Virgin Media Broadband 20MB

[Uhtred]

So simple - introduce a fixed speed with fixed cost. Sorry...but I don't care what you say - my parents pay for an extremely expensive BB service. I want to download at 10+mb when I want without having to worry about caps.

Did you actually take in what i said? Fixed speed? That would mean vm would have to provide enough potential bandwidth for millions of users to download at their maximum connection speed. It just doesn't work like that, residential broadband is contended, to provide that much bandwidth isn't feasible and would be astronomically expensive

 

[Robert]

But I thought it was fair..surely?

We pay £37 a month

You pay £25 a month (example)

My service is restricted to that of yours - so you can use teamspeak and play games

How is that fair? We should be compensated with the price difference.

 

[Hurley]

But I thought it was fair..surely?

We pay £37 a month

You pay £25 a month (example)

My service is restricted to that of yours - so you can use teamspeak and play games

How is that fair? We should be compensated with the price difference.

But were allowed to download 3GB they are only alllowed 720MB on the 4meg connection. If they go above that they get crippled to 2meg / 192Kb.

 

[Darkwave]

Im an xbox gamer

In that case wait until you need a dashboard or game patch.

That might be 30 meg for a patch and steam installs are a one off

Never downloaded a Battlefield 2 patch then, stop making excuses for Virgin and trying to downplay everything.

 

[Uhtred]

because they sell it at 'up to 20meg' and i agree, perhaps it isn't totally fair but it's the majority that matter and vm provide a good service (for boradband at least). Even capped at 5meg you'll most likely get those speeds which is more than can be said for most adsl services with their dodgy p2p capping

I know first hand the FLOODS of complaints and loss of business you get if your network is performing so badly that people can hardly surf the internet.

 

[Uhtred]

In that case wait until you need a dashboard or game patch.

Never downloaded a Battlefield 2 patch then, stop making excuses for Virgin and trying to downplay everything.

As it happens i have. You're not going to be doing one every day are you? Stop being argumentative

 

[Darkwave]

because they sell it at 'up to 20meg' and i agree, perhaps it isn't totally fair but it's the majority that matter and vm provide a good service (for boradband at least). Even capped at 5meg you'll most likely get those speeds which is more than can be said for most adsl services with their dodgy p2p capping

I know first hand the FLOODS of complaints and loss of business you get if your network is performing so badly that people can hardly surf the internet.

"Up to 20Mbit" is clearly defined by real network traffic, any problems, and in the case of ADSL your distance from the exchange. Throwing "up to 20Mbit" in our face because they consciously smack a cap on the transfer rate is absolutely taking the ****, which is why they lump it into the "fair usage" section instead.

Prove to me that the network suffers under uncapped conditions and I'll suck your balls.

As it happens i have. You're not going to be doing one every day are you? Stop being argumentative

I download media, Linux distros, patches, game demos, game betas and updates for massively-multiplayer online games a lot. Just because I need my bandwidth more than you need yours doesn't give you the right to say I should be capped after 10-30 minutes of downloading to the point where I'm getting a quarter of the bandwidth I pay for.

Virgin Media say they're doing this because people who download more or selfish, but you sound selfish to me.

 

[Fr0dders]

i was an NTL customer before they changed to Virgin media and the 20meg package came out

at the time i moved, i had the option of signing up to BeThere, an LLU product which gives me about 11meg for £25/month. When i left NTL, they had no traffic shaping at all.

since i left, and the VM thing got announced, everybody has been saying traffic shaping and download limits were comming, but i really hoped not once the talk of the 20mb service came out.

such a shame that our telecomms infrastructure is too poor to hold us having decent internet connections without limits

 

[Hurley]

The way i see it, people choose the 2meg packages because they dont use the internet a lot.

Other people may like to download music for their ipods so they have the 4meg package.

I was advised when signing up that to play on xbox live i would be better off having the 10 meg package.

Now im no genius on internet speeds and all that but its common sense that tells me people who dont need the internet as much as othes go for the lower packages.

So i agree, why should the bigger users get punished for the smaller users who are on the small packages anyway and hardly want to use the internet.

Surely it cannot make that much of a different to Mr X's nan who wants to logon and send her nephew in Australia an email. I mean cmon how big is an email file. Less than 100 kilobytes?

Who really needs anything faster than 1meg to surf the net or chat on MSN.

We pay the extra because we want the extra bandwidth, now with these new policies, even though we are paying the extra we are not getting what we are paying for.

 

[Uhtred]

"Up to 20Mbit" is clearly defined by real network traffic, any problems, and in the case of ADSL your distance from the exchange. Throwing "up to 20Mbit" in our face because they consciously smack a cap on the transfer rate is absolutely taking the ****, which is why they lump it into the "fair usage" section instead.

Prove to me that the network suffers under uncapped conditions and I'll suck your balls.

I download media, Linux distros, patches, game demos, game betas and updates for massively-multiplayer online games a lot. Just because I need my bandwidth more than you need yours doesn't give you the right to say I should be capped after 10-30 minutes of downloading to the point where I'm getting a quarter of the bandwidth I pay for.

Virgin Media say they're doing this because people who download more or selfish, but you sound selfish to me.

Most adsl providers have fup, if not all, and the limiting factor isn't always the distance from the exchange, adsl users get slower speeds in the evenings due to the bt centrals being under heavier load and many other factors.

I sound selfish? Have i not already said that i'm a heavy user myself and that i'm considerate during peak hours? I probably download a lot more than you but i do it during offpeak hours when i can.

Blimy, talk about over reacting.

To prove it, watch this graph tonight...

http://www.l8nc.com/graph.php?jid=9438dbf29865717ed375312fd8879765

It's a ping test of my vm internet connection, when it comes to peak hours you will notice some red bars start to appear, this is packet loss, also notice the ping time increases, and remember, i'm in a good area for vm. Do that test of some of the heavily contended areas and it will be much worse. (ignore the big red section from this morning, i broke our internet )

 

[Uhtred]

The way i see it, people choose the 2meg packages because they dont use the internet a lot.

Other people may like to download music for their ipods so they have the 4meg package.

I was advised when signing up that to play on xbox live i would be better off having the 10 meg package.

Now im no genius on internet speeds and all that but its common sense that tells me people who dont need the internet as much as othes go for the lower packages.

So i agree, why should the bigger users get punished for the smaller users who are on the small packages anyway and hardly want to use the internet.

Surely it cannot make that much of a different to Mr X's nan who wants to logon and send her nephew in Australia an email. I mean cmon how big is an email file. Less than 100 kilobytes?

Who really needs anything faster than 1meg to surf the net or chat on MSN.

We pay the extra because we want the extra bandwidth, now with these new policies, even though we are paying the extra we are not getting what we are paying for.

To be honest i think we're lucky being on vm. I'd hate to be on adsl where you're charged for the amount you download rather than the speed. nor would i like capping on p2p protocols which is, generally, implemented badly.

The thing is vm is one network with many different types of users. they have to keep the majority happy.

 

[Darkwave]

It's a ping test of my vm internet connection, when it comes to peak hours you will notice some red bars start to appear, this is packet loss, also notice the ping time increases, and remember, i'm in a good area for vm. Do that test of some of the heavily contended areas and it will be much worse.

Oddly enough I'm in one of the most heavily contended areas for Virgin Media, I am in one of the areas they decided to do trial this traffic shaping in, and I never get low pings or packet loss unless I'm connecting to a rubbish server.

I never got low pings or packet loss before the traffic shaping either. I don't buy it, sorry.

 

[Uhtred]

Oddly enough I'm in one of the most heavily contended areas for Virgin Media, I am in one of the areas they decided to do trial this traffic shaping in, and I never get low pings or packet loss unless I'm connecting to a rubbish server.

I never got low pings or packet loss before the traffic shaping either. I don't buy it, sorry.

well why else would they do it? vm have nothing to from capping their service if there isn't a problem with it. But you are right, as i've already said vm is a good service, they are protecting the future of the network, taking proactive action rather than implementing such measures after people start to complain about slow speeds and bad performance.

 

[Darkwave]

well why else would they do it? vm have nothing to from capping their service if there isn't a problem with it. But you are right, as i've already said vm is a good service, they are protecting the future of the network, taking proactive action rather than implementing such measures after people start to complain about slow speeds and bad performance.

I think they're doing it to cut costs. Think about it, if tons of people are paying £37/month for a 20Mbit connection that gets throttled to 5Mbit, they're saving a fortune on bandwidth.

It's all a big con to me, and it's happening on 4Mbit and 2Mbit too.

 

[jake000]

Sorry but sod off with this fair malarky. I pay for 20mb I WANT 20 MEG. Who gives a flying **** if I'm being childish. Will they offer variable pricing? Will they heck.

Reducing you to a quarter of the speed - yeah 5mb...but that isn't what is paid for.

Oh and it doesn't have to be illegal (download content)

BBC TV streams
ITV Web streams
Direct2Drive games
Steam
Xbox live content
Patches

When I leave (if I graduate) I won't be leaving my PC on - i'll want to download when I get home at 5:30/6 - but now...oh no.

I agree.

3Gb on a 20mb connection can be downloaded in around 30mins or less. So during peak times, I can't use my connection to its full potential. Why do I have a 20mb connection if I can't use it? The upgrade is totally pointless.
You don't buy a ferrari to sit at 20mph and you don't have a 20mb connection for using it at 1mb!

 

[Uhtred]

I think they're doing it to cut costs. Think about it, if tons of people are paying £37/month for a 20Mbit connection that gets throttled to 5Mbit, they're saving a fortune on bandwidth.

It's all a big con to me, and it's happening on 4Mbit and 2Mbit too.

Of course, but it's hardly a con, they're telling us exactly what they're doing and why. Most of the time it will be 20meg. Think about it, when people move to 20meg the heavy users will probably download more, i know i download more now that i'm at 10meg. Rather than add massive amounts of bandwidth and cost they are doing it in a way that doesn't increase costs to the user.

Not ideal i agree, but reasonable.

Remember, this is a business, they have to make a profit and keep customers happy. They’re being far more decent about it then many adsl providers I can think of who simply gave the heavy users a mac code

 

[Uhtred]

I agree.

3Gb on a 20mb connection can be downloaded in around 30mins or less. So during peak times, I can't use my connection to its full potential. Why do I have a 20mb connection if I can't use it? The upgrade is totally pointless.
You don't buy a ferrari to sit at 20mph and you don't have a 20mb connection for using it at 1mb!

So you'd drive your Ferrari around at 200mph in a 30 speed limit? Rather a flawed analogy but anyway, if you're not happy with it then downgrade or change provider. I don't suppose vm will mind much

 

[Darkwave]

So you'd drive your Ferrari around at 200mph in a 30 speed limit? Rather a flawed analogy but anyway, if you're not happy with it then downgrade or change provider. I don't suppose vm will mind much

Horribly flawed analogy. The speed limit here is 20Mbit, since that's what we're paying for.

It's more like we've bought a car that will only do a quarter of the speed limit when you actually need to drive.

 

[Uhtred]

Horribly flawed analogy. The speed limit here is 20Mbit, since that's what we're paying for.

It's more like we've bought a car that will only do a quarter of the speed limit when you actually need to drive.

Then think of the restrictions as a contraflow

 

[Darkwave]

Then think of the restrictions as a contraflow

I'd think of the restrictions as some ****hole trying to clean your windows while you try to drive, or someone going around painting different numbers onto speed limit signs so you have to slow down.