Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cjmillsnun
I think a fair discussion of what other broadband providers do is NOT off topic, it is a comparison of what they do against NTL.
And, as was stated above, BT have the same cap in force for the SAME reasons as NTL.
IE that someone who continuosly downloads all day will affect others performance on the network, be it on a DOCSIS system or on ADSL.
|
I've looked at the BT Yahoo Broadband (formerly the openworld) offering, and find no reference in their t&cs and user policy, as published on their web site that their BB service is capped.
http://www.btyahoo.com/broadband/terms500
I know the BT Broadband did have a cap policy, but as that service was cheaper and "no frills", that may be reasonable as customers seeking BT as thier ISP had a choice of levels. ntl are not offering that choice.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cjmillsnun
All users had 30 days after the cap was introduced to leave NTL, not leaving signalled your acceptance of the AUP with the cap in place.
|
Ntl have still yet to formally tell their long standing customers of the cap. Those who know of it, probably do so only by chance i.e. word of mouth, forum use, etc. I know the AUP says it can be changed, but how often is a customer really expected to check conditions of service to see if something changes that could have an effect. BT Yahoo in thier user policy readily say it can be changed, but crucially say they will notify customers if they do change it. A far more responsible policy don't you think. At the end of the day, for a number of users the cap restriction is a material change in the terms of service for whcih I suspect courts could decide it has no validity in contract unless customers are formally advised of the change. I'm not convinced that
the letter is valid in that respect.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cjmillsnun
If they are only going after people who download more that 5gb /day on average then I have NO problem with NTL contacting that user and asking them to moderate their usage.
I have gone over the 1gb limit myself on occasion since the cap was introduced, but now try to moderate my usage o stay within the cap.
If they are not going for people who just go over but are going after genuine bandwidth hogs, then kudos to NTL, they are trying to please the majority of customers.
What people must realise (and it is on NTLs website) it that this is a contended service and therefore people must share the bandwisth allocated.
|
I don't think that many would disagree that it is unreasonable for ntl to seek some traffic reshaping. However I do think that blanket application of the 1GB limit cannot solve the peak congestion, in fact it could worsen it. Contention is the basis of broadband and inevitably the fact that one user has their computer on, affects another user, and vice versa. If we don't want contention an it's inevitable limitations, then we have to be prepared to accept the costs of dedicated leased lines.