View Full Version : Maximum rates with daytime + evening STM in force
Following the thread here (http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12/33634678-stm-rates-vm-expect-you-keep.html) about the rates we have to stay under to not trip evening STM, and hot off the announcement that the daytime STM is fully rolled out, here are the new line speed figures with both STM periods taken into account.
This is the maximum amount of download you can get in a day, averaged across the day with the full daytime + evening STM added together. It is not possible to get more in a day from the same line.
XL = 13.75 meg is now sold as an upto 20 meg line
L (new) = 6.88 meg now sold as an upto 10 meg line
L (old) = 2.75 meg now sold as an upto 4 meg line
M = 1.58 meg now sold as an upto 2 meg line
Notes:
1) This is the absolute max you can get, if you have congestion or loss as well your rate will be even lower.
2) There is no way to get more other than purchasing a faster line.
3) Figures are based on 10 hours at the maximum throttle and 14 hours full tilt.
----------------------------
Comment:
Whats actually happened is our 10 meg lines were uplifted to 20 meg, but if we use it, its clawed back using STM down to the figures given above.
To the naysayers and VM lovers that will be here shortly to rubbish the correctly calculated figures, I say this: 20 meg is called 20 meg because that is the average across the day when given the fixed GB limit that we had previously. The daily amount has been reduced to one quarter for 10 hours a day (except M, which is one half) so it is now impossible to transfer as much.
If you think differently, dont rant on, show your figures.
Welshchris
09-07-2008, 02:24
what the hell?????? lol
LoL ok, the figures are what VM are now giving you for your money with the new STM.
If you bought a 20 meg line, its actually a 13.75 meg line when you work it out over a day.
If this is too complicated for a lot of you, please say and ill rewrite it to be more readable.
They should be required to advertise it this way.
h3llb1tch
09-07-2008, 11:20
They should be required to advertise it this way.
Definitely.
xspeedyx
09-07-2008, 12:14
In that case all ISP's should change the advertising its not gonna happen STM is here and will stay I see it as live with it or walk I for one can live with it
Berealwith
09-07-2008, 12:41
thanks for that working out Mad ad, i understand it i was in the area where it was tested (Preston) and boy it was bad. I walked mate. if i was in Iraq i would have firebombed my ISP hopefully with the bloodyminded idoiots i spoke to in it.
disclaimer:- not all cable ISP employies are idoits some do know thier job
Pogo stick
09-07-2008, 13:32
Don't know about everyone else but those figures sound pretty good to me. How many people are really going to be downloading full whack 24/7 on their BB connection? Generally users will only use it for a few hours a day at most and if they do it at low traffic periods they will almost definitely get the advertised rate
Ignoring contention issues, which will vary from region to region, and time of day (and because the original OP ignores these factors too) these figures mean XL customers would be able to download 1188Gb a day (or 1.18Tb)
i.e. 13.75Mb x 60seconds x 60minutes x 24hours.
Compare that with most other ISPs fixed download limits, now who thinks VM's service is 'limited'?
TraxData
09-07-2008, 14:19
Don't know about everyone else but those figures sound pretty good to me. How many people are really going to be downloading full whack 24/7 on their BB connection? Generally users will only use it for a few hours a day at most and if they do it at low traffic periods they will almost definitely get the advertised rate
Ignoring contention issues, which will vary from region to region, and time of day (and because the original OP ignores these factors too) these figures mean XL customers would be able to download 1188Gb a day (or 1.18Tb)
i.e. 13.75Mb x 60seconds x 60minutes x 24hours.
Compare that with most other ISPs fixed download limits, now who thinks VM's service is 'limited'?
I think your missing the point.
STM does not affect people who download 24/7
The point is your not allowed to use the connection when you need it most (aka when your at home, from work, for example) as it'll get you stm'd, so the only time you can really download without being punished is overnight, for £37/month, it's simply not acceptable.
xspeedyx
09-07-2008, 14:30
I think your missing the point.
STM does not affect people who download 24/7
The point is your not allowed to use the connection when you need it most (aka when your at home, from work, for example) as it'll get you stm'd, so the only time you can really download without being punished is overnight, for £37/month, it's simply not acceptable.
Interesting Trax the people that wanna use the BBI when they get home are for checking emails, xbox live, online pc gaming so you dont get STM'D doing this well I never have its people who download certain content be it linux iso's but how many nights are you gonna download 3gb for (xl customers).
There are 3.5 million customers I bet atleast half of them have NEVER been stm'd.
Dont get wrong I think they should scrap the daytime as thats stupid and they should invest in the network but as you said b4 and is very well known they simple cnt afford it.
JUst made me think when you said when they get home they are stm, I think congestion is the main problem I wonder how much it would cost them to maintain a unstm'd network
TraxData
09-07-2008, 14:55
Interesting Trax the people that wanna use the BBI when they get home are for checking emails, xbox live, online pc gaming so you dont get STM'D doing this well I never have its people who download certain content be it linux iso's but how many nights are you gonna download 3gb for (xl customers).
There are 3.5 million customers I bet atleast half of them have NEVER been stm'd.
Dont get wrong I think they should scrap the daytime as thats stupid and they should invest in the network but as you said b4 and is very well known they simple cnt afford it.
JUst made me think when you said when they get home they are stm, I think congestion is the main problem I wonder how much it would cost them to maintain a unstm'd network
Err, i use xboxlive and got stm'd quite often, why? demos themself weigh in at 1.5-3gb on their own, hi-def trialers, updates, patches, iplayer, itunes, legal streaming user, i got 20Mbit because i want to do those things, but thanks to STM i could not, without getting 75% of the connection taken away from me.
Unacceptable.
How many nights? 3GB is not a big filesize in this day and age, it's as simple as that, despite the **** that VM pump out most people use that sort of bandwith these days, and contrary to what they say on their site "BT cannot keep up, but we can, basicaly" is as neil so politely put it, a load of *******s.
They cant afford it because they keep giving people high up 100+k/year bonuses...
this subject has been done to death and customers are still here so whats the conclusion?
people just like moaning or do 95% of people get a acepptable sevice 99% of the time, if its anything else people should try the green green grass of adsl because they dont have "UPTO" speeds do they.
TraxData
09-07-2008, 15:05
this subject has been done to death and customers are still here so whats the conclusion?
people just like moaning or do 95% of people get a acepptable sevice 99% of the time, if its anything else people should try the green green grass of adsl because they dont have "UPTO" speeds do they.
Alot of people i know who were with VM are now happy with Be/Ukonline actually.
Soon as daytime STM was complete i know personally of 22 people that cancelled!
I've tried ADSL+2...i got 19Mbit and i'm 1.5KM from exchange...
no 95% do not, 95% dont even know about STM because VM hide it and they get blamed thinking its their PC's etc.
Just look at the reaction on VM's on ngs about the daytime STM, yea sure...people who are on retention deals are staying, loyal customers have given up.
Alot of people i know who were with VM are now happy with Be/Ukonline actually.
Soon as daytime STM was complete i know personally of 22 people that cancelled!
I've tried ADSL+2...i got 19Mbit and i'm 1.5KM from exchange...
no 95% do not, 95% dont even know about STM because VM hide it and they get blamed thinking its their PC's etc.
Just look at the reaction on VM's on ngs about the daytime STM, yea sure...people who are on retention deals are staying, loyal customers have given up.
i do like your quotes i know 23 people who were with bt and now they are with virgin............but the bottom line is if people feel as though they are getting ripped off then leave, staying just makes them look stupid it is a free market place.
xspeedyx
09-07-2008, 15:32
Trax daytime stm is here when are they introducing ALLDAY and night 24/7 stm then?
Pogo stick
09-07-2008, 15:45
Dont get wrong I think they should scrap the daytime as thats stupid and they should invest in the network but as you said b4 and is very well known they simple cnt afford it.
JUst made me think when you said when they get home they are stm, I think congestion is the main problem I wonder how much it would cost them to maintain a unstm'd network
It's not so much a case of "how much it would cost to maintain a unstm'd network" but how much it would cost customer's to buy it. VM can afford it and the network's there now, if people want uncontended un-STMd bandwidth they CAN get it from VM now via their Business division (ntl Telewest Business). The problem is, though, that the managed internet access product costs approx £7k install and then approx £7k per annum rental.
Given that, I don't think £37/ month for 20Mb contended and STM'd with a 30Tb/month download limit is all that bad (know I'll get flamed now...)
CountZer0
09-07-2008, 15:45
Ignoring contention issues, which will vary from region to region, and time of day (and because the original OP ignores these factors too) these figures mean XL customers would be able to download 1188Gb a day (or 1.18Tb)
i.e. 13.75Mb x 60seconds x 60minutes x 24hours.
Um, I could be wrong but I don't think those figures are right.
13.75Mbps fully utilised for 24 hours isn't 1188GB.
13.75Mbps = 1.68 MB/s (megabytes per sec)
1.68MB/s over 24 hours = 141.75GB (gigabytes)
That's still a crapload of data but not nearly the 1.18TB you aluded to. I hope my maths is right though. ;)
xspeedyx
09-07-2008, 16:04
30Tb limit I have never heard that even 20Mb running flat 24/7 you couldnt do 30Tb
Pogo stick
09-07-2008, 16:07
Um, I could be wrong but I don't think those figures are right.
13.75Mbps fully utilised for 24 hours isn't 1188GB.
13.75Mbps = 1.68 MB/s (megabytes per sec)
1.68MB/s over 24 hours = 141.75GB (gigabytes)
That's still a crapload of data but not nearly the 1.18TB you aluded to. I hope my maths is right though. ;)
I said Tb (small 'b') so we essentially agree as your big 'B' is a factor of 8 different so multiply your 141.75 GB by 8 (to convert to bits) and we have approximately the same answer, give or take some rounding errors. (not sure why you wanted to convert to bytes in the first place though?)
:handshake
Don't know about everyone else but those figures sound pretty good to me. How many people are really going to be downloading full whack 24/7 on their BB connection?
But you don't need to be going 24/7 to fall foul of STM, merely use the service for 30 minutes at a time that is most convenient to most people.. i.e before 9pm.
Generally users will only use it for a few hours a day at most and if they do it at low traffic periods they will almost definitely get the advertised rate
Unfortunately ofcourse, the "high traffic" periods are exactly when people who have signed up will want to use it.
Ignoring contention issues, which will vary from region to region, and time of day (and because the original OP ignores these factors too) these figures mean XL customers would be able to download 1188Gb a day (or 1.18Tb)
i.e. 13.75Mb x 60seconds x 60minutes x 24hours.
Compare that with most other ISPs fixed download limits, now who thinks VM's service is 'limited'?
You've just shown us quite clearly that it *IS* limited.
Pogo stick
09-07-2008, 16:21
30Tb limit I have never heard that even 20Mb running flat 24/7 you couldnt do 30Tb
Merely doing the maths based on the OPs initial post which takes into account STM and non-STM periods.
Please feel free to pick holes in the calculations
---------- Post added at 16:21 ---------- Previous post was at 16:16 ----------
You've just shown us quite clearly that it *IS* limited.
That comment was tongue in cheek, in that, barring any contention issues, the theoretical limit is 30Tb a month. Compare that with other ISPs actual limits, which are far lower, and to all intents and purposes, for any practical comparisons, regardless of the whinging on here over the service being limited - it effectively isn't
Don't know about everyone else but those figures sound pretty good to me. How many people are really going to be downloading full whack 24/7 on their BB connection? Generally users will only use it for a few hours a day at most and if they do it at low traffic periods they will almost definitely get the advertised rate
Ignoring contention issues, which will vary from region to region, and time of day (and because the original OP ignores these factors too) these figures mean XL customers would be able to download 1188Gb a day (or 1.18Tb)
i.e. 13.75Mb x 60seconds x 60minutes x 24hours.
Compare that with most other ISPs fixed download limits, now who thinks VM's service is 'limited'?
Its not correct to say we can download 1188Gb a day, the true statement is that we can download AT 1188Gb/day, which is indeed the same as 13.75Mb/s.
But then the problem is that 1188 Gigabits/day doesnt mean anything to the average person and is very easlily confused with file sizes in Gigabytes (which are 8 times smaller).
And whether you expand it to 1188Gb/day or stick to 13.75Mb/second, its still the same thing.
And it is still more limited than the original figure of 20 meg that we used to get.
Pogo stick
09-07-2008, 17:09
Its not correct to say we can download 1188Gb a day, the true statement is that we can download AT 1188Gb/day, which is indeed the same as 13.75Mb/s.
Sorry to seem picky Mad Ad, but those statements are identical. Downloading AT 1188Gb/day means you will have downloaded 1188Gb in a day if your average download rate is 13.75Mb/s (from your calculations)
pip08456
09-07-2008, 17:09
Alot of people i know who were with VM are now happy with Be/Ukonline actually.
Soon as daytime STM was complete i know personally of 22 people that cancelled!
I've tried ADSL+2...i got 19Mbit and i'm 1.5KM from exchange...
no 95% do not, 95% dont even know about STM because VM hide it and they get blamed thinking its their PC's etc.
Just look at the reaction on VM's on ngs about the daytime STM, yea sure...people who are on retention deals are staying, loyal customers have given up.
I walked to Be and couldn't be happier. Should've done it sooner. Far better service and at a lower cost per month including BT line rental!
NO STM!!!
It's not so much a case of "how much it would cost to maintain a unstm'd network" but how much it would cost customer's to buy it. VM can afford it and the network's there now, if people want uncontended un-STMd bandwidth they CAN get it from VM now via their Business division (ntl Telewest Business). The problem is, though, that the managed internet access product costs approx £7k install and then approx £7k per annum rental.
Given that, I don't think £37/ month for 20Mb contended and STM'd with a 30Tb/month download limit is all that bad (know I'll get flamed now...)
Now you are getting into the real debate.
If VM wanted to charge me 37 a month and gave me a 13.75 meg line that didnt go up and down like a whores draws at different times of the day id say ok, where do I re-sign for a year and id stop complaining tomorrow.
However for the sake of BS marketing and some local capacity factors (remember Alex Brown is recently on record saying there are no national capacity problems whatsoever) we have to put up with a massive burst speed when we least need it, but then STMed down incredibly harshly if we use more than 1.33 meg average over the evening 5 hours on XL.
Talk about boom and bust.
But Alex doesnt seem to care, he would rather alienate huge chunks of their target customers for the sake of some BS marketing.
The fact is, most people dont know about STM (yet, but awareness is growing), however if they quietly introduced a non STMed product at say, 10 meg, most people wouldnt know about that either.
The customers taking it up would be mainly the customers that VM are now losing to people like BE, yet 10 meg unSTMed is even less than the 13.75 meg we currently get with both STMs in force now.
So they would save another 3.75 meg a day per heavy use customer, AND keep everyone happy that has problems with STM. Thats Win Win isnt it?
But for some stupid reason, Alex Brown has embarked upon an anti customer strategy of take take take, and provides no alternative product - so in small amounts or large they are now losing customers** to their competitors when they simply didnt have to. All for the sake of a little forward thinking.
Thats what happens when you leave geeks in charge of a network, normal business practice goes out the window and marketing has to play catchup and fight the fires when we could all have got what we wanted, without all the negative energy being wasted in threads like this.
(**high tech internet aware customers at that, ones that were best placed to sing the praises of an ISP to the average non tech person in the steet).
pip08456
09-07-2008, 17:33
I agree 100% with you Mad Ad as a person who has a server (in the States so doesn't use any of VM bandwidth) I need to be able to connect and sort problems out remotely and at a reasonable speed, but due to STM I would've been better using dial-up!
I used to sing the praises of NTL but not any more.
Pogo stick
09-07-2008, 18:16
The fact is, most people dont know about STM (yet, but awareness is growing), however if they quietly introduced a non STMed product at say, 10 meg, most people wouldnt know about that either.
The customers taking it up would be mainly the customers that VM are now losing to people like BE, yet 10 meg unSTMed is even less than the 13.75 meg we currently get with both STMs in force now.
So they would save another 3.75 meg a day per heavy use customer, AND keep everyone happy that has problems with STM. Thats Win Win isnt it?
But for some stupid reason, Alex Brown has embarked upon an anti customer strategy of take take take, and provides no alternative product - so in small amounts or large they are now losing customers** to their competitors when they simply didnt have to. All for the sake of a little forward thinking.
Thats what happens when you leave geeks in charge of a network, normal business practice goes out the window and marketing has to play catchup and fight the fires when we could all have got what we wanted, without all the negative energy being wasted in threads like this.
(**high tech internet aware customers at that, ones that were best placed to sing the praises of an ISP to the average non tech person in the steet).
Good point and if you think about it, a docsis 3.0 50Mb connection STM-d to, let's say, 10Mb is exactly that, with the added advantage of the occasional burst to 50Mb.
So depending on how you view it, the new product you mention is, in fact, coming soon: late 2008/early 2009, though will be more than £37/month I expect but I assume the 10Mb non-STMd product you mention above would also have had a premium price
Sorry to seem picky Mad Ad, but those statements are identical. Downloading AT 1188Gb/day means you will have downloaded 1188Gb in a day if your average download rate is 13.75Mb/s (from your calculations)
No its not the same, when we say downloading AT X we acknowledge there is a time factor involved. When we say we have downloaded X, thats an absolute amount.
pip08456
09-07-2008, 18:39
Good point and if you think about it, a docsis 3.0 50Mb connection STM-d to, let's say, 10Mb is exactly that, with the added advantage of the occasional burst to 50Mb.
So depending on how you view it, the new product you mention is, in fact, coming soon: late 2008/early 2009, though will be more than £37/month I expect but I assume the 10Mb non-STMd product you mention above would also have had a premium price
Correct me if I am wrong here but wasn't the 20Mb connection sold as a Premium product at a Premium price? Then they decided to upgrade others to the 20Mb connection then had to bring in STM because it was oversubscribed?
No doubt the "New" 50 Mb product will be sold as a premium one although it would only have "the advantage of the occasional burst" to that speed.
I'm glad I'm no longer with VM!!!!
Pogo stick
09-07-2008, 18:59
No its not the same, when we say downloading AT X we acknowledge there is a time factor involved. When we say we have downloaded X, thats an absolute amount.
It is over 15 years since I got my maths degree, so I'm a bit rusty, but lets see if I can still do this...
1188Gb/day x 1 day = amount downloaded in one day
let's see...in the left hand expression the 'day' is both above and below the line so those terms cancel leaving the expression:
1188Gb x 1 = Amount downloaded in one day
Therefore the amount downloaded in one day = 1188Gb
math 101 as they say in the States
Good point and if you think about it, a docsis 3.0 50Mb connection STM-d to, let's say, 10Mb is exactly that, with the added advantage of the occasional burst to 50Mb.
So depending on how you view it, the new product you mention is, in fact, coming soon: late 2008/early 2009, though will be more than £37/month I expect but I assume the 10Mb non-STMd product you mention above would also have had a premium price
The problem with that is despite being 10 meg after STM, itll also have a puny uprate of 384k, which, because of the way ciscos STM drops packets, will only be usable to about 300k before the latency starts to rise to a crippling level (ever tried having a voip call or playing xbox with a 1 second delay? forget it).
384 is no way enough for 10 meg**, its yet another BS way that Alex at VM has cut down what you do get left with.
**(10 meg originally came with 768k up, and even that was poor)
For those (like me) who are a little challenged by the maths:
Unrestricted speed = 20Mb/s = 9GB/hour
Restricted speed = 5Mb/s = 2.25GB/hour
00:00-10:00 Unrestricted download for 10 hours = 90GB
10:00-10:36 Unrestricted download for 36mins = 6GB
10:36-15:36 STM @ 5Mb/s for 5 hours = 11.25GB
15:36-16:18 Unrestricted download for 42mins = 6.3GB
16:18-21:18 STM @ 5Mb/s for 5 hours = 11.25GB
21:18-23:59 Unrestricted download for 2 hours 42mins = 24.3GB
Unrestricted download = 126.6GB
Restricted download = 22.5GB
Total downloaded = 149.1GB
Unrestricted hours = 14:00
Restricted hours = 10:00
Total hours = 24:00
Average speed = 13.8Mb/s
It is over 15 years since I got my maths degree, so I'm a bit rusty, but lets see if I can still do this...
1188Gb/day x 1 day = amount downloaded in one day
let's see...in the left hand expression the 'day' is both above and below the line so those terms cancel leaving the expression:
1188Gb x 1 = Amount downloaded in one day
Therefore the amount downloaded in one day = 1188Gb
math 101 as they say in the States
Its not the math, its the units. Canceling the terms out doesnt change the fact that as soon as you mention a time factor (per day hour or second) then the unit is a rate. When you dont mention a time factor, the unit is an amount.
Amounts are most commonly measured in Gigabytes, and not Gigabits, and certainly not Gigabits per day. Thats a rate.
For those (like me) who are a little challenged by the maths:
Unrestricted speed = 20Mb/s = 9GB/hour
Restricted speed = 5Mb/s = 2.25GB/hour
00:00-10:00 Unrestricted download for 10 hours = 90GB
10:00-10:36 Unrestricted download for 36mins = 6GB
10:36-15:36 STM @ 5Mb/s for 5 hours = 11.25GB
15:36-16:18 Unrestricted download for 42mins = 6.3GB
16:18-21:18 STM @ 5Mb/s for 5 hours = 11.25GB
21:18-23:59 Unrestricted download for 2 hours 42mins = 24.3GB
Unrestricted download = 126.6GB
Restricted download = 22.5GB
Total downloaded = 149.1GB
Unrestricted hours = 14:00
Restricted hours = 10:00
Total hours = 24:00
Average speed = 13.8Mb/s
Almost correct, well done, except you are a few minutes out.
If, as you correctly say, its 9 gig an hour, and the day allowance is 6 gig, with the evening 3 gig, then thats 40 mins and 20 mins squarely. Adjust that and you have the gold. :D
pip08456
09-07-2008, 19:49
For those (like me) who are a little challenged by the maths:
Unrestricted speed = 20Mb/s = 9GB/hour
Restricted speed = 5Mb/s = 2.25GB/hour
00:00-10:00 Unrestricted download for 10 hours = 90GB
10:00-10:36 Unrestricted download for 36mins = 6GB
10:36-15:36 STM @ 5Mb/s for 5 hours = 11.25GB
15:36-16:18 Unrestricted download for 42mins = 6.3GB
16:18-21:18 STM @ 5Mb/s for 5 hours = 11.25GB
21:18-23:59 Unrestricted download for 2 hours 42mins = 24.3GB
Unrestricted download = 126.6GB
Restricted download = 22.5GB
Total downloaded = 149.1GB
Unrestricted hours = 14:00
Restricted hours = 10:00
Total hours = 24:00
Average speed = 13.8Mb/s
I like this one!
To me speed is money - not for illegal pirposes I must add! - I charge for solving PC problems via remote access to them.
I get paid for what I do and what I supply and quite rightly so.
If I was still with VM I would be paying for 20Mbps and only getting 13.8Mbps I only wish it were true. My average speed when I was with VM was struggling to get to 10Mbps and that's before STM came in! I had countless engineers come who could not find a problem at my end (surprise, surprise!) and couldn't find a problem at theirs.
I did meet an engineer on his party for leaving VM who told me that 50db attenuators should have been fitted to the street cabs to cut the noise on the lines but they hadn't been done. How true that is I don't know.
Getting back to the point though, to pay for 20Mbps and only getting 13.8Mbps is a rip off especially as it was originally sold as a "Premium" service.
Rant over.
Pogo stick
09-07-2008, 19:50
Its not the math, its the units. Canceling the terms out doesnt change the fact that as soon as you mention a time factor (per day hour or second) then the unit is a rate. When you dont mention a time factor, the unit is an amount.
Amounts are most commonly measured in Gigabytes, and not Gigabits, and certainly not Gigabits per day. Thats a rate.
:D
Not quite sure I understand your issue here Mad Ad, but if it's that you want it in GB, then fine, 149GB a day, or ~4470GB a month, is still quite some 'limit' compared to most other ISPs (e.g. Sky's hard cap at 750GB a month)
I like this one!
To me speed is money - not for illegal pirposes I must add! - I charge for solving PC problems via remote access to them.
I get paid for what I do and what I supply and quite rightly so.
If I was still with VM I would be paying for 20Mbps and only getting 13.8Mbps I only wish it were true. My average speed when I was with VM was struggling to get to 10Mbps and that's before STM came in! I had countless engineers come who could not find a problem at my end (surprise, surprise!) and couldn't find a problem at theirs.
I did meet an engineer on his party for leaving VM who told me that 50db attenuators should have been fitted to the street cabs to cut the noise on the lines but they hadn't been done. How true that is I don't know.
Getting back to the point though, to pay for 20Mbps and only getting 13.8Mbps is a rip off especially as it was originally sold as a "Premium" service.
Rant over.
See the post above yours, its 13.75 meg as I said in my original post ;)
Not quite sure I understand your issue here Mad Ad, but if it's that you want it in GB, then fine, 149GB a day, or ~4470GB a month, is still quite some 'limit' compared to most other ISPs (e.g. Sky's hard cap at 750GB a month)
Not to quibble, but its 148.5, but anyway..... what you are now discussing is an opinion and outside the scope of this thread. However briefly, compared with some lower end packages yes its a good amount in a day IF, and only IF you can use the off peak time to its fullest. Many cannot tho, my biggest gripe is how we cannot rely on a fixed amount any more, something the lower capacity ADSL packages still provide (meaning the difference between the boom and the bust is so large, and at a time when most everyone wants to use it, in the evening). Anyway like i said, thats discussion outside of whats intended here.
Pogo stick
09-07-2008, 20:06
See the post above, its 13.75 meg as I said in my original post ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pogo stick
Not quite sure I understand your issue here Mad Ad, but if it's that you want it in GB, then fine, 149GB a day, or ~4470GB a month, is still quite some 'limit' compared to most other ISPs (e.g. Sky's hard cap at 750GB a month)
Not to quibble, but its 148.5, but anyway..... what you are now discussing is an opinion and outside the scope of this thread. However briefly, compared with some lower end packages yes its a good amount in a day IF, and only IF you can use the off peak time to its fullest. Many cannot tho, my biggest gripe is how we cannot rely on a fixed amount any more, something the lower capacity ADSL packages still provide (meaning the difference between the boom and the bust is so large, and at a time when most everyone wants to use it, in the evening). Anyway like i said, thats discussion outside of whats intended here.
and I thought I was the picky one :shrug:
Where, in that quote, or in fact anything I have written in this thread, am I giving my opinion? I have, so far as I'm aware only given factual statement, logical argument or mathematical proof thus far.
If you think it's opinion to state that a possible download limit of approx 4470GB (or 4.47TB) every month is still quite some limit compared to Sky's 750MB a month, then I apologise. I will retract that comment and replace it with the more factual statement I guess you would prefer...
With VM, every month, you can download >3.5TB more than you can with Sky (Contention notwithstanding, obviously)
xspeedyx
09-07-2008, 22:23
On your comment about 750Gb month that is based on sky users living near the exchange and getting 13mb+ speed right?
TraxData
09-07-2008, 22:35
On your comment about 750Gb month that is based on sky users living near the exchange and getting 13mb+ speed right?
You know, you dont have to be near an exchange to get good speeds.
xspeedyx
09-07-2008, 22:37
You know, you dont have to be near an exchange to get good speeds.
Trax what you smoking the closer you are to the exchange with ADSL the better speeds you get
TraxData
09-07-2008, 22:53
Trax what you smoking the closer you are to the exchange with ADSL the better speeds you get
But you still dont need to be right next to an exchange to get good speeds like you seem to be implying :confused:
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/07/89.jpg
Pogo stick
14-07-2008, 14:02
On your comment about 750Gb month that is based on sky users living near the exchange and getting 13mb+ speed right?
The 750Mb hard cap for Sky is based on the quote from TraxData on the thread linked by the OP in the 1st post of this thread (sorry Trax, should have ref'd the quote) I imagine this cap is irrespective of speed and proximity to the exchange.
Chrysalis
15-07-2008, 16:27
On your comment about 750Gb month that is based on sky users living near the exchange and getting 13mb+ speed right?
to do 750gig month a 2.5mbit synch is enough.
Thanks to the OP. It would be interesting to see figures if you avoid being traffic shaped (i.e. no downloading during periods of throttling, so you can browse and download files/email normally without fear of having your internet connection crippled).
The reason I mention it is that before this nonsense started I had uTorrent set up not to download anything between 4pm and 9pm. Traffic shaping absolutely kills my connection, so that even if I then stop download web browsing is slow and pages time out, gaming is impossible and streaming video cuts out a lot.
Thanks to the OP. It would be interesting to see figures if you avoid being traffic shaped (i.e. no downloading during periods of throttling, so you can browse and download files/email normally without fear of having your internet connection crippled).
It's not that complicated to work out -- see the (very basic) STM timetable (http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/34596015-post33.html) for an XL connection.
The reason I mention it is that before this nonsense started I had uTorrent set up not to download anything between 4pm and 9pm. Traffic shaping absolutely kills my connection, so that even if I then stop download web browsing is slow and pages time out, gaming is impossible and streaming video cuts out a lot.
STM shouldn't cripple your connection to that extent.
Probably worth doing a (proper, simultaneous multiple-file download) speed test when you're next STM'd?
Maybe the STM parameters for your UBR are incorrect?
Okay... 10 hours of traffic shaping per day, so that's a 43% reduction in bandwidth available for downloading, not to mention the inconvenience.
I think the reason throttling wrecks my connection is the upstream limits. They are already quite pathetic when not throttled, but when it kicks in the connection becomes chocked easily and I seem to get a lot of dropped packets.
I have tried to raise the issue with tech support, but they are not interested and either don't understand or won't understand and just blame me for the problem. "You must be downloading" they always say. Actually I'm a computer technician, and and studying for Cisco qualifications, plus my router is a pfsense box which gives me exact details on what traffic is flowing, but anyway...
Nice firewall!
Even allowing for the pitiful upload speeds when STM'd, you should still be able to browse web pages (and just about stream video) without too many problems. Could be worth ignoring TS's BS and trying to diagnose yourself.
:tu:
Well, I know for certain that packets are being dropped. I figured it was the traffic shaping just randomly dropping stuff to keep the speed down (since they don't appear to re-configure your cable modem to actually send less data). It seems odd as there is no problem when not throttled, so maybe it is due to incorrect configuration as you suggested.
I really have had it with VM. For four years now they have been unable to correctly bill us, and the service just keeps getting worse. I noticed that they are doing much better offers for new customers than existing ones too, which is a nice reward for nearly a decade of loyalty. I'd sign up with Be today if it wasn't for concerns over my line - Be said 8-10Mb was all I could expect and an old fault (cracking on the line) which took BT a year to fix last time has re-surfaced recently too :-(
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.