Started as Proportional bills for a variable service?

I wish you had posted that in the first place and then we would not have had this convoluted thread which even went down the route of which ISP the OP used, now we know the real subject of this thread maybe we can all settle down and discuss the merits of the ASA conclusions on the descriptions used.

[Tijer]

Most people who have no problems with virgin tend to not post here. Which makes Virgin look like everyone is unhappy with the service they provide.

Only thing i am unhappy about with virgin is the lack of HD channels and the fact they wouldnt let me have another v+ box.... Service wise my broadband has been rock solid with 19-19.5mb connection speeds 95% of the time.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by whydoIneedatech

I wish you had posted that in the first place and then we would not have had this convoluted thread which even went down the route of which ISP the OP used, now we know the real subject of this thread maybe we can all settle down and discuss the merits of the ASA conclusions on the descriptions used.

That's already covered in the other thread. the merits of the ASA conclusions.

is it only me that pays attention around here?

Originally Posted by Gary L

That's already covered in the other thread. the merits of the ASA conclusions.

is it only me that pays attention around here?

Well you did post that in post #30 in this thread in answer to what this thread is about.

[alferret]

Originally Posted by Gary L

No, you just say that because you can't think of anything else to say. you think that saying that you get full speed and no problems cancels out what someone else has said otherwise.

you haven't even said that yes some don't get the speed they should get, but the priority of getting as much money as possible by taking more users on than they should, is more important. not that I'd expect you to say that anyway

You must admit though Gary you do seem to have a rather large chip on your shoulder where VM are concerned, especially STM and speed.

Anyway back to the subject at hand.

Everybody knows that VM do have a capacity issue, they may say they dont but its a bit obvious. But where do they get the money from to update the infrastructure?

STM was brought in so that those people who hammered their connection to the detriment of others had their speed shaped for 5hrs at a time so that people who dont normally get their stated speed or as close and dont abuse the service can get a more normal stable speed.
STM is here to stay and if people dont feel that they are getting what they think they should get then there are plenty of other ISP's that are willing to take their money.

In your initial post you seem to be missing the point.

No, there is an issue with bandwidth availability caused by lots of users downloading an unusually large amount of data per day.

That really doesn't make much sense. Do VM buy their bandwidth per unit,
and cant afford the costs, or that theirs plenty of seats on the bus, as
long as people don't sit in them.

Doesnt matter how VM aquire their bandwidth if the service is running at its maximum capable speed because people are maxing out their 20mb connections downloading linux distro's then then people like me come along and want to stream a bit of TV or play a game we cant because all the bandwidth hoggers are using all the pipe. Which is why we have STM, if someone doesnt understand that then, well what can I say.

I dont believe there is an ISP network that could cope with all of the users downloading all of the time.

That's interesting because when VM were trying to convince me not to go
to adsl they said that all adsl services were 'up to' and I'd never
achieve the stated speed......

VM are correct again no ISP could handle a 100% load 24\7 it would just grind to a halt which sadly does happen ocassionaly in certain area's.
If you have a problem with VM trying to convince you not to go to ADSL and your so unhappy with VM leave. But I can more or less guarantee that unsless you are quite close to an exchange you wont get a stated speed it will be up to.

STM was introduced to try and give a fairer service to all by stopping users using all of the bandwidth 24 hours a day.

Even though retentions claim that adsl doesn't give you the stated
speed, and cable does?

Again VM are trying to do the right thing, a fair service to all.

Cable can give you the sated speed, many, many people do get the speed that they pay for but like many companies they over subscribe.
It happens all the time its called maximising profit.

A cable service running at its optimum will give users the stated speed within the networks own infrastructure.

An ADSL service when running at its optimum will give users an up to speed dependant on line lengh and noise.

Its like having a speed limit on the motorway, its stated 70 as a max and you can get 70 but sometimes during peak hours you might only get 40 or 50. So when your stuck in congestion and only going at a slower speed what you gonna do write to the highways agency.

Hopefully over the coming months as people take up the 50mb service and docsis 3 this will ease some of the congestion for those on 4, 10 & 20mb.

[dave6x]

Originally Posted by Bonglet

I have to say after being customer on cable for over 8 year now
Telewest were superb 2 faults in 6 year all resolved in a day or 2.
Virgin Media since the rebrand awfull overcongested for a FULL year sneak rollout of stm, sneak trials and changes to T&C's that make you wonder what the hell are they in self destruct mode for.
I canna take much more captain i think my engines about to blow for the last time.

I fully agree with Bonglet. I was a very satisfied NTL BB customer for several years, from 600kbps up to the original 10Mbps, then back to 2Mbps for a while, rock solid full advertised speed, low latency, brilliant service that I recommended to everybody!

However, no more! Since early this year the speed is all over the place, loads of nulls, huge latency at times and packet loss issues, website connection issues, etc.

The product is being oversold and the infrastructure is creaking under the pressure. VM is applying Draconian STM measures and blaming its customers for trying to do what their advertising tells them they can do!

I would be very happy with a bandwidth package from VM, a form of proportional billing, where the tier you are on includes a basic download allowance, maybe 2Mb@10GB/mth, 10Mb@50GB/mth, 20Mb@100GB/mth then pro-rata for usage above that. Maybe that would get the 24/7 bandwidth hogs off the network. Interestingly something similar was proposed and shelved by NTL about 3 years ago! See http://www.cableforum.co.uk/article/...ed-as-standard

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by whydoIneedatech

Well you did post that in post #30 in this thread in answer to what this thread is about.

No it was in reply to a question asked in post #24

Originally Posted by Gary L

No it was in reply to a question asked in post #24

Its still in the same thread so no worries.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by alferret

Anyway back to the subject at hand.

I have read your post. really I have

but it's not our fault the company is in debt. it is not our fault that the company has to have STM so they can take on more customers at the detrimental effect to other customers. it's also not our fault that we all have to be squeezed onto a UBR and suck whatever bandwidth isn't there, but has been advertised and sold as it's there.

---------- Post added at 20:26 ---------- Previous post was at 20:24 ----------

Originally Posted by dave6x

The product is being oversold and the infrastructure is creaking under the pressure. VM is applying Draconian STM measures and blaming its customers for trying to do what their advertising tells them they can do!

You say it so much better than I do

[dave6x]

Originally Posted by Gary L

You say it so much better than I do

Thank you for that, however I prefer to see it in the context of my post at #36

[Toto]

Maybe this is a stupid question, but if the original post was on a VM newsgroup service, how can a non VM user see it (assuming that Gary L isn't on the VM service), those groups are private to Virgin customers only I thought?

[alferret]

Originally Posted by Gary L

I have read your post. really I have

but it's not our fault the company is in debt. it is not our fault that the company has to have STM so they can take on more customers at the detrimental effect to other customers. it's also not our fault that we all have to be squeezed onto a UBR and suck whatever bandwidth isn't there, but has been advertised and sold as it's there.

But it is there, you cant use words like we all have to be squeezed onto a UBR and suck whatever bandwidth isn't there I get my full 10mb 24\7 apart from when I have downloaded my 2nd linux distro (which isnt that often) my area AFAIK isnt over subscribed where other area's are but not all.
Its not our fault the company is in debt your right and it is us who have to deal with it. But as an individual you need to decide whether or not you need to subscribe to services supplied based on information given if the service is not as described then complain, if the service does not improove then the only option is to leave.

But it seems like some people keep complaining for the sake of complaining and are not prepared to go elsewhere to get a better service. If there is such a thing.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by alferret

But it is there, you cant use words like we all have to be squeezed onto a UBR and suck whatever bandwidth isn't there I get my full 10mb 24\7 apart from when I have downloaded my 2nd linux distro (which isnt that often) my area AFAIK isnt over subscribed where other area's are but not all.

ok maybe my use of the word all was inapropriate, and is just a figure of speech.

Its not our fault the company is in debt your right and it is us who have to deal with it. But as an individual you need to decide whether or not you need to subscribe to services supplied based on information given if the service is not as described then complain, if the service does not improove then the only option is to leave.

But it seems like some people keep complaining for the sake of complaining and are not prepared to go elsewhere to get a better service. If there is such a thing.

So basically we shouldn't complain and just go elsewhere. but we should complain and if it doesn't improve then go elsewhere again.
why can't we complain and stay if we choose to for any number of reasons?

---------- Post added at 21:17 ---------- Previous post was at 21:10 ----------

Originally Posted by Toto

Maybe this is a stupid question, but if the original post was on a VM newsgroup service, how can a non VM user see it (assuming that Gary L isn't on the VM service), those groups are private to Virgin customers only I thought?

They are private to Virgin customers only. I'm not certain but I think he might be a Virgin customer.

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Gary L

They are private to Virgin customers only. I'm not certain but I think he might be a Virgin customer.

Thanks again, but who's he BTW?

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Toto

Thanks again, but who's he BTW?

Gary L.