View Full Version : how about we start a campaign to let VM know that we LIKE SHAPING
Just a thought for the flip side of this one.
I'm quite happy with whats about to happen. Manly because of the complately transparent way Virgin Media are doing it.
NO CUT OFFS.
CLEARLY STATED LIMITS.
Is there another ISP that is being as clear about this?
I'm sure many are happy.
Most customers are totally unaware as it will never affect them.
I'm sure many are happy.
Most customers are totally unaware as it will never affect them.
Most customers are just plain unaware because they haven't been told. unaware why they have bad speeds because they haven't been told.
---------- Post added at 12:52 ---------- Previous post was at 12:50 ----------
Is there another ISP that is being as clear about this?
You are joking I take it? :confused:
Most customers are just plain unaware because they haven't been told. unaware why they have bad speeds because they haven't been told.
most of the bad speeds arent caused by the throttling as its not fully implemented now is it? the throttling is there to cut back the heavy users and improve speeds for users who are seeing bad speeds
You are joking I take it? :confused:
got any examples that make the comment look like a joke? Don't bother including those showing a cap as that is different
most of the bad speeds arent caused by the throttling as its not fully implemented now is it?
I mean those that are suffering bad speeds from being throttled. most of them haven't been told.
got any examples that make the comment look like a joke? Don't bother including those showing a cap as that is different
He said they were being transparent and clear about the throttling they are doing that will affect everyone. it might be transparent and clear on that one page. but it is not transparent and clear on the pages you would expect to see it on. even The Register say Virgin Media has quietly rolled out bandwidth throttling
Counts.... 1,2,3 posts to miss the point of the thread.
I'm happy with what Virgin Media are about to do if it ensures that my connection is avalable when I want to use it.
Counts.... 1,2,3 posts to miss the point of the thread.
What do you want people to say then? "me too" ? :)
Sherlock614
12-05-2007, 13:35
Having thought and read all the pros and cons of shaping it was all getting a bit of a bore...
I was happy when i saw this:
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12/33613924-official-team-request-re-traffic-management.html
And now this post.
I think i'll make a post entitled "how about we start a campaign to stop traffic shaping posts"
That'll kill some time.
joglynne
12-05-2007, 17:02
Or combine them into just 2 or 3 threads?
1 20Mb
2 shaping/throttling
3 speed tests
For the record, I am on 2Mb, I know about Virgins limits, and I still think Virgin bb is the best option for me. (note the word 'me'-I don't want to be jumped on for having a opinion) :)
Or combine them into just 2 or 3 threads?
1 20Mb
2 shaping/throttling
3 speed tests
For the record, I am on 2Mb, I know about Virgins limits, and I still think Virgin bb is the best option for me. (note the word 'me'-I don't want to be jumped on for having a opinion) :)
same here, even at the throttled speed for 4mb i'd probably be going faster than i could on adsl :p: so whats the point in my paying for "up to 24mb" when i get about a tenth of that?
Im all for shaping.
Im on 10MB and looking forward to 20MB, i would much rather have this shaping and have UNLIMITED DOWNLOADS as opposed to a monthly download limit and no shaping.
AbyssUnderground
12-05-2007, 18:16
Im also for traffic management. Even though Ive not really been affected by low speeds, I don't want it to happen. So I say yes to it, but lift the limits a bit before being put to half speed. They're a little too harsh if you ask me. I can easily use 2GB a day with general browsing, e-mailing and the odd file download.
on in an hour!
12-05-2007, 20:23
Having thought and read all the pros and cons of shaping it was all getting a bit of a bore...
I was happy when i saw this:
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12/33613924-official-team-request-re-traffic-management.html
And now this post.
I think i'll make a post entitled "how about we start a campaign to stop traffic shaping posts"
That'll kill some time.
:clap: well said sherlock.
same here, even at the throttled speed for 4mb i'd probably be going faster than i could on adsl :p: so whats the point in my paying for "up to 24mb" when i get about a tenth of that?
How do you know you would only get about a tenth? I know many people on adsl that have good speeds at all times of the day. too many people put adsl down too much, and some of them have probably never even tried it :Yikes:
monkey2468
12-05-2007, 21:54
How do you know you would only get about a tenth? I know many people on adsl that have good speeds at all times of the day. too many people put adsl down too much, and some of them have probably never even tried it :Yikes:
The max where I live from. ADSL is 0.5Mbps. Most people I know have ADSL and the most any of them get is 1Mbps. Most would like cable but are either not in a cabled area (new housing estate)or cable is so popular that the cabs are exhausted/full and can't provide any more connections 'till someone disconnects. (and non of us live in the middle of nowhere!). As far as I am concerned, even being limited to half speed for several hours (10 down to 5Mbps) is still 5 to 10 times more than they/I can get from ADSL.
on in an hour!
12-05-2007, 21:58
The max where I live from. ADSL is 0.5Mbps. Most people I know have ADSL and the most any of them get is 1Mbps. Most would like cable but are either not in a cabled area (new housing estate)or cable is so popular that the cabs are exhausted/full and can't provide any more connections 'till someone disconnects. (and non of us live in the middle of nowhere!). As far as I am concerned, even being limited to half speed for several hours (10 down to 5Mbps) is still 5 to 10 times more than they/I can get from ADSL.
:clap: well said monkey ;)
If u ask someone sitting in tech support..... I think we are not much happy at the moment as we get a lot of calls for slow speed now, and 20 meg upgrade has filled in the blank spots.;)
Counts.... 1,2,3 posts to miss the point of the thread.
I'm happy with what Virgin Media are about to do if it ensures that my connection is avalable when I want to use it.
Yeh,just not at the speed you pay for ;)
Yeh,just not at the speed you pay for ;)
Just the ability to download at the speeds advertised and not be throttled for the occasional heavy download session is what we want. what virgin call peak loads are in reality normal loads. Virgin are selling a broadband service and as such it is thier responsiblity to put in place adequate infrastructure. Virgin saying that the cabling was not designed for the services now provided is a cop out. customers are being sold a 20MB service and cannot use this speed as its only available off peak, which is not highlighted in the marketing.
on in an hour!
13-05-2007, 00:19
not designed for the services now provided is a cop out
shouldnt that be a 'copper' out paul...:D
just the ability to download at the speeds avertised and not be throttled for the occasional heavy download session is what we want. what virgin call peak loads are in reality normal loads. Virgin are selling a broadband service and as such it is thier responsiblity to put in place adequate infrastructure. Virgin saying that the cabling was not designed for the services now provided is a cop out. customers are being sold a 20MB service and cannot use this speed as its only available off peak, which is not highlighted in the marketing.
I guess anyone who could afford 20MB would be at work during the non throttled hours anyway so why do they insist on saying its a unlimited service?I got more literature today stating that it is unlimited when clearly it is not.
---------- Post added at 00:20 ---------- Previous post was at 00:19 ----------
not designed for the services now provided is a cop out
shouldnt that be a 'copper' out paul...:D
LOL:clap: :clap:
Nedkelly
13-05-2007, 00:23
The network seems to fail at 1 the ubrs 2 the core network stage .The network in the street ie copper and fibre can handle it no problem .They just arn't quick enough at upgrading the ubrs and core stuff :)
not designed for the services now provided is a cop out
shouldnt that be a 'copper' out paul...:D
They might as well be copper lines :)
on in an hour!
13-05-2007, 00:25
They might as well be copper lines :)
its copper from your house to the multiplexer m8 ;)
I guess anyone who could afford 20MB would be at work during the non throttled hours anyway so why do they insist on saying its a unlimited service?I got more literature today stating that it is unlimited when clearly it is not.
The money they spend on advertising would have been better spent on the network. nearly 6 billion pounds in debt :Yikes:
---------- Post added at 00:32 ---------- Previous post was at 00:26 ----------
its copper from your house to the multiplexer m8 ;)
I was meaning the whole lot might as well be :D
on in an hour!
13-05-2007, 00:37
The money they spend on advertising would have been better spent on the network. nearly 6 billion pounds in debt :Yikes:
---------- Post added at 00:32 ---------- Previous post was at 00:26 ----------
I was meaning the whole lot might as well be :D
oh sorry,didnt i mention that!! :D :D :D
Ahh whats 6Billion between friends :)
Nedkelly
13-05-2007, 01:00
Its not much when you say it like that :)
on in an hour!
13-05-2007, 01:13
Its not much when you say it like that :)
not much ned,thats my o/t for last year :D :D :D
Nedkelly
13-05-2007, 01:17
No its the bonuses for the top management and a very small pay rise for us :)
m044bz00
13-05-2007, 10:52
how about we start a campaign to let VM know that we LIKE SHAPING - Just a thought for the flip side of this one.
I'm quite happy with whats about to happen. Manly because of the complately transparent way Virgin Media are doing it.
Yeah, you go for it, start a campaign to show you love it, the next step will be peak hours being extended to 16 hours a day then 24 hours a day and more limits, more cost and less and less services
While you're at it why not give the waterboard a call and tell them to cut your supply for 8 hours a day to save water and the same with your electricity so there's enough to go around for all
While you're at it why not give the waterboard a call and tell them to cut your supply for 8 hours a day to save water and the same with your electricity so there's enough to go around for all
But there not cutting you off. They are just reducing the amount you can use.
Did someone say hosepipe bans?
Dawn Falcon
19-05-2007, 14:51
most of the bad speeds arent caused by the throttling as its not fully implemented now is it? the throttling is there to cut back the heavy users and improve speeds for users who are seeing bad speeds
Ah, come ON! Throttling is nothing whatsoever to do with heavy users. Heavy users you deal with with a maximum cap per month, and throwing off the 24/7 download abusers. This capping is everything about VM upgrading their speeds for the headlines without a matching investment in infrastructure.
No, I haven't worked for an ISP, but I sold web hosting. Overselling is plain and simple a sin in webhosting, and it's a sin as an ISP.
alferret
19-05-2007, 15:53
Ahhhh another thread hijacked by the "WE DONT LIKE SHAPING" fraternity.
Getting it BACK ON TOPIC
I like the shaping, I think its a good thing that VM are doing this. My speed and stability have stablised, im actually getting better speeds between 6pm and midnight than I was 2 months ago :tu:
Seems like my local leechers are being traffic shapped to hell :p: and about time :D
Seems like my local leechers are being traffic shapped to hell :p: and about time :D
:clap:
Dawn Falcon
19-05-2007, 17:46
Seems like my local leechers are being traffic shapped to hell :p: and about time :D
:rolleyes:
All this shows is that you don't understand the technical issues involved. There is a general lack of network bandwidth, and the 24/7 downloaders will STILL be hitting hard even at peak times. This move is a stopgap fix to cover up the lack of general core infrastructure improvement, and your improvement is far more likely to be a result of a specific fix rather than a policy which is not, by design, intended to give a *proportional* performance increase (but rather to allow higher headline speeds without said network upgrade).
Come on, this isn't rocket science.
alferret
19-05-2007, 18:20
:rolleyes:
All this shows is that you don't understand the technical issues involved. There is a general lack of network bandwidth, and the 24/7 downloaders will STILL be hitting hard even at peak times. This move is a stopgap fix to cover up the lack of general core infrastructure improvement, and your improvement is far more likely to be a result of a specific fix rather than a policy which is not, by design, intended to give a *proportional* performance increase (but rather to allow higher headline speeds without said network upgrade).
Come on, this isn't rocket science.
Oh I do understand, believe me I do.
Yes it is a stopgap, and this stopgap has helped my overall speeds during peak hours.
I for one applaud VM, its only those that are losing out on downloading so much material and swamping local connections or people who CAN'T SEE THE BIGGER PICTURE that are moaning.
If by VM using STM to mangage their overall bandwidth consumption they are actually saving money on bandwidth not used, then funds may become availiable to increase the current infrastructure which will then allow more people to have a full speed internet connection 24\7 without raising prices.
helmutcheese
19-05-2007, 18:45
:clap:
Clueless, another user happy to get a backwards service and pay through the nose for it compaired to other countries even some you would class as 3rd world, wonder if he would still take it lying down if the price rose more and the service had a 6GIG PM cap :rolleyes:
---------- Post added at 18:45 ---------- Previous post was at 18:43 ----------
Oh I do understand, believe me I do.
Yes it is a stopgap, and this stopgap has helped my overall speeds during peak hours.
I for one applaud VM, its only those that are losing out on downloading so much material and swamping local connections or people who CAN'T SEE THE BIGGER PICTURE that are moaning.
If by VM using STM to mangage their overall bandwidth consumption they are actually saving money on bandwidth not used, then funds may become availiable to increase the current infrastructure which will then allow more people to have a full speed internet connection 24\7 without raising prices.
P.S I think you will find the problems are not high users, its lack of upgrades and cash spent over the years on the network.
Clueless, another user happy to get a backwards service and pay through the nose for it compaired to other countries even some you would class as 3rd world, wonder if he would still take it lying down if the price rose more and the service had a 6GIG PM cap :rolleyes:
I especially like how having an opinion that differs from yours gives you the judgement of me being clueless.
I wonder if you would take it lying down if a company put on a high rated service and took no useage policies into consideration and therefore let the entire network grind to a halt because of more and more customers continuing to push the boundaries.
I will only accept a service (in terms of braodband) to be truly limitless when we have the capacity to offer infinite bandwidth. Until that leap in quantum physics occurs I am happy to accept the fact that at some point, a line has to be drawn to ensure relative health throughout the entire network. It isn't being clueless, it is called being realistic.
P.S I think you will find the problems are not high users, its lack of upgrades and cash spent over the years on the network.
Furthermore, when the the knowledge of NTL's negative cash flow is relatively common place, doesn't it seem a contradiction in your statement that you want them to spend money on their network, which they clearly do not possess whilst NOT charge the customer more? And you call me clueless?
Dawn Falcon
19-05-2007, 20:43
it is called being realistic.
It's ONE method of controlling users. However, it's not the only way and a lot of people feel it's not the best way, since it punishers average users for normal usage pattens. Whereas, say, kicking off the 24/7 abusers don't.
As for the network, that IS their problem. If they are overselling, they need to solve it. The sort of measures they are adopting are poor responses, which gain them little time and severely impact a lot of normal users. Headline speed shouldn't be the priority!
I'll agree with that, it isn't the only method. However, I am happy the company is willing to choose at least one of the methods available and implement them.
kpanchev
19-05-2007, 23:28
I remember a similar situation - an electricity network, so overloaded, that the voltage dropped from 240V to 150, 160 volts in peak hours. The solution that the electrical company implemented, was 3 to 1, which means you have electricity for 3 hours, after that 1 hour ... you get the picture. There was, of course, another solution - increase the production of electricity, but this required money to be put into it... So can you imagine how many happy customers this electric company had?
I can give the rest of the story - this happened in the eighties in an Eastern European country. Some ten years later, the people running the country were thrown out of leadership, and put to trial.
Now if you're clever enough, you'll make your own comparisons and conclusions. If, on the contrary, you are not, you'll continue to post here saying what a great job VM is doing and how well they manage their network. And you'll continue to call the people that put to use the service they are paying for 'abusers'.
helmutcheese
19-05-2007, 23:46
:tu:
Yet another view linking agreement with shaping with poor interlect. They really should do debating in schools, as incinuating insults in an argument, however subtle, detracts credibility from it.
But taking the bait, and continuing along that line of thought I think there is poor sense in trying to discuss broadband service in analogies of other services which actually do not cater for the whole story. Electric supply is one situation, car sales is another; and similarly, broadband is its own specific entity. You cannot describe one by talking about another, as they are not really the same thing having different deciding factors.
As for praising the job VM are doing, I'll just re-explain what I have put before hand. I praise the fact they are putting forth policies in the public eye in order to maintain constant usability from their network after recognising a potential service limitation. Now, this line has to be drawn somewhere, and no matter where it is drawn, there is always going to be some people on the wrong side of it. This line of fair use, outlined by VM, has the implication that anybody exceeding such during the peak usage period (when every man and his dog wants to use the service) is going beyond the amount set aside for their personal use out of the bandwidth pool available to everyone. It is by this definition that some customers are labelled as 'abusers', as is defined by VM and their imposed limits. So in respect of that, yes, for as long as they exceed the fair usage policy, I will continue to use the term 'abusers' seeing as they are using their fair share and portions thereof of other customers. However, it is easily overlooked that despite breeching the fair usage during peak hours, VM are NOT cutting off access to these people, they only decide to turn their speed down for a period. Usually, the penalties for exceeding usage is service termination or extra fees - the policy VM have encompasses none of those measure, it allows service to continue uninterrupted, and that isn't fair? To me, that is worthy of a bit of praise as it is meeting in the middle ground. It is a lenient punishment. However, I will concede, it would be approrpiate for VM to change the 'unlimited' advertising of the service as it is a little misleading in terms of traffic shaping, but it is only the marketing I have a gripe with.
As for money, NTL/VM has been recouping losses for some time as we all know. Therefore investment in the network is also, by no means unlimited, but there is also no doubt that if things are going to improve, it is going to take good old fashioned cash. What's a good way to increase your revenue? Of course, it's the old chestnut of bump up the prices a wee bit. Now, most of us, myself included, would have been a little bit narked if the XL price went up £2 a month extra if nothing else was changing to the service, and I think VM were able to forsee that. So really their only option was to include a speed increase to justify the future rise in broadband rental - and a significant speed increase would also bring in some new customers as well which would help the cash flow. With the existing network, it seems VM were aware that it would not be able to support this huge speed for everbody the whole time so they had to decide what to do. Traffic shaping was obviously their solution, and if it keeps things running, giving us all a fair share of fast access whilst they get themselves and hopefully their network sorted out in the near future, then I don't see it as a waste.
In closing, I am happy to debate why my opion is that shaping is not a bad thing. However, keep insults out of your arguments - let's be grown up about this shall we?
helmutcheese
20-05-2007, 00:31
ZZzzzzz, if they cant run a business time to call it a day, and liquidate them, some users here seem to think we cutomers owe the ISP something, they run a business and its went downhill since NTL took over TW-BY, so we get retentions not to leave with the promise it will be fixed shortly but I for one would rather pay the full wack for my old 10meg service than have a free serfvice like the one Ive had since Oct 2006 and the Shaping is another nail in the coffin for them.
I told you weeks ago NTL wasted millions on sponsering too many football teams and buying QVC (so stort goes), added to the $36million to Uma thats now failed to attract new cutomers so she is now going to be replaced by Ruby Wax, so that was a waste of cash for a few months, the cash could have upgraded some UBR's but still they are too many users per UBR in some areas because NTL got greedy.
Sherlock614
20-05-2007, 01:15
Couldn't agree more :tu:
Went on this evening... Did a bit of gaming etc. Downloaded a few bits (that i didn't realise took me over the threshold of doom) then BAM - I'm on half speed.
Great.
kpanchev
20-05-2007, 01:42
Yet another view linking agreement with shaping with poor interlect. They really should do debating in schools, as incinuating insults in an argument, however subtle, detracts credibility from it.
But taking the bait, and continuing along that line of thought I think there is poor sense in trying to discuss broadband service in analogies of other services which actually do not cater for the whole story. Electric supply is one situation, car sales is another; and similarly, broadband is its own specific entity. You cannot describe one by talking about another, as they are not really the same thing having different deciding factors.
As for praising the job VM are doing, I'll just re-explain what I have put before hand. I praise the fact they are putting forth policies in the public eye in order to maintain constant usability from their network after recognising a potential service limitation. Now, this line has to be drawn somewhere, and no matter where it is drawn, there is always going to be some people on the wrong side of it. This line of fair use, outlined by VM, has the implication that anybody exceeding such during the peak usage period (when every man and his dog wants to use the service) is going beyond the amount set aside for their personal use out of the bandwidth pool available to everyone. It is by this definition that some customers are labelled as 'abusers', as is defined by VM and their imposed limits. So in respect of that, yes, for as long as they exceed the fair usage policy, I will continue to use the term 'abusers' seeing as they are using their fair share and portions thereof of other customers. However, it is easily overlooked that despite breeching the fair usage during peak hours, VM are NOT cutting off access to these people, they only decide to turn their speed down for a period. Usually, the penalties for exceeding usage is service termination or extra fees - the policy VM have encompasses none of those measure, it allows service to continue uninterrupted, and that isn't fair? To me, that is worthy of a bit of praise as it is meeting in the middle ground. It is a lenient punishment. However, I will concede, it would be approrpiate for VM to change the 'unlimited' advertising of the service as it is a little misleading in terms of traffic shaping, but it is only the marketing I have a gripe with.
As for money, NTL/VM has been recouping losses for some time as we all know. Therefore investment in the network is also, by no means unlimited, but there is also no doubt that if things are going to improve, it is going to take good old fashioned cash. What's a good way to increase your revenue? Of course, it's the old chestnut of bump up the prices a wee bit. Now, most of us, myself included, would have been a little bit narked if the XL price went up £2 a month extra if nothing else was changing to the service, and I think VM were able to forsee that. So really their only option was to include a speed increase to justify the future rise in broadband rental - and a significant speed increase would also bring in some new customers as well which would help the cash flow. With the existing network, it seems VM were aware that it would not be able to support this huge speed for everbody the whole time so they had to decide what to do. Traffic shaping was obviously their solution, and if it keeps things running, giving us all a fair share of fast access whilst they get themselves and hopefully their network sorted out in the near future, then I don't see it as a waste.
In closing, I am happy to debate why my opion is that shaping is not a bad thing. However, keep insults out of your arguments - let's be grown up about this shall we?
Ok, JackSon, let's do some debating. First, you say that we should not compare different services as they are not the same. Well, I would say that all services have one thing in common: they provide SERVICES to CUSTOMERS, and the CUSTOMERS pay MONEY for it. Now what happens, if the customer does not get the service he/she pays for? He gets DISSATISFIED. What happens, when a customer gets dissatisfied? They LEAVE the service and STOP PAYING. That's one side of the business model so far. VM are clever enough to foresee it, so they do what? - when a customer wants to leave, they offer the stars to keep him/her. On the other hand, they run an advertising campaign with even higher speeds, unlimited downloads, bundles with freebies etc. in order to get more and more customers, who pay money. BUT the bandwidth/service is not improved to correspond to the increased amount of customers! So why is this? One possible answer - new customers are bound with 12 months contract and cannot leave - income secured! Old customers not leaving gives good name of the business, thus bringing more new customers, so .... more money!
This is more or less VM's current business model. It is a very good model, if you plan to use it for a couple of years or so, after that get what you can and move on. But this is not a business model, that leaves happy customers! That's why I can't get my mind around the fact, that you are happy being f**ked up! (sorry for the word, but it keeps coming to my mind before any other word)
I see now, your entire point is based on the assumption that I am being F'ed (as you put it). The flaw in that though is that from my view point of my service which I pay for, I am not being F'ed. Although I deeply am touched that you feel cheated on my behalf but the truth is the management does not interfere with my usage, and even if it did, I see it as a fair thing. Yet, the policy in effect helps to ensure a high standard of my service.
I fully understand, as I hinted at before, that always there will be some people who are on the other side of the line in the sand. And in addition to that, I am fully respectful that they see, in light of their service usage, that traffic shaping is a bad thing for them. Just the same as how I am able to view the policy in the context of my usage and see it as good.
So the bottom line is really, for my internet habbits, the shaping policy interferes no more than if there were no policy at all, but with the added bonus that netowrk conditions will not become poor when there is a multitide of high usage on during peak times. I dare say for others it is not the same, but I, for one am not F'ed at all :)
helmutcheese
20-05-2007, 02:37
I have gave TW-BY countless customers from family to customers of my PC business, now I would not give VM 1 of them, I dont encourage them to get cable, I let them make their own choice with no input from myself and before someone says I got paid for it in referals, I didnt as they already had the phone or TV normally so were not classed as new customers when they got in Cable BB
Could anybody who supports shapping or capping please explain to me why they support it and favour the idea i have read this post a few times now and it just does not sink into my little mind.
Traffic shaping is good, because without it, Volvo's would still be cuboids on wheels :)
Capping is not good however (on a serious note) as that incurrs service loss or penalty charges.
helmutcheese
20-05-2007, 02:46
They dont have any real reasons apart from to Troll/Flame others who aint happy with VM currenty after possibly years of a good service esp with TW-BY, they cant even admit the network is oversubbed (can get info from 2nd line or Team Leader if your in a area with major issues) one of them even tried to tell me there is no oversubsription after I got it from VM about my UBR, pure greed is all it is, signed up more users that the hardware was able to cope with esp for 10megs users, then offer 20meg and promise 50meg, no way it will happen till they dig deep and start to do work on network full upgrades not botch up jobs to get by with as in that report last week on front page here or at Digitalspy.
Traffic shaping is good, because without it, Volvo's would still be cuboids on wheels :)
Capping is not good however (on a serious note) as that incurrs service loss or penalty charges.
so you dont like 'penalty charges' and for instance you would, or indeed already have used the consumer contract law to claim your unlawful bank charges back already?.
why dont you like 'penalty charges'?.
i never once had issues with telewest never once even with my over useage i got what i paid for not once i could complain i understand a new service comes into play and there will be faults as such but these sort of issues lol i hate cover ups
Penalty charges in terms of a price per unit bandwidth which is charged when you exceed your limit. Is a little out of control and out of mind until a bill arrives, is why I don't like the idea of that.
Penalty charges in terms of a price per unit bandwidth which is charged when you exceed your limit. Is a little out of control and out of mind until a bill arrives, is why I don't like the idea of that.
so your saying you deem any penalty charges as an unlawful charge under the consumer contract as the courts do today,yes?.
By the way ,did you already claim your bank charges back out of interest?.
Dawn Falcon
20-05-2007, 16:58
Jackson, your service HAS been downgraded because of the marketing-lead drive to 20MBit services (which are, thanks to the same change, barely useable for most people).
That you, yourself, do not feel put out by this dosn't mean that a lot of people are or that this is not a completely valid viewpoint. This is not about heavy users, it affects the average users of the service. (And kick the 24/7 downloaders off, don't cater to them!)
I said nothing about it being unlawful. What I did say was that I don't like how the cost mounts up in the back ground until a usage bill lands on the letter mat. It also is a bit hypothertical in this sense as a 'pay for bandwidth over quota' system is not in effect, it was listed as one (of many) possible alternatives to the chosen policy.
Dawn Falcon, yes, my service has been sitting on the bottom end of the slow scale for some time, but I don't hold the shaping policy in account for that, which, is what this particular thread is about. I also did say that I was aaware that this opinion of mine was not specific to all. But then, when we choose a broadband service, or any other service for that matter, we are all selfish. We choose something which suits rus ather than something which we think would suit everybody. This shaping policy suits me, and I am happy to stay. I know it doesn't suit others, and they are welcome to make their own arangements.
So can anybody give me a valid reason to why they support this shapping stuff?
So can anybody give me a valid reason to why they support this shapping stuff?
Would you rather have a poxy download limit, or be free to use or abuse the rest of the time as you like?
I have been generally in favour of hitting services like p2p and throttling bandwidth for just those services. In the last few weeks I have seen my speed reduced to below 3MBit on what should be a 10MBit connection. I feel aggrieved because I am not a heavy downloader I must have just hit their limit.
I decided I'd had enough - there is no point having a fast connection then being told you can't use it much. Web browsing and email is much the same at most decent broadband speeds, so what's the 10/20Mbit connection for exactly?
I signed up with Be Unlimited and within 10 days was online - and I'm getting just over a 20MBit connection for £24.99 a month. Be support is superb and there simply aren't any slowdowns or traffic shaping. The whole online experience feels very snappy and fast.
Interestingly a while ago I tried Sky Broadband - my exchange supports Sky & Be LLU - and only got 6.5MBit. I called NTL Retentions and they agreed to price match at £10 a month for 10MBit. Still not good enough, though, so I stayed a while and then went to Be.
Unfortunately for a lot of Virgin Media punters who have a VM phone line, a change to a BT phone line is needed for Be or any other ADSL service.
Check if your exxchange is enabled by visiting www.samknows.co.uk - if you have a BT number to enter (even a neighbour's) it will tell you how far from the exchange you live (as the crow flies). I am 825 metres, hence my decent speed.
helmutcheese
20-05-2007, 19:08
Most will still have a BT line from before Cable was here, and I read on forums even BE's that the service is great and fast at the start of your contract then it goes downhill.
---------- Post added at 19:08 ---------- Previous post was at 19:07 ----------
Nope, I would rather is was way it used to be with TW-BY and 10meg until Oct 2006 went it started to go pearshaped.
SegaMark
20-05-2007, 20:45
Shaping is a complete joke, 750MB for 4MBit users is rediculous, I wouldn't mind if it's 2GB which to me sounds reasonable enough.
I have an XBOX360 and I like to download demos and content from market place, as well as legitimate (ie: NOT PIRATED) video content which can add up.
Last night after work I decided to download the Halo 3 BETA which was just under 900MB, this means my connection speeds were cut in half, and considering there are two computers & two XBOX 360's in this house it means there is next to no bandwidth to share, mostly it affects XBOX Live.
What happens when Microsoft launch their X360 video on demand service in the UK? It means that between the hours of 4PM and 12AM it will be near enough useless because I won't be able to stream a legitimate and paid for HD movie, or tv shows without getting punished!
Ever since the VM relaunch I've found the broadband service to be getting worse, very very quickly.
Would you rather have a poxy download limit, or be free to use or abuse the rest of the time as you like?
thats not a valid answer for your support
helmutcheese
20-05-2007, 22:39
None of them have a valid answer.
helmutcheese
20-05-2007, 22:44
You need help ?
homealone
20-05-2007, 22:45
Them?
sorry, I was using my connection to it's full extent, to my huge satisfaction, and hadn't noticed someone had questioned whether that was possible ;)
You need help ?
No, thanks - I'm fine.
You?
helmutcheese
20-05-2007, 22:47
4meg is a dodle even with too many customers try 10meg or even 20meg and see if your happy.
homealone
20-05-2007, 22:49
You need help ?
are you in the wrong thread? :D
helmutcheese
20-05-2007, 22:51
Are you trying to start trouble, I read the topic as sarsasm.
4meg is a dodle even with too many customers try 10meg or even 20meg and see if your happy.
Which is why I am on 4meg, with consistent (nearly 4mb) speeds, and very happy with it - it is fit for (my) purpose - heavy browsing, email, youtube, occasional downloads (very rarely more than 3gig a day, running in the background).
Works for me, sorry yours doesn't for you.
helmutcheese
20-05-2007, 22:54
10meg used to work prefect with TW-BY thats all most are getting at.
homealone
20-05-2007, 23:02
Are you trying to start trouble, I read the topic as sarsasm.
if you have a problem with any posts, threads, or topics the Cable Forum team are more than capable of dealing.
my 4 meg + paid for newsgroups I can schedule does for me ;)
Ok Lezwez, I'll simplify it for you, as I have actually given you my reason more than once in this topic (as have others) if you bothered to read it.
It is apparent that with a network unable to support a sustained full 20Mb for all at peak times, there will have to be some kind of bandwidth management employed. Out of the main alternatives I see, you can have service termination after a certain usage (bandwidth cap), or you can face extra charges for usage over a certain limit (financial deterrent, stealth tax etc.), or there is shaping. Out of the three I see shaping as by far the most customer friendly as service continues and nothing is added onto your bill.
In an ideal situation I would like to have a network with no need for any management at all but it is not a perfect world we live in, so until conditions improve I support shaping above any other possible method which could be employed. I also enjoy the knowledge that the shaping will have a next to nothing impact on my usage becasue of my internet habits. That is not true for all I know, but for me it is and thats what fuels my opinions on my service - how it affects me.
Ok Lezwez, I'll simplify it for you, as I have actually given you my reason more than once in this topic (as have others) if you bothered to read it.
It is apparent that with a network unable to support a sustained full 20Mb for all at peak times, there will have to be some kind of bandwidth management employed. Out of the main alternatives I see, you can have service termination after a certain usage (bandwidth cap), or you can face extra charges for usage over a certain limit (financial deterrent, stealth tax etc.), or there is shaping. Out of the three I see shaping as by far the most customer friendly as service continues and nothing is added onto your bill.
In an ideal situation I would like to have a network with no need for any management at all but it is not a perfect world we live in, so until conditions improve I support shaping above any other possible method which could be employed. I also enjoy the knowledge that the shaping will have a next to nothing impact on my usage becasue of my internet habits. That is not true for all I know, but for me it is and thats what fuels my opinions on my service - how it affects me.
Exactly, its this or download limits, but some are just not reading whats put.
A lot of the people moaning [sorry complaining] were probably not even here when the hot news of the day was "Caps".
No, not what schoolboys wear on their heads, this was a really heated debate that was very similar to this, when there was technically a capped service.
Most people went over the limit, by accident or otherwise, a few got warning letters, and a very few [if any?] got turfed off the service.
My point is, in a few months there will be something else, and although this "speed reduction" is'nt popular with anyone, it looks like its here for the foreseable future, and this forum is probably a tiny minority of Virgin customers.
No doubt your mum or gran wont ever notice the speed reduction, and will never have any complaint whatsoever, it would be interesting to know how many customers are on here regularly, versus the total number of customers.
If we totalled 10% [unlikely] Virgin would have a fairly satisfied 90% of customers.
I cant see them losing too much sleep over it, and all the talk about it on here wont change a thing, but dont let that stop anyone. ;)
Well I'd be happy to endorse a "feature" like this if it worked as intended, but it doesn't for me. I have the 20Mb speed enabled on my my modem although the best speed I've got yet is 15Mb, but that's not why I'm posting.
I'm posting here because between 4pm and 11:45pm EVERY DAY, my speeds are at best around the 1-2Mb mark, and usually hover around the 600-800Kb mark for most of the evening with higher latency to boot (70ms+). Come 11:45pm, my speeds jump to 12Mb+ with latency down to 15-17ms.
So please tell me why I'm paying top money for the "top tier" package and yet only getting around 3% of what I'm paying for? Would anyone realistically settle for that on any other service? If I/we are now getting 1/3rd of the time that I'm paying for at a greatly reduced service, why haven't we had the pricing reduced accordingly? Also remember this is at the peak time that the majority of people use it and is therefore effectively half of the actual usage time, as the rst of the time people are at work/school etc.
Everything was fine until VM took over, and if it's true that a small percentage of users are making the service crap for everyone because of their "abuse", then why don't they just remove their services completely so the rest of us can actually get what we pay for without restriction?
I had VM get an engineer out last week to check it wasn't anything else nearby causing it (which of course I knew it wasn't), he said everything was ok and was quite surprised at just how poor my service was (this was around 4:30pm), no matter which site I tried accessing/downloading from.
Can I download an MP3 track in under 2secs? I seriously doubt I could download a track in 2 minutes like this.
So if you want to start a "campaign" to let VM know how great it all is, just remember to include those of us who aren't getting it so great. I'm quite a distance from a BT exchange, so I'd be lucky to get 1Mb if that, but at least I wouldn't be paying £38 pm for it (ok I'm only paying half price ATM, but that's for the balls-up NTL made with my no TV for 3.5weeks up to and including Christmas, and the susbequent taking of £93 from my bank despite me telling them not to, AND the subsequent charging of full-price BB for 2 months when it was supposed to be half price), can you say "fools"?
Yeah it may be a rant, but I'm sick of paying for other people's crap and want what I'm paying for. I've never "abused" my service, in fact the most I've ever DL'd in one month was 70Gb and that was when we had the 75Gb cap (most of that went on downloading the likes of 24, SG1, BSG etc. which I paid for via NTL/Sky supscription but download because I hate poxy adverts every 5 minutes).
Well I'd be happy to endorse a "feature" like this if it worked as intended, but it doesn't for me. I have the 20Mb speed enabled on my my modem although the best speed I've got yet is 15Mb, but that's not why I'm posting.
I'm posting here because between 4pm and 11:45pm EVERY DAY, my speeds are at best around the 1-2Mb mark, and usually hover around the 600-800Kb mark for most of the evening with higher latency to boot (70ms+). Come 11:45pm, my speeds jump to 12Mb+ with latency down to 15-17ms.
So please tell me why I'm paying top money for the "top tier" package and yet only getting around 3% of what I'm paying for? Would anyone realistically settle for that on any other service? If I/we are now getting 1/3rd of the time that I'm paying for at a greatly reduced service, why haven't we had the pricing reduced accordingly? Also remember this is at the peak time that the majority of people use it and is therefore effectively half of the actual usage time, as the rst of the time people are at work/school etc.
Everything was fine until VM took over, and if it's true that a small percentage of users are making the service crap for everyone because of their "abuse", then why don't they just remove their services completely so the rest of us can actually get what we pay for without restriction?
I had VM get an engineer out last week to check it wasn't anything else nearby causing it (which of course I knew it wasn't), he said everything was ok and was quite surprised at just how poor my service was (this was around 4:30pm), no matter which site I tried accessing/downloading from.
Can I download an MP3 track in under 2secs? I seriously doubt I could download a track in 2 minutes like this.
So if you want to start a "campaign" to let VM know how great it all is, just remember to include those of us who aren't getting it so great. I'm quite a distance from a BT exchange, so I'd be lucky to get 1Mb if that, but at least I wouldn't be paying £38 pm for it (ok I'm only paying half price ATM, but that's for the balls-up NTL made with my no TV for 3.5weeks up to and including Christmas, and the susbequent taking of £93 from my bank despite me telling them not to, AND the subsequent charging of full-price BB for 2 months when it was supposed to be half price), can you say "fools"?
Yeah it may be a rant, but I'm sick of paying for other people's crap and want what I'm paying for. I've never "abused" my service, in fact the most I've ever DL'd in one month was 70Gb and that was when we had the 75Gb cap (most of that went on downloading the likes of 24, SG1, BSG etc. which I paid for via NTL/Sky supscription but download because I hate poxy adverts every 5 minutes).
Biggus, you have my sympathy (probably don't want it, but you have it anyway), and so does anyone else in your position.
Why not vote with your wallet, and reduce your BB to 2 or 4mb - those are fairly stable, and you could tell VM that was why you were doing it; if enough disgruntled subscribers do it, it should get some attention. Or at least you (and others) won't be paying for a service you're not getting.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.