Originally Posted by Jonathan90 (Post 34568996)

lol at virginmedia bbc was talking about the future off broadband bt are going to do fibre to homes in kent i think it was then the guy went to dude home and tested there virginmedia internet connection which was supposedly 50mbits to compare around the uk it took 4 minutes on a internet connection in scotland although virginmedia did it in about 15 seconds it barely broke the 10mbit barrier about 1000 kB's lol

Originally Posted by Horace (Post 34569134)

The download speed was building as it does when downloading too small a file over a fast connection and hit 700KB/s at the cut. It was a 10meg file and if it finished in 5 seconds then he's getting at least 20Mbit.

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34569114)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7439642.stm

I was in hysterics (upload large files quickly! at the same time as downloading really fast!) lmao 1.5mbit is not "quick" for uploading large files.

Did anyone else notice the download was only going at 384KB/s and he seemed amazed that it finished in 5 seconds?

Originally Posted by mentalis (Post 34569189)

I haven't watched the full thing, and without sound (am at work), but I noticed he was using a laptop at the beginning. If everything is wireless can his router handle 50Mb?

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34569136)

With a 50mbit connection it shouldnt have taken anywhere near that long just to get upto 700KB/s.

BBC servers are not exactly slow...

Anyway i was more in hysterics about the **** poor upload which is apparently really quick for uploading large files.

Originally Posted by dev (Post 34569169)

seeing as 1.5mbit is probably faster than what i can get on adsl, yes it is quick

also, the bbc's speed test is useless, i got about 2mb on it, did a speed test from my server straight after and got 20mbit

Originally Posted by Robertus (Post 34569243)

He was using wireless :/ why are you surprised?

Also using a 10mb file with a 50mbit connection - joke imo.

Edit: His laptop was using wireless in the kitchen.

Originally Posted by cimt (Post 34569257)

100Mb/s down a BT phone line?! HA! Unless they're thinking of starting to use Cable...

That test was unrealistic also. All of a sudden it was 1 third of the way done, then it was completed?

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34569248)

Most of us can get 2.5mbit already on ADSL+2

If you really believe 1.5mbit is quick with a 50mbit download speed your so mistaken.

Enjoy being ripped off anyway :)

Originally Posted by markknell (Post 34569265)

Traxdata, I've been using the 50 Mbps service for over a year without problems. I think everyone would love a bigger upload speed but I have no doubts Virgin Media would have to increase the price of the product outside what people can afford.

We have many people testing this service without the negativity I see on this forum. People have a choice and I'm guessing you won't one of the people to take up this service which is fair enough but I can assure you when it goes live I will be.

Originally Posted by Robertus (Post 34569280)

I don't give a toss about the upload, as long as it's sufficient to provide 50mbit.

If I wanted a bloody good upload I'd find a service which provides it, ok?

Not everyone is like you, so to say that we're being ripped off is a tad pathetic imo.

Originally Posted by Robertus (Post 34569284)

No, I do not like to upload at high speeds, but yes of course I like to download.

I don't really use any P2P systems thanks :)

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34569274)

I've seen many people complaining (on the 50mbit forum) about the fact the service cripples if you multitask (upload and download at the same time) that would be because 1.5mbit isnt enough to handle 50mbit down while uploading at the same time (thus why they are using S.ack).

It's nothing to do with the current pricing as to why VM wont offer higher upload speeds, its down to the fact they opted for the cheaper ambit modems which have no upstream bonding capability, they should of stayed with the old ones and kept the 5+mbit upload.

Upload is just as important as download and with so many legal p2p services about the people who want 50mbit will require high upload speeds.

You seriously telling me its a serious premium product for that price with low upload AND STM upon launch? (10gb limit)

P.S Your right, i wont, i have 25mbit both ways for less than what VM will be charging for this.

Also have a backup Be line with 2.5mbit upload as well.

Edit : there is so much negativity about the 50mbit product because customers are sick and tired of being ripped off, and no matter which way you put it 1.5mbit upload just isnt a fair ratio and abit of a ****take to say the least.

Originally Posted by markknell (Post 34569294)

Hmmm... we're not using Ambit modems!

No limits have yet been set on the product so it will be interesting to see what happens on the launch. I agree an unreasonable limit would spoil the product but it would be nice if people made their mind up when all the details are released.

Originally Posted by Robertus (Post 34569293)

And I actually find you quite offensive. Just because I don't have the same usage pattern as you, hahaha. I hate torrents with a passion and I *don't* use any other system :)

Cheers!

Originally Posted by Robertus (Post 34569298)

Don't forget Trax is in bed with Neil, so we get everything from the horses mouth.

Also because I do not use P2P or conduct any upload intensive tasks, this gives people a negative view of me as a person.

You're a cracker Trax :)

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34569300)

Ambit modems will be used upon launch.

The limits have already been set for launch, actually.

They are thinking of charging a higher price and removing STM though.

Any sort of limit would spoil the product, the whole point of a high speed connection is to be able to download files quicker.

STM doesnt make sense on 50mbit, in theory if you can download files quicker u get things quicker and thus can free bandwith up on the network.

---------- Post added at 14:08 ---------- Previous post was at 14:08 ----------



So why do you want 50mbit then? just to look at emails quicker? :D

Originally Posted by Robertus (Post 34569307)

What...so Usenet is void now is it?

:)

And to be honest with systems such as Fileplanet/Gamershell/Steam there's an awful lot of legitimate stuff to download :)

Originally Posted by markknell (Post 34569308)

Wow that's interesting, after testing non-Ambit modems for over a year it seems we've been wasting our time. I'll have to ask Neil.

Originally Posted by markknell (Post 34569318)

TraxData, a lot of the information about the 50 Mbps trial on this forum is very, very out of date. To be honest we might as well leave it at that because this thread is going a little off tangent.

I guess no one really knows what's going on until the product launches because these things change all the time.

Originally Posted by Robertus (Post 34569298)

Don't forget Trax is in bed with Neil, so we get everything from the horses mouth.

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34569248)

Most of us can get 2.5mbit already on ADSL+2

If you really believe 1.5mbit is quick with a 50mbit download speed your so mistaken.

Enjoy being ripped off anyway :)

Originally Posted by Nicosia (Post 34569486)

adsl may have a 2.5mbit upload ( only with bethere unless im mistaken )
but cable still has a faster download even if they where to both offer 50mbit u would see more speed from cable, plus who cares about the upload what do u need it for? the main thing is u have a good dl speed.

but i agre 1.5mbit upload on 50mbit is not a good upload it should be like 10mbit up or 5mbit at least

---------- Post added at 19:57 ---------- Previous post was at 19:55 ----------

tey should of downloaded like a 100mbyte file to test the connection not 10mbyte

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34569651)

I presume this means the feedback from the trials has been favourable & they are now thinking how it can be deployed - although I wonder if the 5 seconds it apparently took the 10MB file to download was foot in mouth for the BBC speed test or the 50Mb/s trial?

I work that out to be about 16Mb/s ;)

Originally Posted by markknell (Post 34569721)

It was the BBC speed test which was the problem. There is always a weakest link from a to b in the internet and this time it was the BBC. The 50 Mbps trials have been sound. I performed this test earlier in the week and done it under 3 seconds but that was before the hype that the BBC generated.

In any case a 10 MB file is far to small to test 50 Mbps.

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34569728)

It wasn't so much the numbers, themselves, but that they allowed them to be broadcast like a good thing - as in, whomever did the script knew nothing about what 50 Mb/s speed should be & it still got passed through to the final take???

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34569751)

Well i thought that was obvious as soon as he said "10 seconds, so as youcan see, wow its alot faster"...but what really did it for me was the "you can upload large files quickly!" alot of emphasis on "quickly", to me it was stupidly obvious this guy had no clue what he was going on about.

Originally Posted by Horace (Post 34569879)

It's relative, most people in this country are probably on 2-4mbit download and .5 upload if that, so to them it is a huge improvement assuming they can get cable and will take the package.

As for BT and fibre, give it another 20 years and you might see the country fibred up assuming the goverment gives BT our taxes. They've never shown any interest in wide-scale deployment, doing a few showcases here and there is meaningless. Up till then cable is my only option for anything faster than 4mbit which is what I'd get with BT's current underinvested infrasture. It's a pity BT was privatised since I'm sure if it wasn't we'd be keeping up with the Swedes and Japanese.

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34569751)

Well i thought that was obvious as soon as he said "10 seconds, so as youcan see, wow its alot faster"...but what really did it for me was the "you can upload large files quickly!" alot of emphasis on "quickly", to me it was stupidly obvious this guy had no clue what he was going on about.

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34569902)

BT are in plans to rollout fibre all across the UK, thus why they was on the news today, if the 100mbit trial they are running now works out they are going to do a full roll out.

Originally Posted by markknell (Post 34569906)

It was 5 seconds not 10 and his comparison was to 4 minutes so yes of course it's a lot faster :rolleyes:
---------- Post added at 01:07 ---------- Previous post was at 01:04 ----------

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34569911)

Again, as i said, they are trialling 100mbit right now on all new builds, if successful they -will- roll out fibre if people want it.

Originally Posted by markknell (Post 34569916)

Come on be serious, they even said in the report this in unlikely to happen due to costs.

Are BT rolling out fibre to anywhere outside Ebbsfleet ??? Hmmm I'd like to see where!

Anyway, I'm off to bed and then away to the US for a week. Enjoy the thread :)

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34569728)

It wasn't so much the numbers, themselves, but that they allowed them to be broadcast like a good thing - as in, whomever did the script knew nothing about what 50 Mb/s speed should be & it still got passed through to the final take???

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34569902)

You couldnt be more wrong.

BT wanted to roll out fibre in the 90s, it was blair that said no to them, you can thank him for the fact we all get screwed over with our net now.

Originally Posted by nando (Post 34569982)

I guess they had to do a like for like comparison. The interviewer had been going all around the country downloading this file...it would have looked odd if he didn't do the same thing on the 50Mbps network. But there's no way it would have reached 50Mbps with such a relatively small file. Like a fast car, it would have still been accelerating when the download finished!

Originally Posted by homealone (Post 34570290)

I agree the first point is relevant from the presenters POV, my point is how did VM marketing people approve it, when it seems to infer their service is slower than advertised - and without any explanation ...

Such as your second point, which is also valid - and could have been used to give a nice positive spin to the piece ???

Originally Posted by nando (Post 34570318)

Remember it wasn't an advert...it's probably very difficult to get the BBC to report things exactly how you'd like! But it was definately better than nothing!

Originally Posted by Horace (Post 34575166)

Be* is faster if you live right next to the exchange.

Originally Posted by jungleguy (Post 34571840)

the fact is VM BB is alot faster than anything else out there. Lets not split hairs.

I got an AppleTV thing, and I can hire a HD movie off the iTunes web site and I don't have to wait. (Maybe this is the future so maybe download speed is more important than upload speed, its about buying content quickly)

FYI I prefer to hire a movie off iTunes cause I can watch it for 48 hrs, not the poxy 24 hrs VM on-demand offer, but thats another story.

Got to be honest BT have no chance of competing with cable technology.

Originally Posted by Horace (Post 34575166)

Be* is faster if you live right next to the exchange.

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34575409)

VM are not the fastest.

Actually upload speed is going to be important as 95% of all current and new services are going the p2p route to save bandwith, this will require you to upload, with a pitterful 1.5mbit upload on the 50mbit package i doubt you'll keep your app open all night/day just to seed back what you downloaded.

There is ALOT of legal HD p2p services coming soon, for which will probably be useless in the UK due to no one actually having good enough upstream.

---------- Post added at 14:41 ---------- Previous post was at 14:40 ----------


Sorry I don't really care about upload speeds. The Apple TV works a treat, and I'm really happy with it and my broadband connection that streams the content.

Originally Posted by jungleguy (Post 34576252)

You wont be saying that in another year, trust me.

My point still stands though, its useless with that upload...then there is the STM on 50mbit. then overnight STM, the new application throttling that's being trialled etc, only thing your connection is gonna be useful for is looking at emails!

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34576310)

I don't understand why I'm gonna need to send data fast to receive a high def film on my AppleTV???!!?! I currently don't need a fast upload speed, and currently am very very happy with the content I can access through my AppleTV thing. Incase you don't know what it does, I can watch movies over the internet on my TV without using a PC, accesing the iTunes store.

It is not important for me to send data fast. I want to receive data fast. When you send an email, you don't sit their waiting for it to go do you, but you you do wait for an email to arrive.

BTW Whats STM?

Originally Posted by jungleguy (Post 34576467)

Apple TV has a hard drive, so its cached.

STM is there to get rid of P2P abusers. Take a look at Keconnect, its a top independent ISP. Support lines are in the UK, and will answer in 3 rings. Unlimited broadband is staggering £129 per MONTH, with no fair usage policy.
http://www.keconnect.co.uk/products/...ial/broadband/
VM offer excellent value for money for the majority of people. The only customers that are not happy, are the one's that expect £129 per month broadband service for £5.50 per month.

Anyhow, lets not miss the point, I currently don't have any issues with what I do with my BB, and I do more than most.

So to summarize this thread, maybe we're worrying unduly about future problems, from future technologies, that may or may not occur.

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34575409)

I am 1.5KM from the exchange and still get 20mbit download (backup line) so you'd be wrong there, wouldnt you?

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34576310)

You wont be saying that in another year, trust me.

Originally Posted by Horace (Post 34580450)

References from you are worthless as has been noted in the past

http://speedtest.net/global.php?cont...=4&region=1811

That's from London and most other cities and towns give the same results. Average of 10meg, 8 in my area.



Why, give some kind of explanation or is this some kind of big secret like the name of the cleaner you know who works at VM?

Originally Posted by TraxData (Post 34580454)

1)Speedtest are not representive of the speeds one can achieve.

2)Most speed problems are down to crappy face plates and extention wiring.

3) -rolls eyes- technology changes all the time, need i say more.