Quote:
Originally Posted by lordy
All companies expect a bit of moaning when they do stuff like this. The only thing that will be a disaster is if profitability is affected or branding is 'hurt'. And thanks to contract lock-in, it's early days yet.
However my guesstimate is most normal people go for 10mb or 20mb.
People that get 50mb now (and 100mb in future) either
1) dont really need or use the extra speed, but have lots of disposable income and just like to have "the best"
2) Really do want to "download 15GB HD movies in one hour" as the product is advertised.
All people in group 1 will be unaffected.
As for people in group 2, I don't know what they will do. I'm going to wait a month to see the full impact, maybe Virgin will relax the throttling?
I'm guessing they are not even doing prioritisation, they are just capping all p2p bandwidth, even if the rest of the network has spare capacity.
Virgin might not even care in the short term, if peering and infrastructure savings are greater than the amount lost by people avoiding the product (defecting or downgrading etc), then they will be happy.
They really should change the way they market the product though, as right now there are not many (any?) legitimate unthrottled download services available in the UK where you can get 15GB HD movies at full-speed (not streaming).
|
No I do not have lots of disposable income. I took out the service because of what was promised.
Less contention, less hold-ups and no management.
Others were told that the 50Mb service would be on a seperate network than the lower tiers but they have, or are in the process of being, migrated to the same overlay network. VM have to do it for the upload upgrades that are being rolled out. That is not what 50Mb was sold at!
I can see VM suffering for this but only time will tell as it effects all tiers.
Who's the idiot going to buy 100Mb to have traffic shaping???
---------- Post added at 00:39 ---------- Previous post was at 00:30 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking
The 2 big things that I don't like about all this are 1) the blanket nature of when and where it is applied regardless of whether there are any problems and 2) the drastic reduction to 25% of your speed.
If it could be tailored to any specific problem times and areas it wouldn't be so bad. I wouldn't have that much of a problem if my max speed was reduced by an appropriate amount, if there was a local traffic problem. But to be reduced to 2.5Mb for quite a long period is unreasonable and disproportionate.
|
It is not a drastic reduction of your speed to 25%, your speeds can be less than that and so far seem like they are.
It is 25% of the network being given to the P2P and newsgroup protocols which means that of that 25% being shared to P2P and newsgroups it is dependant on how many are using it as to how much speed you get.
Simple terms only 25% of the network is available for P2P or newsgroups no matter the load on it during the shaping period.
THB it doesn't impact much on me personally I just don't like goalposts being changed without my prior consent or knowledge.