Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary L
No, you just say that because you can't think of anything else to say. you think that saying that you get full speed and no problems cancels out what someone else has said otherwise.
you haven't even said that yes some don't get the speed they should get, but the priority of getting as much money as possible by taking more users on than they should, is more important. not that I'd expect you to say that anyway  |
You must admit though Gary you do seem to have a rather large chip on your shoulder where VM are concerned, especially STM and speed.
Anyway back to the subject at hand.
Everybody knows that VM do have a capacity issue, they may say they dont but its a bit obvious. But where do they get the money from to update the infrastructure?
STM was brought in so that those people who hammered their connection to the detriment of others had their speed shaped for 5hrs at a time so that people who dont normally get their stated speed or as close and dont abuse the service can get a more normal stable speed.
STM is here to stay and if people dont feel that they are getting what they think they should get then there are plenty of other ISP's that are willing to take their money.
In your initial post you seem to be missing the point.
Quote:
No, there is an issue with bandwidth availability caused by lots of users downloading an unusually large amount of data per day.
That really doesn't make much sense. Do VM buy their bandwidth per unit,
and cant afford the costs, or that theirs plenty of seats on the bus, as
long as people don't sit in them.
|
Doesnt matter how VM aquire their bandwidth if the service is running at its maximum capable speed because people are maxing out their 20mb connections downloading linux distro's then then people like me come along and want to stream a bit of TV or play a game we cant because all the bandwidth hoggers are using all the pipe. Which is why we have STM, if someone doesnt understand that then, well what can I say.
Quote:
I dont believe there is an ISP network that could cope with all of the users downloading all of the time.
That's interesting because when VM were trying to convince me not to go
to adsl they said that all adsl services were 'up to' and I'd never
achieve the stated speed......
|
VM are correct again no ISP could handle a 100% load 24\7 it would just grind to a halt which sadly does happen ocassionaly in certain area's.
If you have a problem with VM trying to convince you not to go to ADSL and your so unhappy with VM leave. But I can more or less guarantee that unsless you are quite close to an exchange you wont get a stated speed it will be up to.
Quote:
STM was introduced to try and give a fairer service to all by stopping users using all of the bandwidth 24 hours a day.
Even though retentions claim that adsl doesn't give you the stated
speed, and cable does?
|
Again VM are trying to do the right thing, a fair service to all.
Cable can give you the sated speed, many, many people do get the speed that they pay for but like many companies they over subscribe.
It happens all the time its called maximising profit.
A cable service running at its optimum will give users the stated speed within the networks own infrastructure.
An ADSL service when running at its optimum will give users an up to speed dependant on line lengh and noise.
Its like having a speed limit on the motorway, its stated 70 as a max and you can get 70 but sometimes during peak hours you might only get 40 or 50. So when your stuck in congestion and only going at a slower speed what you gonna do write to the highways agency.
Hopefully over the coming months as people take up the 50mb service and docsis 3 this will ease some of the congestion for those on 4, 10 & 20mb.