PDA

View Full Version : giganews (usenet)


buba3d
02-11-2010, 21:51
trying to download a linux file for my laptop however i'm getting speeds of 30-50kbps, anybody else got this problem?

50mb connection

Andrewcrawford23
02-11-2010, 21:53
trying to download a linux file for my laptop however i'm getting speeds of 30-50kbps, anybody else got this problem?

50mb connection
possible th new traffic shaping even tohugh it a linux distro it will be seen as file sharing protocol

cant be sure this is the problem

buba3d
02-11-2010, 21:57
possible th new traffic shaping even tohugh it a linux distro it will be seen as file sharing protocol

cant be sure this is the problem
then what's the point of having a 50mb connection, hell whats the point of the 100mb connection if its just going to be the same?

just under 50 quid for a half arsed product.

Sirius
02-11-2010, 21:58
trying to download a linux file for my laptop however i'm getting speeds of 30-50kbps, anybody else got this problem?

50mb connection

To be honest we all might as well get used to paying for a top dollor 50 meg cable modem service but getting only a 2 bit adsl speed. Traffic shaping if ever i have seen it. Try a speed test on speedtest.net and i bet you get 50 meg.

buba3d
02-11-2010, 22:07
To be honest we all might as well get used to paying for a top dollor 50 meg cable modem service but getting only a 2 bit adsl speed. Traffic shaping if ever i have seen it. Try a speed test on speedtest.net and i bet you get 50 meg.
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2010/11/117.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
aberdeen gets me 20mb

Sirius
02-11-2010, 22:08
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2010/11/117.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

Then by that your not being traffic shaped

pip08456
02-11-2010, 22:24
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2010/11/117.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
aberdeen gets me 20mb

Looks like it's time to post your modem stats and log file to see if there's an obvious problem.

carbon60
02-11-2010, 22:38
Giganews is painfully slow here too. Getting 5k/sec. I've had it happen before and the next night it was fine.

buba3d
02-11-2010, 22:52
Download Failed (1)

Sigma
02-11-2010, 22:52
I came here to start a thread about Giganews too. I've been with them for 2 years and I could always max out my connection consistently. In the last week or so, my download speeds have looked like this: -

Download Failed (1)

Giganews say there's no problem at their end. I can get around 19 Mbps consistently in speed tests and when downloading files direct from the web. It made me wonder if this is related to the new traffic shaping. It's happening to me outside peak times though, and my area hasn't been upgraded as I'm not receiving the new faster upload speeds. Could it be possible that Virgin are testing their traffic shaping in my area? Whatever the cause, it's doing my head in.

pigpen
02-11-2010, 23:03
Just did a quick test myself and I'm getting 53MBit/6.6MB/s from Giganews. So whatever is happening in the previous posts isn't happening to me (yet?).

SnoopZ
02-11-2010, 23:04
I had a similar problem on Astraweb yesterday evening and changing the port fixed it.

Sigma
02-11-2010, 23:15
I've tried ports 119, 80 and 23 with Giganews and I've tried news.giganews.com and news-europe.giganews.com, but it makes no difference at all.

pip08456
02-11-2010, 23:23
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v253/buba3d/down.jpg



Your download power level should be 6dBv or less. Need to call it in, to stand the best chance of avoiding our Indian friends I suggest you call in the morning close to 08.00am on

0800 052 0431

Also keep an eye on your upstream power you don't want that going over 55dBv.

buba3d
02-11-2010, 23:36
i got the download power down to 7db using the wee connectore type thing you get supplied when the modem gets installed.

i think its a ubr issue, somebody on another forum told me to use ssl settings and it worked a trick, 50mb full :) but i just want my wow back to normal

Andrewcrawford23
03-11-2010, 00:15
i got the download power down to 7db using the wee connectore type thing you get supplied when the modem gets installed.

i think its a ubr issue, somebody on another forum told me to use ssl settings and it worked a trick, 50mb full :) but i just want my wow back to normal
if ssl fioxed it that suggest shapp[ing

MakaveLee
03-11-2010, 00:19
Im having trouble with Astraweb today and yesterday. My downloads are usually a consistent 1200kbs, yesterday and today they would jump up to 600kbs then go to zero for a few seconds, then jump to 300kbs then drop and so on. I've changed using SSL servers now, im getting a consistent 300kbs, but im not sure if thats cause i've downloaded over my VM threashold today and im being throttled (Thats the speed it usually goes at when im being throttled). Ill report back later!

SnoopZ
03-11-2010, 00:39
Im having trouble with Astraweb today and yesterday. My downloads are usually a consistent 1200kbs, yesterday and today they would jump up to 600kbs then go to zero for a few seconds, then jump to 300kbs then drop and so on. I've changed using SSL servers now, im getting a consistent 300kbs, but im not sure if thats cause i've downloaded over my VM threashold today and im being throttled (Thats the speed it usually goes at when im being throttled). Ill report back later!

Have a look here, changing to port 443 worked for me.

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/35116567-post6.html

Sigma
03-11-2010, 01:14
I came here to start a thread about Giganews too. I've been with them for 2 years and I could always max out my connection consistently. In the last week or so, my download speeds have looked like this: -

http://img560.imageshack.us/img560/2622/giganews.jpg
It's got to be the new traffic shaping, because at around midnight, the speed suddenly changed: -

Download Failed (1)

I've tried rebooting my modem and I definitely don't have the new, faster upload speeds, but I guess that's a separate thing to the traffic shaping. I assumed that the traffic shaping would arrive when the new upload speeds did.

pip08456
03-11-2010, 01:47
It's got to be the new traffic shaping, because at around midnight, the speed suddenly changed: -

http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/84/giga2.jpg

I've tried rebooting my modem and I definitely don't have the new, faster upload speeds, but I guess that's a separate thing to the traffic shaping. I assumed that the traffic shaping would arrive when the new upload speeds did.

Yes faster upload speeds are totally separate and no, traffic shaping is not waiting for the new upload speeds but is effective across all tiers now.

Chrysalis
03-11-2010, 01:53
Yes faster upload speeds are totally separate and no, traffic shaping is not waiting for the new upload speeds but is effective across all tiers now.

in all areas?

pip08456
03-11-2010, 01:54
in all areas?

Yes in all areas.

Chrysalis
03-11-2010, 02:12
Yes in all areas.

Ok I dont know hwo you know this but will take your word for it, if truethe affect on my congestion isnt noticeable, maybe a bit on jitter but not much, throughput seems unaffected.

in fact I am wondering how well the shaping is working, I am getting slow speedtests whilst I have low jitter at night, which is very odd. I am wondering if the shaping is shaping my speedtesting, http traffic etc.

pip08456
03-11-2010, 02:31
http is not affected, it isn't a magical fix to totally solve oversubscription but is a step in the right direction.

This and the upgrades which are happening will see a marked change and can only be seen ATM where the upgrades have happened.

Perhaps an analogy is a motorway, P2P and newsgroups will at peak times be in the slow lane, emails and other non time sensitive in the middle lane and everything else in the fast lane. Not a perfect comparison but good enough I think.

Yes there are one or two problems with it with some online gaming but they are being ironed out.

I am sure once the upgrade reaches you, you will see the improvement.

As Igni has stated in many posts the supply of bandwidth cannot equal demand at the price it is now and that goes for all ISP's not just Virgin.

darren.b
03-11-2010, 02:42
I started Usenet last night at 23:00. Same results, stupid throughput. At 00:04 instantly rocketed up to 2.44MB/s solid. Congestion isn't a problem it seems. It's a pure and simple money suck. Pity it ruins their reputation into the mix.

It's shaping. Simple. I have downgraded all my services to the bare minimum, TV removed, BB to the lowest, landline gone. Just waiting for BT to install Infinity in my street then it's bye bye to the biggest bunch of liars we've ever seen.

I knew this would happen once NTL got their grubby paws on Telewest. I gave them 5 years to wreck it. They exceeded expectations.

Cable are finished. Nothing but liars. AVOID.

pip08456
03-11-2010, 02:48
Of course it's shaping, they've said they are doing it. Good luck with BT as they are worse.

Chrysalis
03-11-2010, 03:18
http is not affected, it isn't a magical fix to totally solve oversubscription but is a step in the right direction.

This and the upgrades which are happening will see a marked change and can only be seen ATM where the upgrades have happened.

Perhaps an analogy is a motorway, P2P and newsgroups will at peak times be in the slow lane, emails and other non time sensitive in the middle lane and everything else in the fast lane. Not a perfect comparison but good enough I think.

Yes there are one or two problems with it with some online gaming but they are being ironed out.

I am sure once the upgrade reaches you, you will see the improvement.

As Igni has stated in many posts the supply of bandwidth cannot equal demand at the price it is now and that goes for all ISP's not just Virgin.

I didnt say was affected deliberatly, I meant it might not be working right for whatever reason. Shaping equipment can mismatch traffic, go wrong etc.

If thats not the case then if an area has serious problems with all the following. STM/shaping/letters(granted letters are not enforced yet) then I think people would find it hard to say its not oversubscription. Because you looking at a scenario where 75% of the capacity is not used by p2p/nntp, and heavy users under other protocols still throttled under STM.

pip08456
03-11-2010, 03:21
I didn't say it wasn't oversubscription, just a step in the right direction.

Chrysalis
03-11-2010, 03:43
yep I meant if others still try to say its not oversubscription. Shaping of course shouldnt be used to replace upgrades but rather just to ensure QoS at peak.

---------- Post added at 02:43 ---------- Previous post was at 02:34 ----------

interesting, I found a few threads on the official forums, some saying the shaping is affecting gaming (this one not too surprising, expected it) but also its causing an mtu issue and a guy suggested a mtu of 900 as a workaround, now my speedtests have shot up from 5-10meg/sec to 18.43meg/sec, maxing out there because seem to be hitting ack saturation on upload due to the smaller packets.

I did notice some mtu oddness on VM's network the last couple of weeks but had nothing conclusive on it, I will test again in the day and at peak with the lower mtu.

darren.b
03-11-2010, 03:56
Of course it's shaping, they've said they are doing it. Good luck with BT as they are worse.

Worse? At what? Providing 5% of the service as sold as? You forget, VM sell their packages based upon SPEED. To restrict to dial up speeds because I am white, I am black, I have 11 toes, I use Usenet, http, email etc is just nonsense.

<WHATEVER>

Enjoy your NTL (disguised as Virgin)'s service. BT don't need to hide behind another company's brand to operate. Why do NTL? Huh?

pip08456
03-11-2010, 04:52
No doubt you will find out and report back here. Hopefully you will prove me wrong.

Chrysalis
03-11-2010, 04:56
I am going bed, but what I have learned from reading VM's own forums.

Unclassified traffic appears to be shaped down, this obviously will void VM's claim only nntp and p2p is throttled. Ignition's own post on there showing a speedtest done on port 8095 showed this.

Few complaints of games been affected.

Few complaints of http been affected ranging from slow http downloads to missing images and pages timing out.

and of course the mtu issue reported.

its worth noting although shaping is disabled at midnight (after STM peak stops) traffic is still probably been routed through the equipment.

I am curious what the name of the equipment is VM are using. If its ellocoya's or something else.

Sirius
03-11-2010, 08:14
Welcome to the new Virginmedia ADSL emulation mode.


This is a free upgrade for all VM's customers at no cost and will show you what ADSL users having been getting for over a year now :rolleyes:

Welcome to

You buy one you get less free






.

browney
03-11-2010, 08:51
I had a similar problem on Astraweb yesterday evening and changing the port fixed it.

Same here.

HSp8
03-11-2010, 09:34
Same here.

+ 1

Ignitionnet
03-11-2010, 11:45
I am curious what the name of the equipment is VM are using. If its ellocoya's or something else.

http://www.allot.com/Service_Gateway_Sigma.html

buba3d
03-11-2010, 12:24
how the have the gaul to charge just under 50 quid for that, is a damn right joke.

Kymmy
03-11-2010, 12:31
They don't.. Some of that charge is the phone line

HSp8
03-11-2010, 13:17
I guess VM have thought this through and are quite happy to risk losing the '1%' of their customers that use Newsgroups/p2p

I was thinking of a move to BT Infinity, but it looks they have the same sort of throttling with this kind of traffic.

buba3d
03-11-2010, 13:41
its not just that its online gaming as well

Sigma
03-11-2010, 14:18
If you use SSL does it get round the traffic shaping? Comments I've read seem to suggest that that's the case.

Why couldn't they just leave the system as it is? I thought that the traffic management was there to deal with the "5%" of people downloading/uploading large amounts. Now my connection is being crippled with traffic shaping as well as traffic management and I'm losing anywhere from 60% to 95% of my connection speed for up to 12 hours a day. I'm not buying the "it's not financially viable not to have it" thing at all, considering Virgin Media's profits are on the up.

psyfur
03-11-2010, 14:43
If you use SSL does it get round the traffic shaping? Comments I've read seem to suggest that that's the case.

Why couldn't they just leave the system as it is? I thought that the traffic management was there to deal with the "5%" of people downloading/uploading large amounts. Now my connection is being crippled with traffic shaping as well as traffic management and I'm losing anywhere from 60% to 95% of my connection speed for up to 12 hours a day. I'm not buying the "it's not financially viable not to have it" thing at all, considering Virgin Media's profits are on the up.

Moving to SSL fixed the issue for me but not sure I have gone over fair usage as I have been in Bali for 3 weeks and the modem was powered off. Oh and I wasnt traffic managed

Chrysalis
03-11-2010, 17:24
ok I have tested. and will pass this on oto VM.

mtu 900 5 speedtest.net london tests in a row.
18.34
18.66
18.29
19.01
18.10
mtu 1500 repeated
6.26
1.27
12.09
6.06
10.69

tbb speedtest, port 8095 was ok port 80 slow. (mtu 900)

port 8095 15.66 meg
port 80 6.66meg.

repeated with similiar results.

I have not tested yet if normal browsing and youtube etc. improve with lower mtu as still not using VM for that.

single stream ftp downloads remain flaky even with mtu 900.

*sloman*
03-11-2010, 17:55
i'm on 50mb just downloaded 5.6gb file at16:45 @5.92mbps, no capping/throttling here.

Location: Derby
Provider: NewsDemon
Port: 80
SSL: YES
Client: SABnzbd+ 0.5.4

HSp8
03-11-2010, 17:58
i'm on 50mb just downloaded 5.6gb file at16:45 @5.92mbps, no capping/throttling here.

Location: Derby
Provider: NewsDemon
Port: 80
SSL: YES
Client: SABnzbd+ 0.5.4

try it again past 5pm - I think that's when the throttling kicks in

*sloman*
03-11-2010, 18:01
try it again past 5pm - I think that's when the throttling kicks in

ah yes just seen this:

"File sharing

We moderate the total volume of file sharing traffic on our network between 5pm and midnight on weekdays and midday and midnight on weekends. This policy is restricted to Peer to Peer ("P2P") applications and Newsgroups (which are commonly used to distribute large amounts of data)"

i'll give it 5mins and report back

Update: 17:10
Nope still downloading at 5.80MB/s to 6.01MB/s, just started another download of a 6.4gb file.( i aint going to lie and say its linux distro hahaha)
Location: Derby
Provider: NewsDemon
Port: 80
SSL: YES
Client: SABnzbd+ 0.5.4

HSp8
03-11-2010, 18:15
trying large file from Astraweb (ssl) now - I'm on 50Mb package

getting 20Mb via port 563 (the problem one)

getting full 50Mb via port 443

SnoopZ
03-11-2010, 18:44
On port 443 i'm maxing out at 20mbit with a perfect flatline which is perfect, however it is all up and down on port 563 anywhere between 2mbit-18mbit which is hopeless.

keepitretro
03-11-2010, 19:36
Just tried usenet here

Astraweb

ssl enabled

ssl-eu.astraweb.com

port 563 15-18 mbs

port 443 full speed

50mb btw..

kannanni
03-11-2010, 19:43
What about torrents guys? on the 50 meg package are they being shaped after 5 pm ?

Andrewcrawford23
03-11-2010, 19:49
What about torrents guys? on the 50 meg package are they being shaped after 5 pm ?
mmm yes any p2p software is shaped

SnoopZ
03-11-2010, 19:50
What about torrents guys? on the 50 meg package are they being shaped after 5 pm ?

No idea im afraid i wouldn't touch those with a barge pole now i use newsgroups. :)

keepitretro
03-11-2010, 19:54
Look like it just tried utorrent can't get any more than 5mbs

Andrewcrawford23
03-11-2010, 20:35
use encypton you can get full 50mb on anything

pip08456
03-11-2010, 20:37
use encypton you can get full 50mb on anything

Not so Andy

Andrewcrawford23
03-11-2010, 21:09
Not so Andy
if you mean world of warcraft seesm that something serpeate ;)

everything i ave tried so far if i use encyption it boost the speed encyptions i have uysed is ssl ad vpn and ssh tunneling all improbe the speed for torrent, newsgroups and some http transfers tha ti have tested so far fdoesnt mean it ful prove just meant if you are having problem try enyption

Sirius
03-11-2010, 21:29
if you mean world of warcraft seesm that something serpeate ;)

everything i ave tried so far if i use encyption it boost the speed encyptions i have uysed is ssl ad vpn and ssh tunneling all improbe the speed for torrent, newsgroups and some http transfers tha ti have tested so far fdoesnt mean it ful prove just meant if you are having problem try enyption

VPN works ;)

Chrysalis
03-11-2010, 21:38
pure oversubscription this time of day, mtu 1500 = 1-5meg on speedtest
mtu 900 = slightly higher 5-10 meg.

latency is very high also.

so VM have just showed that 75% of the capacity in my area is not capable of handling traffic on port 80,443,21,22,8080. rest squeezed into other 25%.

Rankrotten
03-11-2010, 21:40
I have just started to get really slow speeds on Giganews also.

On my 50meg connection I can always saturate it at over 6000k/sec but now I can barely pull 1000k. All other web traffic is fine and speedtest shows me at 49.3Meg.

Definite traffic shaping

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2010/11/114.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

Edit: Turned on SSL and I'm back up at 6000k d/l. There you have it!

Jayster
03-11-2010, 21:55
pure oversubscription this time of day, mtu 1500 = 1-5meg on speedtest
mtu 900 = slightly higher 5-10 meg.

latency is very high also.

so VM have just showed that 75% of the capacity in my area is not capable of handling traffic on port 80,443,21,22,8080. rest squeezed into other 25%.

I know it has been said that it will be limited at a more local level but I find that hard to believe.

MakaveLee
03-11-2010, 22:21
If you use SSL does it get round the traffic shaping? Comments I've read seem to suggest that that's the case.

Why couldn't they just leave the system as it is? I thought that the traffic management was there to deal with the "5%" of people downloading/uploading large amounts. Now my connection is being crippled with traffic shaping as well as traffic management and I'm losing anywhere from 60% to 95% of my connection speed for up to 12 hours a day. I'm not buying the "it's not financially viable not to have it" thing at all, considering Virgin Media's profits are on the up.

Changing my Astraweb to SSL has fixed the problem for the time being.

vmfriend
03-11-2010, 23:15
Without wanting to offend someone, but what exactly is Giganews used for ?

keepitretro
03-11-2010, 23:21
How long till they restrict em all tho???

Lucky i only have 1 month left on my contract 50mb btw... if it starts getting bad on all ports, think i am just gonna downgrade to 20mb and use vpn as its difficult to get full speeds of vpn with 50mb...

SnoopZ
03-11-2010, 23:52
Without wanting to offend someone, but what exactly is Giganews used for ?

In simple terms it is a newsgroups provider where you pay a small monthly fee to get access to newsgroups where you can simply download whatever is on their servers.

Andrewcrawford23
04-11-2010, 01:53
How long till they restrict em all tho???

Lucky i only have 1 month left on my contract 50mb btw... if it starts getting bad on all ports, think i am just gonna downgrade to 20mb and use vpn as its difficult to get full speeds of vpn with 50mb...
http://vpnuk.net/shared-ip.html they provide up to 100mb

keepitretro
04-11-2010, 08:29
Not sure they would be ok with usenet looking at there T&C.

Sirius
04-11-2010, 09:13
http://vpnuk.net/shared-ip.html they provide up to 100mb

Thats looks ok, For £5.00 might give it a try ;)

fiferz
04-11-2010, 09:33
How long till they restrict em all tho???

Lucky i only have 1 month left on my contract 50mb btw... if it starts getting bad on all ports, think i am just gonna downgrade to 20mb and use vpn as its difficult to get full speeds of vpn with 50mb...

I'm on the 50mb and using the VPN via giganews. No problems here.

keepitretro
04-11-2010, 10:41
What speeds do you get via giganews vpn amst
erdam server?

carbon60
04-11-2010, 11:01
I was getting between 300k and 500k/sec last night. I have SSL switched on. Maybe I need to try moving port...

fiferz
04-11-2010, 13:39
What speeds do you get via giganews vpn amst
erdam server?

5.1MBs usually. I haven't tried any other server yet but I may give the eastern USA one a go.

vmfriend
04-11-2010, 20:41
In simple terms it is a newsgroups provider where you pay a small monthly fee to get access to newsgroups where you can simply download whatever is on their servers.

So what could possibly be on their servers that would warrant someone wanting to pay for the privilege of doing so and why would VM want to restrict speed to such servers ?

Jayster
04-11-2010, 20:46
So what could possibly be on their servers that would warrant someone wanting to pay for the privilege of doing so and why would VM want to restrict speed to such servers ?

Im sure you can guess what the majority of content on there is, Although newsgroups where not designed for it and have been around since before the web as we know it. However I believe the reason most people are complaining is because of how badly the system has been implemented.

Mr_love_monkey
04-11-2010, 21:07
Incidentally, I just got an email from Giganews saying all of their accounts now offer ssl

vmfriend
04-11-2010, 21:33
Im sure you can guess what the majority of content on there is, Although newsgroups where not designed for it and have been around since before the web as we know it. However I believe the reason most people are complaining is because of how badly the system has been implemented.

Ok, if i guessed 'copyrighted material' would i be correct, why do people talk in riddles, why dont they just say i am trying to downloand <insert copyrighted material here> but VM are managing my connection so i can't download it quick enough ?

I find it a bit odd that someone would pay to download copyrighted material ?

As a percentage then, and honestly i am genuinely interested, what proportion is legit and what isn't ?

Sorry I am hijacking the thread, I will stop, this has probably all been discussed before.

Jayster
04-11-2010, 21:46
Ok, if i guessed 'copyrighted material' would i be correct, why do people talk in riddles, why dont they just say i am trying to downloand <insert copyrighted material here> but VM are managing my connection so i can't download it quick enough ?

I find it a bit odd that someone would pay to download copyrighted material ?

As a percentage then, and honestly i am genuinely interested, what proportion is legit and what isn't ?

Sorry I am hijacking the thread, I will stop, this has probably all been discussed before.

You would be correct and I don't have very much experience with newsgroups but the majority of content is copyright since they will be big files and the legit content will just be text. The legit stuff although dying out is support forms, news articles (as he name suggests) etc. Most isp's used to or still do provide free access to newsgroups but block certain groups, In fact VM used to (or maybe they still do?) provide support newsgroups which is where all of the virgin staff on the forums used to be before they moved to the virgin forums.
And as for paying to download copyright material people always have and continue to pay for copyright material.

pip08456
04-11-2010, 22:05
And as for paying to download copyright material people always have and continue to pay for copyright material.

Paying for copyright material is not an infringement and is the open legitimate way.

Paying for a hign speed connection to a newsgroup to download infringing material is not.

@vmfriend most ISP's say it is 5% of customers.

Chrysalis
04-11-2010, 22:20
Ok, if i guessed 'copyrighted material' would i be correct, why do people talk in riddles, why dont they just say i am trying to downloand <insert copyrighted material here> but VM are managing my connection so i can't download it quick enough ?

I find it a bit odd that someone would pay to download copyrighted material ?

As a percentage then, and honestly i am genuinely interested, what proportion is legit and what isn't ?

Sorry I am hijacking the thread, I will stop, this has probably all been discussed before.

I dont find it odd, a fair few people download such material due to lack of availability rather than cost.

gazfan
04-11-2010, 22:53
I find it a bit odd that someone would pay to download copyrighted material ?


Why? - not to condone such practice, but one legitimate DVD can cost more than a months subscription to a newsgroup download service.

Also, specifically for TV programs, it is often possible to download episodes of series being shown in the USA significantly in advance of their screening in the UK. Some people find that worth a relatively small monthly fee.


As a percentage then, and honestly i am genuinely interested, what proportion is legit and what isn't ?


I wouldn't even try to estimate that - there are over 100,000 newsgroups, a lot (especially the 'text' groups) carry legitimate content, others, such as the 'alt.binary' groups carry a lot of copyright infringing material.

Jayster
04-11-2010, 23:08
Paying for copyright material is not an infringement and is the open legitimate way.

Paying for a hign speed connection to a newsgroup to download infringing material is not.

@vmfriend most ISP's say it is 5% of customers.

I meant paying somebody for access to or a copy of the material that has not come from the distributor. Like buying a copy of a dvd or cd from somebody who has ripped it from an original disk or downloaded it then burnt a few copies to sell.

pip08456
04-11-2010, 23:42
I know what you meant but it was not what you said, I merely clarified.

vmfriend
04-11-2010, 23:58
Why? - not to condone such practice, but one legitimate DVD can cost more than a months subscription to a newsgroup download service.

Also, specifically for TV programs, it is often possible to download episodes of series being shown in the USA significantly in advance of their screening in the UK. Some people find that worth a relatively small monthly fee.



I wouldn't even try to estimate that - there are over 100,000 newsgroups, a lot (especially the 'text' groups) carry legitimate content, others, such as the 'alt.binary' groups carry a lot of copyright infringing material.

I understand what you mean, I was trying to make the point that from what I have read most people seem to offer cost as a reason to download copyright material, although I am sure that there are some people who could afford to pay choose not to.

It just seems strange that someone would pay a fee of any kind when the reason for not paying for copyright material could be cost.

When you say USA tv series, again i take the point, however someone has still paid to produce the series and likely it will appear on tv in the uk where a subscription is required, so again avoiding paying, again I accept that some people could afford to pay but choose not to because they want to see it as soon as possible.

I don't want to start an argument, i genuinely want to understand why the use of torrents/newsgroups etc is a contentious issue and why some people choice to use them and some not.

In addition i would rather people just admit to downloading films/music illegally and that they are annoyed that they can't download it 24/7.

Of course paying to download copyrighted material is legitimate, but I assume newsgroups is not a legitimate source (ie the original content producer does not get a cut of the action)

---------- Post added at 22:58 ---------- Previous post was at 22:56 ----------

Apologies for typos, I can't edit them for some reason.

SnoopZ
05-11-2010, 00:16
I understand what you mean, I was trying to make the point that from what I have read most people seem to offer cost as a reason to download copyright material, although I am sure that there are some people who could afford to pay choose not to.

It just seems strange that someone would pay a fee of any kind when the reason for not paying for copyright material could be cost.

When you say USA tv series, again i take the point, however someone has still paid to produce the series and likely it will appear on tv in the uk where a subscription is required, so again avoiding paying, again I accept that some people could afford to pay but choose not to because they want to see it as soon as possible.

I don't want to start an argument, i genuinely want to understand why the use of torrents/newsgroups etc is a contentious issue and why some people choice to use them and some not.

In addition i would rather people just admit to downloading films/music illegally and that they are annoyed that they can't download it 24/7.

Of course paying to download copyrighted material is legitimate, but I assume newsgroups is not a legitimate source (ie the original content producer does not get a cut of the action)

---------- Post added at 22:58 ---------- Previous post was at 22:56 ----------

Apologies for typos, I can't edit them for some reason.

It is currently FAR safer to download stuff from newsgroups rather than torrents and normally you get your full internet speed instantly when STM and traffic shaping aren't in operation, so paying £7 a month for that is well worth it i think.

pip08456
05-11-2010, 00:21
It is currently FAR safer to download stuff from newsgroups rather than torrents and normally you get your full internet speed instantly when STM and traffic shaping aren't in operation, so paying £7 a month for that is well worth it i think.

It is FAR safer to download from EITHER newsgroups OR a private torrent tracker.

SnoopZ
05-11-2010, 00:25
It is FAR safer to download from EITHER newsgroups OR a private torrent tracker.

Private torrents i have never used, been using newsgroups maybe 4yrs or so. :)

gazfan
05-11-2010, 00:45
I understand what you mean, I was trying to make the point that from what I have read most people seem to offer cost as a reason to download copyright material, although I am sure that there are some people who could afford to pay choose not to.


I agree, it is a question of balancing the payment of about £8.00 a month for several download 'opportunities' compared to £12 for one legitimate DVD. Your last comment is the most apt, in my opinion.

It just seems strange that someone would pay a fee of any kind when the reason for not paying for copyright material could be cost.

As above, this is relative - someone downloading a DVD a week could see the newsgroup subscription fee as an 'affordable' option compared to the full retail price of the legitimate media.

When you say USA tv series, again i take the point, however someone has still paid to produce the series and likely it will appear on tv in the uk where a subscription is required, so again avoiding paying, again I accept that some people could afford to pay but choose not to because they want to see it as soon as possible.

As I said, it isn't my intention to condone such practice.

I don't want to start an argument, i genuinely want to understand why the use of torrents/newsgroups etc is a contentious issue and why some people choice to use them and some not.

Not an argument - a discussion, hopefully :)

In my opinion the 'difference' between newsgroups & torrents is that use of torrents 'automatically' implies sharing your download via the peering system.

Using newsgroups implies a 'personal' download of material that - conceptually - is made available by a 'common carrier' & not shared. The 'excuse' here being that if one downloads a film or TV program, then deletes the file after watching it, then no 'distribution' of illegal content has occured.

In addition i would rather people just admit to downloading films/music illegally and that they are annoyed that they can't download it 24/7.

Very true - the irony of that is moot.

Of course paying to download copyrighted material is legitimate, but I assume newsgroups is not a legitimate source (ie the original content producer does not get a cut of the action)

Newsgroups 'legitimacy' seems to have avoided direct sanctions, so far, but the successful prosecution of a newsgroup indexing service earlier this year was interesting.

zer0
05-11-2010, 19:12
does VM usenet have ssl? getting half speed is no fun
should i change my mtu from 1500?

customers should be the only ones to decide what they use their connection for

Sirius
05-11-2010, 19:15
does VM usenet have ssl? getting half speed is no fun
should i change my mtu from 1500?

customers should be the only ones to decide what they use their connection for

No they don't allow SSL.

I have now committed to a paid for newsgroups provider with SSL and a separate VPN provider so i can tunnel if needed, It means i still get full speed.

pinkpound
05-11-2010, 19:29
No they don't allow SSL.

I have now committed to a paid for newsgroups provider with SSL and a separate VPN provider so i can tunnel if needed, It means i still get full speed.


May I ask which VPN you have signed up to Sirius

Many Thanks

Sirius
05-11-2010, 19:54
May I ask which VPN you have signed up to Sirius

Many Thanks


http://vpnuk.net/serverstatus1.php


On a 1 month trial at the moment

pinkpound
05-11-2010, 20:11
http://vpnuk.net/serverstatus1.php


On a 1 month trial at the moment

Me too ;)

TheDon
05-11-2010, 20:38
It is FAR safer to download from EITHER newsgroups OR a private torrent tracker.

Only if you're sure the private tracker has a decent entry system. Most of the so called private trackers let anyone join so they're as safe as a public torrent site.

keepitretro
05-11-2010, 21:06
Do you get full speed thru ur vpn sirius?

buba3d
05-11-2010, 21:07
never mind

Sirius
05-11-2010, 21:20
Do you get full speed thru ur vpn sirius?

when i use it i have been getting about 30 meg which is better than the 1 or 2 meg VM restrict me to via shaping. Note i only use Newsgroups on the vpn not torrents. To be honest i dont think i will keep with them its a pain in the arse.

pinkpound
05-11-2010, 21:24
when i use it i have been getting about 30 meg which is better than the 1 or 2 meg VM restrict me to via shaping. Note i only use Newsgroups on the vpn not torrents. To be honest i dont think i will keep with them its a pain in the arse.


35mb for me which is alot better than 800kbs I was getting

I've just noticed I've had the 5mb upload increase today

Iam about 6- 7 miles west of Sirius ;)

keepitretro
05-11-2010, 22:05
I am with astraweb currently ssl on port 563 is throttled but port 443 aint. Throttled speed here was 28mb tonight must depend on load on local area. Lincoln btw.

Sirius
05-11-2010, 22:10
35mb for me which is alot better than 800kbs I was getting

I've just noticed I've had the 5mb upload increase today

Iam about 6- 7 miles west of Sirius ;)

Which side of the water :)

keepitretro
05-11-2010, 22:35
North.

---------- Post added at 21:35 ---------- Previous post was at 21:16 ----------

To be honest it does not bother me that much as i aint downloading as much as i used to (me contract is up in a month) cause its a software based throttle i reckon there's gonna be ways round it. I know it sucks weekend losing 12 hours sat and 12 sunday, and 7 every weekday. But seeing as i only download off peak anyways i aint that bothered. According to vm 100mb is comming to lincoln before month end! Think vm 50mb is still better than the bt infinity tho...

xx.Morph.xx
06-11-2010, 08:47
I found http://www.clickonf5.org/software/11-free-vpn-services-list-us-uk-china-germany/6369 while ago, dunno if it's of any help anyone?

Andrewcrawford23
06-11-2010, 09:40
Which side of the water :)
i have to agree ther vpn stup is pqin , but wen i used them i decided to go the openvpn route via my linux firewall meant everything leaving the network went thoruh teh vpn when i was using 20mb i got 20mb i have tried on 100mb conenction and got 98mb never tried on hgiher yet

fred54321
06-11-2010, 13:36
just a quick question if i use my newsreader software with giganews with vpn i loose 13mb service if i run with vpn off it does not loose bandwidth any ideas im useing netgear router wnr2000 and a 50mb modem.
cheers

Andrewcrawford23
06-11-2010, 13:48
just a quick question if i use my newsreader software with giganews with vpn i loose 13mb service if i run with vpn off it does not loose bandwidth any ideas im useing netgear router wnr2000 and a 50mb modem.
cheers
teh vpn provider is to able to provider full 50mb

REM
07-11-2010, 03:09
Ok, if i guessed 'copyrighted material' would i be correct, why do people talk in riddles

If your guess WAS correct then you have answered your own question.

It's probably the same reason hit men don't advertise in the Yellow Pages.

andip1967
07-11-2010, 14:12
Just banged SSL on Giganews port 563 and back up to full speeds

REM
08-11-2010, 00:05
Just banged SSL on Giganews port 563 and back up to full speeds

Do you find the processing power of decoding the SSL impacts your d/l speed much?

I'm running News Leecher under Parallels 6 on a 2.6Ghx Mac Pro Quad and there is quite a speed drop when using SSL.

Sigma
08-11-2010, 00:16
Do you find the processing power of decoding the SSL impacts your d/l speed much?
It doesn't impact it at all for me on a Windows 7 box with a 2.4 GHz quad core and 3GB RAM. I enabled SSL on Giganews, but I was initially using port 563 which is still throttled, but I switched to port 443 and I'm back to hitting about 19.5 Mbps again, which is the same speed I used to get before the throttling came into effect and I wasn't using SSL.

carbon60
08-11-2010, 23:20
Do you find the processing power of decoding the SSL impacts your d/l speed much?

I'm running News Leecher under Parallels 6 on a 2.6Ghx Mac Pro Quad and there is quite a speed drop when using SSL.

I'm running NewsLeecher under VMware Fusion 2 on a 2.4Ghz Black MacBook Core 2 Duo and and get full 20Mbit using SSL (at least before the current issues). Other operations on the laptop are slowed down though.

I just need to upgrade to 10.6 (I've had the box for over a year) so I can try Giganews' new Mimo client since it's a Mac application.

REM
09-11-2010, 20:29
I'm running NewsLeecher under VMware Fusion 2 on a 2.4Ghz Black MacBook Core 2 Duo and and get full 20Mbit using SSL (at least before the current issues). Other operations on the laptop are slowed down though.

I just need to upgrade to 10.6 (I've had the box for over a year) so I can try Giganews' new Mimo client since it's a Mac application.

I tried Mimo last week. I think it was about 5 minutes before I uttered the word CR4P and promptly removed it from my system. I found it lousy.

I got to know and love NL so anything else is going to have a hard time making me change. Having to boot up WIN7 in Parallels is worth it.


I think I have worked out why my speed it reduced when using SSL. I expect on a 20Mb/s connection it would have no impact on my machine either, maybe even 50.

The_Gunslinger
23-01-2011, 19:51
If you use SSL does it get round the traffic shaping? Comments I've read seem to suggest that that's the case.

Why couldn't they just leave the system as it is? I thought that the traffic management was there to deal with the "5%" of people downloading/uploading large amounts. Now my connection is being crippled with traffic shaping as well as traffic management and I'm losing anywhere from 60% to 95% of my connection speed for up to 12 hours a day. I'm not buying the "it's not financially viable not to have it" thing at all, considering Virgin Media's profits are on the up.

because they are slowly but surely realising, that it is not those of us that download and upload a fair bit, but is in fact the non-computer/internet literate generation they have irresponsibly released onto the internet with all their dam "on demand" services and time shifted tv !! that are sucking up hugeeeeee amounts of bandwidth by streaming HD material to their TV sets all night, and i think you'll also find that the 30 million trillion gaming machines all hooking up to play online is also placing a massive draw on resources everywhere,when lets face it, it was not exactly designed for that.

I too am seeing really really dismal speeds of VM newsgroup access at various times of the day, yet if i shift into my astraweb account, using SSL and port 563 instead of 119 (for theVM servers) i am seeing nearly double the speed at times. Trouble is my astra web account is for a pre-paid block of bandwidth, so don't want to hit it that much, once they stop doing free access via VM, and they will at some point, i'll shift to a full astraweb account with unlimited bandwidth, i have been very impressed with not only the speed and stability of their servers but also the massive retention period

Ignitionnet
23-01-2011, 20:20
No, it is you guys who download and upload a fair bit, just now the 'non-computer/internet literate generation' are actually using a few GB here and there they don't compensate as much as they used to by paying the same but using considerably less so average usage is higher :)

Previously Usenet whores were downloading DVDs and 'non-computer/internet literate generation' members were browsing a bit, now Usenet whores are downloading Blu Rays and the 'non-computer/internet literate generation' are rude enough to stream a bit here and there along with both playing games online and downloading the odd legitimately purchased one, along with this prices per Mbit have dropped too.

The_Gunslinger
08-02-2011, 00:50
Thing is it's not just
non-computer/internet literate generation' are actually using a few GB here and there
It's a lot more than that, and more than here and there, as they are spending hours streaming high def material every day, downlaoders don't always sit there constantly downloading huge amounts !

Take me for example, i wouild be classed as a heavy downloader by some, however, i downloaded nothing today, and when i do download, it is usually done and dusted in 2 hours, max 3 ... and that is at the crippled speeds, whereas mr jones next door might stream one full movie and 2 tv shows at full speed ... wonder who's used more bandwidth there ?

And yes, i will agree with you, there will be a small percentage (although i suspect it is smaller than people think) that are grabbing the BluRay stuff, the rest of us know it's not worth downloading stuff that size that much.
But, at crippled speeds they are going to be downloading less per hour than streaming media family, just now with the speed restrictions targeting users specifically (like they promised not to !) said download whore is now going to be downloading longer, perpetuating said problem !


The overall increase in non-computer related traffic as you put it has risen tenfold (and that's a conservative guestimate) compared to those that you could categorise as download whores


But it doesnt give them the right to assume that anyone using said type of programs are immediately bad, some of us just want the dam speed we paid for, without some corporate a*shat saying "oh that's bad can't have you using that"

pip08456
08-02-2011, 01:15
Thing is it's not just

It's a lot more than that, and more than here and there, as they are spending hours streaming high def material every day, downlaoders don't always sit there constantly downloading huge amounts !

Take me for example, i wouild be classed as a heavy downloader by some, however, i downloaded nothing today, and when i do download, it is usually done and dusted in 2 hours, max 3 ... and that is at the crippled speeds, whereas mr jones next door might stream one full movie and 2 tv shows at full speed ... wonder who's used more bandwidth there ?

And yes, i will agree with you, there will be a small percentage (although i suspect it is smaller than people think) that are grabbing the BluRay stuff, the rest of us know it's not worth downloading stuff that size that much.
But, at crippled speeds they are going to be downloading less per hour than streaming media family, just now with the speed restrictions targeting users specifically (like they promised not to !) said download whore is now going to be downloading longer, perpetuating said problem !


The overall increase in non-computer related traffic as you put it has risen tenfold (and that's a conservative guestimate) compared to those that you could categorise as download whores


But it doesnt give them the right to assume that anyone using said type of programs are immediately bad, some of us just want the dam speed we paid for, without some corporate a*shat saying "oh that's bad can't have you using that"

Whereas I agree with you about the rise in "normal" usage now causing problems, I have to disagree about the "download/upload" you are referring to as yourself and others doing the same. (and I'm not blameless!).

I have and still do download on occasion something that is not avaiable elsewhere. It has never, to my knowledge, been available even if I'm prepared to pay for it (and believe me, I've searched!) and looks like it never will be.

However, copyright is copyright, I'm willing to take the risk but the "powers that be" are under so much preassure from the "powers that have" that eventually all ISP's will be restricting it or banning it completely.

Like it or not it will happen. Then and only then will we see if there is 1-5% of users ruining it for the rest of their customers or if indeed the ISP's have critically underestimated what internet usage will be with all the streaming etc.

Chrysalis
08-02-2011, 02:06
Whereas I agree with you about the rise in "normal" usage now causing problems, I have to disagree about the "download/upload" you are referring to as yourself and others doing the same. (and I'm not blameless!).

I have and still do download on occasion something that is not avaiable elsewhere. It has never, to my knowledge, been available even if I'm prepared to pay for it (and believe me, I've searched!) and looks like it never will be.

However, copyright is copyright, I'm willing to take the risk but the "powers that be" are under so much preassure from the "powers that have" that eventually all ISP's will be restricting it or banning it completely.

Like it or not it will happen. Then and only then will we see if there is 1-5% of users ruining it for the rest of their customers or if indeed the ISP's have critically underestimated what internet usage will be with all the streaming etc.

History suggests on your latter point its isp's underestimating.

O2 traffic shape very heavily and then capped their unlimited product at 30gig and they still extremely congested.
Plusnet also had no noticeable relief when they started shaping it is only when they added capacity afterwards things started getting back under control for them.

qasdfdsaq
08-02-2011, 10:15
I presume you mean O2's non-LLU product? Since that runs over BT's network (and is basically rebranded BT broadband) I'm not surprised. The LLU product has much higher caps, very little to no shaping and is still uncongested.

Ignitionnet
08-02-2011, 10:45
Thing is it's not just

It's a lot more than that, and more than here and there, as they are spending hours streaming high def material every day, downlaoders don't always sit there constantly downloading huge amounts !

Average utilisation is still pretty low. If these people were spending hours streaming they wouldn't be paying for TV and wouldn't be able to grab that stuff at full speed anyway as they'd have the STM hammer brought down on them.

Most people still run on 10Mbps services, you just can't stream HD for hours on end on that service.

Virgin know the types and amounts of traffic traversing their network. People smacking Usenet for 300GB/month are still by a mile heavier users than Joe Average with their XBox who does 30GB/month.

The capacity crunch is because more people are using more, sure, but people downloading heavily are still big time outliers. 100 people using 10GB/month more is the same 1TB increase as 1 person using 1TB/month more, yes, however they are paying up to 100 times more for the pleasure.

So long as people are paying for what they are using or costs are coming down sufficiently that people are paying for their increased video usage it's a non-issue. Outlying users do not and have never paid appropriate rates for their usage.

We could go to pay per GB though if you think that would be fairer?

---------- Post added at 09:45 ---------- Previous post was at 09:37 ----------

History suggests on your latter point its isp's underestimating.

O2 traffic shape very heavily and then capped their unlimited product at 30gig and they still extremely congested.
Plusnet also had no noticeable relief when they started shaping it is only when they added capacity afterwards things started getting back under control for them.

Plusnet themselves quite strongly disagree with your second comment. It should be remembered that Plusnet started shaping in 2005, at that time P2P was a much larger proportion of traffic than now. No You Tube, no XBox Live HD streaming, no iPlayer, much less streaming, no question.

Your first applies to O2 Access only, shaping isn't even switched on on O2's LLU network which covers the overwhelming majority of their customers.

Chrysalis
08-02-2011, 16:03
O2 access is correct nevertherless?

incidently O2 LLU is now shaped for new customers, and some people are reporting congestion on it.

Regarding plusnet as I recall they turned on shaping, the complaints kept coming and coming until BT brought the company and added new BT centrals, only then did the complaints stop (or slow down).

Ignitionnet
08-02-2011, 18:40
O2 access is correct nevertherless?

incidently O2 LLU is now shaped for new customers, and some people are reporting congestion on it.

Regarding plusnet as I recall they turned on shaping, the complaints kept coming and coming until BT brought the company and added new BT centrals, only then did the complaints stop (or slow down).

O2 Access is absolutely correct however this is a small subset of O2's customers and you didn't specify that you just said 'O2' which is disingenuous. It's like referring to Virgin Media's off-net operation with the label 'Virgin Media' without any qualification, there are quite different policies on-net and off-net on both.

As I said O2's LLU network hasn't had its shaping turned on.

There have been a few isolated reports of congestion, yes, these have, thus far, been addressed swiftly and capacity upgrades are ongoing - see O2 / Be's planned works list, those are hardware upgrades.

Regarding Plusnet you recall quite incorrectly. BT have never run Plusnet's capacity planning nor did they add capacity to Plusnet's network, this is managed by ex-Plusnet staff. Plusnet had teething troubles with their shaping but once this was complete they had the most advanced application management in the UK.

There was a brief period when Plusnet saw issues with higher priority traffic and this was addressed both through adjustments to their management platform and addition of capacity.

The_Gunslinger
18-02-2011, 00:11
Some good/fair points made to my comments above, time, as pip says will prove one way or another, but i can guarantee you something, they will never back down off the "heavy downloaders are evil" soap box, just wont happen, regardless of the results.
But for the record, and i don't think ISP's are solely to blame for this, there has been a major underestimation on the loadings being placed by every man and his dog trying to stream stuff, remember downloaders can run their file grabbing in quiet hours, we all have for a long time now, but the internet has no "quiet period" as such, just as streaming stuff is always going to be tied to regular sort of hours, with the evenings getting hammered compared to say 2am through 5am GMT

Ignitionnet, heavy users will always be heavy users i agree, but as you said the general usage is up hugely, and it's not down to increased activity from heavy users or increased copyright infringement
(i am getting a little p****d off with the constant banging on about that - they need to go after those downloading, duplicating and selling said material, thats where the loss of money is coming from !.... although i can see why, couple of years ago, i could buy 2 pretty new films at the bootsale for about 5 or 6 quid, if they didnt work you took em back and they swapped them no questions asked, no replies like "oh sorry sir you bought that over a week ago, and you don't have your receipt so we cant help you" :mad: that you get from shops that charge you 5 times as much !)

Anyway.... as you will i am sure agree, the heavier users, yes i would fall into that group i guess, are also those paying the considerably higher premiums for the higher speeds and bandwidth, i know i have been since i switched up to cable broadband directly from dial-up to 10meg ! which if i remember correctly was the fastest at the time available to me, i then went to the 20, and subsequently the 50 ... and will probably go to the 100 if and when it's available subject to a couple of concerns.

..... so i don't want to hear about a bunch of freeloaders on heavily subsidised tariffs banging on about equality of service, or people preaching that the service for said groups is being affected by the heavier users.... if the heavier users didnt pay the inflated prices for the top tier services, the lower tiers would not be half as cheap! and if they were not as cheap there would not be as many users in total and the congestion would be reduced :rolleyes: .... you get (or should get) what you pay for !

qasdfdsaq
18-02-2011, 01:12
Actually it's completely the other way round. People on higher tariffs pay considerably less proportionally for their bandwidth, heavier users pay far less per unit bandwidth used, and it's the bottom tariffs that are the cash cows. People on 10mb pay a massive premium for the amount they use and subsidize the higher tariffs. Without the majority of users on 10mb using bugger all subsidizing the higher tariffs, we wouldn't have 50mb or 100mb for <£40 a month.

30mb users get 3x the bandwidth, 3.3x more download allowance under STM yet only pay 1/3rd more compared to 10mb. 50mb costs 22% more again, but you get 67% more speed and no DS throttling.

You think you're paying a premium for 50mb? If you were paying the same amount for your bandwidth as the 10mb, you should be paying at least £105 a month. You're the one on the heavily subsidized tariff.

Chrysalis
18-02-2011, 01:53
hmm.

Thats an assumption 10mbit is full of light users. ;)

3 people in my family alone are on 10mbit and use way more then I do, on 30mbit I am using under 30 gig month, and they using over 100 gig easily on 10mbit with torrents. One of them also has kids so they will be using bandwidth as well.

10mbit is quite capable and is still double the speed of the average adsl connection, even using it half the time will push 1.5tb.

The_Gunslinger
18-02-2011, 02:18
Whilst it might have come down in price lately, when i switched to the highest available, each time the cost was considerably MORE than any of their competitors, for what is now sub standard service, and pretty much on a par with the slower offerings from other suppliers.... plus i would not have to deal with thick f*****s in the off shore "tech support" !!

If early adopters are prepaired to pay the premiums for that faster service, don't cut your own throats by forcing them elsewhere.

As for the cheaper tariffs being the cash cows, i don't see it, they are not paying more per mb or whatever, because on their reduced speed service they can't shift that sort of volume, it is the sheer number of those users that makes the difference, and for what they are paying, it barely covers the install/kit/maintenance costs.

The early adopters of the top tier packages are the ones that get little or no discounts half the time, whereas the lower tarifs are discounted up the ying-yang to remain competitive with the other ISP's in the mass market speed sections.


EDIT:
LoL Chrysalis just said what i was trying to, in less words and it came across better, hahaha

qasdfdsaq
18-02-2011, 09:45
Still the wrong way round.

Don't think 10mb are paying more per mb?

10mb = £21 = £2.10 per mb
30mb = £28.5 = £1.28 per mb
50mb = £35 = £0.70 per mb
100mb = £45 = £0.45 per mb.

10mb customers are paying three times more per mb than you are.

Early adopters may pay more for higher services but those higher services still cost far less per unit service than the existing slower services. Even when 50mb came out it was only £45, yet when compared to 10mb it should be over £100. 50mb has droppped a third off it's price whereas 10mb has had a price rise. Discounted up to the ying-yang my ass.

The vast majority of users are still on 10mb and the vast majority of them download less than 45GB a month, probably less than 10 on average. If 50mb was priced fairly you should be downloading no more than a 16GB a month download allowance on 50mb.

Chrysalis
18-02-2011, 09:57
One way I gauge the resource commands of the bottom tier is to realise how congested legacy is in my area compared to overlay, completely overloaded by 10mbit customers.

Of course raw price per mbit is indeed better value on the higher tiers, but these prices take into account usage doesnt increase in proportion of the burst speed, so 50mbit users arent using 5x the average of 10mbit.

Ignitionnet
18-02-2011, 13:39
One way I gauge the resource commands of the bottom tier is to realise how congested legacy is in my area compared to overlay, completely overloaded by 10mbit customers.

Err Chrys how exactly can you guage the resource demands of the bottom tier when you don't know how many modems are connected to the port?

It might be more congested because people are hammering it, or it might be because there's far too many modems there - you don't know.

---------- Post added at 12:39 ---------- Previous post was at 12:35 ----------

Actually it's completely the other way round.<Snip>

What he said. The comments about the discounted packages don't hold true either given the amount of people on 20, 30 or 50Mb who apparently have discounted packages and negotiated free upgrades.

Granny who pays her bill on time each month and checks her email every so often is still paying the bills for Mr News Freak to download his hundreds of GB a month and pay not much more.

Again, if you feel you are being robbed and your subscription is subsidising others perhaps going to a pay per GB system would be better? Only pay for what you use, no more.

Chrysalis
18-02-2011, 20:26
ignition I mean the demand on the infrastructure from 10mbit tier customers as a whole, if the port these customers are on is overwhelmed then its evident that the demand is more than VM are able/willing to spend on. So in the case of this argument its ultimately irrelevant how many customers are on the port. I would say its a case of VM in my area of underestimating the costs of supplying a 10mbit service.

I expect the average usage per customer on 50mbit tier is nowhere near 5 times the average usage of a 10mbit customer.

Another thing that is hardly ever taken into account on these discussions in profit margin.

Lets take an example.

ISP has baseline costs of £10 month whatever the speed, then a nomimal increase in costs depending on service supplied.

So lets say.

10mbit sold for £12 month with £10 base cost= £2 profit month per customer.
20mbit sold for £17 a month with £10 base cost and extra £1 cost, so £6 on average profit per customer.
30mbit sold for £25 month with £10 base cost and extra £2 cost, £13 profit per customer.

I see this argument with adsl providers also, people who claim automatically that low users on bottom packages are more profiteable than premium services, but forgetting the margins are very low on base packages. The saving grace for the lower tier's is the customer volume, I have no doubt per customer VM make less profit than on the top tiers.

Ignitionnet
19-02-2011, 10:23
Chrys it's very relevant how many customers are on the port - that's what decides what most of the costs per customer are on a cable network as most of the costs are fixed infrastructure costs which have to be spread between a cohort of customers.

Spend 10k on a line card and optics for 200 customers you've rather higher 'fixed' costs per customer than spreading it between 500 - this is what the economics are based on as far as node sizes and service groups go.

Chrysalis
19-02-2011, 11:08
I know that, but its logical to assume a highly utilised port means the resource cost for those using it is high as they using it a lot. So in terms of cost I am simply looking at port utilisation.

If VM stick 100 or 400 users on a port, it still costs the same to run that port. So VM in my area have seemingly capped costs for 10mbit users by over contending the port (hence the service only barely useable).

My main point been is tho, there is an assumption that if someone is on a higher tier they are probably a heavier user, when that wont always be the case.

I think it would be daft to say I am less profitable to VM than my 2 sisters as I am on a higher tier package paying more money and use less bandwidth. Even worse both my sisters only tend to use their broadband at peak, so whatever they are using is 90% in peak hours when capacity is most stressed.

One thing I am happy about with VM is they still charge a premium for burst speed and thats how it should be, not the farce thats in the adsl market.

The_Gunslinger
19-02-2011, 11:30
that i think is the point, you are rightly or wrongly assuming that the higher teir users are always downloading/using that bandwidth, when in reality many are not, and are paying for the convenience of having the speed when they want it..... only to be capped, shapped and generally crippled,

as for the discounts, i would put money on that there are likely more people on 10mb connections that have a huge discount based on tv and phone joint packages (i am actually fed up with the constant phone calls regarding tv packages, so much so that i phoned the uk complaints team and told them if they didn't stop bugging me, i'd take both phones and the multiple packages on those and the BB Internet elsewhere, seems to have done the trick) ... i would hazard there are more people on the higher tiers that only have BB with them.

BT are about to hit the same problem... they are force feeding us infinity adverts right now, touting how great the 3 times speed increase is (very cleverly not actually giving you any idea of the speed you will get, just estimated 3x increase on current...... well 3x crap is still crap lol) ..... and pushing the wonderful HD content you can watch through your new connection....... I'LL GIVE IT 6 MONTHS BEFORE THEY HIT A PROBLEM, if they don't start shaping and capping from the word go !

Ignitionnet
19-02-2011, 11:32
I know that, but its logical to assume a highly utilised port means the resource cost for those using it is high as they using it a lot. So in terms of cost I am simply looking at port utilisation.

If VM stick 100 or 400 users on a port, it still costs the same to run that port.

Indeed, however you are spreading that cost between 100 or 400 sources of income - you've contradicted yourself a bit between the two paragraphs there.

My main point been is tho, there is an assumption that if someone is on a higher tier they are probably a heavier user, when that wont always be the case.

Not always, I would hope that's very obvious, but mostly. There will be the odd leecher who pays as little as possible and downloads half the Internet but for the most part impatience gets the better of people or STM or a similar policy annoys them pushing them to higher speeds.

Regardless it's peak usage that matters - ask VM for their figures across their tiers if you still have questions they should answer them. There will, of course, be exceptions.

Chrysalis
19-02-2011, 11:40
that i think is the point, you are rightly or wrongly assuming that the higher teir users are always downloading/using that bandwidth, when in reality many are not, and are paying for the convenience of having the speed when they want it..... only to be capped, shapped and generally crippled,

as for the discounts, i would put money on that there are likely more people on 10mb connections that have a huge discount based on tv and phone joint packages (i am actually fed up with the constant phone calls regarding tv packages, so much so that i phoned the uk complaints team and told them if they didn't stop bugging me, i'd take both phones and the multiple packages on those and the BB Internet elsewhere, seems to have done the trick) ... i would hazard there are more people on the higher tiers that only have BB with them.

BT are about to hit the same problem... they are force feeding us infinity adverts right now, touting how great the 3 times speed increase is (very cleverly not actually giving you any idea of the speed you will get, just estimated 3x increase on current...... well 3x crap is still crap lol) ..... and pushing the wonderful HD content you can watch through your new connection....... I'LL GIVE IT 6 MONTHS BEFORE THEY HIT A PROBLEM, if they don't start shaping and capping from the word go !

They already are hitting problems ;) people getting sub 20mbit during peak on FTTC is not unusual. Also not too surprising given its using BT wholesale (which is very high cost for bandwidth) , they are also traffic shaping on infinity although I dont know the exact specifics other than the FUP is higher so throttling for heavy use kicks in later but p2p etc. will be throttled at peak like their adsl.

---------- Post added at 10:40 ---------- Previous post was at 10:38 ----------

Indeed, however you are spreading that cost between 100 or 400 sources of income - you've contradicted yourself a bit between the two paragraphs there.



Not always, I would hope that's very obvious, but mostly. There will be the odd leecher who pays as little as possible and downloads half the Internet but for the most part impatience gets the better of people or STM or a similar policy annoys them pushing them to higher speeds.

Regardless it's peak usage that matters - ask VM for their figures across their tiers if you still have questions they should answer them. There will, of course, be exceptions.

I am never good at wording things :) but I meant a resource cost, ie the true demand per customer on unrestricted resources, is why I didnt say actual cost as I am aware VM can and do control costs by capping capacity. Ultimately 10mbit on VM is poorer value for money especially when considering its also contended higher on legacy (based on figures you provided before in an old thread).

Ignitionnet
19-02-2011, 21:21
I am never good at wording things :) but I meant a resource cost, ie the true demand per customer on unrestricted resources, is why I didnt say actual cost as I am aware VM can and do control costs by capping capacity. Ultimately 10mbit on VM is poorer value for money especially when considering its also contended higher on legacy (based on figures you provided before in an old thread).

Being contended higher means less bandwidth per customer proportionately being provided, so not only don't they get their fair share of resource compared with the other tiers they actually get less.

Someone has to pay the bills - let's hear it for granny paying full price and using single figures GB a month.

Sannas
12-08-2011, 05:56
I know this thread is old, but why is this argument even here?

The issue isn't with who is downloading and what is being downloaded its simple case of infrastructure and virgin top the bill as far as their backbone is concerned. Virgin, BT and others aren't investing any where near what the should be in their infrastructure to allow for the increase in download speeds. It is a simple fact, if people are willing to pay a substantial price for an Internet connection with a set speed then they should be entitled to use that speed for what ever they want providing its legal. Virgin and other companies are in competition for the speed that they can offer.

Virgin are currently testing 200 meg connections and have rolled out 100 meg to the majority of its users however their backbone realistically cannot support this upgrade, financially virgin probably cant afford the speed they are offering, as this would mean what they pay for their tier 1 connectivity would be too great, so they throttle, block or restrict connections to networks that can provide a source of illegal content, thus preventing them for being charged excessive amounts for their own traffic.

So rather blaming each other why not look at the companies that are providing internet services, BT is often mistaken for being a tier 1 provider and last time I checked they use sprint, global crossing and level 3 as their tier 1 providers, so even BT havent got the connectivity and have to pay for internet access, hence their throtteling techniques.

REM
14-08-2011, 01:46
Virgin are currently testing 200 meg connections

They stopped doing that in April and are into 1.5Ghz tests now.