrous. People who will pay for a 3mb line, are going to be heavy users, people who use the internet a lot, and want to download BIG files, fast. And to give them a service that can only be used less than an hour a day is just pointless.
Like your definition of the usage pattern of people on the highest tier the facts to back it up you got from where? My son-in-law has a top tier connection that he hardly uses at all but does want top performance and things to happen fast when he does use it.
Whilst I am on the lowest tier which is quite adequate for my needs, even with a cap, I will on occasion move to the highest tier for an odd month when I have a short term need for that speed but my bandwidth used will probably stay pretty much the same as normal whilst on that top tier.
Every NTL customer is given a service that can be used for 24 hours a day no matter what tier they are on and nobody is restricted to less than an hours use aa days.
Regardless of how we all feel about caps, i really do think ntl have made a big mistake. AOL are already playing on the 'uncapped' ads, and with other ADSL companies moving into new area's, it won't be long before ntl are left behind, and losing their customers by the hundreds, and possibly thousands, to other providers, who will undoubtably play on a lot peoples fears of going over the cap, most people won't know how much 5gb is, and the sheer fear of it, will be enough to make them think twice about where they go.
Marketing can make any service appear to be very good but how effective is most of it? Yes, a lot of people do not know how much 5Gb is but it doesn't stop many thousand signing up for ADSL services with a 1 or 2 Gb per month cap. NTL will not lose customers by the thousand with the new tiers and caps, they are more likely to gain customers particularly when broadband is bundled with other services at a discount which will be happening. British people are very much stuck in their ways and do not change suppliers easily and I can't see them changing because of the caps because most of them will never be affected.
Hans Gruber
08-01-2005, 11:41
You see i have no problem with caps. Therefor if i read your post correctly i must therefor only be interested in profit.
I didn't make any accusations directed at at anyone, I purely suggested it's possible some people on here don't fully have the customer as their first prority. I'm sorry if you thought this was aimed at you but it was not.
Hans Gruber
08-01-2005, 11:51
Just some everybody knows, my main problem with the cap is, as things get faster, people find more possibilities of how technology can be used. The next big thing in technology is high definition video, now there is no way using any kind of HD service is going to use small files. The only reason HD is now possible is due to faster internet services, but this will never catch on if we start capping usage.
Of course it is in the ISPs best interests to restrict what people can do, possibly so they can sell further subscription services at a later date. But for the good of the internet it is NOT good to restrict people usage. It seems the suggestion is anyone that uses over 40gb a month is a pirate that is no doubt funding terrorism. Which, currently, for the majority may be the case, but technology moves so fast this will not be true for long, but anyone using one of these new capped ISPs will not be able to experience this technology.
Once NTL realises how much bandwidth people really do need in the near future, what will they do? Remove the cap? Not likely if it's firmly in place. We will end up missing out on a huge part of the internet. Which is BAD.
ian@huth
08-01-2005, 12:14
Just some everybody knows, my main problem with the cap is, as things get faster, people find more possibilities of how technology can be used. The next big thing in technology is high definition video, now there is no way using any kind of HD service is going to use small files. The only reason HD is now possible is due to faster internet services, but this will never catch on if we start capping usage.
Of course it is in the ISPs best interests to restrict what people can do, possibly so they can sell further subscription services at a later date. But for the good of the internet it is NOT good to restrict people usage. It seems the suggestion is anyone that uses over 40gb a month is a pirate that is no doubt funding terrorism. Which, currently, for the majority may be the case, but technology moves so fast this will not be true for long, but anyone using one of these new capped ISPs will not be able to experience this technology.
Once NTL realises how much bandwidth people really do need in the near future, what will they do? Remove the cap? Not likely if it's firmly in place. We will end up missing out on a huge part of the internet. Which is BAD.
There will be many new applications coming in the future which will require much more bandwidth. The broadband speeds that NTL provide are not standing still, they are increasing rapidly. Both speeds and caps will increase over a period of time allowing those future applications to be run when they arrive.
High definition TV streams will eventually be available but money has to be invested in this area whether they are delivered via the internet, cable TV, satellite TV or Terrestrial TV.
Infrastructure and software have to be installed that will allow advancement in speeds and raising of caps and that can be time consuming and expensive. NTL have shown that they are making serious investment towards these ends.
Hans Gruber
08-01-2005, 12:34
Do you really want to have to wait for NTL to acknowledge these new technologies before you can make use of them?
ian@huth
08-01-2005, 13:12
Do you really want to have to wait for NTL to acknowledge these new technologies before you can make use of them?
Which new technologies?
If you are talking about High Definition video streaming have you got a PC powerful enough to process it correctly or enough storage to download it for later viewing? Some of the tests on satellite are using 19 Mbps at 1920x1080i resolution and another at the same resolution is using 34 Mbps.
NTL will know what is coming along and will take account of how things will affect their market position. They will not base their strategy on niche markets.
One rumour doing the rounds at the moment is that NTL will soon be replacing all customers broadband modems with new modems running DOCSIS2. Think of that what you will. ;)
Hans Gruber
08-01-2005, 13:21
Which new technologies?
If you are talking about High Definition video streaming have you got a PC powerful enough to process it correctly or enough storage to download it for later viewing? Some of the tests on satellite are using 19 Mbps at 1920x1080i resolution and another at the same resolution is using 34 Mbps.
NTL will know what is coming along and will take account of how things will affect their market position. They will not base their strategy on niche markets.
One rumour doing the rounds at the moment is that NTL will soon be replacing all customers broadband modems with new modems running DOCSIS2. Think of that what you will. ;)
Who knows what new techs might come along, but I'd like to be able to experience them without NTL dictating how I must receive them. And yeah my PC is fast enough to decode the files (well if the WM samples are anything to go by) :p
The fact is 40gb is not much by coming standards. If it was maybe a 6 month stop gap while NTL increased capacity, people could live with it. But from past experience companies don't remove restrictions once in place, if it means possible lower profit margins.
JohnHorb
08-01-2005, 13:24
But from past experience companies don't remove restrictions once in place, if it means possible lower profit margins.Isn't speed a restriction?
all i can say is sooooooo true and to the point. :tu:
sits back and waits for the normal heavy users to say how small there drives are :DDear Bill
Please can you help as ive now run out of space on my 500gig array of HDs.
Please can you fix it for me to get another 500gigs please as thats such a small capacity on its own :)
;)
PS.
You seem to be one NTLs top IT professionals so you must be on "Premium" wages, so you could afford it no problem!!!
Ill pm my delivery address later :D
Dear Bill
Please can you help as ive now run out of space on my 500gig array of HDs.
Please can you fix it for me to get another 500gigs please as thats such a small capacity on its own :)
;)
PS.
You seem to be one NTLs top IT professionals so you must be on "Premium" wages, so you could afford it no problem!!!
Ill pm my delivery address later :D
Sorry i need the money to buy more shares. :LOL:
Why is everyone assuming these caps will actively enforced? Has the current one?
NTL have not said what they will do with people that go over the cap. They may cut you off, they may charge for the extra download. The fact is that WE DON'T KNOW. All we have at the moment is speculation.
To be honest, if the cap is a problem, then most of us do have an answer: Find an uncapped broadband provider. If enough people do this, you can bet NTL will reconsider their position.
Why is everyone assuming these caps will actively enforced? Has the current one?
NTL have not said what they will do with people that go over the cap. They may cut you off, they may charge for the extra download. The fact is that WE DON'T KNOW. All we have at the moment is speculation.
To be honest, if the cap is a problem, then most of us do have an answer: Find an uncapped broadband provider. If enough people do this, you can bet NTL will reconsider their position.:tu:
Now there is commonsense Well said.
But lets face it. People just love to debate about the unknown, which is what this is. The unknown until such time NTL give out more information.
I am buying a new dvd recorder but they are not sure until the day it is sent what time it will arrive. You can debate that if you want its the same thing in the end An unknown .
:LOL:
MovedGoalPosts
08-01-2005, 14:43
Why is everyone assuming these caps will actively enforced? Has the current one?
NTL have not said what they will do with people that go over the cap. They may cut you off, they may charge for the extra download. The fact is that WE DON'T KNOW. All we have at the moment is speculation.
Ntl's own propoaganda suggests metering will be a real possibility: http://www.ntl.com/locales/gb/en/investors/presentations/Dec-04-Duffy-conferences-Final-UBS.pdf see page 11 shows references that they expect a luanch in 2005 after VOD. This story was pciked up on by CF in news article: http://www.cableforum.co.uk/article/118/ntl-metered-broadband-in-2005 . Although I will admit that it is unclear whether this would be an additional package to the exisitng (upgraded speed) lineups.
To be honest, if the cap is a problem, then most of us do have an answer: Find an uncapped broadband provider. If enough people do this, you can bet NTL will reconsider their position.
Agreed, but ntl do seem rather blinkered to the views of their customers, with high level management spouting the party line and generally preferring to provide what is good for ntl rather than what the customer might prefer.
quadplay
08-01-2005, 14:44
I am buying a new dvd recorder but they are not sure until the day it is sent what time it will arrive. You can debate that if you want its the same thing in the end An unknown .
You still owe me that :beer: if that works, Bill! :LOL:
You still owe me that :beer: if that works, Bill! :LOL:
Definitely :D
Chrysalis
08-01-2005, 16:30
I find it even more funny how we get treated like dumb idiots. How does 3mbit make web browsing faster then 750kbit, have you ran tests? becuase I have between 300kbit,750kbit and 1.5mbit and there is a subantial difference between 300kbit and 750kbit but next to nothing between 750kbit and 1.5mbit so going upto 3mbit will make under 5% difference. The only thing 3mbit helps on is downloading large files, even downloading small files such as virus defenitions is slower on the old speeds but its hardly unacceptable just a few seconds. 3mbit comes into play when you downloading things such as CD/DVD images, Large movie clips, game demos, multitasking between different internet apps, have large household using the internet all at once, HDTV (available abroad already and internet is a global market, and a 2ghz pc can handle it quite easily). To be quite frank 3mbit for web browsing is a waste of money you get a <%5 improvement so I guess its for the dumb and rich (waits for the flames). NTL are just like wannadoo and BT playing on the public's lack of knowledge, they advertising high speeds no mention of cap and hoping a low price lures the customers in. UK has a low average (6 gig is low) because our country is still behind in internet maturity.
My 95% 5% argument isnt flawed either as I never said the 5% who rarely use support are the same 5% who ntl claim they dont want as customers. 5% might not be anywhere near the true figure who dont use support but I am just assuming its a small percentage as ntl seem to be after the newbie customer's who dont know whats what and try to get them to think that 2mbit/3mbit is only used for web browsing/email.
Well what do you know yet another Cap thread with nothing new in it. The same crowds of cap supporters and cap detesters debating the same points. I've read nothing new in this thread that hasn't been said on here before.
When all is said and done it looks like a hard cap is coming. What we say or do on here will not change that fact. The only way this 'may' change is if enough people leave NTLs services post cap implementation and that simply will not happen.
ian@huth
08-01-2005, 17:05
Chysalis, the three tiers that we have with NTL each have a different upload speed and it can be that the highest tier is required by some customers because it has a much higher upload than the other two. These users may do very little downloading at all.
Some users may only want to download a few very high quality images each month but cannot afford the time to wait for the slower speed tiers to download them.
Web browsing may not be much different on the three tiers but many a time whilst just browsing you get a link which when clicked downloads a file to your computer. That file may take 6 minutes on a 1 meg connection, 3 minutes on a 2 meg connection and 2 minutes on a 3 meg connection but some people would rather not wait that extra 4 minutes and wouldn't mind paying the fiver a week extra to avoid it.
UK has a low average (6 gig is low) because our country is still behind in internet maturity.
Or it could be that the majority of our country are mature enough to realise that they can get a much better quality audio visual experience using equipment made specifically for the purpose that doesn't use any bandwidth. They may be mature enough to realise that downloading everything under the sun 24/7, much of which will never be seen, heard or used is pretty pointless.
Ignition
08-01-2005, 18:08
UK has a low average (6 gig is low) because our country is still behind in internet maturity.
Rrright, so Canada which has had multi-megabit DSL since 1995 and uses similar or less is equally immature?
Don't equate 'immaturity' with low usage, you're insulting everyone who doesn't use the internet for warez. (Awaits the screams of innocence and the list of all the legit apps that while they are getting more popular still pale into comparison with the 60+% of your average ISP's traffic which is P2P, not including the Usenet traffic)
Hans Gruber
08-01-2005, 18:09
So the only reason people will exceed the cap limit now is down to immaturtiy? Come on ianathuth, please don't go down that route.
ian@huth
08-01-2005, 18:56
So the only reason people will exceed the cap limit now is down to immaturtiy? Come on ianathuth, please don't go down that route.
Did I say that? No.
What I did infer was that there were a lot of users downloading anything and everything they could and would never listen to most of the mp3s they downloaded, never watch many of the videos that they downloaded and never play many of the games and game demos that they downloaded.
Think about it logically. If someone is downloading 24/7, when do they get the chance to listen, watch or play what they have downloaded? What do they do with all that material? How do they store it all?
Hans Gruber
08-01-2005, 19:32
Did I say that? No.
What I did infer was that there were a lot of users downloading anything and everything they could and would never listen to most of the mp3s they downloaded, never watch many of the videos that they downloaded and never play many of the games and game demos that they downloaded.
Think about it logically. If someone is downloading 24/7, when do they get the chance to listen, watch or play what they have downloaded? What do they do with all that material? How do they store it all?
Surely that is their business? People can do what they like with their time and money, it's really not for you to tell them what they should and shouldn't do. You need to understand not everyone is you.
And yes, you did say that. What has maturity got to do with what equiptment people use for their own personal entertainment?
Chrysalis
08-01-2005, 19:32
I dont download 24/7 but I am not comfortable with a 40 gig limit, I am sure there is many others like me.
Be assured many will leave ntl because of this even if they are light users as the cap will simply scare them off they wont want to go back to the days where they have to worry about their usage.
Chrysalis
08-01-2005, 19:37
Did I say that? No.
What I did infer was that there were a lot of users downloading anything and everything they could and would never listen to most of the mp3s they downloaded, never watch many of the videos that they downloaded and never play many of the games and game demos that they downloaded.
Think about it logically. If someone is downloading 24/7, when do they get the chance to listen, watch or play what they have downloaded? What do they do with all that material? How do they store it all?
Right shall I buy a dvd player and use my 14" tv with mono sound to watch dvd's instead of my pc which has 17" monitor and 4 speakers with subwoofer?
JohnHorb
08-01-2005, 19:44
Why? Don't you have a DVD drive on your PC?
ian@huth
08-01-2005, 20:58
Right shall I buy a dvd player and use my 14" tv with mono sound to watch dvd's instead of my pc which has 17" monitor and 4 speakers with subwoofer?
I would rather watch my DVDs on my 32" widescreen with home theatre system :) and still have my PC available to do other things whilst I am watching it.
Be assured many will leave ntl because of this even if they are light users as the cap will simply scare them off they wont want to go back to the days where they have to worry about their usage.
I doubt that very much. There are millions of people paying too much for their gas, electricity, telephone calls, credit cards, mortgage, etc (the list goes on and on) because they can't be bothered to change even though they know they should.
quadplay
09-01-2005, 00:23
Be assured many will leave ntl because of this even if they are light users as the cap will simply scare them off they wont want to go back to the days where they have to worry about their usage.
No, some will leave. The vast majority (through inertia or choice), will stay unless they find that they are regularly exceeding the cap - in which case, they can either change tier, or they might find a more specialist ISP would be a better choice for them. Most won't worry until they are informed by ntl that they should worry. I'm sure you'll find that the majority of customers are not yet aware of the forthcoming speed upgrades, and the downstream bandwidth cap that appears to be impending.
Remember, this forum, and others like it, are in no way representative of the Internet community these days. This forum, for example, currently has 6,380 members (which includes a number of members who do not use ntl's broadband service) - ntl has over 1.2 million broadband customers. The people who congregate here and discuss such matters are more likely to be heavier users, and that skews the discussion somewhat.
Chrysalis
09-01-2005, 16:28
Well even if say %3 leave, %3 of 1million is a fair sized number, 30000 people leaving is many in my view.
Anyway, my next point in this discussion. After reading the responses of those who agree with the cap, I seem to be getting this message.
NTL seem content in having high customer turnover they don't mind if people leave as long as the people signing up is more then the people leaving so they continue growth of their userbase. This approach is fine in a way I guess as it does give them growth but its an expensive approach also as there is engineer costs in installlations and admin costs in account closures/setups also the cost of providing the install free adds to this. I am bringing this up because I am trying to work out why NTL are not making a profit without the capping/proxies/admin fees/top tier price hike etc. That is why I questioned NTL not bringing back the install fee's. NTL just seem to be throwing money away be it bad management decisions and the people who pay the price are us. It was also brought up that the contention is at ubr level and so the contention can come easier, this is a good point but dont telewest have the potential same problem? If not why is this, do they have different ubr's? or do they have more of them?
On the subject of profit I think the only people who will know if NTL are making an actual profit and how much (in the broadband sector only) are shareholders and high level management so the people posting on these forums are you one of the 2? I am aware NTL probably tell their staff we need X amount to make a profit but companies usually have a target profit level and if they are below it they make the staff believe they are not hitting profit at all and something nasty will happen if they dont reach it, its a way to motivate the staff to work harder. This I have experienced many times.
quadplay
09-01-2005, 16:39
I don't think 30,000 people will leave the service as a direct result of this. We might be talking in the low thousands, but I doubt it.
The amount of profit or loss ntl makes is published in their quarterly and annual reports - which are available as PDF files on their website - so it's easy to find out. These reports also include a breakdown of how many subscribers take TV, telephone, dial-up or broadband services.
I think the real danger for NTL here is that they will become the next AOL.
AOL marketed themselves as good for newbies, with easy set-up, friendly software, parental controls etc. Also, AOL was everywhere, CDs in every shop and on every magazine, even on the default Windows desktop. At first, a lot of people signed up and loved it, but after a while those people started to get a bit more savvy and wanting to break away from the enforced AOL browser etc. Their techie friends didn't think much of AOL either, and never recommended it. So, they moved to a different provider.
AOL tried to counter, with less lock-in etc. NTL is in danger is going the same way. NTL is the default choice for anyone who already had NTL TV and phone packages. However, more and more people are getting into downloading media, be is via the Apple movie trailers site, Bittorrent, web radio etc. The BBCs new P2P app for distributing TV shows free of charge is likely to be massive in the comming year too. When people realise they can't use all this stuff on NTL, and their friends tell them how much better unlimited ADSL is, they will switch. Not only will they ditch their cable modem, but also their cable TV and phone. NTL won't just loose £25 a month, more like £55/month for someone with digital telly.
Even AOL are now doing unlimited (no cap) broadband, and BT/Sky would just love your business. There is even Freeview on the TV front. Keep in mind that NTL is already falling behind with both the TV (Sky has more channels available, better (working) interactive, HDTV in 2006) and phone (caller ID doesn't seem to be available in ex-C&W areas like mine). Don't think that ADSL ISPs won't match the speed/price of NTL either.
Personally, I like NTL as a provider, but if the cap is enforced I'd be forced to move. I know at least three people who I wouldn't consider particularly tech savvy who moved to NTL cable internet when they saw how much better is was than ADSL, but I have no doubt they would move back again. As the credit card companies offering 0% on balance transfers have found, people are getting more canny and will move when they have to.
I don't think 30,000 people will leave the service as a direct result of this. We might be talking in the low thousands, but I doubt it.
The amount of profit or loss ntl makes is published in their quarterly and annual reports - which are available as PDF files on their website - so it's easy to find out. These reports also include a breakdown of how many subscribers take TV, telephone, dial-up or broadband services.
Actually, I would have though 30000 out of 1 million would be lower than the normal quarterly turnover of customers..
Chrysalis
09-01-2005, 17:14
People will move, some out of morality of simply not wanting a cap no matter how much they use and other's who's usage doesnt fit with what ntl offer. Doesnt the report published by ntl show total profit not profit for the broadband sector only? if it does sorry I am wrong there.
Mojo you make a good point ntl seem to marketing themselves for the newbie type user, broadband medic and low usage accounts.
I forgot to say this in my last post as well, isp's such as nildram and pipex are not niche isp's they provide EVERYTHING that BT and wannadoo provide but they also provide more, the only reason why they dont have the same customer base is because of brand name and advertising. How many nildram TV ads do you see? none. What the customer don't know about they wont order. AOL is the only isp with no cap that advertises on tv. Simple fact is large isp's take advantage of this and exploit customer's they know most people are not aware of whats on offer out there and only provide the minimal needed.
Ignition
09-01-2005, 18:46
I forgot to say this in my last post as well, isp's such as nildram and pipex are not niche isp's they provide EVERYTHING that BT and wannadoo provide but they also provide more
Pipex and Nildram are the same company dude. Pipex don't provide any more than Wanadoo last I checked, dynamic IP, webspace, news server, email and that's about it. No doubt Wanadoo have various 'newbie' services that appeal more to the less experienced user. There are also various content services that BT / Wanadoo / Tiscali provide rather than leaving it all up to users and Bittorrent.
Actually I'm fairly insulted at your describing the mass market as being 'newbie' users. Why not go with Andrews and Arnold or another 'leet' ISP if ntl are too 'newbie' for you? What exactly do you do for a living, you're an IT guru presumably as you're quite happy to talk down to and describe as ignorant people who just want a cheap but quick internet connection with support there when they need it.
Sadly ntl will still be in business and will probably get a nice large net influx of customers as a result of these new packages. If I were you I'd get over it and find yourself an ISP leet enough to provide you services. Once again you provide nothing to back up your claims and insult the average user of high speed internet, that 95% who just want it to work rapidly when they want to browse, email, chat and download the odd file.
ian@huth
09-01-2005, 20:03
Not all customers who are on the lower tiers and have usage patterns that are well within the caps are newbies. A lot of them have a life outside of the internet but use it now and then.
I would suspect that many of the higher usage customers are newbies who have got a new toy and think it is their duty to download everything possible. Many of this type eventually wake up to the fact that they never use most of what they download.
I love the figures you keep quoting Ignition, after all:-
79.48% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Logic is a systematic method for getting the wrong conclusion with confidence.
Statistics is a systematic method for getting the wrong conclusion with 95% confidence.
I asked a statistician for her phone number... and she gave me an estimate.
Statistics are like a bikini. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.
Three percent exceeds 2 percent by 50 percent, not by 1 percent.
:D
Ignition
09-01-2005, 20:21
The unfortunate part in this case DVS is that they are true, based on easily measurable and quantifiable things reported reliably by electronic means.
Sign an NDA and I'll show you some stats on ntl subscribers proving out what I say about the UK industry as a whole.
Chrysalis
09-01-2005, 20:29
pipex own nildram but they still operate as different isp's, pipx offer unmetered bandwidth wannadoo doesnt.
I am into IT as you said but I am not wrong about the newbie argument, most people I speak to havent got a clue that ntl even have a cap and they certianly wouldnt know what I was on about if I said what would you do if you had a 5 gig cap. There are also other things such as people downloading at work because their work has a nice connection and then not downloading at home, but not everyone is lucky enough to be in that position. I would like someone to show me a website that needs a 3mbit connection and is quite slow on a 750kbit connection. Prove me wrong please.
homealone
09-01-2005, 20:38
I love the figures you keep quoting Ignition, after all:-
79.48% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Logic is a systematic method for getting the wrong conclusion with confidence.
Statistics is a systematic method for getting the wrong conclusion with 95% confidence.
I asked a statistician for her phone number... and she gave me an estimate.
Statistics are like a bikini. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.
Three percent exceeds 2 percent by 50 percent, not by 1 percent.
:D
not to disagree, but 'statistics' is an ambiguous term - on one hand describing the result of analysis of real data, on the other, a technique for predicting probabilities, based on sampled data.
- which category the stats quoted by Ignition fall in to I leave to your own conclusion.... ;)
ian@huth
09-01-2005, 22:18
I am into IT as you said but I am not wrong about the newbie argument, most people I speak to havent got a clue that ntl even have a cap and they certianly wouldnt know what I was on about if I said what would you do if you had a 5 gig cap. There are also other things such as people downloading at work because their work has a nice connection and then not downloading at home, but not everyone is lucky enough to be in that position. I would like someone to show me a website that needs a 3mbit connection and is quite slow on a 750kbit connection. Prove me wrong please.
Most people that you speak to would make up a very (repeated many times) small percentage of NTLs customer base.
Most NTL customers don't know there is a cap because they have never been informed of one by the company.
Most NTL customers have never visited this or similar sites so will not know of the discussions about caps.
Lack of knowledge about the existance of caps on NTL does not make a customer a newbie.
There are many websites that contain links which if the user clicks on every one will take substantially more time on a 750k connection than on a 3 Mb connection. When a person visits a website they do tend to click on the links within it. I visit a website every now and then which is basically nothing but a list of links to very large PDF files and you can certainly see the difference that hish speed connections make.
th'engineer
10-01-2005, 10:28
So when you moving :Sprint:
Bill just reiterating my view from the original cap have not changed my view thats one consistancy .
:LOL:
What happens Bill if NTL lose customers through introducing a cap.
DieDieMyDarling
10-01-2005, 11:21
There are many websites that contain links which if the user clicks on every one will take substantially more time on a 750k connection than on a 3 Mb connection. When a person visits a website they do tend to click on the links within it. I visit a website every now and then which is basically nothing but a list of links to very large PDF files and you can certainly see the difference that hish speed connections make.
And those 'very large' PDF files are going to eat into your cap. So, either you use your new 3mb connection to view normal websites, get email, etc, and don't notice much difference in speed, OR you use the speed for bigger files, notice the difference, but use up your cap much faster.
The thing i'm most looking forward to, is finding out if newsgroups, email, and outages improve any after the caps, i personally don't think they will, as ntl are still made up of the blind leading the blind, and mis-management is mis-management, however low you make the caps. :D
Yeah, its just like you could clock up 40gbs worth of pdfs a month :rolleyes:
Hans Gruber
10-01-2005, 14:40
Unless he has a stall down the market selling dodgy books :p
DieDieMyDarling
10-01-2005, 18:23
Unless he has a stall down the market selling dodgy books :p
If you think of 'large' PDF's as 50mb or there abouts, then it would only take 20 to make up 1gb. I used to download the tutorial ones, for Macromedia Flash, Photoshop, etc. They're all quite big files, some reaching over 150mb. :D And that's nothing compared to some of the tutorials for the likes of 3D rendering, including video's, they can be over 1GB (2 cd's worth). :erm:
gimpymoo
10-01-2005, 18:30
Is metered broadband really the way forward? And are telcos only implementing it to save their own bacon with the implementation of newer apps such as VOIP and VOD over IP which would take money AWAY from their own services. If in say a years time when VOIP is established, if I decide to use NTL's service, im sure they will waive the bandwith charge (seeing as im paying for the call anyway), although if I was to use Skype, im sure they would not be as generous.
My concerns is will the above technologies be able to take off if we are asked to pay once for the bandwith and then PAY again for the service? Kind of defeats the object of the exercise.
Were basically going back to the dial up culture where you will logon to get your emails, browse for a few minutes then log off under the fair of a huge internet bill.
Will I pay my bills online if im having to pay extra when it can be done at my bank for free... will I shop online when I can "browse" the shops in town for free considering all the sites which load oodles of multimedia content.. do I want to pay for that?
I just feel that PAYG broadband is a bad move and appears to be a step backwards considering the advances being made in IP technology and feel as though the only people who are going to benefit is the Telcos.
Do you think BT are going to let some company offer an un-metered service on their lines when they only offer a metered service which costs more?
ian@huth
10-01-2005, 18:42
Ten years is a very long time in internet terms. Technology and software will alter the speeds at which broadband operates and the levels at which services are capped, if indeed they are capped. In my eyes, capping is not being done to increase ISPs revenue but to ensure that the majority of customers get a reasonable internet experience. I don't think that there is anything to worry about for the vast majority of users and they will be able to continue doing their internet shopping, banking, etc as they do now.
I tried earlier today to get some interest in this topic but have had no takers so far. http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/showthread.php?t=22421
Hans Gruber
10-01-2005, 19:22
And are telcos only implementing it to save their own bacon with the implementation of newer apps such as VOIP and VOD over IP which would take money AWAY from their own services. If in say a years time when VOIP is established, if I decide to use NTL's service, im sure they will waive the bandwith charge (seeing as im paying for the call anyway), although if I was to use Skype, im sure they would not be as generous.
To me that's the reason they are introducing caps. If they cap the service before these services take off NTL can charge what they like once they start running their own services. People will be none the wiser that these kind of services previously existed freely and will just assume they'd have to pay NTL to use them.
We're coming to a point where the internet is being governed by the ISPs profits. It is in no way of any benefit for the customer.
What I don't get it why people, who claim to go nowhere near the limit, are so pro-cap. Surely it won't affect them one way or the other? Overloaded areas will still be overloaded, and other areas will still have plenty of bandwidth to go round. If you live in a bad area now, just wait till people are downloading at 3mbit.
There are many websites that contain links which if the user clicks on every one will take substantially more time on a 750k connection than on a 3 Mb connection. When a person visits a website they do tend to click on the links within it. I visit a website every now and then which is basically nothing but a list of links to very large PDF files and you can certainly see the difference that hish speed connections make.
Doesn't your own argument defeat that? Surely the "average" user, whoever that is, isn't going to be downloading many large PDF files. No, NTL are doing this is they can put a big number on their adverts and claim to be faster/cheaper than everyone else.
That's generally fine for the "standard" 2Mb package, but the point is that there isn't going to be a package for high bandwidth users. The 3Mb is still capped. I can't imagine why anyone would ever want to order it, since the difference it would make to anyone who stays within the cap limit will be nill.
The problem for NTL is that something like this is enough to push people away, since BT and Sky offer better stuff anyway. I think it will scare a lot of people off too, since they will know that if they get ADSL they can switch provider fairly easily if their ISP suddenly becomes rubbish.
ian@huth
10-01-2005, 22:56
Doesn't your own argument defeat that? Surely the "average" user, whoever that is, isn't going to be downloading many large PDF files. No, NTL are doing this is they can put a big number on their adverts and claim to be faster/cheaper than everyone else.
That's generally fine for the "standard" 2Mb package, but the point is that there isn't going to be a package for high bandwidth users. The 3Mb is still capped. I can't imagine why anyone would ever want to order it, since the difference it would make to anyone who stays within the cap limit will be nill.
The problem for NTL is that something like this is enough to push people away, since BT and Sky offer better stuff anyway. I think it will scare a lot of people off too, since they will know that if they get ADSL they can switch provider fairly easily if their ISP suddenly becomes rubbish.
Why wouldn't the average user do just that?
Any user, no matter how experienced or how little they use the internet can go to a site that may have been thrown up by a Google search, find the content interesting and download all the PDFs on the site. A new user may be browsing the net for the first time and come across a site containing thumbnails of pictures and decide to download the very large BMPs from there. Inexperience doesn't mean that you just browse sites with little content on them.
ian@huth
10-01-2005, 23:20
To me that's the reason they are introducing caps. If they cap the service before these services take off NTL can charge what they like once they start running their own services. People will be none the wiser that these kind of services previously existed freely and will just assume they'd have to pay NTL to use them.
We're coming to a point where the internet is being governed by the ISPs profits. It is in no way of any benefit for the customer.
What I don't get it why people, who claim to go nowhere near the limit, are so pro-cap. Surely it won't affect them one way or the other? Overloaded areas will still be overloaded, and other areas will still have plenty of bandwidth to go round. If you live in a bad area now, just wait till people are downloading at 3mbit.
Right, I don't go anywhere near the cap and I have no problems with my connection. If you accept the fact that 5% of customers use over 60% of bandwidth, as verified by members here that have the black and white stats in front of them, then that 5% is costing NTL more than the revenue they receive from them. This is not just in pure transit costs but also in providing infrastructure to minimise the effect of those heavy users on other customers. Capping the heavy users can reduce or eliminate this drain on profits and make more cash available to improve the network for everyone.
DieDieMyDarling
10-01-2005, 23:51
Why wouldn't the average user do just that?
Any user, no matter how experienced or how little they use the internet can go to a site that may have been thrown up by a Google search, find the content interesting and download all the PDFs on the site. A new user may be browsing the net for the first time and come across a site containing thumbnails of pictures and decide to download the very large BMPs from there. Inexperience doesn't mean that you just browse sites with little content on them.
An inexperienced user wouldn't want 3mb, especially not for 37.99 a month. People who will justify that amount of money a month, will be people who want the speed for a reason. People who download a lot of big files, and wish to do it quicker. A few gamers might also do it, thinking (wrongly) it will give them better pings. Etc. I honestly think anyone who doesn't see through ntl's reasons for doing this, are fooling only themselves.
This is meant to be an advertising ploy. 'We have the fastest "national" speeds' - 'even our lowest teir customers are on 1mb' - 'Our cable tv service is very unreliable, our email servers work when they feel like it, our newsgroup servers are missing in action, and our transparent proxies will see to it that some of your favourite websites just can't be found'... oh hang on, they never use the truth in adverts, my bad. :D :D :D
ian@huth
11-01-2005, 00:03
An inexperienced user wouldn't want 3mb, especially not for 37.99 a month. People who will justify that amount of money a month, will be people who want the speed for a reason. People who download a lot of big files, and wish to do it quicker. A few gamers might also do it, thinking (wrongly) it will give them better pings. Etc. I honestly think anyone who doesn't see through ntl's reasons for doing this, are fooling only themselves.
This is meant to be an advertising ploy. 'We have the fastest "national" speeds' - 'even our lowest teir customers are on 1mb' - 'Our cable tv service is very unreliable, our email servers work when they feel like it, our newsgroup servers are missing in action, and our transparent proxies will see to it that some of your favourite websites just can't be found'... oh hang on, they never use the truth in adverts, my bad. :D :D :D
You show quite a lack of understanding of human nature with those statements.
Some people want the biggest and fastest no matter what the cost or what their usage is like. £37.99 is a lot of money to some people and small change to others. Experience has nothing at all to do with the speeds people want, the amount that they are willing to pay or the volume that they download. Both experienced users and newbies download small files and very big files. They both can use well below the caps or well above them.
A few gamers know the pings are no better but use 3Mb because of the upload speed
pipex own nildram but they still operate as different isp's, pipx offer unmetered bandwidth wannadoo doesnt.
I am into IT as you said but I am not wrong about the newbie argument, most people I speak to havent got a clue that ntl even have a cap and they certianly wouldnt know what I was on about if I said what would you do if you had a 5 gig cap. There are also other things such as people downloading at work because their work has a nice connection and then not downloading at home, but not everyone is lucky enough to be in that position. I would like someone to show me a website that needs a 3mbit connection and is quite slow on a 750kbit connection. Prove me wrong please.
How about not one website, but opening 7 at once? I use firefox and use group tab bookmarks, some total 7 websites, Im pretty sure a 3Mb connection would totally outstrip a 750k one at opening them.
However, you are quite right about most people not knowing about NTL's "cap", mainly because they didnt check the agreement they signed. (either by registering online or physically signing up). That is not NTL's fault and it is mentioned somewhere in ntlworld.com, I think :P
An inexperienced user wouldn't want 3mb, especially not for 37.99 a month. People who will justify that amount of money a month, will be people who want the speed for a reason. People who download a lot of big files, and wish to do it quicker. A few gamers might also do it, thinking (wrongly) it will give them better pings. Etc. I honestly think anyone who doesn't see through ntl's reasons for doing this, are fooling only themselves.
This is meant to be an advertising ploy. 'We have the fastest "national" speeds' - 'even our lowest teir customers are on 1mb' - 'Our cable tv service is very unreliable, our email servers work when they feel like it, our newsgroup servers are missing in action, and our transparent proxies will see to it that some of your favourite websites just can't be found'... oh hang on, they never use the truth in adverts, my bad. :D :D :D
Yes, Like BT dont tell people about their 1GB a month cap in their "fast broadband" adverts, Like AOL doesnt tell you that there is an AUP (and thus a form of cap) On their "unlimited" service, Like Pipex dont tell you that their support sucks, their microfilters manage to randomly bugger up the phone or adsl modem (Friends personal experience), Like bulldogs advertising didnt make it clear that their 4Mb was available to 10 people, like BMW didnt tell people that their fuel tanks could explode....may I go on?
Advertising is well, supposed to lure people in, you wouldnt see an atkins diet ad saying "well weight watches is proven to be easier to stick to, and more effective" would you? the point of advertising is to get people interested, not to scare people off :)
Advertising is well, supposed to lure people in, you wouldnt see an atkins diet ad saying "well weight watches is proven to be easier to stick to, and more effective" would you? the point of advertising is to get people interested, not to scare people off :)
You forgot to mention all those credit ads that don't mention that although they do lower your monthly payments, you end up with a loan term so long your grandchildren's grandchildren are still paying it off. Or some where you use your house as collateral, end up paying 300% interest, losing your house, family, friends and the use of your knees and/or legs. And still having to pay back 300% more than you took out.
Yes, Like BT dont tell people about their 1GB a month cap in their "fast broadband" adverts
They do-it says "usage limits apply" at the end of the radio ads.
Like AOL doesnt tell you that there is an AUP (and thus a form of cap) On their "unlimited" service,
There is no "cap" as such, but if what you're doing affects others they will act on it, that's not unreasonable.
Like Pipex dont tell you that their support sucks
It doesn't in my experience.
their microfilters manage to randomly bugger up the phone or adsl modem (Friends personal experience)
They don't.
Like bulldogs advertising didnt make it clear that their 4Mb was available to 10 people
It was clearly advertised as a service being offered to those living in Central London (a few more than 10 methinks)
like BMW didnt tell people that their fuel tanks could explode....
Not sure what you're referring to here, but you are making very sweeping & generic comments.
may I go on?
Please do. :)
Advertising is well, supposed to lure people in, you wouldnt see an atkins diet ad saying "well weight watches is proven to be easier to stick to, and more effective" would you? the point of advertising is to get people interested, not to scare people off :)
Advertising something is one thing, but changing the AUP for it late on a Friday afternoon without actively telling your customers is another.
DieDieMyDarling
11-01-2005, 11:02
BT DID email it's customers informing them of the changes, i know a few people on BT, and they were all emailed and told that they were introducing caps in 2005, the email also informed them if they had anything to worry about, based on their past use.
Ntl have never emailed me informing me of caps, in fact they've never even replied to my emails, some of which were very important issues.
Most big companies have problems, and you can't please all of the people all of the time, but out of all the big companies i've ever been with, Ntl are by FAR the worst. The only reason i stay with them, is as people have mentioned, the hassle of changing the phones over. But, once the cap comes in, i'm taking my £100+ a month account to BT, and my broadband to AOL. Hopefully a lot of other people, who've seen the problems, will do the same, and maybe for once, ntl will actually start caring.
They do-it says "usage limits apply" at the end of the radio ads. <------SO quickly it hurts, Its misleading
There is no "cap" as such, but if what you're doing affects others they will act on it, that's not unreasonable. <---You mean like on ntl? ah yes but when ntl do that its evil isnt it...
It doesn't in my experience. EXACTLY!!!! Ive seen the fallout of the service of pipex, and how inadaquate is was.
They don't.
Then explain why my freind cant use his, with it in the adsl modem or the phone randomly doesnt work, and this is the reason for the support nightmare, because they wont accept the problem.
It was clearly advertised as a service being offered to those living in Central London (a few more than 10 methinks) Not all, and certainly not in the ads I heard.
Not sure what you're referring to here, but you are making very sweeping & generic comments. BMW had a known issue where the fuel tanks of the first batch of new minis had a flaw where it wasnt earthed properly, thus a spark could cause an exlposion when being filled with petrol, it was rare, but possible, and there was a recall on it.
Please do. :)
J
Advertising something is one thing, but changing the AUP for it late on a Friday afternoon without actively telling your customers is another. Ah, but i wasnt talking about that, was i?
<------SO quickly it hurts, Its misleading
But that's totally different from your original statement that they don't mention it at all.
<---You mean like on ntl? ah yes but when ntl do that its evil isnt it...
There's a big difference between actively advertising a capped service, & changing your AUP late on a Friday night & not telling anyone.
EXACTLY!!!! Ive seen the fallout of the service of pipex, and how inadaquate is was.
"Seen it" where & how??
Then explain why my freind cant use his, with it in the adsl modem or the phone randomly doesnt work, and this is the reason for the support nightmare, because they wont accept the problem.
A faulty adaptor maybe?
Not all, and certainly not in the ads I heard.
Again, different from your original statement. Central London is a small area, & having been involved with Bulldog at that point, I remember clearly how the adverts were shown, & they specificall mentioned Central London, so for someone living in Birmingham (for example) it would be pointless applying.
BMW had a known issue where the fuel tanks of the first batch of new minis had a flaw where it wasnt earthed properly, thus a spark could cause an exlposion when being filled with petrol, it was rare, but possible, and there was a recall on it.
So they made a product with a fault & recalled it-what's the problem there? :shrug:
Ah, but i wasnt talking about that, was i?
Then why post in a thread about the ntl cap? ;)
Im sure its been mentioned 5000 times but after experiences family and friends ref the "internet" - here is how they work !!!
Most people I know are new to both computers and the internet - they look at whats on offer and they look at ONE thing - the price - they would not even know what the word CAP meant, never mind Useage Restrictions. Its hard for someone who is new to all of this to understand how much they would use over a month etc as its all computer Jargon - Megabytes, GigaBytes - Wahhh
9/10 people stick with the biggest/most advertised thing out there - such as BT, AOL, Freeserve, NTL and Telewest. Here is a mad example of my very own sister and tell me shes not insane. She had a BT line installed and also a Telewest phone line. She paid for the dial up service and over all a month, came to quite a bit let me tell you.
I could not see her for example going for a 3mbit line as she would be happy with either BT (adsl) or NTL/Telewest (300, soon to be 1mbit). Even my Mate who plays online games went for the Cheapest BT Lock you in for 12 months deal even though there was a CAP which again he never understood, after all he does not download does he !!!
This is another area though, perception - if the Average user thinks its only clocks up when they DOWNLOAD things when in reality anything he does online is adding up the monthly figure - not saying the advertising is not saying this, just people will switch off to the things they dont want to hear.
Ive said this once and I shall say this again - NTL should really think about 3 diff type of users, LITE, Home and Power and gear the products around that, having a CAP across the board is bad, I dont know of any other company that does this, if you do, post and let me know :)
PC_Arcade
11-01-2005, 12:22
However, you are quite right about most people not knowing about NTL's "cap", mainly because they didnt check the agreement they signed. (either by registering online or physically signing up). That is not NTL's fault and it is mentioned somewhere in ntlworld.com, I think :P
What about those who did read (or at least skim through) the agreement I signed and was aware of the AUP AT THE TIME THEY SIGNED (when there was no "cap"), which NTL then changed from under us, last thing on a friday then buggered off home in order to avoid the flak??
That IS NTL's fault.
Ive said this once and I shall say this again - NTL should really think about 3 diff type of users, LITE, Home and Power and gear the products around that, having a CAP across the board is bad, I dont know of any other company that does this, if you do, post and let me know :)
It comes down to something I have been banging on about for ages when it comes to ntl.....
Choice (or lack of it where ntl are concerned)
What about those who did read (or at least skim through) the agreement I signed and was aware of the AUP AT THE TIME THEY SIGNED (when there was no "cap"), which NTL then changed from under us, last thing on a friday then buggered off home in order to avoid the flak??
That IS NTL's fault.
What cap? So far as I'm aware, nobody who signed up with NTL before the 'cap' was introduced has ever been sent a letter accusing them of exceeding it. This is possibly because they did not announce it properly to existing customers in accordance with the contract, so it's not enforceable.
PC_Arcade
11-01-2005, 12:33
What cap? So far as I'm aware, nobody who signed up with NTL before the 'cap' was introduced has ever been sent a letter accusing them of exceeding it. This is possibly because they did not announce it properly to existing customers in accordance with the contract, so it's not enforceable.
Hence the reason I put "cap" in inverted comma's.
But what people seem to overlook is that a lot of people signed up for a service with no specific usage limits in the T&C's or the AUP at the time, reading the contract they signed, would not do them any good whatsoever in that case (which was answering the post I quoted).
I've never maintained that the cap was actively enforced at the moment. If NTL can't enforce it due to the sneaky and underhand way it was introduced, then that's their problem.
Hence the reason I put "cap" in inverted comma's.
But what people seem to overlook is that a lot of people signed up for a service with no specific usage limits in the T&C's or the AUP at the time, reading the contract they signed, would not do them any good whatsoever in that case (which was answering the post I quoted).
I've never maintained that the cap was actively enforced at the moment. If NTL can't enforce it due to the sneaky and underhand way it was introduced, then that's their problem.
But the same AUP allows them to change the AUP at any time, & says that it's your responsibility to check the AUP for changes!
Legally, they are probably within the law initially, but I think morally they are totally wrong, & I would like to see them make that 'we can change the AUP to whatever we want" clause stand up in court.
etccarmageddon
11-01-2005, 12:42
they can enforce a cap if they want to - if they dont want your business for whatever reason they like they can ask you to sling your hook provided they give you contractual notice.
orangebird
11-01-2005, 12:46
What cap? So far as I'm aware, nobody who signed up with NTL before the 'cap' was introduced has ever been sent a letter accusing them of exceeding it. This is possibly because they did not announce it properly to existing customers in accordance with the contract, so it's not enforceable.
No Towny, that's not the reason. It IS enforceable, because as part of the T&Cs states that it is the CUSTOMERS responsibility to check the AUP regularly themselves, not ntls to announce every change. Like it or not, that's the LEGAL and BINDING way it is :)
No Towny, that's not the reason. It IS enforceable, because as part of the T&Cs states that it is the CUSTOMERS responsibility to check the AUP regularly themselves, not ntls to announce every change. Like it or not, that's the LEGAL and BINDING way it is :)
I'd be interested to see them defend that clause in Court, were it ever to come to that. There is such an offence as Unfair Term in a Contract. The fact that NTL gets you to sign something doesn't mean that it's legally fair and enforceable.
Graham F
11-01-2005, 12:52
:tu: well said OB, i would rep you but can't from work :confused:
tomjleeds
11-01-2005, 14:20
You show quite a lack of understanding of human nature with those statements.
Some people want the biggest and fastest no matter what the cost or what their usage is like. £37.99 is a lot of money to some people and small change to others. Experience has nothing at all to do with the speeds people want, the amount that they are willing to pay or the volume that they download. Both experienced users and newbies download small files and very big files. They both can use well below the caps or well above them.
A few gamers know the pings are no better but use 3Mb because of the upload speed
You're right. Back in the days when 56Kbps modems were fast, my cousin who hardly ever used the net had ISDN just to show off. Another of my friends who would be absolutely fine with the 300Kbps package has the 1.5Mbps one, just because they can afford it!
The main reason I'm planning on upgrading to 3Mbps is for the doubled upload speed from the 2Mbps package. I've wanted to do this for a long time, but now at least I have the cap to justify my action ;)
orangebird
11-01-2005, 14:47
I'd be interested to see them defend that clause in Court, were it ever to come to that. There is such an offence as Unfair Term in a Contract. The fact that NTL gets you to sign something doesn't mean that it's legally fair and enforceable.
I'd be even more interested to see a customer be able to take ntl to court because of a clause in a contract they never knew about because they couldn't be arsed to read it....
I'd be even more interested to see a customer be able to take ntl to court because of a clause in a contract they never knew about because they couldn't be arsed to read it....
<Devil's Advocate>Just because it's there doesn't make it legal or legally enforceable.
ntl could (without telling you) change your T's & C's of employment, & alter whatever they wanted about your job role. They could then argue that your original contract stated that they could change the Ts & Cs at will, & that is was your responsibility to check for updates.
Doesn't make it legal or legally enforceable though. </Devil's Advocate>
orangebird
11-01-2005, 15:18
<Devil's Advocate>Just because it's there doesn't make it legal or legally enforceable.
ntl could (without telling you) change your T's & C's of employment, & alter whatever they wanted about your job role. They could then argue that your original contract stated that they could change the Ts & Cs at will, & that is was your responsibility to check for updates.
Doesn't make it legal or legally enforceable though. </Devil's Advocate>
ntl don't do that though.
And do you honestly think that ntl would spend 10s of thousands of pounds a year on legally qualified people to write this stuff just for sport?
:dozey:
ntl don't do that though.
Yes they do-they did just that with the AUP.
And do you honestly think that ntl would spend 10s of thousands of pounds a year on legally qualified people to write this stuff just for sport?
:dozey:
Would that be the same qualified people that helped put together the contract for the Met Police that ntl just lost? :rolleyes:
All I'm saying is that just because ntl slip it in doesn't make it legal. :shrug:
And just because they have highly qualified people doesn't mean they get things right (same applies to any company), & that's what would be down to a court of law to decide should it ever come to that (whether the term in the AUP was legally enforceable) :)
orangebird
11-01-2005, 16:17
Yes they do-they did just that with the AUP.
But you were referring to employment t&cs... :confused:
Would that be the same qualified people that helped put together the contract for the Met Police that ntl just lost? :rolleyes:
And how exactly can those that negotiate contracts be held responsible for those that screw up the said negiotiated service? :dozey:
All I'm saying is that just because ntl slip it in doesn't make it legal. :shrug:
Only when it suits eh?
And just because they have highly qualified people doesn't mean they get things right (same applies to any company), & that's what would be down to a court of law to decide should it ever come to that (whether the term in the AUP was legally enforceable) :)
It's not about the t&c's being right or wrong or legal at the end of the day Neil. It's about abiding by what you (the company and the customer)agree to when the services are accepted. Why can't people take responsibility for themselves? :shrug:
But you were referring to employment t&cs... :confused:
And how exactly can those that negotiate contracts be held responsible for those that screw up the said negiotiated service? :dozey:
Only when it suits eh?
It's not about the t&c's being right or wrong or legal at the end of the day Neil. It's about abiding by what you (the company and the customer)agree to when the services are accepted. Why can't people take responsibility for themselves? :shrug:
Calm down dear, it's only a discussion forum! :D :angel:
I'm not suggesting people shouldn't be responsible for their actions, just that ntl moved the goalposts, & that's not what people signed up for. :)
ian@huth
11-01-2005, 17:01
Calm down dear, it's only a discussion forum! :D :angel:
I'm not suggesting people shouldn't be responsible for their actions, just that ntl moved the goalposts, & that's not what people signed up for. :)
LOL, any change in terms and conditions is a moving of the goalpoasts and not what people signed up for. :)
The speeds that NTL broadband customers are getting now are, for the majority of its customers, not what they signed for but are welcomed by them.
The terms and conditions that people did sign for contained details of how those terms and conditions could be altered in the future.
Whether any term or condition is legally binding is a matter for the courts. It does not matter how much NTL or anyone else pay for legal opinion and representation, it is a matter of what the courts decide.
LOL, any change in terms and conditions is a moving of the goalpoasts and not what people signed up for. :)
Agreed. :)
The speeds that NTL broadband customers are getting now are, for the majority of its customers, not what they signed for but are welcomed by them.
Agreed again!
The terms and conditions that people did sign for contained details of how those terms and conditions could be altered in the future.
And again!
Whether any term or condition is legally binding is a matter for the courts. It does not matter how much NTL or anyone else pay for legal opinion and representation, it is a matter of what the courts decide.
That's exactly the point I have been making. :angel:
Graham F
11-01-2005, 17:12
so i guess we will never find out, as none of you are taking ntl to court :angel:
so i guess we will never find out, as none of you are taking ntl to court :angel:
I'm willing to bet that ntl will not be taking anyone to court either. ;)
Graham F
11-01-2005, 17:17
:erm: why would they :confused:
they would just cut you off surely?
Chrysalis
11-01-2005, 21:16
To me that's the reason they are introducing caps. If they cap the service before these services take off NTL can charge what they like once they start running their own services. People will be none the wiser that these kind of services previously existed freely and will just assume they'd have to pay NTL to use them.
We're coming to a point where the internet is being governed by the ISPs profits. It is in no way of any benefit for the customer.
What I don't get it why people, who claim to go nowhere near the limit, are so pro-cap. Surely it won't affect them one way or the other? Overloaded areas will still be overloaded, and other areas will still have plenty of bandwidth to go round. If you live in a bad area now, just wait till people are downloading at 3mbit.
Good point, if you in a congested area the cap wont make any difference you will still suffer and have a cap to add to it, all a cap will do is decrease early morning activity peak time usage will stay the same. Seems to me recent changes are governed for the shareholders, my last 3 email's sent to ntl customer feedback have had no reply, I have had no email notification of ntl pre warning me about future caps (BT issued emails to its customers as stated earlier in thread), I just feel unwanted by ntl and they want my money and dont care. Forgive me if this offends you but I have very low satisfaction of my service at the moment, I pay my money to ntl and I have the right to feel this way. I also think people leaving will hurt ntl, these people leaving may be paying for sky sports and movies every month as well and a premium pone package so a 3 figure sum monthly, 50-100k of these wiped of the turnover sheet makes ntl a weaker company, weaker in credit, weaker in contract negotiations and weaker in publicity. Thats why so many people have worked out here that these packages really havent been thought though, even if they are making a loss on some customers its good business practice to accomodate them so why the power package only offers a 40 gig limit is down to the shareholders and their pockets.
You think pipex,nildram,plusnet and others make a profit on all their users then you are wrong, but what is important is they make a profit on their userbase as a whole and keep a good reputation while they at by keeping their customers happy.
I run a webhosting company and for £3.50 a month a customer can potentially use 15 gig traffic a month, and if they do use it I will make a loss on that customer but what happens if the customer uses that 15 gig? do I kick them off for making me a loss or do I accept it, I accept it and be glad they are happy with the service because I know 1 happy customer is likely to tell his friends and bring me more customers and I get high retention this is proper business practice. I hope ntl executives are reading and learning. :)
Well said Chrysalis. I remember when Demon were having mail problems (a rare occourance, they are no NTL) they posted almost hourly status reports. One mentioned "mad pop3ers" who checked their email every five minutes (this was pre-broadband). They also said that was fine. I had a friend who used to stay connected 24/7 on dial-up to them. His bills used to show 100+ hour phone calls costing £0.00, and they didn't mind. I only left them because it took them so long to get the free calls thing going. If I hadn't, I'd be on ADSL now...
Chrysalis hit the nail on the head. Sadly, NTL seems to be at the mercy of shareholders. All companies that answer to shareholders seem to turn "evil" pretty quickly :(
DieDieMyDarling
11-01-2005, 23:25
The way ntl are introducing the caps says it all really, when they changed the AUP in the first place, they did it in secret, overnight, sneakily, and now with these caps, there's no information made available to the cumstomers, most people will probably never even know there's a cap being enforced, it won't be mentioned in the adverts, there won't be any letters or emails, we'll only find out on here, because some people know where to find information like this out. Bt send out their letters/emails in November (i think it was november), stating that caps would be introduced in 2005.
Ntl's cap is apparently being introduced in the first quarter of 2005, yet there's nothing being mentioned. So they're happy enough to take on all the new customers, not telling them of any caps that are planned, then any new customer that joins, only to find out their useage is capped, can't really complain, as ntl reserve the right to change the T&C any time they wish.
Would new customers be different, as they'll have signed into an initial 12 month contract, and thus their T&C can't be changed in that time?
ian@huth
11-01-2005, 23:46
The way ntl are introducing the caps says it all really, when they changed the AUP in the first place, they did it in secret, overnight, sneakily, and now with these caps, there's no information made available to the cumstomers, most people will probably never even know there's a cap being enforced, it won't be mentioned in the adverts, there won't be any letters or emails, we'll only find out on here, because some people know where to find information like this out. Bt send out their letters/emails in November (i think it was november), stating that caps would be introduced in 2005.
Ntl's cap is apparently being introduced in the first quarter of 2005, yet there's nothing being mentioned. So they're happy enough to take on all the new customers, not telling them of any caps that are planned, then any new customer that joins, only to find out their useage is capped, can't really complain, as ntl reserve the right to change the T&C any time they wish.
Would new customers be different, as they'll have signed into an initial 12 month contract, and thus their T&C can't be changed in that time?
NTL have given no information to customers because the new service has not started yet. There is plenty of time to notify customers before the new service starts. Existing customers will not be automatically put on the new service but will have to apply for it, terms and conditions being given to them at that time so that they can either agree to them and go ahead or disagree and stay as they are now. I would imagine that eventually customers who have not asked to move to the new service will be moved on to it with adequate notice and they would then have the option to agree the new terms or cancel their service.
Customers within their 12 month contract CAN have their terms and conditions altered but they then have the right to cancel that contract if the changes are substantial
A point that Chrysalis was making that "even if they are making a loss on some customers its good business practice to accomodate them" is flawed if that accomodation of them results in massive expenditure or massive disruption to other users. If you consider a UBR with several really heavy users on it that are disrupting every users service on that UBR you have the coice of getting the heavy users to modify their usage or upgrading the infrastructure to cater for them. If the necessary infrastructure upgrade will cost several thousand pounds is that a choice that should be made. Someone has to pay for that upgrade.
DieDieMyDarling
12-01-2005, 10:13
I disagree. BT informed their customers BEFORE it happened, a few months in advance. THey were told in November, of changes that would take place in the first quarter of 2005.
And we can only judge ntl by it's history, it didn't tell customers of the AUP change,
The idea that people could stay as they are, is flawed. If I was a heavy user, and was downloading as much as i possibly could, of course i'd stay on the old contract, getting 1.5mb with only a guide of how much i should download. So, if ntl are indeed trying to get rid of / slowdown heavy users, then this wouldn't help at all. Although, saying that, ntl aren't renowned for doing things 'right'. :erm:
ian@huth
12-01-2005, 10:28
I disagree. BT informed their customers BEFORE it happened, a few months in advance. THey were told in November, of changes that would take place in the first quarter of 2005.
The speed increases and "hard" caps haven't happened yet. NTL can still inform its customers before they happen.
And we can only judge ntl by it's history, it didn't tell customers of the AUP change,
Have you read the terms and conditions regarding changes in the AUP?
The idea that people could stay as they are, is flawed. If I was a heavy user, and was downloading as much as i possibly could, of course i'd stay on the old contract, getting 1.5mb with only a guide of how much i should download. So, if ntl are indeed trying to get rid of / slowdown heavy users, then this wouldn't help at all. Although, saying that, ntl aren't renowned for doing things 'right'. :erm:
There can be at least two possibilities here. The current "soft" cap could be hardened for customers staying on the old contract or other sections of the T&Cs could be applied. Also the old contract could be altered to provide "hard" caps.
NTL seem to be offering the majority of its customers an excellent deal. We will have to wait and see how it all pans out.
A point that Chrysalis was making that "even if they are making a loss on some customers its good business practice to accomodate them" is flawed if that accomodation of them results in massive expenditure or massive disruption to other users. If you consider a UBR with several really heavy users on it that are disrupting every users service on that UBR you have the coice of getting the heavy users to modify their usage or upgrading the infrastructure to cater for them. If the necessary infrastructure upgrade will cost several thousand pounds is that a choice that should be made. Someone has to pay for that upgrade.
That's a very short sighted view to take. Eventually, the upgrade will have to be done anyway. Broadband speeds will keep increasing and NTL will have to keep up. I don't think people really understand what broadband is about in this country. Video on demand, downloadable video rentals, the BBCs back catalogue... these are just the tip of the iceberg. Already, I don't want the news on TV any more, I just watch it on the BBC web site so I can pick the stories I'm interested in. With 2mb the quality could be better, but assuming it uses 75% of the available bandwidth you could only watch for about an hour and a half a day, less if you surf.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.