*ALL* ntl Cap Discussion Here Please.

[Doofy]

Broadband is fast becoming a utility just like gas, electricity, etc, etc if i use more gas and electric then i pay more i use less i pay less. I do not see what the difference is myself the more you use the more you should pay IMO. If you do not wish to pay more than be content with what you have.

[Florence]

Originally Posted by big_ba*tard

How does it affect your service lets have the facts here please?
Show proof how much you were affected if you were at all?
What has others downloading stopped you doing?
Now you you might get a isp giving you a poor excuse its down to others but they are talking rubbish.

If one person is maxing downloads and max uploads, on a busy UBR others can end up with slower speeds. It is a contended BB internet service not a personal 1to1 connection.

[big_ba*tard]

Originally Posted by Doofy

Broadband is fast becoming a utility just like gas, electricity, etc, etc if i use more gas and electric then i pay more i use less i pay less. I do not see what the difference is myself the more you use the more you should pay IMO. If you do not wish to pay more than be content with what you have.

We do pay extra for what we want 1mb ,2mb,3mb or 4mb in some areas

Originally Posted by big_ba*tard

How does it affect your service lets have the facts here please?
Show proof how much you were affected if you have at all?
What has others downloading stopped you doing?
Now you you might get a isp giving you a poor excuse its down to others but they are talking rubbish.

See post #1353. As it happens, it doesn't affect me, because AFAIK no-one else on my street is maxing their connection, but with a 20:1 contention, maxing your connection will impact on your neighbours. I presume this is why the current 'soft' caps are only enforced if you are having a detrimental effect on other users. However, a 'hard' cap is fairer, as it does not then depend on your neighbours' usage and how many customers NTL happens to have in your area.
[Edit] Kits has already made the same point

Originally Posted by big_ba*tard

Now you you might get a isp giving you a poor excuse its down to others but they are talking rubbish.

And i take it you work on NTL's network and have access to all the info relating to bandwidth usage and total amount of users on each UBR. Pray tell, show us your advanced knowledge about the cable network we use and give us your knowledge on how we can serve better so we need not cap users ?

Originally Posted by big_ba*tard

We do pay extra for what we want 1mb ,2mb,3mb or 4mb in some areas

There is no 4M ntl service. Having read your posts again I am convinced that not only have you have signed up with a provocative name - you appear to be here purely to spout rubbish and inflame this topic. If you have something sensible to say then please say it, otherwise you will be taking an early bath.

Originally Posted by Paul M

There is no 4M ntl service. Having read your posts again I am convinced that not only have you have signed up with a provocative name - you appear to be here purely to spout rubbish and inflame this topic. If you have something sensible to say then please say it, otherwise you will be taking an early bath.

Senseability goes out the window when they come out from under the bridge

[vbrindle]

Originally Posted by dezzo

Too small for you and some others. Perfectly acceptable to other users though.

Ntl aren't holding a gun to your head and forcing you to take the service. A number of providers are now capping their services and as broadband moves more towards being a utility I can see more and more companies doing this.

I disagree. 1Gb is too small for a 3Mb service. Especially when it's the same cap as the 2Mb service.

[Florence]

Originally Posted by vbrindle

I disagree. 1Gb is too small for a 3Mb service. Especially when it's the same cap as the 2Mb service.

That was the main reason I only took the 2mb service if it had been as first rumoured I was going to 3mb giving NTL an extra £13/£15 a month instead I have stayed on £24.99

[big_ba*tard]

Let's not get onto ntl to much they struggle to keep a good e-mail service going let alone anything else.
But why offer faster bb if they can not handle it?
Now adsl will be 8mb later this year with no limits and there is no way ntl or tw can not afford to keep up.
So you will have to up your speeds but then you will have to cap even more because you can not cope with moderate downloader on a 3mb connection.
Which i will say and continue to say is rubbish as you are setting out charging for the extra gb's downloaded which would by peoples posts on here effect there downloads.
So would ntl etc then have to pay other broadband users for the bad speeds they get because others are paying by the gb for going over there cap?

Originally Posted by Bill C

And i take it you work on NTL's network and have access to all the info relating to bandwidth usage and total amount of users on each UBR. Pray tell, show us your advanced knowledge about the cable network we use and give us your knowledge on how we can serve better so we need not cap users ?

[Derek]

Originally Posted by vbrindle

I disagree. 1Gb is too small for a 3Mb service. Especially when it's the same cap as the 2Mb service.

Well you can disagree if you want. Thats the beauty of living in a democracy

I firmly believe (and this is backed up from info I've seen when I still worked in Ntl) that the majority of users will not exceed the daily limits. Possibly if things such as the BBC's interactive media player and other high bandwidth applications appear and gobble up your allowance then the caps will have to be looked at again.

Some people will exceed the caps (myself included)and they can either go to another uncapped provider (if they still exist) or pay the extra for going over the limit.

Originally Posted by vbrindle

I disagree. 1Gb is too small for a 3Mb service. Especially when it's the same cap as the 2Mb service.

Agreed, if it is enforced that way. If it's enforced as an average over a period, or as 30GB a month, I have no problem. (I often download software as CD images from MSDN. One download can be 3 CDs = 1.8GB).

[Derek]

Originally Posted by big_ba*tard

Now adsl will be 8mb later this year with no limits and there is no way ntl or tw can not afford to keep up.

Yep 8Mb if the local exchange is situated at the bottom of your garden

[slowcoach]

A low user is not necessarily a profitable proposition for an ISP.
Take the case of myself and my two neighbours, I have been on-line since the old bulletin board days (started with an acoustic coupler 300/75 speed), my two neighbours both connected to NTL at the lowest price tier within the past few years as a result of all the media hype. In both cases my neighbours cancelled their contracts after 12 months as they could not justify the cost every month. Installation costs for NTL were the same for all three of us, plus my neighbours had the promotional offer at the time (three months at half price, or whatever it was), then there was the additional cost to NTL of my neighbours continually having to phone CS due to their total lack of IT knowledge. I am not saying that my neighbours are typical of a new customer but it does seem strange that they both followed the same pattern exactly, so one can deduce that there must be many others following the same pattern.

If my neighbours are the type of †œlow userâ₠¬Ã‚Â� customer NTL is hoping to attract then I fail to see where the benefit to NTL is, surely a long term, savvy customer on top tier has got to be a much better proposition financially, yet these are the same customers that NTL is starting to target by all accounts.

The top tiers only advantage is their superior download speed, if NTL are going to frown on downloading then what is the point of providing the higher tiers, especially since the vast majority of NTL customers choose the cheapest tier anyway.

With VOD starting to launch are NTL going to limit the amount of films a user can download each day, not on your Nellie, suddenly there is no †œimpactà¢ÃƒÆ’¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚Âà ‚Â� issues, VOD will prove what a load of BS the whole capping issue is, if you are willing to pay then other users feeling the impact will suddenly be of little concern to NTL.

[Paul K]

Originally Posted by Paul M

There is no 4M ntl service. Having read your posts again I am convinced that not only have you have signed up with a provocative name - you appear to be here purely to spout rubbish and inflame this topic. If you have something sensible to say then please say it, otherwise you will be taking an early bath.

Let's face it, with this topic and the upgrade topic we were always likely to get flooded with new members who only want to cause problems because the cap is going to impact how much they can illegally share. If all the posts by the P2P crew were removed from this thread and the cap was discussed sensibly and properly then this thread would be half the length it is. Yes we know there are some "legal" ways of using a lot of bandwidth each month but we also know that there is one very easy way to use 60Gb+ a month
Personally I feel that the cap for the 1Mb service is too low, we'll monitor our normal usage and if we are encroaching on the cap too often we will have to look at what tier we are using. NTL have upgraded the BB speeds on numerous occasions for free, why should we moan too loudly about having to look at our usage to make sure we are using the right tier for us?
__________________

Originally Posted by JohnHorb

Agreed, if it is enforced that way. If it's enforced as an average over a period, or as 30GB a month, I have no problem. (I often download software as CD images from MSDN. One download can be 3 CDs = 1.8GB).

I think it's likely that the cap will be based on average monthly usage otherwise NTL will have a hell of a time policing the usage policy.