Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

Don't start to turn this around on me. Your the one who is incapable of accepting the fact that Sky BB is not a better product than VM even when it has been proven to you.

So what if Sky is cheaper, it doesn't make it a better product. This is not proof that one service is better than the other. :rolleyes:

:zzz:

:zzz:

Aww, now it boils down to insults, the truth hurts doesn't it that you cannot hold a debate properly - thanks for proving it even more to me. Thank you and goodnight. :D

Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

This "discussion" re Sky (ADSL) and cable can go on forever. IF you live near to an exchange ADSL can offer the advertised speeds, BUT if you are like me and live a few miles from the exchange cable wins hands down!

In my case BT could not deliver a decent/reliable dial-up on it's lines, NTL could. When NTL offered BB I stuck with them and am very happy with the service.

No ONE solution covers all circumstances, it all boils down to what suits the user! No need to fall out over it!

Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

I'm not to sure of the total way BB on cable works etc, or even half of it lol. But correct me if I'm wrong or do not other factor come into play with the BT line ASDL or what ever it's called these days.

Dont BT split areas or even streets (if they are large) into kind of clusters. Meaning there are so many connections on a cluster or a single connection to the exchange for broadband (sorry if I have the termanology wrong, but hope you know what I mean ).

As I recall this kind of information from several years ago when I first started to get into broadband. It's kind of if there are 30 people in a cluster and several are heavy downloaders it effects the speeds for the remainder.

Whilst the person on the next street is on full speeds on the same deal simply down to no heavy downloaders in the same cluster?.

Was this or is this the same case now?. As I recall, whatever the termanology, it being the case several years ago!. And this sort of matter would certainly effect performance polls if they are set in certain areas only?.

Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

I believe you are in fact referring to contention.

Domestic broadband services, whether using ADSL over BT type lines, or cable, ultimately have some level of shared bandwidth. Initially on ADSL this used to be 50 : 1 i.e. 50 users could share the bandwidth of one exchange point. Better services offered 20 :1. I believe (but don't know for certain) that cable effectively had a contention of 20:1 so was less affected by heavy users. Many of those ratios could have changed as newer technologies have been deployed.

Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

Sky BB maybe great but the TV boxes they keep fobbing me off with are not .Im not on my 5th box at least in 12 months

Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

If that site "www.samknows.com" adsl measuring feature is accurate I am really suprised at the short range adsl really is. According to that I would get a maximum of 6 mb on adsl 2. I checked where the building was and considered this was just a 5-10 minute walk from my house! When people kept mentioning the distance ADSL reaches I really never expected it to be this short.

I would side with the discussion that says "some people have great connection, some have bad connection with Virgin Media so opinions would vary allot on this subject. Also I have never had ADSL in this area so cannot have an opinion on that side. I do admit the upside and downside to cable is that it reaches ALOT further than adsl so has has alot more consumers and maybe too many consumers for the companies own good :)

Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

sky BB is crap...

3 family members having decided that cheaper was better decided to go for sky and now they cant keep a constant connection for more than 5 minutes before they get disconnected for a bit. How long that "bit" is varies from a few seconds up to a good 30 minutes.

It could just be that all 3 were just darn unlucky...but at least in the last 6 years of being with telewest/virgin I have very rarely ever had a disconnection. I would much rather be throttled back with the speed than loose my connection every few seconds. Even the slow speed rarely ever happens to me, so im quite happy with the service im getting.

Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

I had the same problem with disconnections, turning off UPnP solved it for me:

http://www.skyuser.co.uk/forum/sky-b...-off-upnp.html

[Admin Edit:-(Off-topic Remarks deleted)]

Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

Cable is better than ADSL in an ideal world. We all know that.
There are many reasons why ADSL can underperform that are not specific to Sky.
Long lines, bad wiring, bad installation etc. The latter is very common with Sky as the router is often installed after the TV box, which itself is noisey.

Still for some people Sky is better when you factor in costs (assuming they already have Sky TV), and for others it isn't.

Not sure what the big deal is here? I'm surprised at the attitude of some mods TBH.

Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

Just because I am a mod/admin - doesn't mean I am not entitled to my opinions and I will correct those people who consistantly spout rubbish when it has been proven that VM BB is a much better product than Sky BB.

Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

You cant prove something is better than another (thats a qualitive statement), it doesnt say precisely what is being measured. So two people can argue about 'better' all day long.

You can prove something is faster (quantative), you can prove something is cheaper (quantative), you can prove something is more reliable. again quantative looking at (uptime). , or has more bandwidth. Cable comes out on top for most of these things except price. That is a very important metric for some people when it comes to deciding if something is better value. You can chose to ignore that metric and therefore win your argument :)

I still expect moderators to be able to see and understand another POV, and maybe even aspire to the definition of the word 'moderate'.

Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

What you expect moderators to do on other forums is your business, but if you expect moderators to keep quiet, not say anything or not get involved in threads, you are on the wrong forum. Btw, I am not a moderator, I'm an Admin/Co Owner/Founder of this website. So I think I should be able to say what I want within reason, hmm just like everyone else really. ;)

Also - I will not see a point of view from someone who shows consistently that they have one sided opinions and cast them off as facts. Also - I haven't broken any rules so don't know what your talking about when it comes to the last point you made and I will reiterate that I am still entitled to my opinion whether I am on the team or not.

I am not casting my opinion off as a fact, I wouldn't say it otherwise. I am stating that it is a proven fact that VM BB is a far superior product to Sky BB in many ways. The link with broadbandchoices and the fact that cable beats ADSL hands down, should tell people so, just stating Sky BB as a better product, just because its ones person agenda all the time to defend Sky, is wrong and I will correct such inaccuracies.

So far we have had the cost thrown into the argument. Traffic management and the cost to call Tech support. The cost might be steep but I believe that could come down and has been reduced already for 20Mb, not everyone gets Traffic managed. As for calling Tech support, not everyone needs to call them.

Another reason people might not want Sky is perhaps people would prefer not to pay into the coffers of a Murdoch owned franchise.

Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

And that is my reason. I don't like a business who's owner has been proven to be able to influence the political power in this country with his ownership of Newspapers and News channels.

Those on this forum who are happy to knock readers of his papers and watchers of his news channels have to admit that his readership are a large percentage of the voters who religiously vote for what ever party his papers say are to be SUPPORTED at the next election. BTW i have nothing to do with his papers or news channels because of who owns them.

BTW

My daughter has SKY broadband due to being OFF NET for Virgin and ask her just what a crock her connection is at a night time ?. She lives 500 meters from the Stanley Street Exchange in Warrington and only gets 3 meg, Sky blame BT, BT blame Sky, She will be moving to a new house this year and one of the decision points as to its location is that its in a VM ON NET area for broadband.

Re: Wait, Wait, Wait... Sky's beating VM?!
 

Spot on! :tu: