Cable Forum

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Virgin Media Internet Service (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=12)
-   -   30M : Finally had enough of VM BS........... (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33689080)

carlwaring 05-09-2012 22:01

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
Here's mine; done just now.

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

Ping's a little higher than normal :(

kwikbreaks 05-09-2012 22:14

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35471135)
Care to put a figure on that?

No I can't. My statement is based on the number of complaints I've seen here and elsewhere and the high level of vitriol exhibited by ex-customers whenever VM gets discussed on various boards.

Quote:

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35471135)
Last time I checked, official figures were that 66% of their customers were getting the headline speed.

Care to post a link to those official figures you are quoting? 66% seems rather low to me - I would have expected more.

carlwaring 05-09-2012 22:33

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by kwikbreaks (Post 35471210)
No I can't. My statement is based on the number of complaints I've seen here and elsewhere and the high level of vitriol exhibited by ex-customers whenever VM gets discussed on various boards.

Well yes. And we all know about 'negativity bias', right? :)

Quote:

Care to post a link to those official figures you are quoting?
http://store.virginmedia.com/broadba...al-speeds.html
Quote:

What does 'typical speed' mean?
This is the speed that at least 66% of our customers get on average in a particular month on a particular product. Our typical speed tests run over 24 hours and speeds may vary at peak times.
Quote:

66% seems rather low to me - I would have expected more.
Well at least you found some negative spin to put on it. Well done! ;)

ethan103 05-09-2012 22:44

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35471206)
Here's mine; done just now.

http://www.pingtest.net/result/68999211.png

Ping's a little higher than normal :(


That's quite a bit of jitter.

Try pinging bbc.co.uk and see if the ping is stable.


On the same server I get 13ms ping and 1ms jitter.

MalteseFalcon 05-09-2012 23:05

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
http://www.pingtest.net/result/69001512.png

qasdfdsaq 05-09-2012 23:09

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by kwikbreaks (Post 35471109)
Yes cable can deliver but for many it simply doesn't. Mines fine right now but it has been poor in the past.

Indeed, pinging some Austrian guy's 15/1 cable connection today (from my BT line mind you, so it has the jitter of both our connections added together):

RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 56.109 / 56.982 / 60.922 / 1.511

Spoiler: 
Pinging 90.146.212.178 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=58ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=58ms TTL=47

Ping statistics for 90.146.212.178:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 55ms, Maximum = 58ms, Average = 56ms


Meanwhile in VM land (this is VM 100Mb EH9 on my ping page, so reasonably good for VM):

RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 38.945 / 44.493 / 58.957 / 4.376

Spoiler: 
Pinging d1.qasdfdsaq.com [92.235.190.31] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=44ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=41ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=51ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=47

Ping statistics for 92.235.190.31:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 39ms, Maximum = 54ms, Average = 43ms


Meanwhile in BT land...

RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 21.395 / 21.635 / 21.756 / 0.103

Spoiler: 
Pinging bbc.qasdfdsaq.com [212.58.246.94] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51

Ping statistics for 212.58.246.94:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 21ms, Maximum = 21ms, Average = 21ms

carlwaring 05-09-2012 23:35

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
I just tried from here:

C:\Users\Carl>ping 92.235.190.31

Pinging 92.235.190.31 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=56
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=33ms TTL=56
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=56
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=56

Ping statistics for 92.235.190.31:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 27ms, Maximum = 47ms, Average = 33ms

qasdfdsaq 06-09-2012 00:26

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 35471033)
you sure? lots of situations where estimated live data is pushed back 3 months at a time multiple times. My own area has missed its original sept 2012 date and new estimated date is now dec 2012.

They only did two speed upgrades and neither of them were done by area. There was no estimated date, a precise date was given both times and the whole country was switched on that day.

You're talking new area rollout, not existing area speed upgrades.

ethan103 06-09-2012 00:47

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq (Post 35471231)
Indeed, pinging some Austrian guy's 15/1 cable connection today (from my BT line mind you, so it has the jitter of both our connections added together):

RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 56.109 / 56.982 / 60.922 / 1.511

Spoiler: 
Pinging 90.146.212.178 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=56ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=55ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=58ms TTL=47
Reply from 90.146.212.178: bytes=32 time=58ms TTL=47

Ping statistics for 90.146.212.178:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 55ms, Maximum = 58ms, Average = 56ms


Meanwhile in VM land (this is VM 100Mb EH9 on my ping page, so reasonably good for VM):

RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 38.945 / 44.493 / 58.957 / 4.376

Spoiler: 
Pinging d1.qasdfdsaq.com [92.235.190.31] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=54ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=44ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=43ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=45ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=41ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=42ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=51ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=50ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=48ms TTL=47
Reply from 92.235.190.31: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=47

Ping statistics for 92.235.190.31:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 39ms, Maximum = 54ms, Average = 43ms


Meanwhile in BT land...

RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max/dev: 21.395 / 21.635 / 21.756 / 0.103

Spoiler: 
Pinging bbc.qasdfdsaq.com [212.58.246.94] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51
Reply from 212.58.246.94: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=51

Ping statistics for 212.58.246.94:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 20, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 21ms, Maximum = 21ms, Average = 21ms


The BT line is impressive however it could just be down to your own Virgin connection.

What is bbc.co.uk like for you on both?

craigj2k12 06-09-2012 01:40

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ethan103 (Post 35471258)
The BT line is impressive however it could just be down to your own Virgin connection.

What is bbc.co.uk like for you on both?

I think youre mis understanding, he is on BT, those tests are from his infinity connection to those stated

kwikbreaks 06-09-2012 09:16

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35471215)

Ah by "official" you mean VM's figures - I thought you meant some independent testing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35471215)
Well at least you found some negative spin to put on it. Well done! ;)

Actually it wasn't negative - I'd assumed that more than 66% would be getting somewhere close to their headline speeds. In fact 66% was a number chosen by VM to calculate their averages so is an arbitrary number. Measuring over 24hours makes the speeds pretty meaningless too though as it's what you can get at peak times that counts because by definition that's when most people want to use the service. Most really wouldn't care if they could get a Gbps at 3:00am if their peak time speeds were poor.

The devil is in the detail of course - how close is close? I'd accept that within 10% is close and I suspect more than 66% get that close even at peak. Where the problem lies imo is that the skinny pipes mean that when it unravels it unravels big time and VM seem to take an age to fix it.

carlwaring 06-09-2012 09:27

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by kwikbreaks (Post 35471301)
Ah by "official" you mean VM's figures - I thought you meant some independent testing.

I do indeed. Independent testing for VM by Samknows. They are also officially the fastest according to OFCOM; though I'm sure you'll now come up with a reason why that's not actually true either.

Quote:

Actually it wasn't negative - I'd assumed that more than 66% would be getting somewhere close to their headline speeds.
I wasn't being serious; hence the smiley. And I actually agree with you :)

Quote:

Measuring over 24hours makes the numbers pretty meaningless though as it's what you can get at peak times that counts because by definition that's when most people want to use the service. Most really wouldn't care if they could get a Gbps at 3:00am.
Actually I would have thought that measuring over a longer period would give more accurate results.

The tests are conducted at random times throughout the day; mainly when your connection is otherwise idle.

Quote:

BTW - with jitter like you've got I'm not surprised your VOIP wasn't any too hot.
Indeed. I was going to ask about that. It was the only thing left that could be the problem! Any way to reduce it from here?

kwikbreaks 06-09-2012 09:38

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
I've edited my reply a bit as it didn't put across my meaning well and in doing that I also took out the VOIP comment.

Your 7ms speedtest is higher than I normally see - my JDA testing which runs 24x7 normally shows 1-4 unless I'm actively downloading or uploading something sizeable. VOIP should still work well with 7ms. It was the big variations of 20ms in your command box ping that I meant but as that was a one off it's not enough to base my comment on.

Where jitter affects VOIP is when it is bad enough for packets to arrive out of sequence because that will obviously screw up the speach to some degree. If lots are oos it will be awful - I make sure I'm not hammering the downloads if the phone is being used.

qasdfdsaq 06-09-2012 10:22

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ethan103 (Post 35471258)
The BT line is impressive however it could just be down to your own Virgin connection.

What is bbc.co.uk like for you on both?

The BT line *is* pinging the BBC.

Chrysalis 06-09-2012 19:19

Re: Finally had enough of VM BS...........
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq (Post 35471257)
They only did two speed upgrades and neither of them were done by area. There was no estimated date, a precise date was given both times and the whole country was switched on that day.

You're talking new area rollout, not existing area speed upgrades.

ok fair enough, if you still have my ip by the way you can test jitter on that also ;)


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 22:38.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum