Re: Quick Question? Expected Speeds
 

I posted the above for a laugh because it said I was on nearly 21Mb, its genuine but how accurate?

I really could not care as long as I have a connection.

Re: Quick Question? Expected Speeds
 

I work from home, send and receive large files around the world as and when required. So 30-45 mins to download check make changes and re-upload another 30-45 mins, is a bit of a deal to me.

Re: Quick Question? Expected Speeds
 

Shouldn't you be on business broadband then?

Re: Quick Question? Expected Speeds
 

Just for wanting a decent upload speed? :confused:

Re: Quick Question? Expected Speeds
 

Doesn't _wtf_ want to be able to upload and download large files whenever s/he needs to, regardless of any local or network congestion?
Sounds to me like the solution is a leased or managed line, whatever connection speed is required...
:shrug:

Re: Quick Question? Expected Speeds
 

Be offer 2.5mbit upload...which is enough for uploading large files...

Are you trying to say people uploading/downloading large files cause network congestion? you couldnt be more wrong...

Re: Quick Question? Expected Speeds
 

... until "large" = "huge by today's standards" or BeThere find they can't afford to expand fast enough and have to introduce STM too.

Of course not. Read it again?
There's little point in you trying to find something critical of you in every post -- if I'd wanted to flag up that _wtf_ hadn't groaned about slow upload speeds or that s/he's actions were causing the congestion, that's exactly what I'd have written.

Re: Quick Question? Expected Speeds
 

Not everyone is like VM you know, some isp's actually upgrade their hardware/infrastructure when its needed to provide the user with what they are paying for.

Be wont implement STM.

Re: Quick Question? Expected Speeds
 

If Be continue (almost) doubling their user base in a quarter, I'd guess that sooner or later they'll hit capacity problems.

I'm relieved that you're so certain.
However Be's parent have a far from admirable track record.
(O2 missed the 3G rollout condition by four months and denied deliberately traffic managing 3G speeds until caught red-handed.)

Isn't it primarily about access to investment funds for very low marginal rates of return or, in VM's case, the lack of access due to unprofitability?

Re: Quick Question? Expected Speeds
 

sigh

it always makes me wonder you know.... why can places like japan manage to provide 100mbit connection speeds for all these years -- not just download i might add, but upload speed as well -- and yet, in this country we're getting absolutely raped with much lower connection speeds for higher prices, and to make it worse, they completely fail to provide those speeds anyway?

100mbit in japan is dirt cheap. it's not even the fastest connection you can get there. in certain places you are able to get 1gig connection speeds.

if in some countries they're able to provide 1gig connection speeds at affordable prices, why oh why are virgin media unable to provide a mere 20mb without capping the hell out of us?

anyone remember this?

http://www.neowin.net/index.php?act=view&id=32304

what has happened to this company since then?

edit:

i just had to quote this part.

oh god... that made me laugh.

Re: Quick Question? Expected Speeds
 

The 100mbit trial was a complete failure, no one could reach 100...max anyone reached was 80 and it almost brought everyone else to a halt LOL.

To be fair, it's only VM that is ripping us off in the Uk for the most part, ADSL/ADSL+2 really cant offer high upload speeds, Be got it right with offering 2.5mbit through adsl+2

VM have a major advantage...they could do so many things and be very leading edge, but that requires them to pay for upgrades on the network, which, as you know with NTL/VM isnt likely to happen.

They are upgrading the backhaul links to 40Gbit from 10Gbit (yes, most of the network is still only 10)...now when we were just about to get 20Mbit...that would of been great...but for what they are doing now they really need 100Gbit link ups, but it isnt going to happen, which is why once 50mbit really kicks off with alot of people on it...it will go down the STM route as well.

Of course, as you know, they are going to offer a poor upload on that tier as well (current 1.5mbit, rummoured that it may go to 2.5mbit)

They had 6mbit upload at the start of the trials (which let's face it, although good for VM it should of been at least 50/10 to be a fair ratio)

But they scrapped the modems they was using for the -ALOT- cheaper ones..which unfortunetly for the customers have no upstream bonding, which is why its dropped down to 1.5mbit.

Take a wild guess on who's idea it was to just buy the cheaper modems rather than give customers what they are actually asking for.

Unfortunetly for VM (and this has even been noted by alex) they are realising that information is coming out and people are not happy with such low upload speeds, they are slowly learning that people want around 5mbit upload minimum for such a premium product.

This is going to leave VM in a tricky situation...but not one they cant get out of because 20mbit everyone wanted 1.5mbit upload...(which ironically, was the plan then they cut it at the last minute, good old VM) but we got just enough to max the downstream out and that's that.

With VM's track record you really cant expect any sort of powerful upload imo.

And there is some ISP's that offer great down/up if you live in the right area you can get 25mbit symetrical (both ways) for £50/month.

Then there is the H2o network which if successful could easily run VM into the ground.

So, it's not all that bad.