Originally Posted by Jefferson T (Post 34604160)

HHHmmm the last time I spoke to technical support I was told to ensure that I only used my pc in safe mode and without any firewalls to ensure my connection was ok.

It does work both ways.

Originally Posted by David F (Post 34604158)

No I blame VM for poor customer service ,poor none uk tech support, over subscribed networks meaning stupid traffic management and last for now phorm

none of the above are to blame on my pc

Originally Posted by jelly bean (Post 34604170)

the best are?what is a firewall and what is a virus scanner?:p:

Originally Posted by Jefferson T (Post 34604171)

Anyway I'm sure I'll have just as much problems when I'm on BT and have virgin's ADSL service lol

I guess it's just that you get good and bad in every company.

There have been people I've spoken to in virgin that are brilliant - and there have been people are are dire.

Originally Posted by Haggis23 (Post 34604131)

If you've left why moan about a company you're no longer with?

Im glad you're happy now with your new SP :wavey:

And disillusioned...i think you may want to look that up in the dictionary as it doesnt mean that you imagined something...thats ILLUSION ;)

Originally Posted by Jefferson T (Post 34604179)

In all seriousness when I have had really bad experiences with them I thank them for their time, hang up and re-dial to speak to someone else.

Maybe I should complain or something.

Originally Posted by lorraine1000 (Post 34601620)

Ok where do i start maybe the start, ok when i was on telewest i had no problem with speed i could run 5 to 6 computers and have no problems, now i cant even have 3 computers on and all hell breaks out as noone can even open a webpage. thats the start of it then time after time no internet at all but they was not bad with the speed they got it up and running most6 times within a day.

then the phone calls i made to tell them there is a problem, you get this silly person on the phone asking the most silly things, now come on if you got no online line staying on you no there is a problem and i get asked if i have spyware please. i tell them what i done and gone though and i am a tech myself and tell them this each and every time i call even if i called 1 hour before hand they still ask me the same thing over and over again.

i asked them so many times about the speed and all i get is everything is fine and yet my noise ratio is so bad that the people that work there should know there is a problem. then they send people out to check my things and i get told, well there is really nothing wrong your end its the network thats doing it and there is really nothing we can do everyone having the same problems because there is being no maintaince being done on the network there trying to save money, now this was not said to me by one person but a few.

That being said...if i were running more than 2 computers at any one time id expect slower speeds?

then other things like when i call my calls are not logged, and when i having so many problem with my internet i sure they are meant to take so much off my bill but thats never happened. i was told this is done auto but its not.

Then the last lot that has really upset me is the problem on the internet from 18th June and its still on going in the enfield and london area and we still have not been given a fix date and well let me show you the update we get,

http://status-cable.virginmedia.com/...?ticket=734399

and calling makes it just worst as no one seems to know anything about it, untill they go up alot higher and then they come back to you and just say sorry we are working on this and we dont know a time that it will be fixed half the time there no internet and then there is some but so slow one computer has trouble opening a website page, sometimes it takes me around 20mins just to get to the status page to see if there any updates. as you can see on each of the updates on that page they are all the same and each one says a fix of 4 hours what are we meant to think here. with little or no help at all. If they have got this sort of problem that is taking so long to fix by now they should know what the problem is and give us a correct update on what the problem is and how long its going to take to fix. we have been told all sorts of things like the council took longer to dig up the road than what they wanted and that delayed the fix, and that it would be fully working by the 26th June and still to this date its still not and nothing else has been said on the problem and i was only told that as i got to talk to a level 2 tech, or i would not have known that.

and thats not all of it this is wrong.

Lorraine

Originally Posted by TraxData2 (Post 34604186)

Someone needs to learn what sarcasm and satire are ;)



Yes, because your using connection at full speed for more than 20 minutes in a day is "abuse" isnt it?

See your still stuck in the 90s, just like the whole of VM, file sizes aint small anymore, i have 3 pcs on my network, all of which get used...guess..yep, you got it, when i'm awake, when i'm at home and when i need it.


Trax can you explain something to me. Virgin claims only 5% of customers are affected by SRM. Is this wrong?

And secondly, am I right in thinking the other ISPs employ shaping or fair usage. Surely that's equally bad?

And a final point, you paint VM as worse than the competition, but on through put speeds they regulary top the surveys.

Interesting in knowing more from you or someone else on the forum.




Not all day? your right it isnt, the only problem here is people do this wonderful thing called sleeping at night and an even better thing called working during the daytime.

10am-9PM may as well be all day, i wont count the 3-4pm free slot as it's no use to you if u've already hit the STM :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Pontiac (Post 34607132)

The only downside I see to Virgin is STM on their broadband internet. Other than that, I can't see much wrong with them. There should be an option to pay something extra for no STM, and they should then use that money to upgrade the network. I've actually seen more network slowdown SINCE the introduction of STM, that's the funny thing.

Originally Posted by J..M (Post 34609427)

I like Virgin cos their Inet works ........ Unlike pipex who unplugged me then blocked my line & ignored all my letters ...... Oh Virgil ;) is cheaper too .... Which is good ....... Their installation guys are Numpties tho

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004 (Post 34607575)

The sooner BT roll out their product and we have a level playing field the better.
" Mother of Broadband " my backside.

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu (Post 34610165)

As far as i am aware, VM will have a lot of work to do, to keep customers soon, as l heard a rumour, that Sky are going to have trials in Swindon, l believe, to run a cable network of there own, so that could kill off VM completely.

Originally Posted by J..M (Post 34610080)

Umm....... Where are these optic fibres then ?

Do they feed the steel cubicals VM have at the side of the road ? ...... Cos the stuff under my garden is copper ........

What I do know is @ peak times both VM & BT sloooooooow right down...... Which ain't brill.... But it would appear to be one of those unfortunate facts of life......Another fact of life is that VM is cheaper :)

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 34610095)

I always thought it was fibre to the cabinet (but could be wrong), then copper to your house.

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 34610059)

You really think BT's recent announcement that it will be rolling out fibre will come to VM's areas? Not likely mate. BT have insisted they won't make the investment unless ofcom slack regs which means they are able to make a worthwhile profit from their investment. This stink to me of BT wanting to charge over inflated prices to offer fibre bb connections. They also want max penetration of the market and have no competition which also tells me that they won't be doing it in VM areas for the forseeable future because they want to invest in areas where they are going to make money and where there is competition they won't make the sort of money they can if they offered fibre optic bb in non vm areas.

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 34610380)

The fibre runs to the cabinets in the street then it's not copper to your home at all it's coax. Steel coated with copper to protect it. Still much better than coax and it prevents detiriation of the network and also your speed. (Sorry if i spelt that wrong)

The reason VM slow right down is because of STM.

---------- Post added at 09:37 ---------- Previous post was at 09:36 ----------



Close, but no quite right see above:)

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 34610059)

You really think BT's recent announcement that it will be rolling out fibre will come to VM's areas? Not likely mate. BT have insisted they won't make the investment unless ofcom slack regs which means they are able to make a worthwhile profit from their investment. This stink to me of BT wanting to charge over inflated prices to offer fibre bb connections. They also want max penetration of the market and have no competition which also tells me that they won't be doing it in VM areas for the forseeable future because they want to invest in areas where they are going to make money and where there is competition they won't make the sort of money they can if they offered fibre optic bb in non vm areas.

Originally Posted by Stuart C (Post 34610196)

Based upon past performance, I doubt Sky would do that. What they may be trialling is a Homechoice/Tiscali style IPTV system based upon ADSL. Not sure they'd even trial that, as any such system would be competing against Sky's satellite system as well.

Unless, of course, VOD has affected Sky more than they are willing to let on, after all with the current Sky, Sky + and Sky HD boxes it is impossible to create a system that offers the amount of content Virgin's VOD does.

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 34610197)

Arthur, Sky bought EasyNet a couple of years ago, which gives them a network and local loop access, so your rumour is in fact, history.

Originally Posted by J..M (Post 34610080)

Umm....... Where are these optic fibres then ?

Do they feed the steel cubicals VM have at the side of the road ? ...... Cos the stuff under my garden is copper ........

What I do know is @ peak times both VM & BT sloooooooow right down...... Which ain't brill.... But it would appear to be one of those unfortunate facts of life......Another fact of life is that VM is cheaper :)

Originally Posted by foreverwar (Post 34610197)

Arthur, Sky bought EasyNet a couple of years ago, which gives them a network and local loop access, so your rumour is in fact, history.

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004 (Post 34612453)

"FTTx or Fibre to the Cabinet in this case, up to the last 200m is copper. Any slowing of internet speeds though is not down to the length of copper cable used and would be down to, probably, UBR usage etc."


Probably down to UBR usage?
If we are to believe the VM spin about " copper cable " being for "Telephone lines" whether it is 200m or even 10% of that then it is still going to be slowed down?
I can see right through the VM BS unfortunately there are some that cannot ;)

Originally Posted by Stuart C (Post 34612470)

No, you have your own agenda..

Actually, as far as it goes, VM's statement is not BS. The simple fact is that ADSL (even the wonderful 2+ that is used for LLU connections) does have distance limitations. Cable does not. Of course, it has other problems (such as capacity on UBRs), but ADSL could theoretically suffer those as well.

If you believe that is BS, just look at any vaguely technical documentation on ADSL..

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004 (Post 34610975)

Where is your evidence that BT will not be providing to VM areas?
After all, if they are after " Max penetration " that you refer to your statement with all respect is blown out the water.
I for one would welcome any competition that gives the choice that even Richard Branson has stated customers should have.
People in vm areas could easily switch if BT are offering a better deal, which is all about choice after all, I do not agree with your sentiments at all with due respect.

---------- Post added at 09:32 ---------- Previous post was at 09:29 ----------

BT have said to ofcom that they won't bother doing it unless there is something in it for them. In other words it can be read as they want maximum profit from their investment. They won't get this if they fibre up VM areas because competition will be rife and most VM customers now take 1,2 or even 3 or 4 services from VM which makes it much harder for BT to persuade them to move over to them. In the same report BT have said they want Ofcom to relax regs so they can get a decent return from their investment, in other words they want to charge a decent price for their bb offerings. I hope VM do get some competition and it drives prices down. It gives the likes of me more choice and better prices because they have to fight for my custom.

What do you mean you don't agree with my sentiments? I am more than happy for VM to have the competition if it means i get a better deal but from what BT have said it doesn't look likely and looks like they would sooner fibre up non cabled areas and therefore there would be no competition which means BT can demand a higher return for their fibre optic bb and won't be challenged.

When i said max penetration i meant max customer penetration, the only way they can do this and gurantee a good income from their investment is start of cabling non vm areas where there is no competition apart from ADSL and LLU ADSL+2


Atleast you admit that vm slows down for some reason, vm advertising BS does not even claim that their service slows down at all! merely ridiculing any other service provider, bring on the competition thats what I say.
VM must be a tad worried, how much are these adverts that they are running?

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004 (Post 34612494)

Stuart please dont insult me and say I have an agenda.
I am merely questioning VM'S publicity.
They claim that " Copper " has an effect on speed, they claim basically that copper is only used by BT, and that the use of copper is only good for telephone calls.
But then we hear, this is not in the adverts by the way, that around 200m of copper is used in its broadband service.
You believe what you want, dont accuse me of having an agenda.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 34611078)

Its more to do with not been forced to wholesale their product at cost. BT will do city areas primarily thats a forgone conclusion. BTw is losing customers to LLU, rolling out fibre to LLU ares (which are typically also cable areas) is the best way to get those customers back. You right it may well cost more, but that isn't necessairly a bad thing because currently retail prices on many adsl isps at the moment is too low and stopping investment.

---------- Post added at 13:33 ---------- Previous post was at 13:32 ----------

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 34611078)

It is true sky have been trialling fibre to the cabinet, probably for VOD style services I expect. Sky anytime on the sky+ boxes has always only been an intermediate service. ADSL wont cut it on its without FTTC/H because only approx 25% of lines would have enough bandwidth to reliably supply the service.

---------- Post added at 13:35 ---------- Previous post was at 13:33 ----------

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 34612806)

BT will stay behind VM in the local loop but will be ahead in the backhaul, of course BT are also ahead in profitability as well with the ability to invest when required.

The question is, what is the point of a local loop that can do 50mbit when the service provider can only cater for 5mbit of bandwidth uncongested?

Originally Posted by camy (Post 34572638)

hi, im sick of all of those people who say virgin is rubbish, there always complaning and most of them dont even have virgin, im with them for xl tv, l broadband and l phone and i have never had any problems with there broadband or tv sevices ive had a couple of problems with my phone service but when ive rang virgin they've always sent an engineer around as soon as they could and fixed the problems ,and ive never had any trouble with there on demand services and im on 4mb broadband (soon being upgrade to 10mb !!!) and whenever i check my speed i always get between 3.6 and 4 meg which is great so if your gonna talk about virgin in a badway FIND ANOTHER FORUM

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 34613643)

after BTs FTTC/H the local loops will be very similiar to VMs in terms of amount of fibre, and there has been indications VM will keep STM on docsis3 but we will see.

Originally Posted by Stuart C (Post 34612501)

No insult was intended, but you are very quick to criticise VM, and very slow to mention the possibility that other ISPs also have problems.

Originally Posted by Stuart C (Post 34612501)

No insult was intended, but you are very quick to criticise VM, and very slow to mention the possibility that other ISPs also have problems.

My statement about Cable not being distance limited, and ADSL being distance limited isn't opinion. It is fact.

Copper (as used in Phone lines) *does* have an effect on speeds. Over miles (unless the cable is specifically designed for high bandwidth signals, as VM's network is). This is why the cable network backbone is fibre, and copper runs are relatively short (as you note, less than 200 metres)

Basically, the problem as I understand it is signal loss. Now, I know that there are networks that use miles of copper for high bandwidth applications, but these use specially designed cable , and use various techniques to minimise signal loss. This techniques are not practical to use on BT's network.

BT's phone network was not originally designed for data transfer, hence the fact there can be miles of cable between the user and the exchange, which is what slows data transfer.

Not that I am defending VM's publicity. While it doesn't explicitly state that the entire network is fibre (the ASA would leap on them if it did), it does very strongly imply that, which is wrong.

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004 (Post 34628869)

Stuart, copper is copper, whether it is used for miles or less than 100 metres it still has a detrimental effect if you believe vm's a BS, or are we to believe that the copper from the coax into the modem is some kind of special copper sourced from vm mines?
I am quick to criticise VM because I pay them a lot of money, so if I think what they are saying is BS I will say it, and it is not a matter of any agenda, im paying for a product I will have my say no matter who disagrees with it.
VM say copper used in BT telephone lines is not ideal for data transfer, what they forget to realise is that the last bit of wire going into the modem contains a six letter word, ------ whether it is miles, as you put it, or 100m makes not a tuppence of difference, sadly VM think we are all idiots.

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34628881)

There is a difference between copper single core wire & coaxial cable using copper for the core and shield...

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004 (Post 34628893)

Thanks for that ;)
But would we agree that copper is copper?

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34628899)

yes, but how you arrange it is the key, try running network cables with & without twisting the pairs, both configurations involve copper, but only one will work over a certain distance..

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004 (Post 34628905)

I appreciate what you say, thing is vm make copper out to be the devil incarnate, forgetting for the sake of drawing in customers that their own broadband network uses copper,all I am doing is showing the vm BS for what it is,but I appreciate and agree with what you say.

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34628911)

ok, cool, I'd call it marketing, rather than BS, but I agree they are trying to 'big up' the idea that they use fibre optic cable for some of the network, while keeping quiet about the fact is isn't to the home...

Originally Posted by Broadbandings (Post 34628917)

Cableco's in the US have jumped on this bandwagon too, specifically since Verizon started rolling out fibre to the home en masse, so it's not a Virgin specific thing anymore though they were the first!

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/W...d-You-Do-97296

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34628928)

bloomin' marketeers, it always sounds good in the meeting, because they don't invite anyone who would be critical..

Originally Posted by tvtimes (Post 34614310)

What would the need be for keeping STM on docsis3.0 though and where have you heard this from?:)

The only reason shaping takes place now is because there are too many like minded inviduals eating up vm's bandwith and affecting other peoples speeds who don't use up their connection as much. But with DOCSIS3.0 there will be bandwith contraints so should be no reason for shaping?

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34628911)

ok, cool, I'd call it marketing, rather than BS, but I agree they are trying to 'big up' the idea that they use fibre optic cable for some of the network, while keeping quiet about the fact is isn't to the home...

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004 (Post 34628893)

Thanks for that ;)
But would we agree that copper is copper?

Originally Posted by Broadbandings (Post 34629229)

I think the whole point is turning advertising on its' head. Just as advertising shows the one extreme of whatever product it's advertising so you can turn it on its' head. VM portray their network as being purely fibre optic in the advertisements and broadband delivered over copper as being a bad thing. The advertisements are saying exactly that there's no fibre in the network, they discuss fibre optic broadband, say about how bad broadband delivered over copper is, and draw differentials between Virgin and DSL because Virgin use fibre optics.

Originally Posted by Broadbandings (Post 34629294)

OK so it's changed from 'does not imply' in http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/34629270-post261.html to saying that it 'could imply', punters won't be worrying, let the regulators worry about it and it doesn't require having a moan about.

Nothing more to say and glad you agree the ad is potentially misleading even if you don't consider it merits having a moan about - some people do.

I don't care that much, however I know the ASA adjudication well as I was one of the members of the public who complained to the ASA about it as I have done other misleading adverts about broadband, it being what I know and what I do and I dislike seeing the public, including me, ripped off on the basis of dubious ads :)

Originally Posted by Downloads (Post 34629298)

It doesn't surprise me you complained about it at all :)

How are the public being ripped off on the basis of this advert though?

Originally Posted by Downloads (Post 34629254)

I'm not sure you even read what i said.

They WON'T in an advert say that x% is made up of fibre and x% is made up of copper, that would be a really crap advert. They call it a fibre optic network which given the vast length of fibre compared to copper is absolutely fair enough.

Calling something a fibre optic network doesn't mean that it has to be 100% fibre to the home. I'm an analyst and from my experience companies make statements all the time that are sweeping. You don't have to qualify every statement you make in life.

---------- Post added at 16:43 ---------- Previous post was at 16:38 ----------

I don't need a history lesson on this site believe me. People use to complain a lot on their own issues more, there's just a hardcore of disgruntled people now who just post for the sake of it, one person here i remember arguing with a year ago and seems to just have been doing the same moaning for the last year.

Originally Posted by Broadbandings (Post 34629309)

Nah I don't get personal at companies, quite the opposite in VM's case I'd welcome them delivering fully on the massive potential and promise they have :)

Originally Posted by Downloads (Post 34629305)

Thats cool, as long as it's nothing personal against VM lol I've told them to sod off before complained and moaned about specific issues.

My main beef is with one particular person who does have something personal against them, i just wish they would leave, cos being a positive person generally having to see the negativity on multiple threads when all you want to do is chat about the services and see balanced opinion is painful.

I left for a year and i think this is my call to leave for another one lol

Originally Posted by Downloads (Post 34629305)

Thats cool, as long as it's nothing personal against VM lol I've told them to sod off before complained and moaned about specific issues.

My main beef is with one particular person who does have something personal against them, i just wish they would leave, cos being a positive person generally having to see the negativity on multiple threads when all you want to do is chat about the services and see balanced opinion is painful.

I left for a year and i think this is my call to leave for another one lol