Presumably, the smaller ISPs slow down due to the huge costs of bandwidth they have to pay to BT?

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

Presumably, the smaller ISPs slow down due to the huge costs of bandwidth they have to pay to BT?

Don't worry about him. He made his own random joints in his brain's logic circuits.

In reply to a post by RandomJointer:

Neither does flouncing when being called on for making stuff up.

I assume that refers to me. As I said before, the post sadoldman objects to could not have been so doing, as I wasn't aware there was such a scheme.

My difficulty in refuting things you say is that you are impervious to logic, and totally incapable of understanding that BT Retail is demonstrably not the UK's best ISP for many people. I usually have more interesting and useful things to do than deal with irritants such as yourself.

You can't even accept that I in particular often agree with you about Infinity being possibly the best choice of FTTC for most people. For ADSL2+ that is far from being the case.

You may believe me to be a liar, but that's (one of) your problem(s). I believe you to be an utter ass, in the non-American meaning of the word, and that is not a problem to me at all.

In reply to a post by BatBoy:

Presumably, the smaller ISPs slow down due to the huge costs of bandwidth they have to pay to BT?

Which is exactly why the better LLU providers don't suffer the same problems (as they source their bandwidth from other wholesale transit providers).
The likes of O2, BE, Sky and Talk-Talk don't have to pay BT's over-priced back-bone bandwidth, so they can either offer a cheaper or better service (their choice).

Clearly BT's bandwidth is too expensive.
If it was cheap the LLU providers would buy it (they're not stupid, after all). The fact they don't points towards BT bandwidth being too expensive.

Despite the warnings (from certain pro-BT supporters - they know who they are) many months/years back that these small-time bit players would soon fall by the wayside (because they only have a dozen customers per exchange - was one outlandish claim a while back - clearly not true, as I personally know more than 12 people with a BE/O2 connection in this town, and there's no possible way I can know all BE/O2 customers in a town with 50,000 people), the LLU providers are still going and still able to provide almost flat-out speeds 24/7 (excepting the odd network & routing issue - something BT shouldn't suffer as their networks must be so huge, they should be able to re-route traffic almost un-noticed by their users).

Agree on all points (especially the "utter ass" bit - a fair conclusion in my book).

Hi Roberto

You advised punters that BT Retail 'slows down in the evening'

You were called on it.

You didn't come up with the goods.

The rest is just flouncing and personal attacks.

Edited by deleted (Sat 20-Aug-11 21:54:12)

In reply to a post by RandomJointer:

Hi Roberto

You advised punters that BT Retail 'slows down in the evening'

You were called on it.

You didn't come up with the goods.

The rest is just flouncing and personal attacks.

OK (and since you're so keen on taking a single post as evidence of how poor an ISP can be); here's one post from a non-P2P user who says BT slows down in the evenings.
Satisfied?

In reply to a post by RandomJointer:

You advised punters that BT Retail 'slows down in the evening'

You were called on it.

You didn't come up with the goods.

You were asked to provide information as to who was posting referral links on the forums, you failed to come up with the goods.

Here.

Let's face it, your accusation against RobertoS of failing to back up one post is more than a little hypocritical.

Edited by billford (Sat 20-Aug-11 22:10:27)

In reply to a post by adebov:

OK (and since you're so keen on taking a single post as evidence of how poor an ISP can be); here's one post from a non-P2P user who says BT slows down in the evenings.

Interesting thread that. At the time I particularly liked his:-

I'm yet to see a BT customer having a negative outcome from any customer emailing the BT CEO.

As a shareholder, I'm happy with that

which I didn't comment on. As I just said, I usually have better things to do than take him to task. (Something he delights in wrt others).

Not the shareholder bit, that would have been petty, but the fact he clearly regards it as perfectly acceptable that customers should need to email the CEO of a Group the size of BT, because their problems cannot be resolved by anyone lower down.

That is one powerful recommendation for BT .

Indeed.
The fact that customers even have to report faults to the group CEO is a very poor state of affairs.
I wouldn't expect to have to e-mail Takanobu Ito if my car breaks down. I would fully expect the local dealer or Honda UK customer support to be fully capable of fixing the problem without being pushed from above.

EDIT: As a share-holder I would certainly NOT be happy with the CEO office having to get involved in day to day fault fixing, because regular support is ineffectual.
The job of a CEO is to ensure the company makes a profit for the shareholders (or owners), not to act as 3rd line support because 1st & 2nd line support keep telling people to go away.

Edited by adebov (Sat 20-Aug-11 22:24:07)