how about we start a campaign to let VM know that we DONT LIKE SHAPING

[pedrohizzo]

Originally Posted by dontpannic

Oh do me a lemon, thats a perfect example.

I'm just going to wash my hands of this thread now. Flame me all you like for having MY OPINION, but all I know is that I'm happy with the service that VM provide, I'm happy with STM, (according to my summary of some of the replies to this thread) It seems to be reducing the heavy downloaders to tears, which I find funny.

It's good for me, internet is definitely quicker in my area of an evening now, so I'm happy.

it's not reducing heavy downloaders to tears, what it is doing is affecting people who do the majority of their surfing when they get home, it is most definately not affecting heavy downloaders, as i think you will find in several threads they say themselves they dont care because they just download after 12pm.

it seems that you are labeling everyone who complains as someone who downloads illegal content and that seems to be the whole basis of your argument.

so how about you do me a lemon

and i think you'll find i haven't "flamed" anyone, however i have an opinion just like you.

[Paul H]

Originally Posted by pedrohizzo

it's not reducing heavy downloaders to tears, what it is doing is affecting people who do the majority of their surfing when they get home, it is most definately not affecting heavy downloaders, as i think you will find in several threads they say themselves they dont care because they just download after 12pm.

it seems that you are labeling everyone who complains as someone who downloads illegal content and that seems to be the whole basis of your argument.

so how about you do me a lemon

and i think you'll find i haven't "flamed" anyone, however i have an opinion just like you.

I agree!
I really disagree when people accuse anyone who complains as being an illegal downloader or they are the reason anyway why all this throttling is there for. there were hardly any problems at all with speeds for everyone before the 20MB and the throttling. but all of a sudden there is loads of problems. why????!

[pedrohizzo]

(i got bored again ), came up with this using slightly sketchy numbers and my math may be off (more than likely it is lol). i based it on how long it took me to download 400mb which was about 15 mins, if anyone wants to correct it feel free as i'm not very good at this kind of thing just looking for insight. this is what traffic shaping is doing to the various packages.

4pm - 12 am - 8 hours traffic shaping is in effect

2mb = 6.4gb max traffic / shaped for 6 hours = 3.2gb @ 1mb speed + 700mb @ 2mb speed

4mb = 12.8gb max traffic / shaped for 6 hours 40 minutes @ 2mb = 6.4gb @ 2mb speed + 1.5gb @ 4mb speed

10mb = 32gb max traffic / shaped 7 hours 20 minutes @ 5mb = 16gb @ 5mb speed + 6gb @ 10mb speed

20mb = 64gb max traffic / shaped 7 hours 40 minutes @ 5mb = 16gb @ 5mb speed + 6gb @ 20mb speed

[ECW_Original]

Just a thought:
If its people maxing out their UPLOAD speed that causes more impact on the whole network, why not INSTEAD of limiting download speeds, why not just limit the upload speeds during peak time, then anyone that wants to download can, and still that small majority that just use the net for emails and general browsing could still do so!

Or am I talking bubbles?

[helmutcheese]

Users have been crying out for decent uplaods for years, we still have crap uploads, the fact is the ISP needs to spend cash on upgrades instead of pocketing or wasting profits (read yesterdays news).

[popper]

Originally Posted by Florence

After talking to VM CS I put a scenario to them if I unplugged the modem all day plugged it in after 4pm after work, downloaded a product paid for or a large Microsoft beta file that maxed me out on download only would i be capped. I was told yes as i would be in the 5%....... At one time it was what was used all day that worked out who was the 5% not 20/40mins in the evening when people come home from work.

so if im reading you right florence, they told you or implyed, that this whole 5% figure perhaps comes from as far back as the 512k download days for the amount of data that could be downloaded in the 24 hours and hence the figure for tier's we see today?.

[lordy]

Originally Posted by helmutcheese

You have your ISP to blame for takiing on more and more custmers in areas that were at limit of users for the design of the network,

And that is basically the problem. Companies want your money but they dont want you to use *what is advertised*. Even now there is no clear link to their new FUP (not AUP) on the signup page. And muck talk about 'unlimited' Why would a casual Web Browser even care about 'unlimited'. The Advertising Standards Agengency or whoever need to give these companies a big kick up the backside.

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/webs...duct.do?id=227

[popper]

Originally Posted by pedrohizzo

maybe someone can answer this, back when ntl:telewest had their 256k,512k,756k package did they have the aup because i'm sure i remember people not wanting to upgrade then because of the changes to the contract.

are you making the classic mistake of assuming that the AUP is the contract?, it's not.

the T&C is the only consumer contract, and theres the matter of 'reciprication' any clause most cover both partys in equal measure or it can become null and void.

true you may need to fill out a county court fileing, or report the matter to Ofcom for them to get/seek assurances from the company that they will not try and enforce any null contract clause, but the option is there if you are willing to write the letter and send it registered post at minimal costs.

the moral is 'just because someone writes a clause into the consumer contract doesnt make it right or proper or lawful', challenge it and see how long it lasts, and that goes for any consumer contract even cable and ADSL broadband service providers.

[pedrohizzo]

i was just thinking and thought i remembered there being no mention in the original contract of any kind of a limit or restriction and no mention of a fair use clause. either way that is all in the past now as i accepted the new contract which does mention fair use/acceptable use when i got upgraded for free because my old stb broke.

[popper]

Originally Posted by SMHarman

Possibly, but the point is you are using a shared resource. Increasing the maximum speed enables people to use that resource faster when there is less congestion (keeping to a road analagy, a bit like the German Autobahns), but also reflecting and understanding that at times you cannot drive flat out (and as such about 30% of the autobahn network has speed limits on it).

and its also understood that the 'Autobahns' is engineered for the given amount of traffic per hour and allowances made for peak times, put more traffic on there than it was designed for at peak, and the need for traffic shaping I.e speed limits becomes a factor FOR SAFETY reasons.

its also assumed that the owners will be monitoring the needs of the traffic, and if its seen that there is a growing need to add more capacity as your selling more machines, they build on another lane or two all the way from your entry point to the most popular destinations with a view that its better to spend the tax money on moving the traffic faster than risk the major pileup day after day, every day....

---------- Post added at 01:35 ---------- Previous post was at 01:15 ----------

Originally Posted by pedrohizzo

i was just thinking and thought i remembered there being no mention in the original contract of any kind of a limit or restriction and no mention of a fair use clause. either way that is all in the past now as i accepted the new contract which does mention fair use/acceptable use when i got upgraded for free because my old stb broke.

the moral is 'just because someone writes a clause into the consumer contract doesnt make it right or proper or lawful', challenge it and see how long it lasts.

perhaps if people started posted here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...xed-broadband/ and asking/posting the right questions, they may get some good advice as to the law and their rights and protections under it, just as they did with the banks charges and forcing the companys to refund the unlawful charges and and perhaps have them reform the consumer contracts for the long term good of all.

---------- Post added at 02:22 ---------- Previous post was at 01:35 ----------

Originally Posted by dontpannic

Because its there. I have 5 people in this household, I download quite a bit. Why should I have to justify my choice of broadband to someone?

i cant see anyone saying you need to justyfy your choice of broadband package, but seeing as you bring it up, it does seem that you would have to justify it to your mum and dad who are paying for the account your using....

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by popper

and its also understood that the 'Autobahns' is engineered for the given amount of traffic per hour and allowances made for peak times, put more traffic on there than it was designed for at peak, and the need for traffic shaping I.e speed limits becomes a factor FOR SAFETY reasons.

its also assumed that the owners will be monitoring the needs of the traffic, and if its seen that there is a growing need to add more capacity as your selling more machines, they build on another lane or two all the way from your entry point to the most popular destinations with a view that its better to spend the tax money on moving the traffic faster than risk the major pileup day after day, every day....

Good points, but generally in any network, road or data, you will reach a crunch point that occurs for a while whilst that extra lane is built. And during the building time you can expect even more pain. It could easily be argued that this is where the VM network currently is at. The extra lane needs building, but they are currently planning the lane etc.

[dontpannic]

Originally Posted by helmutcheese

1) We ARE limited no matter what anyone inc the Mod says, the fact is if I drive on the M1 and am made to leave it after 5miles cause of roadworks then
I'm limited on my use of the M1, in the same sense as if I can use the M1 from start to finish but there is a speed restriction of 50MPH, its still a limit imposed on me.

Right, for the final time.

IT IS A SPEED RESTRICTION! YOU CAN STILL DOWNLOAD AS MUCH AS YOU LIKE!

That probably still won't register with most people, but you have to stop saying its a limited service - it's not!

[Magilla]

Originally Posted by dontpannic

Right, for the final time.

That probably still won't register with most people, but you have to stop saying its a limited service - it's not!

YES IT IS! And whining in massive letters will not change this fact. As you say, the speed is limited, thus the service *is* limited in some way.

---------- Post added at 11:02 ---------- Previous post was at 10:27 ----------

Originally Posted by dontpannic

Because its there. I have 5 people in this household, I download quite a bit. Why should I have to justify my choice of broadband to someone?

You don't, but your basic arguement seems to be that shaping is great because "I have never been shaped", but this appears to be by virtue of the fact that you have a connection that massively outweights your needs.

[Paul H]

Originally Posted by Magilla

YES IT IS! And whining in massive letters will not change this fact. As you say, the speed is limited, thus the service *is* limited in some way.

Which brings us back to the use of the word unlimited, when there is quite clearly limits in place

[Magilla]

Originally Posted by pedrohizzo

it seems that you are labeling everyone who complains as someone who downloads illegal content and that seems to be the whole basis of your argument.

Indeed, when flawed assumptions are the only way to backup your point of view you have to wonder how valid that point of view is.

Originally Posted by pedrohizzo

and i think you'll find i haven't "flamed" anyone, however i have an opinion just like you.

Quite!