Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,552
- Location
- Hertfordshire
Jitter seems ok. 
Virgin Media Discussion Thread
- Thread starter macca40
- Start date
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,552
- Location
- Hertfordshire
Dont think that test is especially comprehensive though.
I don't know if that's strictly true, I've been told that I will be getting FTTP (Fibre to the premise) and this press release backs it up.
http://www.virginmedia.com/corporat...unces-largest-uk-fibre-broadband-rollout.html
Edited - I've researched this a bit further now, I can see what your saying - but was partly right, so existing HFC (Hybrid Fibre Coax) on virgins network is capable of speed delivery between 200-300mb.
FTTP will be deployed to new areas across the country capable of 300MB - 1GB, presuming it will just come standard 300MB to begin with.
Does that mean that everyone who already has HFC can get 300 or will it depend on how far they live from the cab, guessing node contention is also a factor?
http://www.virginmedia.com/corporat...unces-largest-uk-fibre-broadband-rollout.html
Edited - I've researched this a bit further now, I can see what your saying - but was partly right, so existing HFC (Hybrid Fibre Coax) on virgins network is capable of speed delivery between 200-300mb.
FTTP will be deployed to new areas across the country capable of 300MB - 1GB, presuming it will just come standard 300MB to begin with.
Does that mean that everyone who already has HFC can get 300 or will it depend on how far they live from the cab, guessing node contention is also a factor?
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2016
- Posts
- 64
this is my graph using a SHub 3.0
Does this look ok to you? everywhere i ping to i get packet loss
and a cmd -n 100
What results do you get?
Does the above look ok or do you think its worth a call to CS
Does this look ok to you? everywhere i ping to i get packet loss
and a cmd -n 100
What results do you get?
Does the above look ok or do you think its worth a call to CS
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 12,082
Not getting a response to a ping isn't necessarily packet loss. The equipment you're pinging may just be busy doing something useful, or may be configured to not reply at all.
Associate
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2016
- Posts
- 64
Thanks - I was concerned about the Packet loss on several hops as well as the ping times suddenly shooting up
Virgin have said for years that they de-prioritise pings over their network when they bandwidth is busy. They don't want their routers slowing down real traffic to service ping testing. However, this does also hide response times and latency, so it helps VM deflect complaints of poor pings because pings are now an unreliable testing tool.
Oh OK. I rang up Virgin Media today to see how much it would cost to upgrade to the 300Mb package and was pleasantly surprised. I might do that tomorrow then if all goes well although I'm still a bit worried it might not be as good for Twitch streaming at high bit rates seeing as that is the main thing I use my internet for (will also start uploading some YouTube videos as well).
Whatever happened to the rollout of FTTH from Virgin anyway? did that stall? is it still progressing and if so is there a good place to keep up to date on it at all please? the pace of broadband expansions/speed increases in the UK is really quite depressing now, it's 2017 and there are many places in Europe relaxing on their 1Gbps line like it's an expectancy and not a privilege to have it
I know you didn't blame Virgin for the poor nationwide speeds but it's all openreach's fault. Virgin just runs a limited HFC CATV network.
Also DOCSIS 3.1 is fine for up to 10Gb because coax is an actual transmission line as opposed to just a bunch of 100 year old twisted wires. And Virgin has ALWAYS been faster than any commonly available xDSL technology.
Openreach just want to milk 100 year old degraded wires with as many iterations of xDSL as they can possibly milk; all while increasing line rental charges for everybody, while lying to people and telling them their 100 year old wires have magically turned into "fibre".
Last edited:
I presume you know the ins and outs of replacing the old cable with fibre, how much it would cost, the benefit etc? Who is going to fund it all?
Because I'm sure people with access to this knowledge have looked at it, and decided that it's far too expensive for the time being.
Associate
- Joined
- 12 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 703
- Location
- Grimsby UK
Well I just upgraded to the vivid 300 package
331mb down and 21mb up now. Happy with that.
331mb down and 21mb up now. Happy with that.
No, they've looked at it and decided that there is more profit in leaving it as long as they can and milking as much as they can while there is little competition. Why spend money when you can market your old stuff?
What's the source of this information? Conjecture?
Same as the source of yours.
Edit: Actually, that's a pretty unworthy response. I had some discussions a while ago with the network and infrastructure planners at Virgin (Blueyonder as they were then) regarding low speeds and investment in the UK in comparison to places like South Korea and Holland, and it boiled down to money. They had many excuses, but it pretty much came down to investment and profit. It was interesting how expenditure (ie work on improving the network) went down before they sold themselves off to Liberty, because it made the bottom line look better in advance of the sell-off. Now we have the continued oversubscription in many areas, and underinvestment in the backbone, because they are stretching resources to maximise profits.
It's the monolithic telecoms model where you eek out improvements when you have to, cream off profit the rest of the time. There's an old telecoms saying that once you've built the network, "you're making money while you sleep", and you want your lines maximised all the time before you upgrade them.
Last edited:
Didn't VM almost go bust laying out their fibre network about 20 years ago? I know there is profit and corporate greed involved but I don't think the Openreach board had a meeting after investigating rolling out FTTP everywhere or replacing all copper with fibre and went 'LOL let's just milk those poor ******** some more before the government intervene'.
They would have looked at it and decided that it wasn't worth the investments because it may ruin the company or the benefit was not worth the risk or cash investment. It's not like you can openly order 1Gbit in every part of Europe, that's complete nonsense and I don't understand why people believe this.
The thing is, a good majority of consumers don't want or need over 40 mbps, as long as they can go on Facebook, watch YouTube and stream Netflix, they're happy. Why should a company cater for a small percentage of us turbo nerds who ultimately will use the max connection speed of 1Gbit about once per month and even then in most cases it will be for e-peen size on forums.
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,159
The thing that makes me angry is with BDUK the Government really had an opportunity to roll out proper fibre and they completely missed it. Only now are they saying it is needed. So a bit less investment saved the Government for a few years. They're going to have to invest again to keep us competitive. Seems like a waste to me.