YW

Its not just me though - despite all the calling we get, there are some good guys in PUG and we do kick @rse when we can and when justified.
Theres always very valid feedback from guys on the forums too.

Just because PN are now BT owned (and dont have to play the big shareholder game anymore), IMHO doesnt mean that the new accounts can be subsidised more and they forget about the "old accounts".

-----

and before anyone does wonder (goes into self defence mode) this doesnt actually affect me, because I dont personally do p2p these days, so Im pretty happy with the other speeds I get on the other protocols.
However.. I still think the limits were way too tight for those customers who do, and feel strongly that they should be brought more inline with BBYW3.

Edited by kitz (Fri 27-Apr-07 17:47:27)

I won't dare ask who the "some" are as don't want the others feeling left out

I think people respect you because you will post the good and bad. Where some others can come across as not wanting to say anything bad about PN.
Also you say it how you see it, not everyone will agree with all your views, but you do state them in good faith.

Even the new packages don't amount to much with PlusNet's disclaimer:

"We cannot guarantee line speed as broadband is delivered over a shared network and will always be subject to our traffic management policies."

Is there any point in listing the management levels when PlusNet will always have an explanation for unacceptable speeds? And surely they mean contention anyway - which should be naturally occurring, not managed. It looks to me like obfuscation.

Simon

is it obsfucation for a highly rated ISP to warn that customers will receive no more that 2mb speeds at peak times... ???

No doubt your zen experience is better than that Simon, so the principles are similar..

Not for the first time, I haven't a clue what you're talking about. I made a specific reference to where I thought there was obfuscation -- which presumably isn't something you want to discuss.

Simon

The premier expected speeds are back.
http://community.plus.net/blog/2007/05/25/premier-product-expected-speed-page-update/

It looks like pretty much the same speeds as last time, except those are now the minimum speeds rather than the maximum speeds.

What I would like to see is the minimum speed AND the average "expected" speed. I am hoping the minimum speed is going to rarely be the expected speed.

NOTE: I completely understand that Plusnet couldn't be held to the average "expected" speed and it would vary depending on a variety of factors, etc., but the average speed currently being seen on the premier platform for those times of day would be a more useful value to compare against bbyw (i.e would I prefer a fixed speed limit of 512Kbps between 4pm - 6pm or a minimum of 192Kbps and a maximum of 8Mbps with an historical average of 1Mbps?)

>I am hoping the minimum speed is going to rarely be the expected speed.

You might be hoping for too much.

Gotta say - I love that idea... Real-time performance / Average over the last week would be the best possible measure we could put there. I can see it being quite easy, in theory to ask 20+ customers to run a client which tests real speeds, but harder to run an actual torrent speed test with any consistency. The other option might be to try doing some clever maths from this side, but it would not be easy to get accuracy.

I'll have a think while I'm lying awake this weekend, cold and damp, in the field I'm being off dragged to now.

Have a good weekend folks,

Ian

In reply to:

---

I'll have a think while I'm lying awake this weekend, cold and damp, in the field I'm being off dragged to now.

---

Ian, you really do set yourself up sometimes

Alternatively -

See Plusnet really are "Out standing in their field!"

LOL