In reply to a post by vimto_girl:

Graph compiled by myself from raw dataset.

Unlikely that dataset has been published, but the OP is of course welcome to post a link if it has.

no more takers for some reason

For what is is worth vimto PM'd me (and probably others) the answer (yawn)

It is very old data and the differences are really quite small, on all 5 ISP's >80% of user achieve >80% of Max download speed at peak time; impressive for an inexpensive service.

Ian

Or from the graph 80% achieved 82%, even more impressive.

What tickled me in the Ofcom report in my second link earlier is that Plusnet had the highest incidence of disconnections. Maybe we should tell samknows about the multiple rapid channel hopping attempts that may be distorting that figure .

>80%

COUGH...COUGH

Could not be bothered to work out the %age but thanks....

multiple rapid channel hopping attempts

In November 2014??

http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,1353...

The capacity issues thread started on new years eve.......2014 ....

You could be right about the bulk use of it, but it was well known much before then that some gateways were better than others, and that sometimes they got clogged up.Then Plusnet used to bump a few users off to rebalance the system.

IIRC the BT Wholesale system was just dropping us on using a round-robin system, not a load-balancing one.

In reply to a post by ian007jen:

Can you just tell us.............

In reply to a post by ian007jen:

For what is is worth vimto PM'd me (and probably others) the answer (yawn)

Ha, so much to say after you got the result and clearly didn't like it Why didn't you just say your piece before huh?

The differences are not small, take your 80% peak-time speed target (one you picked out all by yourself), that is a reduction from 38 Mb/s to 30 Mb/s in the evening. With the best ISP there was 0% chance of not hitting this target, with the worst there was a 13% chance, more than 1 in 8. That's a big difference in my book.

And the data is not very old, it is from Nov 2014, and results prove performance remained remarkably consistent through 2013 and 2014, so this shows established performance and trends. And without past results, future results have no reference or significance, and any changes specific to 2015 can't be captured.

Edited by deleted (Tue 14-Jul-15 21:11:01)

This is probably the most boring and uninteresting post ever on a web site that has multiple boring, repetitive and uninteresting posts.

us....

Not just me....

I suppose we could look at the document http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/b...

Figure 2.8 on page 23...I did remember seeing this before but with the colours of the lines (and my colour blindness) I found it very difficult to make out the ISP's, I remember thinking it would be easier with dotted or dashed lines.

This graph does show the the small variation of the top 5 (up-to 38 and 76).

Just noticed the x and y axis have been swapped, can you re-plot your graph this way round, and with the vertical axis in 5 steps (0,20,40.....100).

Ian

This is probably the most boring and uninteresting post ever on a web site that has multiple boring, repetitive and uninteresting posts.

Could not agree more

(yawn again)

In reply to a post by rogerfp:

This is probably the most boring and uninteresting post ever on a web site that has multiple boring, repetitive and uninteresting posts.

That's ok. I can deal with that.