Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ejs]

If he answers no does that make it ok?

Yes, of course, why wouldn't it be OK? Isn't it pretty much OK by definition, if the speed drop has made no difference to what you can and cannot do online?

If we all had that train of thought then one could argue why have the internet at all as after all visiting a shop was adequate back in the day, watching films on vhs tape was adequate and so on.

I don't think considering if your Internet bandwidth is adequate for what you want to do with it is equivalent to arguing about not having the Internet at all. I wasn't arguing that any amount of speed loss is OK.

I expect even if some people did get 1Gbps symmetric FTTP, they'd still be running speedtests every 15 minutes and complaining about congestion or whatever if they didn't get the full 900+ Mbps speedtest result.

[Bowdon]

To be fair the thread isn't about me complaining about a speed reduction. That was the causation of my rant about the current fttc technology and how the more popular it gets the worse the service becomes.

I did a guesstimate on the speeds and times as that wasn't the point of the thread but you kept asking about speed and times.

I've never complained about speed on any forum ever, and while I know the line "does it affect your usage" question when its usually a person complaining about a minor stat variation, I don't think a 12Mbps drop is minor. If I hadn't known about the neighbour recently joining the FTTC cabinet then I'd be wondering if it was a fault and/or dlm kicked in.

The thread rant/moan is about that fttc is going backwards in performance the more people move to it. I hope BT/OR either adapt G.fast so more people can benefit, or start tweaking the frequences so people get a speed increase and more stable lines.. or its going to be a long 6 years for FTTP to get around to people.

[ejs]

It will be a long 6 years if people keep moaning about speeds dropping even when it doesn't seem to matter and they don't even seem to know what difference it has made to how long it takes to download stuff!

[Bowdon]

The thread was about the speed deterioration of FTTC technology as more people use it.

It's not about speed itself as if you read the original post you'd have seen that I had accepted the speed drop because I know the reason it was happening.

It will be a long 6 years when some people keep pushing this "Why do people need more speed" line.

[sevenlayermuddle]

The thread was about the speed deterioration of FTTC technology as more people use it.

Or alternatively (glass half full, vs half empty), is it about the artificially high speeds that are seen by the first few users when FTTC goes live at a new cabinet, before settling down to reallistic speeds as uptake increases?

That was my own experience.   I knew pretty well what the technology had to offer for my line... mid 20s.   The fact that I initially obtained >50Mbps did not change my expectation, I knew it was not likely to last, and in any case mid 20s is all I needed.  Currently down from 50s at circa 27Mbps, I am quite happy.

[Ronski]

At what point is someone permitted to be disappointed with a service they pay a fixed price for when their speeds are gradually eroded away, by crosstalk, poor lines etc. My upload speed halved from when I took out the service from 12 to 6Mbps on a crap ECI cabinet. My bill didn't halve, but my ISPs and OR income from me disappeared when I voted with my wallet and moved to Virgin.

Taking some peoples view why do people complain when a train is late, I mean it still got them there didn't it 

What one person finds acceptable and another doesn't is their own opinion, Bowdon said it was just a rant, which is just him letting off steam.

[Chrysalis]

Yes, of course, why wouldn't it be OK? Isn't it pretty much OK by definition, if the speed drop has made no difference to what you can and cannot do online?
I don't think considering if your Internet bandwidth is adequate for what you want to do with it is equivalent to arguing about not having the Internet at all. I wasn't arguing that any amount of speed loss is OK.

I expect even if some people did get 1Gbps symmetric FTTP, they'd still be running speedtests every 15 minutes and complaining about congestion or whatever if they didn't get the full 900+ Mbps speedtest result.

They would but thats very different to the inherent problem of FTTC cross talk causing large drops in access speed's and there been a technical solution to the problem that the telco has chosen not to deploy.

I am not going to defend it the massive wide range thats deemed acceptable I find very below par, on my own checker, anything between 46mbit and 80mbit access speed is deemed acceptable, thats almost half of the operating range of speed.

[ejs]

The thread was about the speed deterioration of FTTC technology as more people use it.

Oh that's what this thread was supposed to be about. I got the impression you were moaning about losing 12Mbps.

[Weaver]

If you need a lot more speed, I really recommend line bonding. It really works superbly well, if done properly.