[Merged] BB Speed Upgrades - Page 58

The_real_dj · 04-08-2004, 12:49

I currently have a pace box, which is not in use for tv (just bieng used as a rather large cable modem).

I asked NTL if i could swap to a modem but they said i would lose my email address!!!.

I am just wondering if my pace box will get the faster speed or will i have to wait till I get a new samsung??

Has any one with a Pace box got 1.5 MB ???

Cheers

zovat · 04-08-2004, 14:05

Daft question I know, but....

I have a motorola Surfboard CM, will I need to re-set in order to get the new config file, of will NTL remote reboot when they have done the upgrade ?

Also - can I check on the CM as to whether it has been changed, or just by using the speed checker. (My wife is often using the connection when I am home, so the speed test is not necessarily a reliable guide.)

Oh - in Bracknell -RG12 - apparently going to be done in august...

Nor · 04-08-2004, 14:18

Looks like Glasgow has been done ahead of schedule. Website said October, but reset my SACM today and its been done.

IanUK · 04-08-2004, 14:33

Quote:

Samsung and Pace boxes use the same file, so don't worry.

Thanks BBKing, I'll just have to be patient then

Cheers

Ian

Stephen · 04-08-2004, 14:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nor

Looks like Glasgow has been done ahead of schedule. Website said October, but reset my SACM today and its been done.

Some areas are meant to be october as the network is not ready for the speed increase yet. I think parts of Clydebank are where it is down as october, but as you see from looking through the thread many areas have been upgraded already even though they say october and november. I am in Castlemilk and was done on monday.

Nor · 04-08-2004, 15:26

I'm Burnside mate so a stones throw away from you. I was probably done monday too then, just not noticed

s0d · 04-08-2004, 15:31

Southampton seems to be done.

Downloading at 88kb/s constantly

cyclone · 04-08-2004, 15:48

Swindon STILL not done

BBKing · 04-08-2004, 16:21

Worth pointing out that just because you have or haven't been done doesn't mean your entire area hasn't been done. Some areas are being done later because of capacity work or resegmentations. Hence the postcode checker, although this appears to be working on a random date principle at the moment.

No Paces or Samsungs will have 1.5Mb yet, incidentally.

Kneebs · 04-08-2004, 16:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBKing

No Paces or Samsungs will have 1.5Mb yet, incidentally.

I dont suppose you know if all 1MB thru the STB will be done together do you? The checker for me says August , however I think that may be referring to 150/600/SACMs.

Or are you notified when a particular areas' Pace boxes have been swapped over to the Samsung ones ?

Cheers BBK

~Dan~ · 04-08-2004, 19:17

Looks like Leeds had been done. I had HUGE problems uploading in the early hours of the morning (various times between 4 and 9am) - browsing and downloading was fine but as soon as I started an upload my connection dropped (sorted by a reboot.) Just now I noticed the speed increase when I downloaded something. Maybe my upload problem was a side effect of the upgrade in progress? (It's fine now.)

Rik · 04-08-2004, 20:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by robtufts

I'm off the luton dns (have lutn in my hostmask) and on 1.5mb and people in the same town as me have been upgraded too, to 750 and 300k

Same here and im on 1.5Meg as well

Hemel Hempstead im in, strange thing is tho when I turned my pc on this morning had no internet....looked at Modem and it all looked well......

All I done was released and refreshed cable modem from router and and it worked fine!

Very strange

Rik · 04-08-2004, 20:38

All I can say to people in the Luton area is make sure you reboot your cable modem and then check your speed

You may be pleasantly suprised

purenuman · 04-08-2004, 20:42

Even better now it's settled down

Wed, 4 Aug 2004 19:35:36 UTC
1st 128K took 561 ms = 233640 Bytes/sec = approx 1944 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 561 ms = 233640 Bytes/sec = approx 1944 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 561 ms = 233640 Bytes/sec = approx 1944 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 561 ms = 233640 Bytes/sec = approx 1944 kbits/sec

And steady as a rock

S Manchester.... (Stret)

td444 · 04-08-2004, 20:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by purenuman

Even better now it's settled down

Wed, 4 Aug 2004 19:35:36 UTC
1st 128K took 561 ms = 233640 Bytes/sec = approx 1944 kbits/sec
2nd 128K took 561 ms = 233640 Bytes/sec = approx 1944 kbits/sec
3rd 128K took 561 ms = 233640 Bytes/sec = approx 1944 kbits/sec
4th 128K took 561 ms = 233640 Bytes/sec = approx 1944 kbits/sec

And steady as a rock

S Manchester.... (Stret)

Hehe I do find it funny when people try to blatantly lie