1GB Cap Letter!!!!

[Sociable]

Originally Posted by Klaus

Why should he be kicked off the service? Those of us who signed up before the addition to the AUP, signed up to an unlimited service. We pay extra for faster access because we are heavy users of the Internet. That is who the 1Mb service is aimed at. Now we are penalised for using the service to it's full potential...

Klaus

Even though you like I signed up for an "unlimited" service, even we agreed to the original AUP which already had a fair use section. It just wasn't clearly defined what would be classed as outside "Fair Use" in the original AUP.

End of the day the sort of 24/7 use you are doing is a clear abuse of the system and other users in your area would be fully justified in suing NTL for NOT kicking you off the network or at least curbing your activity.

Without being funny the sort of highly excessive use being advocated by a few now actually ruins the case being made for an "Intelligent" fair use policy to be put in place.

Worse than that it actually helps NTL justify the current policy and lets them off the hook as regards reaching an intelligent and effective compromise. What we all need is a revised system which is fair to all whilst still helps maximise both potential usage and improves the overall quality of service.

[joker]

Originally Posted by ProfPete

When will people like you understand that you are paying for a CONTENDED service, with data rates of UP TO 1mbps? You are NOT entitled to download that amount of data on a contended service at all, and frankly you are being selfish.

If you want to download at 1mbps all the time, you should be paying £700 per month, not £35, because THAT IS WHAT IT COSTS. You are using far more than your fair share (incidentally, 1gig/day is TWICE your fair share).

There is nothing wrong with the network. Contention is applied on the local loop because that is the physical design of the system. The backhaul network is flying, and does not suffer from contention at all.

Unfortunately, people like you who are stealing from ntl are preventing them from investing in the network, and forward moving. They have no interest in providing 2mbps, because people like you will just download 600gb/month, costing them a further £700 or more per customer, for a measly £20 or so extra.

Until you accept that you have a contended service, those of us who want higher bandwidth services despearately just aren't going to see them. Please wake up to reality.

That is a vailed point, that it is costing NTL a lot of money, but if they cannot handle then why offer the service?
On the other hand if this is causing people problems, then they should turn down users who wish to use the service for mainly for downloading. But as NTL is a business its all about money and they won't do that.

Also them who do want faster connections, but are *having to wait* because of users who download a lot, i think is utter nonsence. If someone wanted a 2mg connection then they would have it for the speed of downloading, or other things that require fast speeds/a high amount of bandwidth.

Also in this day and age, an issue like this can only get bigger. As files sizes increase .

[iron25]

Do you really think that if NTL got rid of all their 'heavy users' and made everyone stick to 1gb a day that they would spend all that money that they would save on improving their network? I don't think so. They wouldn't have to because people would hardly be using it whilst still paying over the odds for their connection.

[Frank]

Originally Posted by iron25

I pay for a service and I intend to use that service, if I want to download 24 hours a day then I am entitled to and until someone tells me otherwise I will continue to do so.

Sure, I agree with that, but at the same time bandwidth isn't free. I don't agree with how ntl implemented the cap, or their limit of 30GB for that matter, but I do think that a limit such as Clara's of 150GB or something is very reasonable. 267GB is not reasonable on a contended service.

Originally Posted by iron25

To say I should be kicked off just proves to me how ignorant you are. It's people like you which annoy me, just because I download more than you I should get kicked off. Get real!

I didn't say that at all, I said that 267GB was ridiculous and gave an example of my usage.

Originally Posted by iron25

If NTL only want me to download 1gb a day than I should be paying about £3.50 a month and not £35. I did not get 1mb so that I can download web pages quicker, I got it because I download alot.

If we are talking about ignorance, then you have a lot to learn about bandwidth costs...

Originally Posted by iron25

Since having NTL broadband I have not suffered any slow down and to blame poor network performance on heavy users is pathetic. The poor performance is down to a poor network!

Not really, it is about both.

[Frank]

Originally Posted by joker

That is a vailed point, that it is costing NTL a lot of money, but if they cannot handle then why offer the service?

But they aren't offering a 250GB+ bandwidth allowance. Simple as.

If they want to offer a reasonable limit then fine, but I do think their current limits are stupid, backward, and not thought out well, and you are of course right when you say file sizes are only increasing.

[Blake]

Hi,

As i understand it, It is not the downloads that affect the network..

But the "Uploads"

Same kinda princaple can be used for your own connection, you upload at max, your downloads are going to suffer.

Same as the uBR I guess.

I could be totaly wrong about this, but after reading Robins help guide, thats the impression I get anyways.


Have fun

[MovedGoalPosts]

Perhaps, belatedly I come to this thread. Indeed it is perhaps stranger that none of my Anticap colleagues have got here before me.

I'm just working my way through all this, and wish to avoid a "knee jerk" reaction, but the phrase "there's no smoke without fire" does spring to mind to all those who thought that the cap stuff was just hot air, when it appeared out of the blue just over a year ago.

If ntl think that many of their customers are going to put up with this, I hope they will have to return to the drawing board. This forum is full of examples of poor customer service, poor email service, poor installation service, low speed service (compared to stated service speeds), etc. Combine this with, as was originally complained of at the time the policy was first placed in the AUP, an absence of any effective ntl supplied means for customers to monitor their own bandwidth consumption. If the cap is to be applied, there really becomes little if any point for many subscribing, especially to the higher speed tiers.

I can assure you that anticap.co.uk is going to be watching this very closely.

It's about time they started sending these letters out.

Personally I have no interest in downloading the entire internet each month - but I do have an interest in my connection responding speedily - which it does not do when some of these selfish people are downloading their 300GB a month.

Please - all of you who want to do this, don't moan and threaten to leave - just do it now - and leave the rest of us to enjoy our nice fast connections.

[kronas]

Originally Posted by pem

Personally I have no interest in downloading the entire internet each month - but I do have an interest in my connection responding speedily - which it does not do when some of these selfish people are downloading their 300GB a month.

i pay good money for NTL to provide me with an internet service with excellent uptime and speeds, if there network cannot cope with the pressures at UBR level then that is there fault, for not keeping the infastructure in check, there were no limits or guidelines or restrictions or information telling me to 'consider' my usage for other users when i signed up, i know its a contended service but if other companies can do it why not NTL ?

Originally Posted by kronas

....., i know its a contended service but if other companies can do it why not NTL ?

What makes you think they can ? You would have exactly the same problem if you were on ADSL with the "standard" 50:1 contention ratio - if someone started downloading 300GB a month then it would affect the other 49 - if a few started it then the rest would be in trouble. That is the whole problem of a contended system - you share the bandwidth, if one or two start hogging it then the rest suffer.

[kronas]

Originally Posted by pem

What makes you think they can ? You would have exactly the same problem if you were on ADSL with the "standard" 50:1 contention ratio - if someone started downloading 300GB a month then it would affect the other 49 - if a few started it then the rest would be in trouble. That is the whole problem of a contended system - you share the bandwidth, if one or two start hogging it then the rest suffer.

maybe because other compaines can actually provide many of there customers with a good service, i know of plenty of people in my area who have ADSL with the same ISP and dont have contention problems.........

in theory does NTL not have a far lower contention ratio ?

[punky]

A little OT I guess, but it was mentioned here, so here is a logical place to put it. I was checking the bulldog site for the 4mbps service and saw this:

From http://www.bulldogdsl.com/residentia...time/a4000.asp

Prices include VAT. AllTime 4000 will be charged £72.99 per month. This special promotion is available for a limited period.

Special promotion/limited period? What is? The price? The availability? Either way it doesn't look good, I suppose. Either the price is going to sky rocket in a few months, or they will stop doing it altogether

It's strange how they are implementing a residential service in Central London only. For a residential service, it would of made more sense to start implementing it outside-in, where most people live. It's a shame. I'd seriously consider signing up, especially with the 400kbps upload and no limits. I don't really break the NTL cap (for my downloading habits, it's more a case of timing, rather than moderation), but its always nice not to have to worry.

[etccarmageddon]

Originally Posted by blue jammer

Bulldog looks dodgy if you ask me, their 2MB connection isn't 2MB ALL the time, it's off peak, and during peak hours it's 512MB, Pah.

wrong, the bulldog 2mb product quoted at £37.99 a month is NOT 512MB off peak. you're confusing it with the primetime product they offer at under £30 a month which IS 512mb off peak. I think that's already been pointed out though.

but also it's worth noting that Bulldog call it 2mb but that includes overheads... the actual speed you get will be in the region of 1.7mb! unless things have improved since I last read the forums on ADSLGUIDE.

[Lee]

Has anyone sent this to theregister.co.uk yet?

[Florence]

Originally Posted by Lee

Has anyone sent this to theregister.co.uk yet?

That would be upto the customers who received the letters I would have thought.