BB in Beds area = awful

Dean B · 03-12-2003, 13:06

Is anyone else in the Bedford area experiencing truly awful web browsing? I'm also seeing individual images loading on the taskbar which is something I've never seen in the eighteen months I've had BB (512/256).
I can turn the cable modem (SB4100) off, fire up my Earthlink dial up which connects at 52K, and watch pages load almost as fast.

I've tried different proxy & dns servers. No difference. And neither does the time of day seem to play a part. It's as slow now at 2pm as it is at 8pm.

Given up trying to get through to TS.

-Dean

threadbare · 03-12-2003, 13:31

you should call TS if its that bad

btw cable modem is 600/128

Dean B · 03-12-2003, 13:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by threadbare

you should call TS if its that bad

btw cable modem is 600/128

I've been trying to call TS. I was losing the will to live being kept on hold

Did they upgrade my cable modem? I know for a fact it was 512/256 as I was one of the first, so the engineer told me, to get it in Bedford.

-Dean

Neil · 03-12-2003, 13:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean B

I've been trying to call TS. I was losing the will to live being kept on hold

Did they upgrade my cable modem? I know for a fact it was 512/256 as I was one of the first, so the engineer told me, to get it in Bedford.

-Dean

Your upload is 128k on the 600k service-not 256, whatever the 'engineer' might have told you.

threadbare · 03-12-2003, 14:01

hang in there I am sure they will sort it for you - when u get thru

the cable modem was orginally 512/128 but i think the engineer was mistaken about the upload

Dean B · 03-12-2003, 14:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

Your upload is 128k on the 600k service-not 256, whatever the 'engineer' might have told you.

Neil,

Thx. That would explain the 15KB upload speed on FTP. Have always thought that was slow

Did they drop the 512 service or is that still an option? Is there any way of checking whether I'm on 512 or 600? I get, or should I say got, around 70KB http download.

-Dean

zovat · 03-12-2003, 14:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean B

Neil,

Thx. That would explain the 15KB upload speed on FTP. Have always thought that was slow

Did they drop the 512 service or is that still an option? Is there any way of checking whether I'm on 512 or 600? I get, or should I say got, around 70KB http download.

-Dean

IIRC

The 512 was replaced by 600 in all regions some time ago (I am in an origional NTL area, so had 600 from day one

)

I dont remember the upload ever being other than 128 on this service

Neil · 03-12-2003, 14:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean B

Neil,

Thx. That would explain the 15KB upload speed on FTP. Have always thought that was slow

Did they drop the 512 service or is that still an option? Is there any way of checking whether I'm on 512 or 600? I get, or should I say got, around 70KB http download.

-Dean

The '512' service was always 600k in 'original' ntl areas (such as yours)

You are on 600 (512 is not an option), & you should be able to download at approx 65/70k.

Do Robin's speed test here: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/robin.d...speedtest.html & let us have a look at your results.

N.

tkiely · 03-12-2003, 16:10

I reckon it's a cache problem (what a surprise)

In Hatfield it has been rubbish for days (no Hatfield jokes please) although speed test report no problems the pages load soooooooooo slowley just as the original complainent said.

albone · 03-12-2003, 19:44

Yep I can quite agree the service we are getting is C**p at the moment! it has just taken aprox 30 sec just to change to the reply page! were as normally it's almost instant. This also leads to dropped pages too! Most frustrateing!
Well as requested here for your perusal is both Toast and the Robin speed tests for you.
but this has been happening for the last three or four days I had hoped it would get better as they say there is problems and work going on in the luton area which is where our link comes from.

33.6K Modem: 16-27K
56K Modem: 34-45K
ISDN/I-DSL: 100-120K
Your throughput: 114 K
Cable/ADSL: 229-950K
T1: 1078-1300K
Kbps:

1st 128k took 7000 ms = 18725 Bytes./sec = aprox 156 kbites/sec
2nd 128k took 7484 ms = 17514 Bytes./sec = aprox 146 Kbites/sec
3rd 128k took 7156 ms = 18316 Bytes./sec = aprox 152 kbites/sec
4th 128k took 7797 ms = 16811 Bytes./sec = aprox 140 kbites/sec

the error margins we are getting are driving me up the wall, so I can understand others giving up and going to another provider!

Dean B · 03-12-2003, 20:22

Tonight it is absolutely terrible. Countless 'server errors' and page load times nearer minutes than secs.

========================================
Wed, 3 Dec 2003 21:17:52 UTC
1st 128K took 3324 ms = 39432 Bytes/sec = approx 328 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 9554 ms = 13719 Bytes/sec = approx 114 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 3635 ms = 36058 Bytes/sec = approx 300 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 3495 ms = 37503 Bytes/sec = approx 312 kbits/sec
========================================

-Dean

albone · 03-12-2003, 20:27

It has just got a wee bit faster but still a grotty service.
Loaded 414,161 bytes in 26.297 seconds from OnSpeed server.

33.6K Modem: 16-27K
56K Modem: 34-45K
ISDN/I-DSL: 100-120K
Your throughput: 126 K
Cable/ADSL: 229-950K
T1: 1078-1300K
Kbps:

Dean B · 03-12-2003, 20:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by albone

It has just got a wee bit faster but still a grotty service.
Loaded 414,161 bytes in 26.297 seconds from OnSpeed server.

33.6K Modem: 16-27K
56K Modem: 34-45K
ISDN/I-DSL: 100-120K
Your throughput: 126 K
Cable/ADSL: 229-950K
T1: 1078-1300K
Kbps:

You have a URL for this OnSpeed server?

Ta,
-Dean

tkiely · 03-12-2003, 21:28

strike-a-light!!!!!!! ÃƒÆ’Ã†â€™ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…Â¡ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£35 per mth, total bill lthis mth ÃƒÆ’Ã†â€™ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…Â¡ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£109 for this?????

Wed, 3 Dec 2003 22:26:00 UTC
1st 128K took 7070 ms = 18539 Bytes/sec = approx 154 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 10605 ms = 12359 Bytes/sec = approx 103 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 8112 ms = 16158 Bytes/sec = approx 134 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 9884 ms = 13261 Bytes/sec = approx 110 kbits/sec

I'm too polite to say what I think!

ntl, wake up to yourselves!

Neil · 03-12-2003, 21:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by tkiely

strike-a-light!!!!!!! ÃƒÆ’Ã†â€™ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…Â¡ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£35 per mth, total bill lthis mth ÃƒÆ’Ã†â€™ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â€šÂ¬Ã…Â¡ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£109 for this?????

Wed, 3 Dec 2003 22:26:00 UTC
1st 128K took 7070 ms = 18539 Bytes/sec = approx 154 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 10605 ms = 12359 Bytes/sec = approx 103 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 8112 ms = 16158 Bytes/sec = approx 134 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 9884 ms = 13261 Bytes/sec = approx 110 kbits/sec

I'm too polite to say what I think!

ntl, wake up to yourselves!

http://forum.nthellworld.co.uk/showp...78&postcount=1