ADSL24

After receiving my long awaited MAC code from Eclipse I decided to migrate to ADSL24. Their Home 30 package looks good as you get 30GB peak usage and 300Gb off peak all for

your current ISP has taken you off bt's equipment. This isn't ADSL24's fault. BT charge them to move you back on, so they have to in turn pass that charge back on to you.

So does this mean that whatever ISP i decide to migrate to will charge me?

I guess some ISPs might absorb the costs in return for a long term contract, you'll end up paying one way or the other.

yea. Personally I'd pay the

Im guessing that whichever ISP I choose, I will have to pay the migration cost. If I choose a 12 month contract and the ISP are a pile of [censored] like Eclipse im screwed. At least with a monthly contract if the ISP are no good I can just leave.

correct, if you are LLU'ed you will be charged by any ISP.

Not necessarily.

I was on Eclipse LLU (Flex 500), and recently moved to Be who accepted the Eclipse LLU MAC. Now synched at 12mbps down/1.3mbps up on 3 month contract. I think other providers may also accept LLU MACs.

I meant to say any non LLU

Newnet

I migrated a friend from Pipex LLU to NewNet at no cost on a 1-month contract, and it was recently checked by another TB user and there is still no charge for migration from LLU, so NewNet gets my vote.

HTH - Blue

Exactly

If you can get Eclipse LLU, can you get any other LLU services, like Be?
If not, then go for an Entanet reseller, ADSL24 get my vote - fantastic speeds and service.

y go with a services thats got a 60gig cap

Two possible reasons:

one, you use less than 61 GB per month,
two, it isn't capped.

In reply to:

---

so they have to in turn pass that charge back on to you.

---

After they have added on another tenner

After they have added on another tenner

When you only charge

You forgot to mention that the added tenner means they don't charge BT's recently imposed

How much have you paid out in this 'cease charge' over the last year and how much have you bagged from overcharging on activations?

I know accounts are not your strong point ( 10 months overdue now, when you gonna be listed as 'proposal to strike off' again? Must be soon ) but I spot a nice little earner.

Edited by deleted (Mon 09-Jul-07 18:27:44)

How much have you paid out in this 'cease charge' over the last year

Surely that will depend on the quality of the ISP - they'd have paid out loads if a good many people leave, and very little if most people stay.

Every time a customer moves house or students finish for the year we get a cease order and have to pay the cease charge.

I discussed these matters at length with Enta when your employers introduced the cease charge (which they had already collected in the form of the higher activation fee for so many years!) and while the details are commercially sensitive I can assure you that the new activation fee is not a big earner for Enta. UKFSN does not add anything to the activation charge so there was never any income for us from it anyway.

It seems you need to for another business opportunity as so far you only seem to be spotting fantasy ones.

Well I suppose we will see the effect on your bottom line when you eventually get around to filing last years accounts. Any news when you expect to do so?

soon.

I'm pleased to hear it.

out of interest, how much in late filing penalties have you paid out or owe so far this year? Is it more than the amount of 'cease charges' you have paid?

How much extra profit is your employer making from the introduced cease charges?

ROFL. If you are thinking I work for BT, perhaps you should check their accounts for details of profit and loss, they file them!

Jason, don't feed the troll

Regards,
Steve

In reply to:

---

Jason, don't feed the troll

---

Yep Jason ignore him, he has a habbit of wanting to know others financial business. Actually what has this thread even got to do with a companys financial accounts? Opps silly me i was trying to apply logic to a trolls posting.

Yes I really shouldn't feed Jason's blatant trolling.

This is way off track. will leave it open in the event the OP wants to add anything.........rememeber the OP folks, the person who started the thread and their concerns?

ADSL24's 300gb offpeak package is tempting but the

That is only for new connections. Migrations in are free, with the exception of migrating in from a LLU provider, and if you're migrating in from a LLU provider you'll end up paying wherever you go in the form of either cash or being tied in to a lengthy contract.

Regards,
Steve

In reply to:

---

There is also no port blocking or traffic throttling.

---

As an Entanet reseller you will find that ADSL24 is subject to how Entanet manage their network and Entanet do throttle their customers connections when they struggle with capacity issues - except they call it an "anti-loss tool".

Change the record will you? Entanet are clearly not struggling with capacity at the moment, http://noc.enta.net/?page_id=166 for the proof.
Sure there's a little spike at about 10pm that occasionally needs to be managed for a short while, big deal.

Regards,
Steve

Fact is that the OP seems to be under the impression that ADSL24 don't throttle whereas the reality is that they do. I merely gave him/her the facts.

You may wish facts to be covered up but in case you hadn't noticed this board is actually an independant site where this particular forum is for:-

"Looking for an ISP to supply you with DSL at home? Discuss your thoughts with other people who are already using DSL! ".

This board isn't the Entanet PR and marketing forum where anything that Entanet and it's PR fanboys prefer kept quiet is covered up.

And neither is it an LLU fanboys board.
And if you care to look at some of my posts in other boards you'll see that I'm not an Enta fanboy as depending on posters' requirements and budgets I have suggested Idnet, Newnet and even PlusNet, and yes, sometimes Entanet as suitable ISPs.
And none of the Entanet 'fanboys' try to cover up the ALT or what it does. Yes, when it kicks in it reduces line speeds a little at a time when needed but that is sensible network management, not the indiscriminate throttling of certain ports or protocols between certain times (or even 24/7) regardless of overall network conditions or just to cope with a real lack of capacity.

In reply to:

---

none of the Entanet 'fanboys' try to cover up the ALT or what it does.

---

Why not just call the ALT (i.e. anti-loss tool) exactly what it is then - i.e. throttling?

You were the one who decided to be extremely rude and totally ignore the OP post just to tell me to "change the record" when I mentioned Enatnet do throttle because the OP seemed to be under the misguided impression they don't.

I will leave it up to the readers of TBB to decide whether people that visit TBB are entitled to know the facts about ISPs or whether Entanet PR fanboys should be allowed to act like a bunch of football hooliogans trying to "beat up" anyone who doesn't blindly support their "team" and who would prefer the facts about Entanet's throttling not to be mentioned.

Edited by deleted (Wed 01-Aug-07 15:42:18)

The facts are that there is a world of difference between short term traffic management to cope with a short lived spike in demand compared with the routine throttles used by some ISPs on certain ports and protocols and that distinction has to be made, rather than mislead the OP with FUD. Like I said, I have suggested ISPs other than Entanet to other posters on these boards, it would be nice to see you once, just once, suggest something other than an LLU provider.
And if you think 'change the record' is extremely rude, I think you need to grow a bit of a thicker skin. You wouldn't like it if I was really trying

If you both check the date of the OP it is likely this is all irrelevant. How about letting the thread sink out of sight where it belongs?

You don 't get it do you Tony? Throttling in my book is getting a 2.5Mbit connection and only being able to download at under quarter of the speed, now that is throttling.


Below is all the centrals at 7.13, which is peak time, now if they are throttled, I want to know what connection you have got.



Central 1 = Green
Expected performance 7.2Mbps

Central 2 = Green
Expected performance 7.2Mbps

Central 3 = Green
Expected performance 7.2Mbps

Central 4 = Green
Expected performance 7.2Mbps

Central 5 = Green
Expected performance 7.2Mbps

Central 6 = Not-live
Expected performance 7.2Mbps

Central 7 = Not-live
Expected performance 7.2Mbps


I will run an ISp or any company down if they stuffed me up or their service is bad, but if a company gives me a good service, I will praise them and so far ADSL24 have been fantastic, that could change. I am not a fan boy as you keep putting it, just a happy customer.

I think any Entanet supplier is good value for money or seems to be, the problem the OP is having with LLU is one reason why I would never go to LLU, people here thinks it is a good idea, but not if it is going to cost you to get off it.

Me too, never again will I enter into a contract that is more than a couple of months, never, ever again. no, no ,no. I will not ever.

I think that says it.

In reply to:

---

Below is all the centrals at 7.13, which is peak time, now if they are throttled, I want to know what connection you have got.

---

Below are all the centrals at 21:57:01, which is also peak time - now if they aren't being throttled, I want to know what connection you have got.

Central Pipe Status
Central 1
Expected performance 4.4Mbps

Central 2
Expected performance 4.4Mbps

Central 3
Expected performance 4.2Mbps

Central 4
Expected performance 4.2Mbps

Central 5
Expected performance 4.2Mbps

Edited by deleted (Wed 01-Aug-07 22:03:29)

It don't affect me, unless it goes under 2Mbis, I would not notice any difference. I noticed that it is going back up again. But syaing that even 4Mbits is enough for most people, You would not get that sort of speed with Many ISp's at this price.

I know people say that Newnet don't don't throttle, but they also don't give you a lot of GB for your money either. It depends what you want at the end of the day. I would love to know how Newnet copes with demand, unless they have not got enough customers to have that problem.

I am happy with ADSL24, I think they offer a great service for the price, even if I could get close to 8 Mbits and I was throttled to 4Mbits for a while, it would not worry me, after all, eveything you need to do on the net can be done with a connection speed of 2mbits, unless you are using BT vision and then that is a different thing.

The point isn't whether people are happy with Entanet's throttling - the point simply is that Entanet do throttle.

In reply to:

---

You would not get that sort of speed with Many ISp's at this price.

---

Conversely you can get faster speeds for less than Entanet charge from LLU providers mainly with no caps either.

What you just posted was not throttling.The centrals automatically drop to lower levels around 10 to avoid packet loss as off-peak comes in.After 10 mins they come back up.

Better luck next time

You hit the nail on the head. "It depends what you want at the end of the day."

Entanet cater for heavy users, and have to throttle. The method they use seems to be the best there is, and the effect is small, but all Tony is saying is they DO throttle. Fact. The users are happy with it. Fine. But when a poster asks for a non-throttling ISP it is not fair to the poster for Enta re-sellers, never mind users, to deny the Enta ALT (throttle). It is up to the asker to decide if the ALT is acceptable - for most it will be.

Newnet price structure deters heavy users as you say. For the non-heavy users they are cheaper and better than Enta because by not having the heavy users they do not need to throttle, or lose packets! My IP Profile is 4500, my speeds vary from 4200 best to 3800/3900 typical to 3200 minimum. I doubt if Enta would give me that - at 50% higher price.

Enta do throttle,your right.The fact is that they have so much capacity at the moment that the throttling has little or no effect on most peoples connections.

Whats making the fan boys as you call them mad is the fact your going around nearly every post making them out to be Tiscali the second.

Collins dictionary. Throttle:-

noun - any device that controls the quantity of fuel or fuel and air mixture entering an engine.

verb - to control or restrict (a flow of fluid) by means of a throttle valve.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anti Loss Tool - A VALVE or A DEVICE.

In reply to:

---

Me too, never again will I enter into a contract that is more than a couple of months, never, ever again. no, no ,no. I will not ever.

---

No more getting married.

In reply to:

---

What you just posted was not throttling.The centrals automatically drop to lower levels around 10 to avoid packet loss as off-peak comes in.After 10 mins they come back up.

---

The centrals automatically drop everyones speeds to lower levels? Got any more twaddle you want to tell us about?

I think you will find that BT centrals don't "automatically" drop customers speeds just for Entanet customers unless Entanet are implimenting some form of network controls.

What is the fancy market speak for that from Entanet? Bet it is some other form of "tool" that the PR Entanet fanboys won't admit is throttling!

Better luck next time!

Edited by deleted (Wed 01-Aug-07 23:26:27)

In reply to:

---

all Tony is saying is they DO throttle

---

Precisely.

In reply to:

---

But when a poster asks for a non-throttling ISP it is not fair to the poster for Enta re-sellers, never mind users, to deny the Enta ALT (throttle).

---

Yet again - precisely.

Many people undoubtedly find the Entanet PR fanboys extremely tiresome with their constant barrage trying to deny Entanet throttle or trying to cover up this fact with "double talk" - which is misleading people that come to TBB for factual advice.

Entanet do throttle their users - you can call it an "anti loss tool", a dextrom nurderlator or even an apple tree - but none of the fancy market speak changes the fact that Entanet throttle users connections.

That was me, I forgot to sign in. I am not a heavy user, but I just think Entanet resellers give a good deal. I do agree with Tony that it is some sort of throttle and I do think that something this should be put on the resellers website. ADSL24 website says no throttling, It was only because I been on these forums that I knew the score.

As I said the ALT don't affect me as I would never get to 4Mbits anyway, but I can see that people could get annoyed if they joined a Entanet reseller, thinking they will get their full speed all the time.

I agree it can not happen and there must be some system in place, BT charges a flaming fortune and at the end of the day ISp's got to make money.

Newnet price structure deters me and I am not a heavy user. The problem is Newnet prices are not that good.

I agree, I am not disagreeing with you, but Entanet throttling is a lot better than others, at least I can use their service 24 hours a day for anything I want, try doing that with other ISp's who throttle and block ports.


I would not touch LLU with a barge pole, and a lot of people would not be able to get a LLU service anyway,, there are still a lot of exchanges out there that is not LLU enabled and I doubt ever will be.

I have seen too many horror stories of people on LLU. As much as I hate BT, I am staying on their system

So who are you with?

I have never been married and no I won't be getting married either, I am not that silly. It is only a bit of paper anyway, means nothing.

In reply to:

---

Newnet price structure deters heavy users as you say. For the non-heavy users they are cheaper and better than Enta because by not having the heavy users they do not need to throttle, or lose packets! My IP Profile is 4500, my speeds vary from 4200 best to 3800/3900 typical to 3200 minimum. I doubt if Enta would give me that - at 50% higher price.

---

Those speeds aren't great for a 4500 profile, is it just that your exchange is congested or something else? I have a 7150 profile and my typical speed on Entanet is around 6850. Last night I was doing a download that dipped to about 4500 at the height of the 10pm spike but that was only for a few minutes and it climbed steadily to about 6500 by the time it finished at about 10:30.

Regards,
Steve

In reply to:

---

I will leave it up to the readers of TBB to decide whether people that visit TBB are entitled to know the facts about ISPs

---

I quite agree so will you now include reference to your beloved Sky's FUP at http://www.sky.com/portal/site/skycom/usage

In reply to:

---

FAIR USAGE POLICY

If you subscribe to a Product that does not have a Usage Cap, our Fair Use Policy (

In reply to:

---

I quite agree so will you now include reference to your beloved Sky's FUP at http://www.sky.com/portal/site/skycom/usage

---

Erm what's in a FUP is irrelevant. Its only when they are invoked that you need to take any notice of them.

Fact is that SKY don't throttle customers on their LLU service. They never have done to my knowledge.

Anyway this isn't a theoretical discussion about SKY - its a factual one about whether or not ADSL24 throttle. And from what I've read it seems they do.

In reply to:

---

I would not touch LLU with a barge pole, and a lot of people would not be able to get a LLU service anyway,, there are still a lot of exchanges out there that is not LLU enabled and I doubt ever will be.

I have seen too many horror stories of people on LLU. As much as I hate BT, I am staying on their system

---

That's a real shame as there are decent LLU providers out there. I've been with one for over 18 months now and its been a breath of fresh air to have enjoyed a clean, genuinely unshaped and unlimited service for less than

In reply to:

---

Those speeds aren't great for a 4500 profile, is it just that your exchange is congested or something else?

---

I'd say they were pretty good. My profile is 2500 and my range, day or night, is 700 to 1500 with the odd burst in the small hours to 2000 or so. I'm with IDNet, who've spoken to BT and say it's exchange congestion.

No quibble with most of that zyborg, except you seem to ignore the Newnet 3GB (

Whereas your beloved Entanet just put throttling on their users without even telling them at first.

When Entanet's throttling was first introduced - Entanet didn't even tell it's customers (i.e. Entanet didn't even inform their own resellers such as ADSL24) for about 3 days after they introduced it.

I think you ought to take a look at Entanet's Terms and Conditions to see what they can do to your connection and without even informing you or their own resellers.

If Entanet choose to they can just throttle your speeds virtually down to zero as it is in their T and C's.

So who was it that invoked their T an C's first to throttle their customers ?

Was it Sky or Entanet?

errrrrrrr - answer is it was Entanet who throttled their customers. Sky doesn't throttle their customers at all.

Edited by deleted (Thu 02-Aug-07 13:37:23)

You have already admitted that Sky throttle all their customers to a maximum of 16 Mbps.

In reply to:

---

If Entanet choose to they can just throttle your speeds virtually down to zero as it is in their T and C's.

---

Really? Where does it say that?

In reply to:

---

Sky doesn't throttle their customers at all.

---

Actually they do. ADSL2+ is capable of speeds of up to 24Mb, but Sky have throttled the maximum speed on their Max service to 16Mb And they do it 24/7 as well

Regards,
Steve

Edited by sjr (Thu 02-Aug-07 14:09:33)

just to humour those who know better - yes they do throttle, but in a constructive and considered manner
it works, well I can only state that from a personal perspective rather than fantasize what may
or may not be in order to suit a particular agenda.

I have never experienced less than 2meg speeds, and only from 22:00 for 2/3 hours
a smooth sophisticated management strategy.
Thumbs up for me !


Try it - 1 months contract

In reply to:

---

In reply to:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If Entanet choose to they can just throttle your speeds virtually down to zero as it is in their T and C's.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Really? Where does it say that?

---

You really should read the T and C's of Entanet resellers in order not to make a complete idiot of yourself.

For exampe ADSL24's Terms and Conditions state that they/Entanet can:-

"Suspend, close down or restrict the whole or any part of the Services in order to carry out emergency or other repairs, maintenance and/or improvements or to prevent overload of the network or to preserve the safety, security or integrity of the Services and any Internet traffic conveyed " Full T and C's of ADSL24.

I highlighted the appropiate text that shows they could - in theory - throttle your connection down to next to nothing without even telling you first.

Entanet already brought in throttling without telling their customers in January.

Even Entanet resellers were annoyed that Entanet brought in throttling without even bothering to tell the resellers. For example ADSL24 were moaning because they felt Entanet had treated them like mushrooms by not even telling them about bringing in throttling - ADSL24 complaining about not being told before Entanet brought in blanket throttling.

Also ukfsn weren't happy about the way Entanet introduced throttling without telling the resellers - ukfsn annoyed about all the complaints they had because Entanet didn't tell them they had brought in throttling.

Edited by deleted (Thu 02-Aug-07 21:58:27)

In reply to:

---

yes they do throttle,

---

That is all I have said all along.

Every time anyone mentions Entanet throttle you get the pack of Entanet PR fanboys acting like a bunch of second hand car salesman trying to cover this "defect" about Entanet up.

If any had bothered to check what the original poster of this topic actually did - they may have noticed he signed up to Newnet - see here.

The centrals automatically drop everyones speeds to lower levels? Got any more twaddle you want to tell us about?

I think you will find that BT centrals don't "automatically" drop customers speeds just for Entanet customers unless Entanet are implimenting some form of network controls.

TK, you know full well he meant Entanet impose an advance speed drop (shortly before the 10pm rush) !

What is the fancy market speak for that from Entanet? Bet it is some other form of "tool" that the PR Entanet fanboys won't admit is throttling!

They don't have a "fancy" name for it.
However, as is usual from Entanet, they've told us what it is, and why it's there.
It is......A momentary speed drop (to a little lower than would normally be in place at 10pm).
It's for.....Packet loss and ping protection (to avoid a momentary increase in pings and packet loss at precisely 10pm, to give the ALT time to adapt to the sudden burst of usage that evening).

Of course, we all know your views on ping protection and keeping packet loss at a minimum......You'd rather us have sky high pings, get booted from our online gaming, and lose half of Auntie May's phone call from Texas.
Me....I'd rather have a small drop in speed for a short while, and keep the rest of the good stuff.

I am, however, totally wasting my breath.....FWs don't change.


EDIT....Oh, and 22:21 (21 minutes past the start of peak demand), and:
C1 = 6.6Mbps
C2 = 6.6Mbps
C3 = 4.5Mbps
C4 = 6.2Mbps
C5 = 6.6Mbps

Considering the most any of us can get from ADSLmax, is around 6.7Mbps, I don't see much throttling (apart from on C3, which is only lower than the others because BT wouldn't load balance if the life of their CEO's granny depended on it).

Edited by adebov (Thu 02-Aug-07 22:23:35)

Uh uh!

Sky sell an "up to" 16Mb broadband service. They use ADSL2+ 24Mb technology to supply it. So at that level they cannot be accused of throttling their customers.

They can only be accused of throttling if they have customers sync'ing at a particular figure - and normally receiving speeds dependent on contention/congestion below that - if they choose to use something like an anti-loss tool to reduce deliberately that customer's download speed.

If the effect of contention/congestion is such as to seriously reduce the customer's speed, that is not throttling. Just commercial suicide.

Look at their web site John - they sell up to 16. The underlying technology is irrelevant.

Would you care to link us to a post, say within the last month or two, from an "Entanet Fanboy" claiming the ALT doesn't exist?

When Entanet's throttling was first introduced - Entanet didn't even tell it's customers (i.e. Entanet didn't even inform their own resellers such as ADSL24) for about 3 days after they introduced it.

It could have been worse....They could have throttled http down to a fraction of the connection speed, and spent the next month claiming it was "a fault"!

Sky doesn't throttle their customers at all.

Cannot comment on Sky.
On the other LLU company you're always recommending (even to people that can't get LLU)....BE There......They do throttle.
This afternoon, I tried a speedtest on our 10.5Mbps connection.....5.7Mbps.
A few hours later.....8.2Mbps.
Both below the maximum throughput from a 10.5Mbps sync.

So, BE are by your definition (by the nature of their network, not making maximum speed available)....Throttling.
Best you stop recommending them, and put them onto the S**T pile, along with Entanet

I was reminding the poster of his own words.

OK . I didn't realise that.

Can't see where on a quick look though. And they don't - so wherever he said it he was incorrect.

I never said it actually but we all make mistakes.

Edited by deleted (Fri 03-Aug-07 01:28:58)

http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=which_isp&Number=3078665

In reply to:

---

Sky doesn't throttle their customers at all

---

I was under the impression they did on the BTW connect product.

Regarding Entanet not advising customers/resellers about the ALT. I remember this. I was annoyed at the time, as were other users & resellers. Enta said they had to test the equipment under real load conditions and that letting the cat out of the bag may have put this plan into jeopardy. You know what, I think it was quite a valid point and the ALT turned out to be a good thing, not a bad thing like a lot of us feared.

In any case right or wrong, I think I could forgive Enta this one communication blip. They have to be about the most open ISP there is in regard to the performance/capacity of their network. Did BT et al give advance warning of their throttling plans?

The "Fan Boy" tag you are slapping on posters is getting a bit tiresome incidentally. It does not take a genius to figure out ISPs tend to have "fan boys" when they are good. I remember when Plusnet was the fan boy ISP. The fan boys soon stopped praising them when they were no longer a good ISP. I have no doubt if Entanet ever turn bad a similar thing will happen. I certainly wouldn't praise an ISP if there was no good reason to do so, and I'm sure I wouldn't be alone.

Edited by deleted (Thu 02-Aug-07 23:34:43)

In reply to:

---

I was waiting for him to link to where I said it to back up his silliness.

---

TK - you will have noticed in general I am backing you up on this subject all over the place.

However, I have great respect for John, and you should also if you read his excellent helpful posts to many people.

A simple mistake just not justify even the mildest personal abuse of this kind. You could have pointed out his error politely just as I did.

Edited by RobertoS (Thu 02-Aug-07 23:25:32)

a qualified constuctive reply - thanks for some sanity

kind of defines the differences between the respondants
one one hand we have hostile criticism, on the other we have a considered opinion
stated in an earnest attempt to support and resolve an issue raised

Checkmate

i did say "just to humour those who know better"

looks like the subtefuge worked!

Good point.

I amended my post as john is helpful - unlike the perpetual bombardment from the Entanet fanboys when it is mentioned that Entanet throttle their customers connections.

Edited by deleted (Fri 03-Aug-07 01:41:18)

BE don't throttle. It's possible that the speedtest you were using was busy or it could have been contention at the exchange.

I have noticed that Tony_Keith does seem to have some form of problem with entanet for some reason and as is his usual style has battered the word throttle to death in this thread. I personally would never recommend something that I haven't experience of myself

Edited by deleted (Fri 03-Aug-07 03:34:27)

I'm sorry, I mistook keith_thfc for Tony_Keith.

It was keith_thfc who clarified the preferred method of throttling by Sky.

BE don't throttle.

Precisely the point I was making.
I was highlighting that just because one may be getting reduced speeds because of momentary network incapacity (and it wasn't the speedtest that was causing the problem), it doesn't always count as throttling.
Remember, of course, that any exchange congestion [affecting BE speeds] is on the BE network, and as they only have around 40-50 users per exchange, it's unlikely to be local.
So, at the time I did the tests, BE's network was suffering from reduced speeds, due to too many users trying to download at the same time.
It's exactly the same end result [as with Entanet], only the reduced speeds with Entanet are achieved in a controlled manner, where BE's reduced speeds are uncontrolled, but do both count as "throttling".

I have noticed that Tony_Keith does seem to have some form of problem with entanet for some reason

He does seem to have some kind of problem, but I'm not sure it's just with Entanet
I think he's just attention seeking, and if we could all ignore him, he'd move to another forum and get his kicks there (maybe one involving the pros & cons of stuffed vegetables).

It's a shame, because this forum doesn't need the kind of venom spat out be certain people.
A work colleague stopped using this forum because he got so fed up with the attitude of some posters (who shall remain nameless).

OK, Entanet do have a speed limiting mechanism in place.
We all know that, and we all know what it's for (only, certain "contributors" like to bang on about its existence, and call it throttling, without accepting it's there for a reason, is idle for around 20-22 hours a day, and is viewed by customers as, generally, a good thing).
It's called ALT (anti-loss tool).
OK, it's a fancy acronym, and TK doesn't like them. So I propose, from now on, we call it a Derek (far easier to work out what it does, from that name).

I personally would never recommend something that I haven't experience of myself

Same here (except Newnet & IDnet - I recommend them because of the repeated good postings, and very few bad ones).

I certainly wouldn't slag off a service I know nothing about.
I have personal experience of, or have witnessed friends connections with; Plusnet, Eclipse, AOL, Tiscali, Talk-Talk, Metronet, BT, ACE, BE & Bulldog, so I feel qualified to comment on those providers.
Maybe TK would care to state his personal experience of Entanet connections & customer service.
If he has none, he should be toning down.

unlike the perpetual bombardment from the Entanet fanboys when it is mentioned that Entanet throttle their customers connections.

Maybe if certain "contributors" stated the truth (Entanet impose temporary speed limits, for 2-3 hours each weekday, to protect pings & limit packet loss, to keep time critical applications such as gaming & VOIP at normal performance), rather than just jumping it at every opportunity with the Daily Mail style statement "Entanet throttle" (Daily Mail style, as in that used for dramatic effect, and with little relationship to the facts)?

As I've aksed before (but don't expect you to be able to reply), maybe you'd care to provide a link (to a post on this forum) where an Entanet "Fanboy" has stated, within the last couple of months, that the ALT doesn't exist?

They/we are not "Fanboys" (and you accuse Entanet of using fashionable silly names for things).
They/we are Entanet customers who prefer to clarify and balance some of the junk non-Entanet customers like to quote.

Yes, Entanet do sometimes limit speeds to protect their users.
No, it is not so they don't have to provide so much capacity (their network sits well under capacity for around 20-22 hours each weekday, and they're adding centrals every few months).
Yes, it could technically be called throttling, but that would mean us having to state that every ISP throttles (because no ISP has enough capacity to meet full demand, with full speed 24/7, so if the limit of a 622Mbps central is reached, that ISP is throttling.

You still with AOL? Don't they throttle?
Weren't you stating (a few months back), that AOL don't throttle, and will not be in the future? Talk about a Fanboy!

In reply to:

---

You still with AOL? Don't they throttle?
Weren't you stating (a few months back), that AOL don't throttle, and will not be in the future? Talk about a Fanboy!

---

He did go very quiet after the FUP was imposed after the Takeover.

I am quite impressed with the Entanet method and if I weren't with BE would go with one of their resellers, as most people on this forum who are with them would reccomend them. I would rather be able to download at 4.6 mbit/s than have the speed on certain protocols restricted all the time as is the wont of some ISPs

In reply to:

---

"Suspend, close down or restrict the whole or any part of the Services in order to carry out emergency or other repairs, maintenance and/or improvements or to prevent overload of the network or to preserve the safety, security or integrity of the Services and any Internet traffic conveyed "

---

Now you're getting ridiculous, that sort of clause is standard in every ISP you care to mention. For example Be say in their legal section...

In reply to:

---

Be may need to make changes to its network or the technical specification of a Service or may need to suspend provision of the Services for operational or technical reasons. Be will use all reasonable endeavours to notify you in advance of such changes or suspension if it materially affects your Services. Obviously we

Just tried to delete my post in response, but tis too late.

to you.

In reply to:

---

he should be toning down

---

Is that pun intentional?

he,he,he, best read ive had in ages, still playing that same old tune on that broken fiddle,if they tell this many lies over an argument they can`t possibly win....what will they be like when youve got a problem!

Err....What "lies"? I see no lies (well, not on my part, or Entanet, anyway).

Apart from when Entanet first switched on the ALT (for live testing), when they didn't give prior warning (they've explained it needed "real life" testing, and if they'd have given everybody advance warning, the usage patterns may well have changed - most Entanet customers accepted this explanation, and it's still better than BT's "there is a fault", when BT tried to explain why http was being throttled to a few hundred kbps).

Care to elaborate further on these "lies"?

I would rather be able to download at 4.6 mbit/s than have the speed on certain protocols restricted all the time as is the wont of some ISPs

Exactly why I've stayed put for over a year (never done that before).
For an ISP (using IPstream) which such high usage allowances, it's nice to be able to download faster than 2Mbps 24/7 (and mostly at the full speed of my line, 3500kbps profile).
Until switching to Entanet, I've never managed to get more than 400-800kbps between 6pm - midnight.
So, you're right, 4.6Mbps, across all protocols, with Entanet, is still a hell of a lot better than all but the most expensive ISPs, or those with low allowances.

Although I don't do much online gaming, Entanet's method of preserving pings (pretty much the same 24/7) is a real bonus (especially when you're playing against someone on a BT or AOL connection, and their ping has just gone through the roof).
It's good for VOIP, too.

The only reason they will have the activation fee is because they offer a one months contract.

The ISP will still get charged

Is this argument ever going to end? I was with Nildram for over 4 years & recently they started throttling P2P & Newsgroup, they only owned up to doing it after complaints on these forums by disgusted customers. Now they only throttle when capacity is reaching its limits. I migrated to UKFSN after it became almost certain that Pipex/Nildram etc were going to be part of Tiscali at least I can see the loading on the centrals & see which one I'm on... never had that with an ISP before. The ALT/throttling tool whatever you want to call it works fine for me, I get the fastest P2P or Newsgroup downloads I have ever seen even when ALT kicks in & Nildram was not by any means slow. I have a great gaming connection at any time of day, last night I was running a server from 8.00pm-10.45pm & you certainly could not tell when the 'ALT' kicked in at 10pm (when the off peak downloading frenzy starts)

You can argue all you like about ALT, I don't really care as my connection does exactly what I want it to do, If things change then I will look around for something better but hopefully I will be here for a long time.

Good evening Tony,

Long time no speak

So we can all agree that Entanet Do throttle. Are we all happy with this?



Ta,

Mark

Hi mark - trust you are keeping well?

I think we can now all agree that Enatnet do throttle.

Yep, they do

ps. must add in a way that ensures "ALL" users get the same speed if there are issues with the centrals etc.

Don't call me Fan Boy here Tony - but in all honestly I've never seen under 2 Meg and only after 10pm on a weeknight

Edited by deleted (Fri 03-Aug-07 23:46:53)

God. You've done Entanet to death and now you're starting on this new company Enatnet - what have Enatnet done to you?

let's stop the bitching and conlude:

if you can get SKY llu or even BE then this is best value under the sun.

However, if you cannot get the above and accept that Entanet use ALT of which is throttling which is publicly advertised then it's probably the best option to go if you download quite a bit, currently it's the best ISP to go with.

In reply to:

---

if you can get SKY llu or even BE then this is best value under the sun.

---

I can get both but for me NewNet is better value than both.

Be is slightly worse value.
Sky is much worse value.

I have no doubt that Be and Sky represent good value to some people; I wish that the people who unconditionally recommend them would understand they are not good value to everyone.

And if you like being tied into 12 month contracts and paying a year's subscription all at once. As you say it is horses for courses. What suits one person would not necesarily suit another. If you want the freedom of short contracts, not having to pay for connection equipment and no download limit then BE is extremely good value.

It don't matter if I wanted to go ona LLU service or not, our exchange will never have a LLU service.

I pay

In reply to:

---

if you like being tied into 12 month contracts and paying a year's subscription all at once.

---

Tis off topic if you are talking about Newnet - but the only forced annual contract they have is Home Lite 12. The annual price is

It depends, if you have Sky T.V, then getting Sky LLU broadband may suit you, the unlimited one is good for

That is the problem with a lot os services these days, getting tied into a 12 month contract, and some are getting worse and want to keep you for 18 months. People who sing for an 18 month contract need to be looked at by a doctor.


Mine is one month, if I don't like I can go elsewhere, not that there are many decent ones left now to go to.

Just seen this

In reply to:

---

People who sing for an 18 month contract need to be looked at by a doctor.

---

"Sing"?

Well that is certainly enough reason for them to see a doctor.

But why I actually posted this reply was to point out that even if they didn't need to see a doctor before they sign, they almost certainly will need a psychiatrist after 18 months.

which can be hit and miss, I am not saying don't get free braodband, but I think you pay in the long run, one way or other.

I don't know where all this 18 month contract is coming from, are companies getting so desperate to keep customers that they are need to hold them to a long contract?

I have been looking around mobile pjhones and was thinking of getting a contract, I looked at 3, but they want to try me into a 18 month contract, no way, will I do that, o2 will pout me on a monthly one, but I need to supply my own phone which is not difficult.

First it was mobile phone service providers, now it is ISp's, what is going to be next. Gas, electric, normal phone?

In reply to:

---

I don't know where all this 18 month contract is coming from, are companies getting so desperate to keep customers that they are need to hold them to a long contract?

---

Agreed.

I will stick with monthly contracts or 3 monthly contracts at most, at least until they are no longer offered and only 12 and 18 month contracts are on offer perish the thought