Virgin Media to Double Broadband Speed

[asbo dog]

any one else force upstream channel changes before the upgrade?

found it a breeze on 30mb, very rarely did i get same channel after hard reset of hub, but on 60mb i cant get off channel 1 and latency is peaking at 60 - 100 ms at peaky times and normally i can find a channel that stays at 60 ms max peaks which is best i can get any time of day since being with vm a year ago.

i liked the option being there so when those random couple of hours of insane latency happen i could choice to find the best of the worst before deciding what game to button bash

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by General Maximus

As an impartial dude, I thought I would step in.

BT isn't like VM Tim where they'll tell everyone they can get "up to" 100mbit. My exchange is enabled for 80mbit and maybe the new 100, but when I put my postcode into the checker it tells me my estimate is 55 down and 13 up and that is out of a maximum of 80 down and 20 up. This gives me a choice of taking thee 40/10 tier where I know I'll get 100% of my speed or taking the 80/20 tier and hoping for the best. The nice thing about BT is that at least I know what I am going to get consistently and the speed wont vary as much as it does on VM. If you try to proceed with your 60/whatever order you'll see you are signing up to the 80/20 tier whatever it is called.

They still advertise the maximum speed, but they are just more honest on the website. However with VM, if you aren't getting what you are paying for, then they will work on the network to try and get that speed for you (unless you go through the overseas call centres, who will just tell you that there is no fault). I was paying for 100mb, but could only get 75mb on a good day. So VM sent round an engineer who identified a fault on the network, and now I can get 105mb.

[Kymmy]

Just been told that although my area is upgraded that my connection won't be until the discount code on my account clears next month

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

60 is 60. And that is what BT have told me is available to me. Or are you going to say that they are wrong also?

If you want to talk about name calling, the you should look at many of your previous posts when anyone doesn't agree with you. And also the private messages that you send.

It's about time that you were mature enough to accept that you don't know it all. And other people are entitled to make a post that you don't agree with, without you abusing them for it.


If you are right, then BT are also wrong, because they said quite clearly 60mb

I'll be happy to inform you that you are wrong. Just as with standard ADSL on BT not everyone can get 20Mb or 24Mb due to line length so everyone on VDSL / Infinity can't get 80Mb due to line length from cabinet.

If 80Mb weren't available in your area you wouldn't have the option to order 60Mb, just as with old ADSL which ran to 8Mb and 20Mb (on BT Total Broadband), if you received a quote over 8Mb you were in a 20Mb-capable area, no question.

Your home isn't capable of 80Mb, your area will have homes that are as they're closer to the cabinet, simples.

[qasdfdsaq]

I don't think he understands simples, since he couldn't quite grasp that if there's two options and it's not the first one then it must be the other.

Anyhow back to my original point, which was that unlike VM, BT deployed their double-speed upgrade across the whole network in one go, nobody has yet shown anything to prove otherwise. They said it'd be done by Spring, they did it in Spring, unlike VM who took till the end of March two years on last time they promised me an upgrade...

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Anyhow back to my original point, which was that unlike VM, BT deployed their double-speed upgrade across the whole network in one go, nobody has yet shown anything to prove otherwise. They said it'd be done by Spring, they did it in Spring, unlike VM who took till the end of March two years on last time they promised me an upgrade...

So? The networks are built differently, and BT don't have to deal with kit that is anywhere up to 12 years old

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

I don't think he understands simples, since he couldn't quite grasp that if there's two options and it's not the first one then it must be the other.

Anyhow back to my original point, which was that unlike VM, BT deployed their double-speed upgrade across the whole network in one go, nobody has yet shown anything to prove otherwise. They said it'd be done by Spring, they did it in Spring, unlike VM who took till the end of March two years on last time they promised me an upgrade...

They did the 8a - 17a profile upgrade for the most part last year, just needed the rate caps lifting to 80Mb/20Mb.

[ccarmock]

Also when VM run a speed double programme the device does sync up at double the speed - though whether this then causes undue congestion on the network is of course a different point!

When BT announce a speed double programme they may roll it out nationally in one go but given the technology they use it doesn't change things for a lot of users.

While I don't have Infinity I checked the reported likely speed before - 34 Mb/s and after the speed double programme it still reports a likely speed of 34 Mb/s - so how would BT's speed double programme help me? As I understand it it will only help if you were running at 40 Mb/s before.

One of BT's challenges is in many cases an old rotting copper cable network.

As Ben say Virgin is still running with equipment in some cases 10 years old and also inadequate capacity at the local end to provide a consistently well performing solution in many locations.

Surely Virgin should start investing in replacement equipment for this ancient technology they still support, but also at the same time implement proactive capacity management. They are gathering statistics on utilisation so they should be in a position to plan capacity relief before it has an undue impact on customers.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by ccarmock

Surely Virgin should start investing in replacement equipment for this ancient technology they still support

That is partly what the double speed programme is doing.

[ccarmock]

Thats good to hear Ben. So that leaves the proactive capacity planning !

I was surprised to hear that in areas such as mine (fed from New Malden) that the upstream increases that were done came last to these old ex Telewest areas due to the old network here didn't generally involve replacing the older kit, so I assume that is happening now in these areas ready for the downstream speed doubling. Still on 4 downstreams here. The speed doubling is scheduled to be complete here by July.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by ccarmock

Thats good to hear Ben. So that leaves the proactive capacity planning !

I was surprised to hear that in areas such as mine (fed from New Malden) that the upstream increases that were done came last to these old ex Telewest areas due to the old network here didn't generally involve replacing the older kit, so I assume that is happening now in these areas ready for the downstream speed doubling. Still on 4 downstreams here. The speed doubling is scheduled to be complete here by July.

Yeah it did, several components that limited return paths to 30MHz had to be swapped out for shiny new stuff.

The doubling programme is all capacity increase so new line cards, node splits, etc. The upstream uplift for our areas involved swapping out of amplifiers and fibre nodes where needed.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by ccarmock

Surely Virgin should start investing in replacement equipment for this ancient technology they still support, but also at the same time implement proactive capacity management. They are gathering statistics on utilisation so they should be in a position to plan capacity relief before it has an undue impact on customers.

In fairness, as Ben says, VM are upgrading the equipment where they need to. This is why they are going area by area.

Where BT have installed Infinity, the equipment used will be (at most) a couple of years old, and, unless BT's management are extremely incompetent (which I don't think they are for a second), more than able to cope with the requirements of this speed doubling, and any future increase. As such, the doubling probably is a case of doing not much more than flicking a switch.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

So? The networks are built differently, and BT don't have to deal with kit that is anywhere up to 12 years old

True, but that wasn't the point. Yes, VM could be reasonably expected to take longer, but the way it was handled was lacking.

1) BT provided an estimated date last last year
2) Provided a precise date a few months in advance
3) Did required upgrades in advance (and successfully completed on time)
4) Enabled the service on the specified date which was known to everyone.

VM on the other hand (referring to the upload speed speed and 100mb upgrades for my area)

1) Failed to provide an estimated date until 11 months into the programme
2) Failed to keep to estimated date(s) three times in a row
3) Failed to perform network upgrades in an organized or timely manner
4) Turned on higher speeds as-and-when without giving customers (existing or prospective) any reliable information as to what they'd get

Most of these can be attributed to planning, organizational, and managerial failures and incompetence, you can't blame it all on old equipment - especially when VM has sole responsibility for all their own equipment.

[Mick Fisher]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

True, but that wasn't the point. Yes, VM could be reasonably expected to take longer, but the way it was handled was lacking.

1) BT provided an estimated date last last year
2) Provided a precise date a few months in advance
3) Did required upgrades in advance (and successfully completed on time)
4) Enabled the service on the specified date which was known to everyone.

VM on the other hand (referring to the upload speed speed and 100mb upgrades for my area)

1) Failed to provide an estimated date until 11 months into the programme
2) Failed to keep to estimated date(s) three times in a row
3) Failed to perform network upgrades in an organized or timely manner
4) Turned on higher speeds as-and-when without giving customers (existing or prospective) any reliable information as to what they'd get

Most of these can be attributed to planning, organizational, and managerial failures and incompetence, you can't blame it all on old equipment - especially when VM has sole responsibility for all their own equipment.

But everything is always coming soon with VM, 'tis the nature of the beast.

[General Maximus]

well in this case "coming soon" is too late by the looks of things