Virgin Media to Double Broadband Speed

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by Kushan

If you go by the information so far, STM limits will be doubled so you'll have to download 10Gb in the evening to get hit with it. However you're right in that you should only be reduced to 15Meg, which is still pretty decent.
I think I'd much rather Virgin had lower STM thresholds but only reduced the speed by like 25 or 30% or something, but that's just me. Then again, I'm on 50meg specifically to avoid STM.

A new system is coming in place that will replace both STM and traffic shaping or so I hear.

Details so far indicate it will be extremely fair and protocol agnostic.

---------- Post added at 18:08 ---------- Previous post was at 18:05 ----------

Originally Posted by Kushan

You mean the "traffic" shaping that's supposed to slow P2P/newsgroups but ends up slowing lots of other stuff? Officially no and I know loads of people still have issues with it, but I personally have not run into it in months. Seems like they've given up with it in my area - a few minutes ago, I was downloading from a newsgroup at a solid 6Mb/s.

No, it's completely different.

Instead of shaping and fixed STM limits, the new system will gradually reduce your speed on a sliding scale depending on how much you've downloaded and local port loads. You'll essentially get "de-prioritized" down to the same level as other people who have the same level of utilization as you.

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Kushan

You mean the "traffic" shaping that's supposed to slow P2P/newsgroups but ends up slowing lots of other stuff? Officially no and I know loads of people still have issues with it, but I personally have not run into it in months. Seems like they've given up with it in my area - a few minutes ago, I was downloading from a newsgroup at a solid 6Mb/s.

nope I mean the yet released comcast style management where it will slow everything and they abandon the p2p traffic management.

As currently both sets of traffic management arent up to the job. eg. right now I am downloading at 3mbit/sec, way below STM throttle levels and I am not even STM'd.

Ignition has hinted (and I heard of another source also) that new traffic management is coming soon which is protocol agnostic and based on local utilisation levels as well as own usage levels, however news on this has suddenly dried up.

---------- Post added at 18:45 ---------- Previous post was at 18:40 ----------

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Course some of us are in a situation where VM have been failing to provide what we've already been paying for for the last 14 months. So when more money is spent on unneccessary upgrades for other people and frivolous marketing campains while they're failing to make the investment required to bring existing services up to scratch, we have a perfectly reasonable right to be unhappy.

Not to say I am, just playing devil's advocate here.

seems some of us are the forgotten ones and people assume everyone has an equal quality of service.

why would I be patting VM on the back for doubling advertised speeds when I dont even get current advertised speeds.

[TuesdayWildchild]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

I dunno.VM gives us summat for nothing yet again and so many bitch about it instead of saying thank you very much.

It is more than many other companies would offer without charging.

So I'll say it.Thank you very much Virgin Media.

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

A new system is coming in place that will replace both STM and traffic shaping or so I hear.

Details so far indicate it will be extremely fair and protocol agnostic.

---------- Post added at 18:08 ---------- Previous post was at 18:05 ----------


No, it's completely different.

Instead of shaping and fixed STM limits, the new system will gradually reduce your speed on a sliding scale depending on how much you've downloaded and local port loads. You'll essentially get "de-prioritized" down to the same level as other people who have the same level of utilization as you.

That would be interesting, considering that traffing shaping just doesn't work and STM only annoys people. I completely get why VM would want to reel in those who throttle their connection 24/7, but the STM limits are a bit on the low side (in my opinion).

[Chrysalis]

Kushan the new system wont only affect certian protocols and as such wont be evadable other than to simply stop downloading so you dont let it trigger. That is the major flaw with the P2P system.

The flaw with the STM system is its far too generous on the upload limits allowing a lot of uploading to be done before it kicks in. Ironically its probably too tight on the download limits.

Whatever system is in place tho will have to not fall foul of new ASA regulations which state any throttling must be moderate only on unlimited products.

Another flaw of course is I feel VM will be expecting too much from traffic management, its ideal use is to handle short temporary spikes in traffic load, whilst VM seem to want to use it to manage sustained high utilisation.

I expect VM to make silly mistakes like making the new system downloads only and peak only.

[Kushan]

I'm sure VM will trial this new system and once the trial is successful, they'll roll it out to everyone. Note the choice wording of that statement.

[ccarmock]

Originally Posted by Horizon

The upgrade is most welcome, I agree. But I do argue with the "we're getting it for nothing" point.

The last time I looked, I pay a lot of money to VM each month and by VM's own admission, a lot of that is pure profit to them. Aka telephone line rental, which is in fact a connectivity charge. You're paying just for the "privilege" of being connected to their network, they don't do anything for that dosh.

Once VM have the relevant kit in place (which of course does cost them) then whether they're pumping 20mb, 50mb or 100mb down the same pipe is neither here or there. It does not cost VM anymore or less what speed is sent with STM in place.

After network upgrades, usually for broadband, the only real costs for VM lie on their tv side where they do need to pay for things like fixing faulty stbs, agreeing with broadcasters over carriage rights etc and of course staffing costs.

VM are not upgrading the broadband speeds out of the goodness of their hearts. It's a cold business decision based on what they can afford to do, wish to do and what their competitors are likely to do. The marketing opportunity that the Olympics brings should not be underestimated.

VM may say they are not launching anything over 120mb this year, although that's not what they've told the City... But I bet they will launch 200mb+ (might even be 1gb) in one location and you'll hear about it everywhere come Olympics time.

Yes some of the money we all pay to VM goes into profit for them. They are a commercial organisation not a charity. Like other commercial organisations they will balance the service they offer with the prices they charge and the profit they make. I will be the first to say that there are too many companies out there that focus on pure profit and pay little attention to the service offering. A return to putting the customer first is long overdue in my opinion.

VM is not perfect - the laughable helpdesk is a great example of where they have got things totally wrong and seem to be ignoring cutomer views. Compare with many other organisations notably banks, bringing such service back in house.

You are absolutely right the phone line rental is a connectivity charge, however that does not come free to VM. They have to install & maintain the cable plant to get the connection to you. They have to host and maintain exchange equipment at their end of the line to provide service. They have to pay for interconnectivity between their voice network and other carriers. All of these elements cost them money.

In terms on internet costs, the new line cards, software upgrades, software licences etc are significant costs to VM. Node splits to increase effective capacity often require new fibre to be run between the central hubs and street cabinets. They have ongoing maintenance charges on all the equipment they use. Often this can be some 20% of the original purchase price annually.

Now on the other side there is a lot more they could be doing. The dire over-subscription in some areas is poor. They are selling a service in some regions that they cannot provide effectively, yet still continue to sell.

Overall I think VM provide a good service. Sure they can and should do more, but on the whole it's good. If you look at the doubling of speed at zero cost and also the general reduction in prices over the years the deal isn't bad.

As consumers we will always want more and pay less. However there comes a point where this is not sustainable unless service suffers.

[Chrysalis]

good post ccarmock you addressed both sides of the fence.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

Personally I think it's quite worrying that anyone would be paying so much attention to your profile

I also find it worrying that you have been sending private messages to people that insult and belittle the Cable Forum Team. I do not believe that this is an appropriate way to behave/deal with any issues that you may have when part of a community. I was shocked when I saw some of them reproduced on Digital Spy.

Originally Posted by Masque

I would have called it inattention as realistically to confuse 2 different people with completely different names is a bit worrying.

Should have gone to Specsavers.

I couldn't understand how two people could be both 43 and 59 at the same time! When it was pointed out that it was because I was getting two people mixed up, I immediately apologised. Fortunately, I don't have any severe sight problems, so i'm putting it down to the new strong painkillers that my GP has prescribed me and i'm sticking to that

[Peter_]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I couldn't understand how two people could be both 43 and 59 at the same time! When it was pointed out that it was because I was getting two people mixed up, I immediately apologised. Fortunately, I don't have any severe sight problems, so i'm putting it down to the new strong painkillers that my GP has prescribed me and i'm sticking to that

You gave me a laugh confusing them both.

[Mick Fisher]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I couldn't understand how two people could be both 43 and 59 at the same time!

Fair enough, but what I find worrying is Why the Hell do you care?

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I also find it worrying that you have been sending private messages to people that insult and belittle the Cable Forum Team. I do not believe that this is an appropriate way to behave/deal with any issues that you may have when part of a community. I was shocked when I saw some of them reproduced on Digital Spy.

Are you saying the cable forum team are reproducing pm,s on Digital Spy. Links would be nice as evidence of this ??

[Kymmy]

Back on topic please which is nothing to do with posts on DS by a member banned on here or the age or myself or anyone else in this thread

[thenry]

finally! boooooorrrrrriiiiiinnnnnggggggg!

anyway I know I've asked before with ignition answering that its a test. has it got anything to do with doubling?

http://ukinternetreport.co.uk/cmts/d...l&town=Croydon

Originally Posted by Horizon

The upgrade is most welcome, I agree. But I do argue with the "we're getting it for nothing" point.

The last time I looked, I pay a lot of money to VM each month and by VM's own admission, a lot of that is pure profit to them. Aka telephone line rental, which is in fact a connectivity charge. You're paying just for the "privilege" of being connected to their network, they don't do anything for that dosh.

Once VM have the relevant kit in place (which of course does cost them) then whether they're pumping 20mb, 50mb or 100mb down the same pipe is neither here or there. It does not cost VM anymore or less what speed is sent with STM in place.

After network upgrades, usually for broadband, the only real costs for VM lie on their tv side where they do need to pay for things like fixing faulty stbs, agreeing with broadcasters over carriage rights etc and of course staffing costs.

VM are not upgrading the broadband speeds out of the goodness of their hearts. It's a cold business decision based on what they can afford to do, wish to do and what their competitors are likely to do. The marketing opportunity that the Olympics brings should not be underestimated.

VM may say they are not launching anything over 120mb this year, although that's not what they've told the City... But I bet they will launch 200mb+ (might even be 1gb) in one location and you'll hear about it everywhere come Olympics time.

You still aren't being charged to be upgraded so by anyone's definition it FREE.

I'd hate to think what your definition of free might be.