Quote:
|
Their services necessarily appeal to the lowest common denominator.
|
why?
Quote:
|
Given that the congestion is nearly always upstream and I'm not overly convinced of the upstream throttling's effectiveness I suspect you're quite aware of what's happening.
|
I can guess and my guess is the congestion is actually also caused by normal traffic like ack packets and video streaming etc. things that are taking off and are reasonably popular, for things like live blogs. The shaping seems brutal enough as we seeing complaints of unuseable services going at sub dialup speeds.
Quote:
|
The UK's regulation isn't lax by any stretch. Excessive interventionism has a lot to answer for within the UK's market. If you want lax regulation see Canada.
|
Wrong type of regulation, its regulating competition but not consumer experience.
Quote:
|
Show me where VM have been successfully nailed by Trading Standards for oversubscription please.
|
They havent, trading standards if get involved in individual cases normally lead to VM (or any company for that matter) offering some kind of bribe to the consumer or personal attention given to their situation which stops anything from escalating.
Quote:
|
This applies to any ISP anywhere, it's always a question of money.
|
When have I said otherwise? You know money is an issue but yet dont see raising more of it from customers as the solution.
Lets say I was supplying you with goods. I then realise after we signed contracts that to supply you with what you paying for doesnt make me as much money as I liked so I think start diluting the goods watering them down so to speak so I make more money, you find this acceptable practice? Or you buy a can of lager from the supermarket but its only half full because the lager company says they forced to by competition to sell at low price but can only make money by half filling it? thats ok? profit comes before providing what you market and sell?
What you basically saying is that heavy users arent profiteable, I agree with this statement. This is of course true for decades and applies to any isp. Your opinion is loss making users should not be subsidised and its ok for consumers sharing resources with them to have a 'not fit for purpose' service (look up not fit for purpose on trading standards), unfortenatly this type of service and anything bandwidth related works on subsidy with the exception of PAYG type services. It works on averages, Its highly likely VM actually underprovide capacity in areas with lower usage than average.
Funny tho when I showed you my service situation in february you considered it unacceptable and that was the same thing, 'high utilisation' as described by VM.