Should I quit Virginmedia?

Daffy Duck wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Daffy Duck wrote:
Eeyore wrote:

What speeds do you get at peak times on what package ? I see little
slowdown with Idnet for example.

Have you forgotten your post of 15:09 on the 30th?,,,,you were getting a
speed of 5713kbs,that's over 25% less than the headline 8mbs and even
considerably slower than some other links you've posted......seems like
more than a little slowdown there.

That's what I call a 'little slowdown'. It's STILL 80% of the maximum
theoretical possible, unlike the 12% I was getting with VM at peak times.

Graham

20% is not a "little slowdown".

YES IT IS

And 88% is a BIG slowdown.

Graham

In article , Mark McIntyre
scribeth thus
On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 06:57:54 +0000, Eeyore wrote:

Mark McIntyre wrote:

Lobster wrote:

bt.com's postcode speed checker claims 5.5Mb max.

Expect somewhat less than that, then!

On exactly what basis

On the basis of the postcode speed checker being a theoretical limit,
based on calculated line length and assuming good condition cabling and
no other interference or attentuating factors.

Theres a mate of mine absolutely ****ed off as he lives out near Ely and
relies on BT broadband which has regular drop outs in the evenings and
gets very poor throughputs and thinks that my VM BB is the mutts nuts...

Meanwhile the man from BT and/or openreach are scratching their heads
and laying the blame on each other;!....
--
Tony Sayer

tony sayer wrote:
I really think you have a very biased and blinkered view.

We've all known that for some time now :-D

--
Carl Waring
DigiGuide:
Full: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=1495
Freeview (free): http://getdigiguide.com/?p=4&r=1495
Web-based: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=3&r=1495
http://www.elfyourself.com/?id=1166929362

Eeyore wrote:
I really think you have a very biased and blinkered view.
I think it's a very accurate view.

Then you'd be wrong about that too ;-)

--
Carl Waring
DigiGuide:
Full: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=1495
Freeview (free): http://getdigiguide.com/?p=4&r=1495
Web-based: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=3&r=1495
http://www.elfyourself.com/?id=1166929362

Eeyore wrote:
Idnet can say this (and they do) .

"No contention on our network is achieved by not oversubscribing our
broadband services and ensuring that bandwidth investment exceeds
customer demand. This means that our goals of the highest performance
and reliability can be maintained"
http://www.idnet.net/solutions/homeofficebroadband.jsp#

That's ALL it takes. It's called investment. VM doesn't (can't)
invest since it's mired in debt. That's why it's crap.

Well yeah, but IDnet are what size (and have how many customers) compared to
VM? If you're only small you don't need to spend as much money, do you?



--
Carl Waring
DigiGuide:
Full: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=1495
Freeview (free): http://getdigiguide.com/?p=4&r=1495
Web-based: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=3&r=1495
http://www.elfyourself.com/?id=1166929362

tony sayer wrote:
In article , Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrel scribeth thus


naza wrote:

Now VM network does not have any of these [line related] problems,
but rather contention problems which ADSL has

NO. ADSL does NOT have any inherent significant contention problems.
Not for ages. BT
has fixed that ages back. That's why they don't quote a contention
figure for MAX.
It's still a popular myth however that there are such problems but
it IS a myth. There
may be congestion/contention problems over the *ISP's* network but
that's down to them
and YOUR decision to use them.


but how many people get full 8mbps.

Me for one !

Next to the exchange is it then?..


If on ADSL people where getting 8mbps then most likley ADSL
providers
would have the same issues as VM but that simply isn't the case.
Chossing a Good ISP will not change the laws of physics, a good ISP
will do a little more to resolve your issue's but thats about it.
They
cant really do that much to force BT to do something about you line.

You simply don't understand that realities of how ADSL works.

Idnet can say this (and they do) .

"No contention on our network is achieved by not oversubscribing our
broadband services and ensuring that bandwidth investment exceeds
customer demand. This means
that our goals of the highest performance and reliability can be
maintained" http://www.idnet.net/solutions/homeofficebroadband.jsp#

However they do say this;!...



Please note:
The maximum speeds that your line can support are determined by the
equipment at the exchange within the first 10 days of service.

Speeds are affected by your proximity to your local telephone exchange
and the quality of your phone line.

Actual download speeds can vary from below 2 Mbps during peak times,
up to a maximum of 7.15 Mbps.

..... Hmmm. No answer from the donkey as yet. No surprise there then ;-)

--
Carl Waring
DigiGuide:
Full: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=1495
Freeview (free): http://getdigiguide.com/?p=4&r=1495
Web-based: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=3&r=1495
http://www.elfyourself.com/?id=1166929362

naza wrote:
but how many people get full 8mbps.

Me for one !

Exactly you for ONE. One person does not reflect the state of the
whole network.

Yet because YOU think the service is crap, you expect the rest of us to
believe it.

So, no double-standards there then? :-/

Because you were getting crap speeds on VM does not
mean that every single person who joins VM or are connected to VM are
getting the same service.

Exactly. Good luck getting him to agree though.

The Same for ADSL just becuase your getting
a great service does not mean everyone else is. There are probally
people out there who are with IDnet who dont get the same speeds as
you, yet they will get the same level of customer service.

Indeed.

How many Customers Does IDnet have exactly?

I don't think anyone except IDnet will be able to answer that. I have tried
to find a figure on their web site but it seems they don't produce the same
kind of Quaterly results as, say, VM.


--
Carl Waring
DigiGuide:
Full: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=1495
Freeview (free): http://getdigiguide.com/?p=4&r=1495
Web-based: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=3&r=1495
http://www.elfyourself.com/?id=1166929362

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
Yes it does exist .. never found out why it was called that!...
--

i believe there is a plaque thingy in the village explaining the name,
though the bridge is long gone. nice chippy there too.

Woody wrote:
"HVS" wrote in message
...
On 30 Dec 2007, Eeyore wrote
Daffy Duck wrote:

Just because your service was bad with VM doesn't mean everyone
elses is as well.Mine's spot on but,unlike you,i'm not claiming
that that means everyones is.

Fair enough, but the comments in user groups illustrate that the
vast majority of comments about VM are very negative.

You appear to be lucky that you're on infrastructure originally
operated by Telewest (Blueyonder) rather than NTL. How long that
may give you an advantage is anyone's guess I reckon.

Hmmm.....

I've been with NTL for 7 years (Reading UBR); started with the 512
service in December, 2000, and was gradually increased to the 4meg
service.

I invariably get around 3850/3900 down and 380 up on speed tests;
have had maybe 4 or 5 short outages over the years -- the sort of
thing all ISPs suffer now and then; and haven't needed to have
many dealings with support (thank god, from what I've read).

Since I'm not a fanboy, I tend not to post in user groups saying
how solid my connection is; but those who point out that user
groups provide a skewed sample of customer satisfaction have quite
a solid point.

FWIW, I'm not enthralled -- at all -- with the way the company has
gone since they (a) merged with TW/BY, and then (b) rebranded as
VM. The fixed-line phone was always bad value; the new non-
contract Virgin Mobile charges are considerably more expensive than
the old ones were; the willy-waving over Sky was boringly juvenile
(we cancelled the VM telly after that and went to Sky -- should
have done it years ago if only for the Arts and Performance
channels); the imported BY support department seems deeply flawed
to me (way out of their depth, and often out of the corporate
loop); charging 25p/min for support is absolutely inexcusable;
and I've been migrating my e-mail to my own domain over the past
year or so to keep my options open.

But that said, I've always been happy with the speed and
reliability of my ex-NTL *broadband* service, and won't drop that
unless it goes the way the rest of the company seems to be going.
And so far, the broadband continues to deliver what it says on
the box.

--
Cheers,
Harvey

100% agreed here in Harrogate.

Ahhh. Nice to see another local on here. I'm in Knaresborough :-D

(Sorry for the OT)

--
Carl Waring
DigiGuide:
Full: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=1495
Freeview (free): http://getdigiguide.com/?p=4&r=1495
Web-based: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=3&r=1495
http://www.elfyourself.com/?id=1166929362

BT however are apparently currently thinking more along the lines of
using fibre to the cabinet and using ADSL2+ thereafter.

Probably because its the only way to get the coverage. Its also
interesting to note that presently BT have no incentive to do this, as
they won't make any revenue out of it.

They are apparently thinking of doing it as part of their 21CN project.
Because it will enable them to make new revenue of course. I imagine they
have VOD in mind etc.

That is very unlikley by the outlook. BT have around 85,000 street
cabinets and I took a look at a few resoruces it would mean a lot of
money to get all of them hooked up to a street cabinet and then
install a small DSLAM which would cost in the range of £5000-£10000.
It is being trialled at the moment just like FTTH was. Would not get
your hopes up just yet. The cost of 21CN at the moment is quite big
already so doing a FFTC nationwide would definatly be expensive.