Newnet is excellent, as you can see from that link my move was largely on cost grounds, with a marginal increase in speed. (Actually partly achieved by forcing ADSL2 rather than ADSL2+).

The two extremely relaxing parts are having unlimited on O2, and the lack of the BT Profiling system, so a short low speed sync is cured as soon as you re-sync high again.

But we are off topic. To get back slightly - Newnet is considerably more expensive than Plusnet and I doubt if Newnet is as good as Plusnet for gamers - but I don't do gaming so just surmising.

Edited by RobertoS (Wed 03-Dec-08 11:33:25)

Sorry you can say that about any ISP, its not PN specific.

PN pings were very good for gaming, actually better than my current ISP at the moment. For the right user, PN is very good, but as James said PN is not for everyone

In reply to:

---

Sorry you can say that about any ISP, its not PN specific.

---

If you referring to my 'Subjective' comment, I totally agree, and of course James does not have a biased opinion of the ISP who employs him...

In reply to:

---

but as James said PN is not for everyone

---

Certainly not, but I disagree with the reasoning;

"If you want to download Usenet at line rate, 24/7 we're not the ISP for you."

There are plenty of scenarios where Plusnet would not be suitable. Updating a dozen websites regularly, FTP is restricted on all but one package and classed as 'Gold', packets will be dropped peak time no matter which package intentionally. I could give a dozen other examples.

Not all users requiring consistantly highspeed bandwidth download porn or pirated software 24/7.

yes there are plenty of scenarios, but someone that updates a dozen websites regularly etc should be a lot more savvy on the service they need than the most of us. It just confirms the fact PN are not for everyone. I think they are clear on their service, but I'm sure it can be improved still.

I'm not sure what you want PN to do....close?

I suppose as a customer of Plusnet I eventually felt let down, turning what was once a brilliant network and well repsected ISP into the convoluted mess that it is now.

I also consider that less savvy users signing up are being duped by the glossy website, when in real terms they are experiencing a crippled broadband experience, even though all the network info is freely available, making head or tail of it is a different matter.

Also the prioritising of protocols over others goes against my principles of net neutrality, and realising it is done as a commercial, money spinning move rather than the professed, 'making the BB experience better' sales pitch. I.e cramming users on to an oversubscribed network.

I think Plusnet would have been better off adding more capacity rather than stuffing more users onto a crippled, throttled network, they certainly would have retained the 'discerning' userbase and kept the respect that they once had from many more technically minded people.

I should really just avoid this subsection altogether as my attitude will never change unless Plusnet do.

I could go through what you've said point by point, but I'll summarise instead:

What a load of utter rubbish!

I think rather than a general argument about Plusnet's good and bad points, perhaps we should wait for feedback from the OP so we can discuss his specific needs?

Nothing else is really relevant at this stage.

Totally agree

In reply to:

---

What a load of utter rubbish!

---

Perhaps you would like to do some reading to understand what I am talking about;

Net Neutrality and Consumer Access to Content

3. Quality of Service and on seems particularly relevant and may ring some bells.

Edit; I meant include this link as a follow up;
Telecoms Reform
"The new regulatory framework is expected to become law in all 27 EU Member States by 2010."
"In addition, national telecoms authorities will be able to take action in order to secure minimum quality of service for internet users in order to maintain, if necessary and appropriate, "net neutrality" in Europe."

Minimum QOS for all protocols hopefully.

Edited by deleted (Wed 03-Dec-08 16:33:26)

That article presents a good argument for why ISPs should not be allowed to favour one content provider or source of content over another when managing their network. Is it a surprise to learn that that is a stance I (and as far as I know everyone else at Plusnet) would completely agree with and support?

Where we disagree is the idea that an ISP doesn't need to manage it's network. It would be like a world without traffic lights and speed limits - It just doesn't make sense. For us to operate with the commercial constraints we have (ie our customers couldn't afford us and would choose a competitor if we provisioned enough capacity not to have to manage the network) we have to slow down some traffic at some points of the day.

Our approach is actually really simple if you start at the goal. We prioritise time sensitive traffic over non time sensitive traffic. We do that to try and create as negative an impact for our customers as possible. Because there is a complicated system behind that, we do sometimes get it wrong, but we have a clear working for reviewing and addressing any examples where our simple principle isn't adhered to. Have you seen any reason to believe that isn't the case?

Ian