Vivid 350 quietly released

I know this will get the usual cries of "why release faster services when people have issues with the old ones", but I thought someone might like to know.

Vivid 350 is now about, some people have been upgraded, I hadn't, but 1 phone call later I have, for no additional cost.

The max traffic rate is a little over 400mbit:

http://imgur.com/a/u3IeB

I get 388mbit on speedtest.net and multisource downloads.

http://beta.speedtest.net/result/6512108867

I'm paying £42 a month, broadband only, no phone line, which is the same as I was paying for 300.

well you said it yourself, no need for me to say it, VM does want to dig their own grave with QOS issues.

In reply to a post by nemeth782:

I know this will get the usual cries of "why release faster services when people have issues with the old ones", but I thought someone might like to know.

Larger numbers sell to customers. Some people use STEAM and download 80gb games (!).

Quality has gone out of the window. Lots of low level issues on the network, doesn't matter to the bulk downloaders or those streaming video.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Larger numbers sell to customers. Some people use STEAM and download 80gb games (!).

Quality has gone out of the window. Lots of low level issues on the network, doesn't matter to the bulk downloaders or those streaming video.

Quality is better than it has been since at least 2014 but, facts.

If these 'low level issues' don't impact bulk downloading or streaming video, and there are virtually no upstream issues, what are the problems?

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

If these 'low level issues' don't impact bulk downloading or streaming video, and there are virtually no upstream issues, what are the problems?

Depends what your needs are, I agree. If your needs for internet access are to download large data blocks (e.g. steam games) or have 4 kids + parents independently stream video from Netflix/Amazon/Sky, then yes, the VM network is great.

However for home working using low latency connections to shell sessions in the USA, I want a consistent low latency network, as the distance hurts, and the VPN overhead hurt. So I left VM. Others may use obscure protocols for bespoke applications they are developing that are essentially swamped by heavy downloaders in their segment.

I prefer low jitter, and consistency, which is why I was a BEThere customer, whom sold their network like this (why AAISP used their wholesale). I'm with Plusnet at the moment as their network is "good enough" for me, and in my private life I stream video, making AAISP unaffordable

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Depends what your needs are, I agree. If your needs for internet access are to download large data blocks (e.g. steam games) or have 4 kids + parents independently stream video from Netflix/Amazon/Sky, then yes, the VM network is great.

However for home working using low latency connections to shell sessions in the USA, I want a consistent low latency network, as the distance hurts, and the VPN overhead hurt. So I left VM. Others may use obscure protocols for bespoke applications they are developing that are essentially swamped by heavy downloaders in their segment.

I prefer low jitter, and consistency, which is why I was a BEThere customer, whom sold their network like this (why AAISP used their wholesale). I'm with Plusnet at the moment as their network is "good enough" for me, and in my private life I stream video, making AAISP unaffordable

Afraid higher jitter than xDSL comes with cable as a whole. Nothing really to do with VM specifically. Upstream congestion is harmful to jitter and latency and is virtually non-existent on VM.

I'm looking forward to seeing how it goes for my working from home. As far as I'm aware I don't use any obscure protocols that are more vulnerable to issues than a single-threaded video stream and the hub is 180 ms away. I am, however, using SD-WAN and have path conditioning and WAN optimisation

EDIT: Quite amused you talking about the consistency of the Be network. It had frequent capacity issues and required extensive investment from Telefonica when it was acquired and used for O2. It wasn't even close to viable and was built in a dubious manner with some congestion issues pretty deep in.

Edited by Ignitionnet (Fri 04-Aug-17 22:17:45)

I do download a lot from steam - my total library is about 9TB, just keeping everything updates is multiple GB a day.

I do use SSH, SCP, VNC, RDP, etc quite a bit as I also do quite a bit of support work from home, I've never had an issue.

Single threaded downloads are obviously not as fast, on the tbb tester I get about 90mbit single threaded, but this is more than I could get out of any other ISP single threaded as my connection on frrc would only be about 60mbit.

I watch quite a bit of 4k Netflix and Amazon video without issue.

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

Afraid higher jitter than xDSL comes with cable as a whole. Nothing really to do with VM specifically. Upstream congestion is harmful to jitter and latency and is virtually non-existent on VM.

Agreed, its part of the choice a customer has to make between a DOCSIS product or an xDSL product. Neither is "wrong". One of the things that surprised me is VM (now) have no download limits or throttling - but they seem to throttle uploads still? Not brilliant if you're using a cloud backup service, and the first time upload on a VM 10mbps upload takes longer than an xDSL first time upload at 8mbps.

I'm looking forward to seeing how it goes for my working from home. As far as I'm aware I don't use any obscure protocols that are more vulnerable to issues than a single-threaded video stream and the hub is 180 ms away. I am, however, using SD-WAN and have path conditioning and WAN optimisation

I suspect you're way out of most people on this forum even mentioning SDWAN. I'm aware of what it means, but haven't worked in that space (I have colleagues that do). You should be fine My issue were very much related to the crazy VPN my (then) employer was using which connected in the UK, and then the electronic distance I had to travel inside the employer network.

EDIT: Quite amused you talking about the consistency of the Be network. It had frequent capacity issues and required extensive investment from Telefonica when it was acquired and used for O2. It wasn't even close to viable and was built in a dubious manner with some congestion issues pretty deep in.

It was pretty good until O2 decided to give people broadband with cashback that paid them in a 12 month period. Not just free, but income earning. That never made sense to me.

I quote AAISP whom said they were offered performance targets for various items on the 'tails' they were renting, which was a 'refreshing change' since nobody else was offering performance targets. Maybe this led to their downfall. (Although I gather TalkTalk Business are interesting in this regard, better than BTwholesale).

Edited by jchamier (Sat 05-Aug-17 09:42:32)

In reply to a post by nemeth782:

I do download a lot from steam - my total library is about 9TB, just keeping everything updates is multiple GB a day.

Then you have a requirement for a VERY fast connection. Not everyone has this requirement.

I do use SSH, SCP, VNC, RDP, etc quite a bit as I also do quite a bit of support work from home, I've never had an issue.

Do you do that within a VPN to the UK and then connect to a far away country? If you connect directly to the server from you VM connection and the servers are in the UK, you won't see the effect. Also it will be regional, down to what other people in your segment are doing.

Single threaded downloads are obviously not as fast, on the tbb tester I get about 90mbit single threaded, but this is more than I could get out of any other ISP single threaded as my connection on frrc would only be about 60mbit.

It depends if download speed is remotely important to you.

I watch quite a bit of 4k Netflix and Amazon video without issue.

Likewise, but that only needs a constant 25mbps or higher.

The discussion isn't that either VM or xDSL Is "right" or "wrong" - the discussion is about the different technical parameters of the connections. Many people have the choice of both, and buying based just on download speed is only one parameter. VM also don't offer static IP, or custom reverse DNS.

A few have posted on VM forums saying the gamer package is no longer available to new customers.

Correct, I need to remove it from our listings...always thought it an odd package as it did nothing to help real gaming, the lack of upload management made twitch streaming a bit less of a pain but those people are also highly latency sensitive

Some of us has 300 and then they took it away from the area, so nice to see some people getting 350!

Openreach might do secret 400/50 from 330/50 try to beat off VM

In reply to a post by adslmax:

Openreach might do secret 400/50 from 330/50 try to beat off VM

Openreach can't do secret anything to market, they don't sell to end users and have to consult with service providers. 400/50 would reduce G.fast reach, with the advertising changes it will struggle anyway, and would be pointless as VM can fairly rapidly release faster anyway.

In reply to a post by adslmax:

Openreach might do secret 400/50 from 330/50 try to beat off VM

The sad thing is that I am currently signing people up for 1Gbps symmetrical wifi where my parents live, which is where I will be living from the end of the year.

My dad is having the ISP's base transmitter at the bottom of his garden, and therefore gets a monthly income and a free connection. But as he does not use the internet much he's asked if I can have the free connection instead.

Currently they are at 500/500 but that can be turned up on demand.

Until then I will stick with what I have. I've seen this Wireless ISP in action in another village nearby and I got to say - it leaves BT looking rather [censored].

Edited by 23Prince (Sun 06-Aug-17 11:50:41)

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

In reply to a post by adslmax:

Openreach might do secret 400/50 from 330/50 try to beat off VM

Openreach can't do secret anything to market, they don't sell to end users and have to consult with service providers. 400/50 would reduce G.fast reach, with the advertising changes it will struggle anyway, and would be pointless as VM can fairly rapidly release faster anyway.

I know a few people around here who wish VM would sort this area out so they can have their 300 back! It just disappeared last year and even now it's greyed out with a "Sorry 200 is the best we can do for this area" message

Never heard of a WISP even close to 500Mb let alone 1Gb. Who is this?

http://ruralbb.com/

RuralBB is the company, they have a setup in Stone in South Glos running at those speeds.

However their website now only shows 100/100. I do have e-mails from him saying they were doing 20/50/100 and could do 500 and even 1Gbps on demand.

Sorry for the delay I had to dig it up - but this is the original

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2017/02/100mbps...

Edit - at the bottom of the webpage it does say "*Prices for the 500Mb service on request."

Edited by 23Prince (Sun 06-Aug-17 17:58:01)

Ask them the same question of speed but specify at the IP layer rather than wireless transport layer

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Ask them the same question of speed but specify at the IP layer rather than wireless transport layer

Will do..

Bear in mind I've seen the system at full speed in Stone and it was hitting 500Mbps then. it's also been fully stress tested by the person who hosts the transmitter.

Edited by 23Prince (Sun 06-Aug-17 18:10:49)

In reply to a post by 23Prince:

http://ruralbb.com/

RuralBB is the company, they have a setup in Stone in South Glos running at those speeds.

However their website now only shows 100/100. I do have e-mails from him saying they were doing 20/50/100 and could do 500 and even 1Gbps on demand.


Edit - at the bottom of the webpage it does say "*Prices for the 500Mb service on request."

Blimey I never heard of this company can do 100/500 or even 1Gbps but it was very naughty of them metion there is no up to speed are misleading.

Edited by adslmax (Tue 08-Aug-17 13:08:28)

"Because we use radio waves there is no degradation of broadband speed with distance"

If that were the case we would only need one TV or mobile mast to cover the UK, so any other claims are best interpreted with the reality of what people actually know about wireless.

In reply to a post by 23Prince:

http://ruralbb.com/

RuralBB is the company, they have a setup in Stone in South Glos running at those speeds.

However their website now only shows 100/100. I do have e-mails from him saying they were doing 20/50/100 and could do 500 and even 1Gbps on demand.

Sorry for the delay I had to dig it up - but this is the original

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2017/02/100mbps...

Edit - at the bottom of the webpage it does say "*Prices for the 500Mb service on request."

Gotcha.

The 500Mb would be a dedicated transceiver and a point to point wireless connection over probably V-Band or E-Band. That I would imagine would be why the price is on request, it's the wireless equivalent of FTTPoD

Perhaps they need to talk to the Voyager team to understand how data rate can be limited by distance.

However, in the practical world of terrestrial broadband a point-to-point wireless connection will not have to worry about any degradation over vDSL like distances, so long as there are no trees, buses, lorries, or buildings in the fresnel zone between the two points anyway.

You could say they're right. True, speed will have a dependency on SNR, just like xDSL, but with a PtP link on a narrow beam you can always wind the power up (within license limits) or jack up the antenna gain. We Need A Bigger DIsh.....

But when the link's no longer line-of-sight, the speed's dropped to zero. You'd need a very, very tall mast to cover the whole UK. I think it's called a satellite And you'd need lots of channels, but that's a function of the number of users, not the distance between base and user.

In reply to a post by mpellatt:

We Need A Bigger DIsh.....

Quite large.... http://www.vla.nrao.edu/

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

In reply to a post by 23Prince:

http://ruralbb.com/

RuralBB is the company, they have a setup in Stone in South Glos running at those speeds.

However their website now only shows 100/100. I do have e-mails from him saying they were doing 20/50/100 and could do 500 and even 1Gbps on demand.

Sorry for the delay I had to dig it up - but this is the original

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2017/02/100mbps...

Edit - at the bottom of the webpage it does say "*Prices for the 500Mb service on request."

Gotcha.

The 500Mb would be a dedicated transceiver and a point to point wireless connection over probably V-Band or E-Band. That I would imagine would be why the price is on request, it's the wireless equivalent of FTTPoD

Fair enough but the impression the guy gave me was that he could turn up to 500 or even 1Gbps on demand for the right cost.

Some people are just natural sales people

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Some people are just natural sales people

True, but again bear in mind I've seen this at 500mbps and 1Gbps so I know it works. I also know the setup as it's going into my folks back yard!

So is this a point to point or point to multipoint configuration?

I've seen 5G at multiple Gigabit too.

In reply to a post by nemeth782:

I know this will get the usual cries of "why release faster services when people have issues with the old ones", but I thought someone might like to know.

Vivid 350 is now about, some people have been upgraded, I hadn't, but 1 phone call later I have, for no additional cost.

The max traffic rate is a little over 400mbit:

http://imgur.com/a/u3IeB

I get 388mbit on speedtest.net and multisource downloads.

http://beta.speedtest.net/result/6512108867

I'm paying £42 a month, broadband only, no phone line, which is the same as I was paying for 300.

tried to upgrade today phoned up but computer says no i guess i can wait vivid 300 always maxs out anyway guess its just been greedy wanting more isnt it lol

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

So is this a point to point or point to multipoint configuration?

I've seen 5G at multiple Gigabit too.

This was point to point I think? It was a residential setup with a few dozen people in service.

Point to point wireless/microwave at these speeds is no surprise, but fixed wireless is usually point to multipoint and the wider beam area is the big issue

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Point to point wireless/microwave at these speeds is no surprise, but fixed wireless is usually point to multipoint and the wider beam area is the big issue

I'm going there tomorrow I'll do some speedtests and PM you when they are done.

There are 81 people connected in this village (the threshold is 75 to install) so It's going to be as real world as you can . And on a Sunday

81 people connected means its point to multipoint if they all connect to a single sector on a mast, or they've deployed 81 x point to point links

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

81 people connected means its point to multipoint if they all connect to a single sector on a mast, or they've deployed 81 x point to point links

Yes that;s right

Ill do a test anyway

Two options and you said 'yes thats correct' so which option was correct?

I went with 200 gamer to get the higher (20 Mbps) upload and remove throttling (online backups etc). It seems this package currently is still 20, so no benefit for me right now.

Is it approx £10 a month more than Vivid 200? I know gamer was +£5 ...

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

Two options and you said 'yes thats correct' so which option was correct?

The one I quoted you in? The one where 84 people are all connected to 1 mast etc?

500 Mbps x 81 people impressive point to multipoint fixed wireless in that case and could probably make a fortune scaling that up to sell abroad, particularly when most only sell 30 Mbps

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

500 Mbps x 81 people impressive point to multipoint fixed wireless in that case and could probably make a fortune scaling that up to sell abroad, particularly when most only sell 30 Mbps

Not all are on that - Most are on 50-100. In fact they only sell 100/100 right now but I know at one point everyone had it. I was lead to believe there are 2 dark 10Gbps lines to a local council office and he is allowed to tap into any the council own but are not using for his backhaul.

Or so the e-mails he sent said.

I used O2 for about 3 years and only had 2 issues. Upload was consistent at about 15mbps and upload at 1.1mbps. Was still the same when the stupid cashback offers were introduced.

With UW (talktalk)now and up is 13 mbps and down 0.6mbps so not quite so good. More than good enough to stream an HD film and the children to do their thing.

I just checked my postcode, which says I can get "up to 350" and so rang CS, they told me VIVID 350 is only for business customers. Ah well.

In reply to a post by broadband66:

I used O2 for about 3 years and only had 2 issues. Upload was consistent at about 15mbps and upload at 1.1mbps. Was still the same when the stupid cashback offers were introduced.

With UW (talktalk)now and up is 13 mbps and down 0.6mbps so not quite so good. More than good enough to stream an HD film and the children to do their thing.

Did you get your figures back to front there?

In reply to a post by Khan:

I just checked my postcode, which says I can get "up to 350" and so rang CS, they told me VIVID 350 is only for business customers. Ah well.

No, that is untrue. They can sold it to residential as well.

It seems Virgin is upgrading VIVID 300 customers to 350Mbps downstream, but still marketing it as 300Mbps. Probably best to order VIVID 300 then call support to request an early regrade.

Virgin Media Business VOOM is marketed as 350Mbps downstream, so not surprised that call centre sales staff get confused when someone requests a 350Mbps service.

There's a slight problem in that I'm already on VIVID 300, so I was trying to see if I could get upgraded but I was turned down by 3 customer support reps. No luck. lol

Edited by Khan (Mon 21-Aug-17 19:47:33)

Yes.

In reply to a post by Khan:

There's a slight problem in that I'm already on VIVID 300, so I was trying to see if I could get upgraded but I was turned down by 3 customer support reps. No luck. lol

Strange that everyone seems to be having these issues, the first rep I got on the chat service was able to do it for me, and it took effect within minutes!

Perhaps I've been unlucky and need to try again.

In reply to a post by nemeth782:

Strange that everyone seems to be having these issues, the first rep I got on the chat service was able to do it for me, and it took effect within minutes!

Looks like you was right I just spoke to a chat CS rep and he immediately upgraded me and said the new charge will be £48/mo (an increase of 75p from my current monthly charge).

http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/6568551695

Edited by Khan (Fri 25-Aug-17 12:16:47)

In reply to a post by Khan:

Perhaps I've been unlucky and need to try again.

Meanwhile in other areas, they have taken 300 away saying they can't support it. Nice to see it's being used somewhere. Let us know what it's like at peak times

woke up this mornig to find its ben upgraded after been told 4 times not available in area lol so yay finally get my full upload now too

In reply to a post by acpsd775:

woke up this mornig to find its ben upgraded after been told 4 times not available in area lol so yay finally get my full upload now too

I've had a interesting conversation with someone today as to why their network is so broken in many areas.

In reply to a post by 23Prince:

I've had a interesting conversation with someone today as to why their network is so broken in many areas.

Be interested to hear what you've been told. I've been in contact for months with people who know about it, and have been posting openly in forums.

Most of the issues are resolved. Some areas to clean up, the worst of which should be done by the end of October.

In reply to a post by 23Prince:

In reply to a post by Khan:

Perhaps I've been unlucky and need to try again.

Meanwhile in other areas, they have taken 300 away saying they can't support it. Nice to see it's being used somewhere. Let us know what it's like at peak times

Touch wood it's all great so far, haven't had any traffic issues since I got VIVID 200 first time in May '16. Also, someone said the VIVID 300 and 350 don't have the traffic management filter or whatever it's called.

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

In reply to a post by 23Prince:

I've had a interesting conversation with someone today as to why their network is so broken in many areas.

Be interested to hear what you've been told. I've been in contact for months with people who know about it, and have been posting openly in forums.

Most of the issues are resolved. Some areas to clean up, the worst of which should be done by the end of October.

I am speaking with them again on Tuesday. Well my area is a mess but when they tell me that I will be happy

In reply to a post by 23Prince:

I am speaking with them again on Tuesday. Well my area is a mess but when they tell me that I will be happy

No idea who you're speaking to but there's a list of expected resolution dates.

The vast majority of the issues are due to delays in deploying the new CMTS and, occasionally, issues with splitting nodes.

These are both due to the same root causes - lack of power / space / cooling in hubsites preventing installation of new CMTS and/or transmission kit. I've no idea if Newport or Newport East are impacted as I don't have the list in question, though I imagine Mr Saffron would know if hosts with DNS newp or newe are suffering.

Nothing that interesting really, all very practical and mundane. Not sure what conspiracy theories you were told.

On the upside your move out of the area to one without VM should make it a non-issue in any event.

I forgot the other issue, which is pretty mundane also, lack of RF bandwidth being available on some older networks.

The networks gained a bunch of bandwidth when analogue was switched off, however DTV, HDTV,VoD and, especially, broadband, have eaten it all.

There's not enough room left on some networks for 24 SC-QAMs let alone the upcoming OFDM block for DOCSIS 3.1, so in some areas customers are being made aware of upgrades to be done that will cause outages as equipment needs to be replaced within cabinets.

Another major driver is upstream bandwidth. More and more of that is needed too, VM are wanting to get 4 upstream channels bonded.

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

In reply to a post by 23Prince:

I am speaking with them again on Tuesday. Well my area is a mess but when they tell me that I will be happy

No idea who you're speaking to but there's a list of expected resolution dates.

The vast majority of the issues are due to delays in deploying the new CMTS and, occasionally, issues with splitting nodes.

These are both due to the same root causes - lack of power / space / cooling in hubsites preventing installation of new CMTS and/or transmission kit. I've no idea if Newport or Newport East are impacted as I don't have the list in question, though I imagine Mr Saffron would know if hosts with DNS newp or newe are suffering.

Nothing that interesting really, all very practical and mundane. Not sure what conspiracy theories you were told.

On the upside your move out of the area to one without VM should make it a non-issue in any event.

Jees, you really get offended don't you when someone goes to someone else for advice, I apologise for that.

No conspiracy theory, just facts based on what I have seen and was told, and it all fits.

Yes a move to a non VM area would sort the issue, If I didn't own this house too and rent it to 5 people when I am not here, And for that I need 2 FTTC lines or a decent VM line. (in fact this house has a VM white box in every room, believe it or not. Some still connected and some not.

So I can still find out what VM are doing about it.

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

I forgot the other issue, which is pretty mundane also, lack of RF bandwidth being available on some older networks.

The networks gained a bunch of bandwidth when analogue was switched off, however DTV, HDTV,VoD and, especially, broadband, have eaten it all.

There's not enough room left on some networks for 24 SC-QAMs let alone the upcoming OFDM block for DOCSIS 3.1, so in some areas customers are being made aware of upgrades to be done that will cause outages as equipment needs to be replaced within cabinets.

Another major driver is upstream bandwidth. More and more of that is needed too, VM are wanting to get 4 upstream channels bonded.

My quest is to try and find out why it was removed, and if it will ever return. That's all

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

I forgot the other issue, which is pretty mundane also, lack of RF bandwidth being available on some older networks.

I guess I'm surprised there isn't one single frequency plan for the cable across all the former franchises. Or is that a 10-20 year goal?

In reply to a post by jchamier:

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

I forgot the other issue, which is pretty mundane also, lack of RF bandwidth being available on some older networks.

I guess I'm surprised there isn't one single frequency plan for the cable across all the former franchises. Or is that a 10-20 year goal?

Same reason BT don't rebuild the copper plant without a good reason.

The two Newport areas show an average of 1.5 and 1.8 in July 2017 so towards the bad end compared to other Virgin Media areas

https://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/7788-are-the-dar...

In reply to a post by 23Prince:

Jees, you really get offended don't you when someone goes to someone else for advice, I apologise for that.

No conspiracy theory, just facts based on what I have seen and was told, and it all fits.

Yes a move to a non VM area would sort the issue, If I didn't own this house too and rent it to 5 people when I am not here, And for that I need 2 FTTC lines or a decent VM line. (in fact this house has a VM white box in every room, believe it or not. Some still connected and some not.

So I can still find out what VM are doing about it.

Not offended in the slightest was just curious as to what was so interesting and why they were claiming, incorrectly, that the network was so broken in so many areas when it's in the best shape it has been since 2014 and work is still ongoing.

300Mb appears to be available on both Newport and Newport East hubsites. The website, incorrectly, states up to 200Mb but clicking to order broadband will show 300Mb as being available.

If it weren't available I imagine your slating of the peak time performance would explain it.

300Mb requires either very low traffic and 12 downstream channels, that doesn't exist anymore, or at least 16 downstream channels.

It was removed because the areas were on either 10 or 12 downstream channels and load was too high, then removed until 16 channels were implemented via new CMTS.

Based on Mr S's post and the above I imagine the new CMTS are there but more channels and node splits are needed.

I'll see if I can find out exactly what's going on and when it's planned to be going on by tomorrow.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

The two Newport areas show an average of 1.5 and 1.8 in July 2017 so towards the bad end compared to other Virgin Media areas

https://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/7788-are-the-dar...

Thanks, Mr S. I'll make some more enquiries.

I kinda forgot about this. Will pick it back up tomorrow. I need to enquire about the 'Voom' service anyway.

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

300Mb appears to be available on both Newport and Newport East hubsites. The website, incorrectly, states up to 200Mb but clicking to order broadband will show 300Mb as being available.

Thank you. Last time I had the service here it was up to 300 (was very slow admittedly) but the Sh3 was locked onto 16 channels.

As for right now - when I do this at the same address I've had it in the past on postcode checker I get this

https://postimg.org/image/g7zsjsm0l/

When I click Start to Order I get this..

https://postimg.org/image/fjqy0unat/

And then I get this..

http://postimg.org/image/p5kih5egl/35fe0218/

The reason I jacked them in last time was that, after a long chat with TS it was discovered that the cabinet I am on has problems, and the SH3 was not getting anywhere near the 100Mbps they said it needed to run everything on. I live about 200 yards from the Newport East hubsite. I know that does not matter with VM but I could go and ask someone - they are always there. I am in Area 25

So I checked my old postcode 13 miles away but still same area- same problem there with no 300.

I'd appreciate anything you could find out - and I apologise for my previous tone.

Edited by 23Prince (Wed 06-Sep-17 09:05:00)

Simple - computer say NO! If it say NO, then u can't order 300Meg!

In reply to a post by adslmax:

Simple - computer say NO! If it say NO, then u can't order 300Meg!

That's true. It will say yes I am sure when G.fast comes along. - by which time I will be saying no.

Did you find anything out please?

I've had to complain to the ASA as they state "350 for all" in the advertising - and it's clearly not as even on the business side still 200 max

https://s26.postimg.org/fb585j5yx/Screen_Shot_2017-0...

Edit - ASA

Edited by 23Prince (Sat 09-Sep-17 17:54:28)

VM Business were advertising the Voom 350 service way back in April. I was on the Vivid 200 residential service at the time but VM Business assured me that if I switched to them I would stay on the 200 Mbs service for a short while but that I could expect the 350 service very soon, probably by the end of May. So I went ahead. By August this had still not materialised and nobody could give me a definite forecast, just vague suggestions that it should be up and running by October.

Not only that but the whole switchover had been a disaster. My phone number hadn't been ported, my ntlworld email addresses which I had stated were critical before I even signed up with VM Business stopped working, I hadn't received any bills from VM Business and yet both VM Business and VM Residential were claiming payment for the same three months with the threat of disconnection I didn't pay. To cap it all, I eventually got through to somebody higher up who actually knew what they were talking about and she told me that ntlworld email addresses could only be forwarded for 90 days, then they're lost. She could see previous correspondence and agreed I'd been missold the product and arranged a refund of all the money I'd paid to VM business. So it was back to VM Residential, who course thought I'd never left so my email addresses and phone number were still intact.

It took several weeks for the refund cheque to reach me and get cleared into my bank but everything seemed to working OK again by mid September. Only a week or so later, I got a call from a VM Business rep to see if I'd be interested in trying them again as he said the 350 Mbs service was definitely due in my postcode in the third week of October. You can imagine, I was very cautious by now and said the only way I would consider it was if I could keep my ntlworld email adresses and I'd been told that wasn't possible. He said he'd look into it and call me back if it was. No call back, so I considered the matter closed.

Last week, I got another call from someone else claiming to be from VM Business saying the 350 Mbs service was now live in my street and he had sorted out my ntlworld email problems and that I could have them forwarded to a VM Business email address. I said maybe but I wanted to check what the situation was with VM Residential as if the network had been upgraded, presumably the Vivid 300 service should be available too and I wanted to see how the prices compare. He outright told me only VM Business had been upgraded in my area and that I was stuck on 200Mbs. if I stayed with residential. So I asked for an email confirming the email porting and 350 speed but decided to call VM Residential retentions department anyway to see what they would say. Sure enough they said Vivid 300 was available to me now and even gave me a loyalty bonus to switch to it. I agreed and the new router is due in the post tomorrow. Once I activated it, I should be up and running. Interestingly, when I got the email from the VM Business guy it actually came from halo-connect.com, who appear to be a reseller or independent sales agency so I don't even know how they got involved.

Now, I'm sorry for the long winded post to get to this point but I just logged into My Virginmedia to see if I could get any update on the upgrade and noticed they now show my broadband service to be Vivid 350. Since I haven't received the official contract agreement yet I phoned customer service and the lady confirmed it's been authorised, it is for the Vivid 300 service and she knows of no Vivid 350 service!

So what will I be getting tomorrow?

Screenshot of my Virgin Media page:

https://i.imgur.com/GZqjXdp.jpg

Edited by Derek_S (Mon 23-Oct-17 16:22:10)

No problem thanks for the long post/update!

I'm still 200 in my area. Ive actually lost any and all hope that they will bring it here - when I move in a few months I will be on FTTC 80/20 again so I am getting used to life with that being the max I can go

No VM there either.

From experience you won't be missing much other than the headline speed test 'potential' ...

I'm glad to have finally washed my hands for good of Virgin Media, though I'm still fighting for my £135 refund which they're threatening to take away claiming my kit wasn't return when the tracking shows they've received it :X

Would of begged for 40/10 FTTC instead of the 200/20, suppose I'll see how the Canadian providers hold up.

Why have a specific ISP email address if email is so important?

In reply to a post by broadband66:

Why have a specific ISP email address if email is so important?

My wife and I have had the same ntlworld.com email addresses for nearly twenty years. It takes a 36 page word document to keep track of all the online accounts that have those email addresses registered as my contact address and they are the email addresses that even people who haven't contacted me in years can still. Why would I ever want to change to something else? Especially since ntl, which subsequently became Virgin Media, has always provided the fastest broadband service available to my address since I first got it installed in 2000 and it's generally very reliable..

The only way I would consider changing providers is if another company came along offering significantly faster services for a similar price.

edit: OK I just got my new modem activated and used Speedtest.net to test it. This is what I got. Looks like Vivid 350 is indeed up and running. In fact, make that Vivid 380!

http://beta.speedtest.net/result/6733434328.png

Edited by Derek_S (Tue 24-Oct-17 16:23:01)

In reply to a post by Derek_S:

Why would I ever want to change to something else?

ISP email services have a history of disappearing.

In reply to a post by Zadeks:

In reply to a post by Derek_S:

Why would I ever want to change to something else?

ISP email services have a history of disappearing.

Nothing can be guaranteed to last for ever but at nearly twenty years my current ones have lasted longer than most.

You've been lucky that your connection has been good for so long. Most people change ISP at least every 3 or 4 years to get a faster connection and some users change annually to get a far cheaper cost.

It took ages for my new network to go live (7 months), but the upside was instead of vivid200 being available it was vivid300.

When I did speedtests I was getting 385mbps and when the billing went live it was listed as vivid350.

So the actual timing was perfect.

In reply to a post by Derek_S:

In reply to a post by broadband66:

Why have a specific ISP email address if email is so important?

Why would I ever want to change to something else?

Because of the issues you've just been explaining!

Register your own domain name with 1&1 or another suitable domain provider, you can then setup up as many email addresses as you want such as [email protected], but set these to forward to your current ISP email addresses.

Minimal cost and you are very unlikely to lose the domain and can easily change the addresses they forward to with no need to change the main email address.

This is what I've done and when I change ISP to Virgin next year after 14 years with Plusnet, I can just change the forwarding address and the IMAP stuff in our email clients.

In your situation though I'd do the above going forward, then if/when the NTL address is lost at least all your new contacts/registrations will be to the new address.