Sky Broadband

[Stuart]

Why does it cost ANYTHING to call NTL Customer Services?

[Paul K]

Originally Posted by Stuart C

Why does it cost ANYTHING to call NTL Customer Services?

Because NTL seem to think that customers should pay in more ways than one for problems with their service? I think it's out of order but unless someone tells NTL that they cannot charge unless they can keep the queues to below 2-3 minutes then I cannot see NTL changing anything.

[Wicked_and_Crazy]

has anyone seen NTL's advert in the papers showing a comparision between NTL and Sky broadband where they say its something like £240 more expensive with the sky option in the first year. Most of the cost is due to having to have a BT phone line at £11 a month and NTL saying that for their b/band you dont need a phone. Thats fine but with the Sky option you have a phone ie an extra service that NTL havent priced for in the comparison, talk about not comparing apples with apples.

its not like many people would have NTL TV, B/Band and no phone at all!

[paul11974]

Originally Posted by Wicked_and_Crazy

has anyone seen NTL's advert in the papers showing a comparision between NTL and Sky broadband where they say its something like £240 more expensive with the sky option in the first year. Most of the cost is due to having to have a BT phone line at £11 a month and NTL saying that for their b/band you dont need a phone. Thats fine but with the Sky option you have a phone ie an extra service that NTL havent priced for in the comparison, talk about not comparing apples with apples.

its not like many people would have NTL TV, B/Band and no phone at all!

very very good point and yes i saw the advert in todays news of the world

[kronas]

Originally Posted by Paul

Because NTL seem to think that customers should pay in more ways than one for problems with their service? I think it's out of order but unless someone tells NTL that they cannot charge unless they can keep the queues to below 2-3 minutes then I cannot see NTL changing anything.

to be honest i think most major compaines are now resorting to charge customers for calls, sky do, BT dont, NTL do....... CS should be free, so should faults (tv telephone), technical support i can forgive them for charging, but it should be capped, say 4p per minute for a maximum of 10-15 mins, after that they pickup the bill.

i think thats fair.

[Neil]

Telcos should not charge for phone calls from customers.

[Bengie]

Originally Posted by James Henry

I wouldn't bet on that at all... over 50% of people connected to an ADSL2+ enabled exchange will get over 10Mbit on it, fact

25% or so will be blessed with >16Mbit

Or to put it another way:

Only 50% of people connected to an ADSL2+ enabled exchange are getting 10Mbit on it, fact
75% are blessed with <16Mbit

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by handyman

Ntl's should be able to match or better it. After all they have already offered completly free internet.

They don't have to invest in a network either to do it as they already have a broadband ready network and a connection at every property that offers digital TV.

clever words, "at every property that offers digital TV" they just need to extend that to "everyone of their customers".

I wonder if ntl are even considering investment at all that expands their footprint.

---------- Post added at 14:29 ---------- Previous post was at 14:23 ----------

Originally Posted by James Henry

I wouldn't bet on that at all... over 50% of people connected to an ADSL2+ enabled exchange will get over 10Mbit on it, fact

25% or so will be blessed with >16Mbit

Are those official stats?

Take here for example I llive in an urban area hardly out in the sticks. I am 1 mile away from the city centre and in a highly populated area.

This side of town there is 1 exchange yes 1 covering a 10km radius, do you think 50% of people connected to that exchange will hit 10mbit? I think 50% would be lucky to even get a service.

I am on a exchange in the city but its far side, BTs checker estimated 4.5mbit for me, the line can synch at 6400kbit but because of various problems with the line and BT's way of fixing it involves dumbing down the bandwidth I can get a stable synch of around 4600-4800kbit. This then is worn down to 3mbit because of their faulty BRAS system. Granted BRAS isnt a factor on LLU.

Until BT get fibre rolled out to cabinets or build more exchanges then cable is superior to ADSL by a mile. Currently BT dont care tho, if the line is in spec then they wont touch it, and in spec means you can use it for ringing up people, if its no good for adsl then its tough luck.

Originally Posted by Wicked_and_Crazy

has anyone seen NTL's advert in the papers showing a comparision between NTL and Sky broadband where they say its something like £240 more expensive with the sky option in the first year. Most of the cost is due to having to have a BT phone line at £11 a month and NTL saying that for their b/band you dont need a phone. Thats fine but with the Sky option you have a phone ie an extra service that NTL havent priced for in the comparison, talk about not comparing apples with apples.

its not like many people would have NTL TV, B/Band and no phone at all!

They say bull**** baffles brains, good try ntl

[James Henry]

Originally Posted by Bengie

Or to put it another way:

Only 50% of people connected to an ADSL2+ enabled exchange are getting 10Mbit on it, fact
75% are blessed with <16Mbit

*Sigh*

I was directly answering someone who claimed that you had to be on top of the exchange to receive reasonable speeds.

Please feel free to stick to the basement if stuff like this is all you have to add to discussions in these sections, thx.

I'll find some exact figures from the official stats when I can be bothered for those people on the mission of 'cable good, DSL bad'.

---------- Post added at 15:19 ---------- Previous post was at 15:11 ----------

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Are those official stats?

Yup.

Take here for example I llive in an urban area hardly out in the sticks. I am 1 mile away from the city centre and in a highly populated area.

I live in a highly populated area... my line is currently synched at full ADSL 1 rate with room for more bandwidth and I get 970kB/s on it. I'm 700m from my exchange. I'd bet that most on this exchange are within a couple of km.

This side of town there is 1 exchange yes 1 covering a 10km radius, do you think 50% of people connected to that exchange will hit 10mbit? I think 50% would be lucky to even get a service.

You sure about that? How many people are within 3 or 4km of the exchange?

I am on a exchange in the city but its far side, BTs checker estimated 4.5mbit for me, the line can synch at 6400kbit but because of various problems with the line and BT's way of fixing it involves dumbing down the bandwidth I can get a stable synch of around 4600-4800kbit. This then is worn down to 3mbit because of their faulty BRAS system. Granted BRAS isnt a factor on LLU.

Depending on your line you can reasonable expect 10Mbit on ADSL2+. I am aware of BT's methods to increase stability, they consist of interleaving and increasing target SNR.

Until BT get fibre rolled out to cabinets or build more exchanges then cable is superior to ADSL by a mile. Currently BT dont care tho, if the line is in spec then they wont touch it, and in spec means you can use it for ringing up people, if its no good for adsl then its tough luck.

BT would love to roll out fibre to cabinets, unfortunately while Ofcom keep them held by the balls there's no point. Why invest when you're going to be forced to offer access to your investment for peanuts? It's interesting that we don't see anyone suggesting that ntl unbundle their network. Something to do with a Mr Carter possibly and it's just become institutionalised that BT must be held back by any means necessary to allow cable and LLU to catch up, meanwhile essentially pushing BT into rolling DSL out all over the country, even places that anywhere else in the world wouldn't even be considered for DSL deployment.

Anyway we digress!

---------- Post added at 15:24 ---------- Previous post was at 15:19 ----------

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

They say bull**** baffles brains, good try ntl

Welcome to the wonderful world of advertising. They're hardly going to say 'For basic TV, a phone line, and 10Mbit+ unlimited broadband Sky's deal is £x / month cheaper' so both sides will pick whatever suits them as a comparison

[Chrysalis]

I am 1.66km straight line distance but because of the route BT picked for the line when they laid it its well over 4km actual distance.

So you cant look at a map and draw a circle covering 2km and say right all those people will get 10mbit it dont work like that.

Yes I am very sure about the 10km radius, unless samknows has missing exchanges.

---------- Post added at 16:01 ---------- Previous post was at 15:57 ----------

I think the real situation is yes ofcom will force them to resell it, but lets not kid ourselves they will still be reselling it at a profit, like they still make a profit on the ADSL they are forced to resell. Its just the BT shareholders want XXXXXX profit instead of XXXX.

[James Henry]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

I am 1.66km straight line distance but because of the route BT picked for the line when they laid it its well over 4km actual distance.

So you cant look at a map and draw a circle covering 2km and say right all those people will get 10mbit it dont work like that.

Yes I am very sure about the 10km radius, unless samknows has missing exchanges.

---------- Post added at 16:01 ---------- Previous post was at 15:57 ----------

I think the real situation is yes ofcom will force them to resell it, but lets not kid ourselves they will still be reselling it at a profit, like they still make a profit on the ADSL they are forced to resell. Its just the BT shareholders want XXXXXX profit instead of XXXX.

You reckon they make a ton of profit on LLU now? You're mistaken if you think that's the case.

I'm aware that you can't draw a circle and say xxx will get x speed there - I do actually work with the stuff every day I don't base what I know on reading forums.

Your exchange might be different and infact I think Leicester is one of the notable areas like that along with Milton Keynes, however if you think you can extrapolate that to over 5,000 exchanges I'd disagree.

http://www.broadbanduk.org/reports/d...5_Analysys.pdf

Indicates 50% of UK lines are less than 2KM long offering theoretical 15Mbit on ADSL2+.

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/research/cm/...ns_regions.pdf

Gives a somewhat less optimistic view, so if we take something in the middle 25% being appropriate for 16Mbit is reasonable, as is 50% being capable of >10Mbit.

Another issue is that a lot of UK lines are actually outperforming the expected performances due to the copper plany being of a better quality than anticipated, though obviously some are also underperforming.

Anyway there's some data to chew over, the first report is based on data from operators themselves, the second is extrapolated.

[Chrysalis]

Leics seems to be a black hole for broadband its notably poor for both BT and ntl then.

---------- Post added at 16:56 ---------- Previous post was at 16:52 ----------

ofcom say only 17% are within 2km, I think 2km doesnt give 16mbit tho, people actually getting 16mbit on current adsl2+ services are around 1-1.5km from exchange.

[James Henry]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Leics seems to be a black hole for broadband its notably poor for both BT and ntl then.

---------- Post added at 16:56 ---------- Previous post was at 16:52 ----------

ofcom say only 17% are within 2km, I think 2km doesnt give 16mbit tho, people actually getting 16mbit on current adsl2+ services are around 1-1.5km from exchange.

See the previous, Ofcom are guessing and extrapolating while the BSG data is alledgedly from the operators themselves.

A quick look at adslguide shows a user at 4.1km receiving over 8Mbit.

http://img426.imageshack.us/img426/8...60608124na.jpg is at least 1.4KM long, looking at the stats and depending on the effect the router could have I'd say about 1.7 (attenuation @ 300khz / 10) and shows 20Mbit.

[Griffin]

Originally Posted by James Henry

See the previous, Ofcom are guessing and extrapolating while the BSG data is alledgedly from the operators themselves.

A quick look at adslguide shows a user at 4.1km receiving over 8Mbit.

http://img426.imageshack.us/img426/8...60608124na.jpg is at least 1.4KM long, looking at the stats and depending on the effect the router could have I'd say about 1.7 (attenuation @ 300khz / 10) and shows 20Mbit.

Myself i find its best to get a real comparison from people who have the different services. I also find that most companies & official bodies seem to follow this addage:- if you can't dazzle them with brilliance baffle them with bull****