*ALL* ntl Cap Discussion Here Please. - Page 48

Robc66 · 18-02-2005, 13:34

Well u can send emails and internet shop on 150k with relatively the same results as u would get with 3mb......

PC_Arcade · 18-02-2005, 13:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by orangebird

You're right. I'm sorry. 3meg is a disgustingly slow speed. How am I supposed to send emails and internet shop on such a poor speed?

That's a ridiculous statement, if that's what YOU want to use the net for fine (although I think you'd be better off on the lower tariff), I'd like to use it a little more extensively.

I don't have a 3mb connection, I'm on the fastest speed that NTL provide which currently is 1.5mb (the lowest (with the exeption of BT), Fastest speed available in my area BTW)

The question is "Given that NTL own their network are they unable to compete with ADSL providers on price and data volume (speed is largely irrelevant if it can only be used in moderation anyway) despite the fact that the ADSL providers, in the main also have to pay BT a share?"

cr80123 · 18-02-2005, 13:44

Do all these people who are for the cap work for NTLl? Do they have a profit related pay scheme? As far as I can see that's the only excuse for them. The sole reason they want to limit bandwidth is so they can cram more people onto their network and thus make more money. NTL will lose market share if they implement this.

orangebird · 18-02-2005, 13:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by PC_Arcade

That's a ridiculous statement, if that's what YOU want to use the net for fine (although I think you'd be better off on the lower tariff), I'd like to use it a little more extensively.

I don't have a 3mb connection, I'm on the fastest speed that NTL provide which currently is 1.5mb (the lowest (with the exeption of BT), Fastest speed available in my area BTW)

The question is "Given that NTL own their network are they unable to compete with ADSL providers on price and data volume (speed is largely irrelevant if it can only be used in moderation anyway) despite the fact that the ADSL providers, in the main also have to pay BT a share?"

You're trying to compare apples and oranges. ADSL and cable or different technolgies, and require different development and maintenance. It's like complaining that Aston Martin are more expensive then Ford, when they both provide the same end user product...

At the end of the day, ntl serves the masses very well. And that's what they need to do. They're too big and too cash strapped to concentrate on a very tiny percentage of bandwith hogging customers who have nothing better to do than download linux and movies all day, and who's arms are too short for the very deep pockets they appear to have.

Hans Gruber · 18-02-2005, 13:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by cr80123

Do all these people who are for the cap work for NTLl? Do they have a profit related pay scheme? As far as I can see that's the only excuse for them. The sole reason they want to limit bandwidth is so they can cram more people onto their network and thus make more money. NTL will lose market share if they implement this.

Oddly enough, yes

Well with the exception of about 2 or 3 of them.

orangebird · 18-02-2005, 13:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by cr80123

Do all these people who are for the cap work for NTLl?

No, but I do. I'm not for the cap, or against the cap. I am all for ntl making money though and keeping me in a job.

Quote:

Do they have a profit related pay scheme? As far as I can see that's the only excuse for them. The sole reason they want to limit bandwidth is so they can cram more people onto their network and thus make more money. NTL will lose market share if they implement this.

Then I suggest you look for another excuse. PRP doesn't happen at ntl. ntl have had the 'cap' in place for ages now. The customers numbers are up. Your theory is full of holes.

PC_Arcade · 18-02-2005, 13:59

If I'm comparing apples to oranges then WHY do NTL insist on doing the same, if they aren't the same as ADSL (especially BT) then they should stop trying to compete with them.

In fairness though as a customer, I couldn't care less about the technologies behind ADSL and Cable, its irrelevant, all people see is the Price, the Speed and the Caps (unless their hidden, but it's going to be harder for companies to hise them as they are fast becoming a contentious issue for the mainstream as well given the increased bandwidth use nowadays).

what you and NTL seem to be saying, though, orangebird is that VOIP, Online distribution (legal) of games (such as HL2 etc), as well as moves afoot by the movie industry to offer legit downloads is something that is neither wanted, nor able to be catered for on NTL'S network.

orangebird · 18-02-2005, 14:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by PC_Arcade

If I'm comparing apples to oranges then WHY do NTL insist on doing the same, if they aren't the same as ADSL (especially BT) then they should stop trying to compete with them.

In fairness though as a customer, I couldn't care less about the technologies behind ADSL and Cable, its irrelevant, all people see is the Price, the Speed and the Caps (unless their hidden, but it's going to be harder for companies to hise them as they are fast becoming a contentious issue for the mainstream as well given the increased bandwidth use nowadays).

what you and NTL seem to be saying, though, orangebird is that VOIP, Online distribution (legal) of games (such as HL2 etc), as well as moves afoot by the movie industry to offer legit downloads is something that is neither wanted, nor able to be catered for on NTL'S network.

And you're telling me you need unlimited gigs and 8 meg to do that?
I'm saying and ntl is saying nothing of the sort.

scrotnig · 18-02-2005, 14:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by cr80123

Do all these people who are for the cap work for NTLl? Do they have a profit related pay scheme? As far as I can see that's the only excuse for them. The sole reason they want to limit bandwidth is so they can cram more people onto their network and thus make more money. NTL will lose market share if they implement this.

NTL may lose customers who want to sit on the net day and night downloading stuff to burn onto CDs to sell on Ebay and make a fortune. Good!

The broadband service is aimed at average everyday users. I can assure people here and now that the absolute vast majority of customers are not remotely concerned with caps since none of these caps affects what they want to do.

Since the caps were introduced customer numbers are up massively.

As I have said before, people need to stop thinking that users of this forum in some way represent the entire customer base. I have yet to deal with a broadband customer who has even heard of this site. Most customers are happy with caps.

They aren't going to go away. They were only needed in the first place by any company because certain people saw it as a way to run their own illegal businesses from home.

No residential user can stand here and tell me they need the ability to download more than 200 MP3's a day, or 600 film trailers, or 100 large software programs, every day, every month, every year. No way. Sorry, if you're doing that you're running a business and you can clear off.

cr80123 · 18-02-2005, 14:07

It wasn't a theory I was just asking.

Surely you realise this proposed cap is vastly different from the one they have in place already?

Asuming you agree that an uncapped service is better than a capped one, why (and this isn't just directed at you but at everyone who is pro-cap) would you possibly be keen on a service which isn't as good as one you could have. It's completely illogical.

orangebird · 18-02-2005, 14:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark B

NTL may lose customers who want to sit on the net day and night downloading stuff to burn onto CDs to sell on Ebay and make a fortune. Good!

The broadband service is aimed at average everyday users. I can assure people here and now that the absolute vast majority of customers are not remotely concerned with caps since none of these caps affects what they want to do.

Since the caps were introduced customer numbers are up massively.

As I have said before, people need to stop thinking that users of this forum in some way represent the entire customer base. I have yet to deal with a broadband customer who has even heard of this site. Most customers are happy with caps.

They aren't going to go away. They were only needed in the first place by any company because certain people saw it as a way to run their own illegal businesses from home.

No residential user can stand here and tell me they need the ability to download more than 200 MP3's a day, or 600 film trailers, or 100 large software programs, every day, every month, every year. No way. Sorry, if you're doing that you're running a business and you can clear off.

18-02-2005, 14:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by PC_Arcade

If I'm comparing apples to oranges then WHY do NTL insist on doing the same, if they aren't the same as ADSL (especially BT) then they should stop trying to compete with them.

NTL are particularly guilty of this with the upcoming 3Mb service. It's all very well for them to say that they are going to ensure that their services are comparable to BTs, but if BT don`t have a comparable service then it's nothing but an empty promise.

orangebird · 18-02-2005, 14:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by cr80123

It wasn't a theory I was just asking.

OK then

Quote:

Surely you realise this proposed cap is vastly different from the one they have in place already?

How so?

Quote:

Asuming you agree that an uncapped service is better than a capped one, why (and this isn't just directed at you but at everyone who is pro-cap) would you possibly be keen on a service which isn't as good as one you could have. It's completely illogical.

I couldn't care less whether the service is capped or not. But see Mark Bs post above, which I couldn't have put better myself.

18-02-2005, 14:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark B

As I have said before, people need to stop thinking that users of this forum in some way represent the entire customer base. I have yet to deal with a broadband customer who has even heard of this site. Most customers are happy with caps.

Are most customers happy with caps, or is it actually that most customers are ignorant of the caps? It's not as though NTL went out of their way to publicise them when they were first introduced.

orangebird · 18-02-2005, 14:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr wadd

NTL are particularly guilty of this with the upcoming 3Mb service. It's all very well for them to say that they are going to ensure that their services are comparable to BTs, but if BT don`t have a comparable service then it's nothing but an empty promise.

Not to the regular technology-ignorant customer. BB is BB to 99.9% of the internet using public, regardless of how it gets to your PC. That's why ntl has to compete - because the customers largely don't know any different.