In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

No rules broken so no deletion

Fair play - I just didn't want to go off topic too much.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

they all get it, at least did on the pro product, I dont know if the standard packages get it.

Its very likely its an automated figure thats a set % of the estimated speed on signup.

Another thing with sky is they will honour the signup figures, they dont drop it when openreach drops the figure.

Throughput or access line speed?

In reply to a post by Daemon66:

The fact is that having the capability for multiple FHD/UHD streams and still allowing for good gaming and even simple old web browsing at the same time is what ultra-fast broadband is all about these days. It is not about supporting people stuck in the past who want to do just one thing at a time, those people will never really need anything faster than 25mbps (well until UUHD comes along or whatever).

This is all in *your* opinion. The problem is you're assuming everyone uses their connection in the same way as you. They don't. How many times does it need explaining that this problem destroys performance of everything that uses a single download thread including software updates, downloads, VPNs (this one being particularly troublesome for businesses, with an increasing amount of people taking to the forums to complain about it) and far more. Not everyone subscribes to a 200Mb broadband package to stream Netflix all day and night believe it or not! And even then, the likes of myself (and likely everyone on the same CMTS, given every friend on the same one has the same problem) were stuck with performance so bad it was actually causing problems with streaming e.g. frequent buffering on Youtube/Twitch and causing things like Netflix to drop to the low resolution streams.

Speed is almost irrelevant for online gaming provided it's stable; a few Mb is more than enough. The problem is this problem also seems to cause high packet loss and latency spikes which *does* cause problems. Add to that the major jitter problems with the Superhub 3, which have been finally admitted by the manufacturer, but I'm not holding my breath for VM to admit to it. The depressing thing is this is yet *another* problem picked up on by the community with the ISPs denying any problems for far too long. Just because an ISP refuses to admit to a problem doesn't mean there isn't one.

So you don't have (or don't care about) the problem. Fantastic. Stop trying to trivialise the real problems other people are having. Those of us who have the option of switching likely already have, but not everyone lives in an area with both Virgin and FTTC.

Actually, the fact is that your broadband connection should not be limited in any way that is unexpected. It should provide the flexibility to download in all manor of means that are provided by normal mechanisms of the Internet.

This (Subject) limitation of VM DOCSIS 3 based system is not under question - there are many tests and graphs that have been posted on forums that clearly demonstrate this issue. These are not 'anecdotal' as has been suggested but real tests.

Whether the FACT that this limitation that exists on VM impacts real world usage not in question either. I would suggest that many more people are impacted by this than realise. They get a 'speedtest.net' result that shows 200Mb/s so they are happy.
Netflix doesn't buffer too much and downloading an iPlayer program in HD should take 1 hour, shouldn't it? NO. The vast majority of folks know no different. These are customers that VM want to retain.

For me this was a severe limitation - I changed to VDSL - my broadband service now gives me 75Mb/s whether or not this is provided by single or multiple 'threads'.
I can download IOS updates, windows updates, iPlayer programs, Sky+ boxsets in a quarter of the time it took on my '150Mb/s' VM service.

I'd suggest that the vast majority or people who don't know how to use a partitioned download manager are impacted by this. Anecdotally, it seems that web pages are also 'snapper' on VDLS than the lower quality DOSCSIS3 service.

Ah well, I'm happy now; just wish I'd moved two years ago - damn inertia!

Ian

In reply to a post by watercooled:

This is all in *your* opinion.

Duh! Of course it is only my opinion. That's what a forum is all about.

In reply to a post by watercooled:

The problem is you're assuming everyone uses their connection in the same way as you.

Nope, that was you with your 'majority' claims.

In reply to a post by watercooled:

Stop trying to trivialise the real problems other people are having.

I'm not trying, I am stating that in my opinion they are trivial, to everyone except those who notice them that is, and since they affect only a very small number customers, no matter how much you whine on about it here, it isn't going to change unless you go to another ISP (if you can of course).

already answered.

I cannot say for sure 100% what the intention of that policy is but I know on the pro forums sky were treating throughput below it as faults when reported.

But as you may already know, its the quality of a SLA that is of real value, whilst there is the stated guaranteed speed, there is no SLA to go with it, so if someone falls below that speed then sky dont really have to do anything other than maybe allowing to exit contract penalty free.

Edited by Chrysalis (Mon 05-Dec-16 14:48:02)

In reply to a post by Daemon66:

In reply to a post by watercooled:

This is all in *your* opinion.

Duh! Of course it is only my opinion. That's what a forum is all about.

Then stop pretending it's fact.

In reply to a post by Daemon66:

In reply to a post by watercooled:

The problem is you're assuming everyone uses their connection in the same way as you.

Nope, that was you with your 'majority' claims.

I said nothing of the sort, stop putting words in my mouth. My exact claim was "achievable speeds in the majority of real downloads" - I said NOTHING about it being the majority of people.

In reply to a post by Daemon66:

In reply to a post by watercooled:

Stop trying to trivialise the real problems other people are having.

I'm not trying, I am stating that in my opinion they are trivial, to everyone except those who notice them that is, and since they affect only a very small number customers, no matter how much you whine on about it here, it isn't going to change unless you go to another ISP (if you can of course).

Grow up. Since when as complaining about a real and major technical problem on a forum constituted whining? And as I and Eeeps have explained, it is highly likely far more people are affected by this than realise it, and are having problems with poor download speeds, buffering videos etc but get fobbed off by Virgin because Speedtest looks OK.

I've been with BT for over a month now, but that doesn't mean I'm going to give up in trying to get it resolved for other people. I don't have it in for Virgin at all but I think it's a shame that would could be a potentially simple fix is hampering performance on what is a very capable network - much like the SH3 bug.

In reply to a post by Eeeps:

Actually, the fact is that your broadband connection should not be limited in any way that is unexpected. It should provide the flexibility to download in all manor of means that are provided by normal mechanisms of the Internet.

This (Subject) limitation of VM DOCSIS 3 based system is not under question - there are many tests and graphs that have been posted on forums that clearly demonstrate this issue. These are not 'anecdotal' as has been suggested but real tests.

Whether the FACT that this limitation that exists on VM impacts real world usage not in question either. I would suggest that many more people are impacted by this than realise. They get a 'speedtest.net' result that shows 200Mb/s so they are happy.
Netflix doesn't buffer too much and downloading an iPlayer program in HD should take 1 hour, shouldn't it? NO. The vast majority of folks know no different. These are customers that VM want to retain.

For me this was a severe limitation - I changed to VDSL - my broadband service now gives me 75Mb/s whether or not this is provided by single or multiple 'threads'.
I can download IOS updates, windows updates, iPlayer programs, Sky+ boxsets in a quarter of the time it took on my '150Mb/s' VM service.

I'd suggest that the vast majority or people who don't know how to use a partitioned download manager are impacted by this. Anecdotally, it seems that web pages are also 'snapper' on VDLS than the lower quality DOSCSIS3 service.

Ah well, I'm happy now; just wish I'd moved two years ago - damn inertia!

Ian

I bought this up with VM and in the VM forums 3 years ago - and it's still being debated

I got sick of 2mbps as well which is why, like you I got FTTC and it's night and day. I have 2 lines I am that impressed.