Im looking for a corporate level product anyway and you aint going to get that for less than the price of VM whatever dream world foxuk lives in.

I think VM are vulnerable if talktalk go the same way as BT, sky and co. The ASA usually dont like ruling out against multiple isp's but if VM are left alone selling unlimited with throttles then they vulnerable to a advertising claim in my opinion.

On a 50mb connection download is a theoretical 22.5GB per hour. After a pathetic 5GB over 5 hours you are throttled. That's a couple hours of HD. It's nothing. It's 5%. At 5% utilisation they see fit to throttle. That's just not acceptable.

It's the same on the 100mb service.

I don't think any company should be allowed to advertise unlimited and have any traffic management that cuts in before a constant 20% utilization as a bare minimum. At any less than this it is clear that the issues are down to lack of infrastructure not users' habits. If users are using more bandwidth then put the infrastructure in place and stop adding more and more customers in already congested areas. If you cannot provide the service you are advertising at a certain price then stop advertising it or increase the price so that the service lives up to the advertising.

I also think it is poor of VM not to offer an un traffic managed unlimited product. I'd happily pay more to get a product that suits my needs ie unlimited so I can recover a broken computer without it taking weeks rather than hours. I'd pay extra to have it. Most of the time I wouldn't need it but when I do it is infuriating to be traffic managed to the point you can't use it for legitimate activity.

when i was on 20mb bb the STM was annoying, but on 60mb or 100/120mb bb not so much even at 25mb-50mb speeds its still much faster then what an BT line could provide

you can still download 12-13 GB an hour you not been limited on the amount you can download (unless your going nuts downloading over 1000gb each month then you mite get an letter or an call)

i am mostly fine with the STM my self but not to happy about the TM of Usenet (there TM for p2p seems to have no affect)

i agree the STM on the upstream is little hash (triggering the STM on upload or download STM's both of them)

all i say is be happy they do not cap it to something like 250gb-500gb per month like in the USA, whould i be really happy if VM had no STM yes but due to there network setup it needs to be done (Openreach do it at there exchanges when the backhaul pipes are running hot, every ones speed drops to keep packet loss away)

In reply to a post by leexgx:

i agree the STM on the upstream is little hash (triggering the STM on upload or download STM's both of them)

It shouldn't. If it does there's a fault. The enforcement of STM is done on a per-service flow basis. Upstream and downstream are separate service flows.

Though probably find high upload users are often high download users at the same time.

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

In reply to a post by leexgx:

i agree the STM on the upstream is little hash (triggering the STM on upload or download STM's both of them)

It shouldn't. If it does there's a fault. The enforcement of STM is done on a per-service flow basis. Upstream and downstream are separate service flows.

guess i need to test it again last time i got STM to trigger, it STM both upload and download, i test it later on

Quite!

That should have changed in early 2012 as I remember. New versions of CMTS software.