View Full Version : Virgin ADSL Cap of 2.7GB/week
AbyssUnderground
23-10-2008, 11:29
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7684322.stm
I found it extraordinary when I found this. 2.7GB a week is nothing these days for even average users! So much for it being "unlimited".
As the article doesn't say its for ADSL specifically, we can only assume it is because we know the cap difference for cable already.
Tiscali - advertised as unlimited, has fair usage policy but with unspecified excess, will cut off those deemed heavy users
Be - advertised as unlimited, unspecified excess, will not cut off users
Sky - unlimited with no usage barrier or cut off policy
Virgin Media - 2.7Gb limit per week
Toucan - advertised as unlimited, with unspecified fair usage, will cut customers off
BT, advertised as unlimited, unspecified fair usage, will not cut users off
AOL, 40Gb limit, will remove users who exceed it
Plusnet, 30Gb limit. will remove those who exceed it
Orange, advertised as unlimited, unspecified excess, will remove heavy users
dilli-theclaw
23-10-2008, 11:39
I find it extraordinary too... I have downloaded more than 100gb in the last week...
HHHmmm, maybe they refer to the limit during peak times?
Virgin Broadband offers unlimited downloads on all our broadband packages, which is great if you like to download music and movies or just don't want to worry about monthly allowances or caps. However, if you download a lot, as part of our Acceptable Use Policy, you need to know that we operate a Traffic Management policy (http://www.virgin.net/helpme/broadband/faq/basics_traffic.html).From http://www.virgin.net/allyours/faqs/index.shtml (non-cable FAQs).
I suspect the BBC has duff information; I download probably 10x that amount per month (so I would comfortably exceed 2.7GB every week) and I've never been shaped, managed, throttled or disconnected in any way. Not so as I'd notice, at any rate...
I wonder whether they pressed VM to estimate the level at which traffic management might kick in, and then ran with that as a 'limit'?
Alternatively, of course, they may just be using ancient data, when I first got Virgin.net ADSL there were some pretty restrictive download limits, especially on the cheaper packages.
I'd like to know how the 2.7 Gig limit was arrived at.
smeagoly1
23-10-2008, 12:24
I'd like to know how they got hold of that figure also. Been on ADSL since FEB, as far as i know, the cap is 5G a week. You get capped for a week,if you go over it, do it a 2nd time or the following week, capped for a month.
2.7G is a joke limit, soemone must have go their figures wrong, or I haven't been informed of any changes.
I'd like to know how they got hold of that figure also. Been on ADSL since FEB, as far as i know, the cap is 5G a week. You get capped for a week,if you go over it, do it a 2nd time or the following week, capped for a month.
2.7G is a joke limit, soemone must have go their figures wrong, or I haven't been informed of any changes.
The point is, Virgin's own website states that there is no download limit.
AbyssUnderground
23-10-2008, 13:21
The point is, Virgin's own website states that there is no download limit.
And they're correct in saying that; there isn't. They just limit the speed at which you can download, yet again getting round the word "unlimited". Why hasn't the ISPA and Ofcom cracked down on the use of the word unlimited yet? Its stupid. Unlimited in real life is pretty much impossible in whatever sense it is used. The correct word, as I have said before, is "un-metered", not unlimited. If there is any form of FUP, then there is a limitation, and therefore it is not "unlimited" or "un-metered" in any fashion at all.
I could go on about even further definitions of the word unlimited and un-metered, but I'd probably get bad rep for it :D Unless someone wants to hear my views...?
And they're correct in saying that; there isn't. They just limit the speed at which you can download, yet again getting round the word "unlimited". Why hasn't the ISPA and Ofcom cracked down on the use of the word unlimited yet? Its stupid. Unlimited in real life is pretty much impossible in whatever sense it is used. The correct word, as I have said before, is "un-metered", not unlimited. If there is any form of FUP, then there is a limitation, and therefore it is not "unlimited" or "un-metered" in any fashion at all.
I could go on about even further definitions of the word unlimited and un-metered, but I'd probably get bad rep for it :D Unless someone wants to hear my views...?
Your views are welcome, but let's not take this thread off topic. The point here is that the BBC has made a factually inaccurate statement ... there's not a lot more to it than that.
AbyssUnderground
23-10-2008, 13:27
Your views are welcome, but let's not take this thread off topic. The point here is that the BBC has made a factually inaccurate statement ... there's not a lot more to it than that.
Agreed, I just wanted to further my point about their use of the word unlimited still being consistently incorrect. I guess our argument is in vein though, we've complained for a long time and still nothing has been done about it.
wording has been changed
Virgin Media - unlimited but traffic of heavy users is shaped at busy times
Sky - unlimited with no usage barrier or cut off policy for those on its own network. 40GB monthly limit for other customers.
Plusnet - 30Gb peak-time limit. Those exceeding their limit will be encouraged to upgradePlusnet, 30Gb peak-time limit. Those exceeding their limit will be encouraged to upgrade
Jonathan90
23-10-2008, 16:33
I'd like to know why people call it unlimited simple as why don't they jsut say in advertisements or clearly stateing somewhere on their site that you use accessivley ie constantly thrashing your pipe (that sounds wrong but still) they will cut you off then people will think twice about constantly downlaoding "linux iso's " man people get on my wick.
Turkey Machine
23-10-2008, 16:50
They get away with it by providing unreadably small smallprint on the bottom of newspaper ads, billboards, and fast-moving text on TV ads. IMO, OfCom should slap em all and tell them to be absolutely truthful in what they provide. If I was in charge, I'd make all providers declare the limits on their Fair Usage Policy, because without a specific number it's so vague it's a guessing game that could get you disconnected.
The point here is that the BBC has made a factually inaccurate statement ...
Virgins media relations team got in touch and got them to correct the incorrect information.
If they can be concerned about the BBC making that error and getting it corrected as soon as it was known about, why aren't they bothered about getting Phorm to correct the statement they made where they say that Virgin were close to beginning trials of the Phorm system? :confused:
Virgins media relations team got in touch and got them to correct the incorrect information.
If they can be concerned about the BBC making that error and getting it corrected as soon as it was known about, why aren't they bothered about getting Phorm to correct the statement they made where they say that Virgin were close to beginning trials of the Phorm system? :confused:
Because Phorm may be correct?
But haven't they been saying the same about BT, has BT launched its trial yet?
You also have to consider more credence is given to the BBC than Phorm, and anything the latter may say could be considered incorrect anyway.
Because Phorm may be correct?
They must be. I'm sure Virgin wouldn't let them say it if it wasn't true.
But haven't they been saying the same about BT, has BT launched its trial yet?
BT said themselves they were going to do some more trials. I think they put them on hold when the legality questions started again.
Phorm is off topic. Please stop.
What they changed it too isn't technically accurate either because you get traffic shaped whether it's busy or not. I wish instead they said, "Traffic shaped if the fixed limits are reached any time from 10am to 9pm".
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.