Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrysalis
I really am disappointed, every time there is some kind of development at VM I hope they learn from their old mistakes, which is allowing people to upgrade without proper capacity to handle the higher peak time demand, but it seems they make the same mistake time and time again. On this most recent upgrade it seems to have got worse tho with people in previously good areas even reporting performance issues. 
It does seem to be a situation where they care more about marketing speeds than actual peak time consistency (the time when most people will use the connection). |
I think the problem is a tricky one. They want to be able to advertise those headline speeds as early as possible, not 2 years after initial deployment started. However, they don't really want to spend a lot of money advertising 200Mbit only for 85% of new customers to be told they can't get that. Sort of defeats the point of the advertising (and like the ASA would have words as well). So of course, they relent and let
new customers sign up to those speeds, but then they have that issue where existing customers are "getting screwed" over because why shouldn't they be entitled to the same things new customers get?
I'm not saying I agree with it, it's obviously a bean-counter decision and the quality of the network isn't the primary concern, I am just saying that's what always seems to happen, even when they try their best to curtail it (This speed upgrade wasn't supposed to be going out to existing customers before the area was ready but eventually it did).