*ALL* ntl Cap Discussion (Part 3)

[jonifen]

Originally Posted by jtwn

Hmm actually he may be referring to the 'back in the day' 512k service when it was the only BB available.

If I remember right, it was 128kb when it started out anyway wasn't it?
ADSL is often still 256kb upload and 512kb download for around the same price... even the unlimited packages. As I said above, I can't see NTL thinking customers will genuinely want to stick with that kind of upload level on an unlimited 512k service when they could get better elsewhere.

[maverick]

A lot of people seem to be confusing this 512 unlimited usage service as a new package,this is actually being implemented as a forced downgrade for heavy users.

There has been no mention from NTL that the 512 will be a new package available to users.

[jrhnewark]

Originally Posted by maverick

A lot of people seem to be confusing this 512 unlimited usage service as a new package,this is actually being implemented as a forced downgrade for heavy users.

There has been no mention from NTL that the 512 will be a new package available to users.

Hmm - I don't think they are.

Although, I did make the slightly tongue-in-cheek comment that if the upstream was/is 128kbps, I'd happily 'downgrade'.

[Chrysalis]

Alot of people see unlimited 512kbit as a better service then limited 2mbit/3mbit it depends what you use the service for and how much you like to brag about speed.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Alot of people see unlimited 512kbit as a better service then limited 2mbit/3mbit it depends what you use the service for and how much you like to brag about speed.

Indeed i am thinking hard if this is best for me

[jrhnewark]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Alot of people see unlimited 512kbit as a better service then limited 2mbit/3mbit it depends what you use the service for and how much you like to brag about speed.

I agree with Bill, it is something to consider.

However, as it stands, I doubt my sub-40GB a month 1Mbps usage will be of any effect on anyone else at UBR level, so I doubt I'll be downgraded. I shall continue to do what I've always done with 1Mbps - I'll treat it as unlimited. Just happens to be that my 'use as much as I like' amounts to around 30GB a month.

[theNomad]

So at last after months of ******** about the cap and upping me from 750k when I didnt ask for it,theyre now going back 512k uncapped,well i'm happy with it,I currently pay £24.99 for 1.5mb i'd sooner lose a touch of speed (I never noticed much of an improvement anyway) and pay £7 less and not worry what I use.

cheers NTL for the months of wasted time (and probably 1000s of people leaving over this issue) for bringing things right back to how we started.I'll still get more than what the 10mb people are going too for my £17.99. Shame its overpriced when put next to other companys speed per cost,but at least now I dont have to have my TV/Phone/Net packages over 2-3 different companys.

[mcmanic]

am i right in thinkings its about 150gigs a month on 512k if on 24/7 and running at full speed, it would fit in with the 150gig warning letter thing also. It seems i'm fine for around 120gig at £37 or i could go mad and get downgraded and be able to download 150gig for £17.99

all in all if that happened its not much to cry about if they force me to downgrade at a later date, i think i'll just carry on at present on my 3meg and if i go over 150 gigs (it wouldn't be much anyway) then not to worry about it cos in the end i'll be able to grab the same and be £20 better off, would just mean the PC is never turned off

[DrK]

Lol NTL have done a stunner in my books, as many may or not know, all these P2P programs demand you upload aswell(there are some paysites that dont and some very crappy p2p programs that dont also) most of these demand a certain level of upload speed aswell its directly linked to your download speed.

The intresting fact is here, as the upload is so low 64k most wont even max there new unlimited 512k connection out.

[DieDieMyDarling]

Originally Posted by DrK

Lol NTL have done a stunner in my books, as many may or not know, all these P2P programs demand you upload aswell(there are some paysites that dont and some very crappy p2p programs that dont also) most of these demand a certain level of upload speed aswell its directly linked to your download speed.

The intresting fact is here, as the upload is so low 64k most wont even max there new unlimited 512k connection out.

More and more people are moving to Newsgroups, and you don't need high upstream for that, just whatever supports the acks.

Originally Posted by DieDieMyDarling

More and more people are moving to Newsgroups, and you don't need high upstream for that, just whatever supports the acks.

Good point.

I had a long conversation the other night with a good friend of mine. We came to the conclusion that people are moving to newsgroups for the privacy side as well. He had noticed how the user count on a hub that he hosts on dc had reduced over the last couple of months.

The riaa and the bpi are now very active on the common p2p networks. It is extremely difficult for them to catch you on the newsgroups and in fact i don't think i have ever seen a report of someone being court via the newsgroups.

The speed advantage of newsgroups over the common p2p networks is stunning in my opinion and leaves the other p2p networks standing.

And there is the problem i think for the isp's. The speed that you can download at is where the problems can be. The serial downloaders out there can download a massive amount in a month (because they can or to sell on) and as speed ramp up this will be a even bigger problem not only for the isp's but also the other users sharing that connection.

So where do the isp's draw the line. Do they hard cap and offer lower speed unlimited connections. Or do they offer unlimited high speed connections at high prices. I am glad its not me that has to make the decisions.

Now for me a lower speed unlimited connection is looking favorite at the moment as speed is not everything to me.

Please note i do not condone the downloading of copyrighted material

Just my outlook on p2p and caps and are not representative of the company i work for and is not a admission of guilt .


Also it is not a indication of what Ntl intend to do.

[rogeralpine]

Originally Posted by Rob2005

...good point.

Having read this forum for a while, I always found the discussions about caps laugable in the sense that I couldn't believe some people could actually download so much. Then I discovered newsgroups....All the latest American telly at the touch of a button. After 1 month of it, I'm hooked and I can see why others are too. Once you've got used to DIY VOD, you can never go back. Its the future, very much now.

As I have now gone over the usage allowance myself, I'm on 3MB broaband, this thread is all the more important.

I had a look at my old Bell Cablemedia/Cable & Wireless telephone bills yesterday, to see how much I used to spend on internet over the old dial up system which of course went over the telephone line. My basic bill just for telephone charges for the internet were in excess of £150 per month for a 33/56k service. Now I'm paying under £40 for 3MB broadband, "soon" to be 10MB.

I am sure there are some people out there who would be willing to pay more for their internet. So why can't ntl offer us a unlimited, no cap service now and charge us for it?. We're all aware of the ntl "coming soon", my tv service still has the lurid pink software, the upgrade has been "coming soon" for months...

I bet I can't be the only one who used to get these hefty telephone bills and would be quite happy for ntl to relieve me of some more cash for a heavy usage service. I would be happy to pay £60 for a non-capped service, and wouldn't complain if the charges were higher, although probably wouldn't spend over £100 now. What do others think? What would you be prepared to pay if ntl did offer a high speed, non cap service right now?

...good post. IMHO ntl are shooting themselves in the foot far too early. Just round the corner there are VOD services that are going to pop up all over the show which will require users to have much bigger caps than 30Gb. SO what are ntl going to do - put everyone on 512. Who's going to bother with 10Gb when you can hardly use it - seems absolutely pointless to me. As has been said a multitude of times before, speed isn't a factor for surfing webpages -I couldn't care less whether I have a 512Mb line which loads a page in x.xx seconds, but could have a 10Mb line that loads then in y.yy seconds. IN the real world the difference is negligable. The only real beneft of increased speed is lower download times and if you've got such a crap cap, the far cheaper 512 service will get you all you require albeit in a longer time frame (but if you're organised does this really matter?)

I'd like to know who's going to pay £20 more for a 10Gb service when it is so severly pegged back? I can see ntl only backtracking on this in the months to come - and by then I will have upped shop and gone - too little too late IMHO.

Originally Posted by rogeralpine

...good post. IMHO ntl are shooting themselves in the foot far too early. Just round the corner there are VOD services that are going to pop up all over the show which will require users to have much bigger caps than 30Gb. SO what are ntl going to do - put everyone on 512. Who's going to bother with 10Gb when you can hardly use it - seems absolutely pointless to me. As has been said a multitude of times before, speed isn't a factor for surfing webpages -I couldn't care less whether I have a 512Mb line which loads a page in x.xx seconds, but could have a 10Mb line that loads then in y.yy seconds. IN the real world the difference is negligable. The only real beneft of increased speed is lower download times and if you've got such a crap cap, the far cheaper 512 service will get you all you require albeit in a longer time frame (but if you're organised does this really matter?)

I'd like to know who's going to pay £20 more for a 10Gb service when it is so severly pegged back? I can see ntl only backtracking on this in the months to come - and by then I will have upped shop and gone - too little too late IMHO.

It will be interesting to see how it pans out.

[maverick]

It will be interesting to see if NTL have a group of capped packages and another group of uncapped packages where you will be charged on the amount of bandwidth used, ie the more you download the more you pay.

[DieDieMyDarling]

I personally think the best approach for ntl would be to introduce peak time caps, and leave off-peak times unlimited. Maybe set the times in stone, like 11pm - 7am unlimited. Say 75gb cap for 10mb in the peak times, or maybe even keep it at 30GB. Maybe even create a new tier, 3mb unlimited, with a capped peak time, and uncapped through the night. Still pay 37.99, but get 8 hours a day unlimited downloads, in a time that won't affect too many other users.
If the amount of heavy users is so low, ie 1-2% of the ntl customer base, then surely they could all download overnight and not even affect each other too much, as most people would be in bed and not clogging up the networks. Obviously if they were on 10mb it would probably still cause problems, but being only on 3mb would surely be acceptable.