In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

Economies of scale and all that. The bigger the pipe your traffic is riding on the more customers the cost of that pipe is split between.

So what is the point of changing, then?

Given your comments here and elsewhere I think I've about hit the point where I've no interest in responding to you on this or any other matter. Between the uninformed conspiracy theory echoing on such diverse subjects as 5G and CoViD, the endless repetition on how you aren't interested in FTTP and comments about how little interest you have in Internet as a whole posted on websites devoted to broadband I'm about done. You're welcome to read and respond to my posts as you see fit but aren't getting any kind of response as I'm not going to waste any more time. You've clearly no idea about the topic in hand and I'm not going to bother with discussion, not least because it won't change anything: you've your opinions and silly things like facts aren't going to intrude.

Consider me another of the sheep drinking in the propaganda and having taken the blue pill

Cheers.

Edited by XGS_Is_On (Tue 20-Dec-22 12:52:07)

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

i am so glad i don't get caught up with the propaganda

Its not propaganda, we all do different jobs. In 1999 I paid £50/month for 512kbps/128kbps cable, which achieved 300/90 most of the time (it was a pilot). I now pay around the same for 250Mbps/25Mbps, and when the local FTTP provider arrives I can pay £27 for 900 Mbps/900 Mbps. I work in an IT job and use the speed, I don't just stream 4K netflix as you suggest. I suggest you stop the assumptions and focus on your own needs, not other peoples.

Looks like the word for the day is propaganda do I get a prize for guessing correctly 🤣

In reply to a post by dect:

Looks like the word for the day is propaganda do I get a prize for guessing correctly 🤣

And of course propaganda doesn't need to take account of such irrelevant matters as reliability.

@lewisp8
FWIW: I am on BTO/BT 900/110Mbps package No Zooommmm in my area just yet, Regarding speedtest's on TBB i find it really useful as it provides a brief insight into the capabilities of connections in single/multimode.
Since 15th Dec, I have done a couple of tests here on TBB and I notice that single-thread tests hits the high 400's Mbps then multi-thereadded mode It hits my full speed ~950's Mbps

For comparison my AX89X router internal oloka embedded speedtest ramps up fast to burt speeds, straight to 900+ and pins it there all the way through to end of the test same with upstream. Testing from Wales to London Server..

As has been mentioned earlier if problem/issue persists it may well be worth you focusing on single thead testing then go from there..

Next steps would then to maybe thinkink about TBB testbox is located in relation to your ISP Gateway
Although I doubt that would be a thing .. It would be a different matter if TBB testbox was located in a totally different geographical location as the ISP your using it over (as in, if based in a differnet country) Then it may be grounds to investigate ISP routes/peering etc.

Then again, even shortest path may not be optimal path.

If I were you I would also ensure that TBB testbox is testing either IPv4 or IPv6 (if Zzomm offers ipv6 prefix) Just confirm that Both IPv4/IPv6 resolve back to same device/gateway.

It would state this in the bottom of the test and during initial test to choose IPv4 or run in IPv6 mode.
Perhaps this could be a factor?

If you only just been activated perhaps that could be a thing too.? links being esatblished/sessions being created.. IDK. Just spit ballin' here! HTH.

In reply to a post by jpm:

Different people have different requirements, it doesn't mean they are doing anything wrong or have been captured by advertising.

I never said they were doing anything wrong and I agree some people do find use for the extra, but there are people who are certainly captured by the advertising as you put it. All the adverts are about is speed, the leaflet from Vodafone I had delivered is about how much faster they are compared to BT, just a shame that they compared different technologies. It does say up to 5 times more reliable, more reliable than what? They can't say their service is more reliable than BT FTTC or any FTTC service,how can it be more reliable than something that is reliable?

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Its not propaganda, we all do different jobs. In 1999 I paid £50/month for 512kbps/128kbps cable, which achieved 300/90 most of the time (it was a pilot). I now pay around the same for 250Mbps/25Mbps, and when the local FTTP provider arrives I can pay £27 for 900 Mbps/900 Mbps. I work in an IT job and use the speed, I don't just stream 4K netflix as you suggest. I suggest you stop the assumptions and focus on your own needs, not other peoples.

Everything these days is propaganda, even supermarkets does it to try to get people to use their self scans or scan and shop.

As for propaganda with networks, when they print complete bull, like Vodafone saying about reliability, the majority of people I know that uses FTTC don't seem to have reliability problems these days, they have slow-downs now and again, but that have been happening for years and I doubt FTTP will solve that problem.

I went to ADSL in 2000, more or less when it was launched, BT gave me free connection, but yes it did cost a fair bit of money, over £45 i think, but i had a lodger here then, and we had both our computers connected to a third machine and used internet connection sharing, so dial up was really slow and it made sense to go for ADSL, with the cost shared between us. I would not have gone onto ADSL at the time otherwise. We used the same system in sharing the internet, but had the Frog modem connected to the third computer instead of my Us robotics courier.
I know my own needs, and I what I have suits me.

In reply to a post by GonePostal:

And of course propaganda doesn't need to take account of such irrelevant matters as reliability.

I hear this thing about reliability, but how can it be more reliable than reliable? If I was losing sync all the time or going on a go slow then I would think differently.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

In reply to a post by GonePostal:

And of course propaganda doesn't need to take account of such irrelevant matters as reliability.

I hear this thing about reliability, but how can it be more reliable than reliable? If I was losing sync all the time or going on a go slow then I would think differently.

Adrian

Once again you are advancing personal experience as an exemplar when you are only a very small sample of what happens in the real world. Can you please lift you head just a little and realise that this Forum has a rather wider community than a one-off poster in one of the smaller county towns. No one is denying anything that you have said about your own personal experiences, wants or desires but for most people reading postings on this Forum you are an irrelevance and saying that those who do not want to be part of the Adrian world which hijacks other threads just to add some irrelevant personal experience can skip over your postings is perhaps arrogating a bit more importance to yourself than you really deserve.

Please accept that there is nothing personal in these comments and I would gladly go for a pint with you if I ever get to Hereford but we need to keep the global reach of the Forum in context.

Edited by GonePostal (Wed 21-Dec-22 00:52:33)

Others have sort of covered this already but if you took 2,000,000 FTTC lines and 2,000,000 FTTP lines then the FTTP lines would on average be more reliable than the FTTC lines. Advertising is not specifically directed at one individual line/person.