Best or Worst ISP |
Post Reply | Page <1234 5> |
Author | ||
jazomir
Old Croc Joined: 20 November 2006 Location: Sunderland UK Status: Offline Points: 1710 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I've used BT broadband for over 7 years now, and have only had 4 problems with the service - two of which were line/exchange problems, 1 was with some BT bundled software (which I duly ditched) and one was with one of their sub-contracted salesmen who mis-sold an upgrade package to me (I came out golden as I got the upgrade for nothing in the end as compensation). I am reasonably happy with speed (3.2 -3.5 Mb/s), I have no complaints about the download limits (I use digiatl vault as a backup system and these uploads don't count towards my totals). However, as an ex-BT employee and shareholder, I am somewhat pissed off with the delays in introducing fibre to every house. This was proposed, then implemented and tested by one of the teams I worked alongside 10+ years ago, but nothing has materialised yet. Now, their argument is the cost and the fact that ADSL over copper wire is becoming faster and faster, but in the same period speeds over fibre have risen even faster, hence the cable companies upgrading their networks to offer 50Mb/s systems. The long term cost to the nation by delaying such an implementation must be almost incalculable, but it also gives BT the chance to make extra money by offering fibre packages to businesses at a premium.
On the subject of download limits, IIRC BT rarely charges for over-runs except if these are very large and/or on a regular basis but I doubt if the introduction to fibre would allow the download limit to be raised proportionately. I have a 20GB per month limit which is usually ample for my needs, but then again, I don't download lots of Torrent/FIle-sharing videos which seem to be the main culprit here - one answer may be to order BT Vision which I think by it's very nature may allow unlimited downloads. |
||
For sidefills, can we have two enormous things of a type that might be venerated as Gods by the inhabitants of Easter Island, capable of reaching volumes that would make Beelzebub soil his pants.
|
||
toastyghost
The 10,000 Points Club Joined: 09 January 2007 Location: Manchester Status: Offline Points: 10920 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
It does surprise me that people are surprised that an analogue circuit designed to carry only mw of power has large amounts of signal loss. Regs only state that 64kbit/sec is required alongside telephony service, so it's pretty tough to push for something reasonable. That said, 4Mbit/sec isn't exactly dog slow and people seem to forget that it was only about 4 years ago that 2Mbit/sec fixed rate was launched to the public! ADSL is still affected by all the cable losses that we have to deal with in sound day by day - can you imagine working with 3-4km of soggy, 40 year old copper wire significantly less than 1mm thick? We're already compliant with the code of practice, but the real dilemma is that unless regulations are altered and BT stop advertising lines as capable of handling the maximum (which I and around 10% of people happen to get!) then it makes absolutely no sense for any ISP to only advertise the 4Mbps average because they just won't get any customers in the face of their competitors plastering "(up to) 8Mbps!". Edited by toastyghost - 13 January 2009 at 8:57am |
||
Matute
Registered User Joined: 28 February 2006 Location: Argentina Status: Offline Points: 38 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Just spotted this... Cheers, Matias
|
||
"Hmm... difficult to see... always in motion is the future..."
|
||
toastyghost
The 10,000 Points Club Joined: 09 January 2007 Location: Manchester Status: Offline Points: 10920 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Nicky: That'll be a transit issue - it's bloody hard to make them realise and prove it especially with the current climate of engineers trained in the bare minimum to get in a van, but it is a BT recognised fault type and there are testing tools for it.
Thing is, BT can't cross reference faults themselves as legislation kind of prevents it. They certainly can't mention any details to another ISP if there are customers of their competitors having the same fault. They can work on it on their end if pushed but they can't ever really admit it externally til it's finished, by which point nobody cares. Essentially, the top guys in BT have had all their power and ability to take credit for good work taken away in the name of meeting targets set out by a governing body, so when you do get somebody good it's a miracle and you keep their details for future reference to try and avoid having to explain something supposedly complex like cross-jumpering to the swathes of foreign by-the-numbers call centre staff. And you thought doing sound was a thankless job! |
||
nickyburnell
Old Croc Joined: 06 February 2005 Status: Offline Points: 4410 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I wasn't aware of Zen really, it's nice to know I have an alternative now if need be.
Fast, my ISP have helped with some horrible faults in this area. On five occasions I have had customers getting DNS resolved at router but no Internet. Pings worked with IP addresses but not names. This of course looked like classic browser or winsock issues. Even when changing the router and PC in the customers premises the ISP's did not believe. Tiscali and AOL actually said leave then! Upon migrating these people to Fast and subsiquently them having the same fault (I had already warned Fast) they then kept on and on, forcing BT visits, getting billed for them as the NUMPTY Open Reach engineers couldn't work it out, and finally they lift and shift the kit in the Exchange, voila, all was well. This is on five occasions don't forget, and still BT cannot cross reference the faults to see that they indeed did/do have faulty equipment that gives the impression of faulty software. So I am glad there is another ISP (Zen) that is as savvy. Must be nice working for a company that listens.
Two recomendations then people, Zen & Fast.
|
||
It's everything, not everythink!
|
||
toastyghost
The 10,000 Points Club Joined: 09 January 2007 Location: Manchester Status: Offline Points: 10920 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
The opposition is that they want OFCOM to back off and not make them open up the proposed fibre network to competitors. The costs of laying fibre to every green cab is astronomical, even at a conservative estimate and not having to pay all that cash just to let your competitors use it is an understandable qualm, albeit not a particularly good one for the general public. As for 'unlimited' advertising, it's been taken to ASA twice and both times it was deemed that the fair use policy documents are easily accessible enough, even when they're incredibly vague, for the advertising not to be misleading - something I personally strongly disagree with. I think it's better to have a clear limit and easy to monitor usage graphing tools then a hidden one. When you hit the limit though, it should then warn you and ask you if you want to pay any more for extra usage rather than just billing you automatically - this is something we do although it could be a bit more graceful. Unfortunately I don't have the power to completely change our customer facing account admin tools, and have to raise my own gripes with evidence on a case by case basis; although I do totally understand the reasons for that being in place. I don't have any qualms about showing my download usage and am open to suggestions whether people are customers or not, so here's a screenshot of our current customer tool for viewing daily usage: I care a lot about the company I work for, because despite the occasional disagreement I have with the way things are done it is possible to get changes made if there is a good reason to do so, and we're actively encouraged to absorb opinions and suggestions so that we can continually improve how we do things. Edited by toastyghost - 12 January 2009 at 10:10pm |
||
nickyburnell
Old Croc Joined: 06 February 2005 Status: Offline Points: 4410 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Trading standards should get on the case with, "Mobile Broadband". No it's not, it's like dial up only more variable.
|
||
It's everything, not everythink!
|
||
b3n
Registered User Joined: 28 September 2008 Location: Brighton, UK Status: Offline Points: 222 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
i think its stupid that isps are allowed to advertise unlimited broadband and then have caps. seems like a simple advertising standards breach to me. they should either recalculate the speed of there services to be profitable or be forced to clearly show the cap next to the speed. the only isp i have been happy with is bethere
|
||
odc04r
Old Croc Joined: 12 July 2006 Location: Sarfampton Status: Offline Points: 5483 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
It's more for my peace of mind so that I do not have to watch the bandwidth lest I get billed for every extra Gb which would really piss me off. Sucks that the networks aren't more open though and every other operator has to piggy back on BT. |
||
nickyburnell
Old Croc Joined: 06 February 2005 Status: Offline Points: 4410 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Nice to know the statics cost you nothing to implement, must have a word with my lot about the charge they are charging my customers. Also nice to know their is an unlimited service available which actually means it, £79 is reasonable IMO.
I notice that BT are in the news for not wanting the next stage (the shareholders that is) of BB. Is this the proposed fibre to roadside box rollout?
|
||
It's everything, not everythink!
|
||
toastyghost
The 10,000 Points Club Joined: 09 January 2007 Location: Manchester Status: Offline Points: 10920 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Not too low unless you enjoy throwing money away |
||
odc04r
Old Croc Joined: 12 July 2006 Location: Sarfampton Status: Offline Points: 5483 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
They do seem to offer a lot of extra gaming related services such as Ventrilo and dedicate servers so thats probably helping. I do like my PC gaming every now and again so I am seriously giving these guys a tryout. Will report back if I go for it. I'm sure I wont get anywhere near even 100Gb a month but 50Gb is just perhaps a little too low. A housemate who likes watching a fair bit of iplayer and dancetripping videos doesn't take long to get through a Gb or two. |
||
Post Reply | Page <1234 5> |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |