Print

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

[Bowdon]

Ok, a bit of a rant moaning post.

My router rebooted last night (its a bt hub so reboots nearly every 14 days).

When I turned the computer on today and checked the speed I noticed my download speed dropped from 68Mbps to 56Mbps, and upload speed dropped from 19Mbps (which it seemed to be stuck at) down to 18Mbps.

I've never been in the 50's range before. I think I know why this as happened now. The next door neighbour recently got "Sky Fibre" and on this router reboot I've lost over 10Mbps. It seems too coincidental for the two events not to be connected somehow.

I'm not blaming the neighbours btw. Good luck to them to get the best connection they can. But it shows again the basic flaw of still using a copper base product. The more popular it becomes the less service quality.

I can understand the people who start off at 80Mbps speeds early on in the FTTC days and drop speed over the years. It's a travesty that there isn't any vectoring going on. OR could have been trying to addon vectoring pods first before adding more lines to cabinets that will end up lowering the quality of all the lines in the cabinet.

Anyway, rant and moan over

[ejs]

Does it make any actual difference to your usage of the Internet? Has it changed what you can and cannot do online?

[vic0239]

Ok, a bit of a rant moaning post.

I can empathise completely with you. I haven’t lost speed as such, but about a month ago both my lines started to resync at a non-specific time in the morning and again in the evening, always within the same hour, but at different times. The lines have been tested by OR and no issues were found. This doesn’t really affect me too much, it’s more the fact that after many years of a trouble free connection I now have this issue which I can’t resolve.

[Bowdon]

Does it make any actual difference to your usage of the Internet? Has it changed what you can and cannot do online?

I'll answer the question by saying yes. I've always downloaded big files so the faster my connection is the faster the download happens. This is why I bought the upto 80Mbps product back in the day. If its just a usage issue then why would anyone want more than a 40Mbps connection?

I don't think its an unreasonable gripe to complain about a sudden speed drop from what speed I used to get.

If my speed keeps in the 50's then I'd think about getting a slower fttc product. But then I'd be in the statistics of people who "could have got a higher speed but chose a slower speed" group, when in reality it not worth paying for the higher speed just for an extra couple of Mbps.

I used to download big files on an ADSL2+ connection and they took all day. Technically I could still do that today. But I'm paying for the speed and quickness to download. So if the speed drops significantly then its going to make a difference.

I worked out I'm paying a similar price per month to what I would be paying for native FTTP. So I've started the ball rolling to see about FoD pricing. Then its just a balance on price of is it worth waiting between 6 to 14 years for native FTTP (according to the latest estimation) to reach me.

[ejs]

What size files are you talking about? How long did they take to download, and how long do they take to download now?

[sevenlayermuddle]

My own fttc started off at low 50s download, but has gradually eroded down to high 20s.   Way I look at it though the original speed was the aomaly, we were pretty much first adopters in our entire village.  Mid-high 20s is, in all honesty, a more realistic speed for my line.

And of course it did save me a few £££ as I was able to downgrade to a cheaper package with a 40Mbps ceiling.

[vultura]

My line sync is lower than yours (though the estimates for my line are higher than I receive) and so I do sympathise with you.

Unless OR start to roll out new technologies to combat speed issues I think that the ISPs they sell services to will have a lot of complaints from end-users as reliance on fast internet grows.

[ejs]

I get the impression it tends to be the people with the fastest speeds who moan the most, the amount of fuss some people make because they've gone from getting the full 80Mb to not getting the full 80Mb is ridiculous. I don't have a lot of sympathy for people moaning about only getting speeds in the mid 70s.

[vultura]

I get the impression it tends to be the people with the fastest speeds who moan the most, the amount of fuss some people make because they've gone from getting the full 80Mb to not getting the full 80Mb is ridiculous. I don't have a lot of sympathy for people moaning about only getting speeds in the mid 70s.

If I could get mid 70's reliably I'd be like a dog with two tails.

[benji09]

With a bit of luck, I will have FTTP in my road by the end of the year. Their is no way that I would need that speed, but if enough people take FTTP, the noise margin on my line should get a bit of a boost.........

[Ixel]

With a bit of luck, I will have FTTP in my road by the end of the year. Their is no way that I would need that speed, but if enough people take FTTP, the noise margin on my line should get a bit of a boost.........

Don't forget that FTTP isn't just about faster speed. It's more reliable, it can resist certain things like electromagnetic interference or thunderstorms (assuming you don't have a powercut and don't have a UPS on standby). You may also find it could reduce your latency by a few milliseconds. There's no potential re-sync to worry about either, as FTTP connection should be always on unless there's a fault. No more fluctuating sync rates and no more DLM.

I'm not far from getting my FTTP service, jointers were done this week at the pole and underground chamber outside so hopefully within the next several weeks I can celebrate and enjoy it .

[Bowdon]

As Ixel says FTTP is the next generation of Internet.

I'm disappointed with the speed drop of losing 12Mbps, and it does feel different as files that took 4 minutes to download takes 8 or 10minutes, providing I'm not doing anything else with the connection. I know its not a big difference, as I said earlier I've been on the old ADSL connections downloading a 70Mb file that took all day to download. Luckily back then the per minute charge had gone (previously I was racking up £350+ bills). So its not about a lack of patience.

I'm complaining about the FTTC as a technology, and how long we have to put up with it traveling on the old copper (if your super unlucky you have aluminium) lines that it was finally admitted can't reach the original 'upto' 80Mbps connections on most lines.

We should have all been having a speed boost with G.fast between now and the introduction of FTTP. But with BT/OR revising how G.fast was deployed they decided to stick it on the side of the cabinet, not really benefitting that many people. Some of the other alternatives to G.fast like tweaking FTTC connections and frequences would have had a much greater improvement overall and positively benefitted more people, at least until we reached the 6 years mark for FTTP.

It seems less about creating the future network and more about a game of who blinks first when it comes to rolling out technology.

It is a rant and moan thread so I'm not expecting an answer 

Btw, I'm not attacking BT/OR. I still consider them the gold standard when it comes to deploying technologies. I think being a good ally to someone means we need to point out the truth. It is ok to show our disappointment and frustration, as long as it doesn't descend in to a negative attack etc.

[ejs]

Those figures don't make any sense. If losing 12Mbps doubles or more than doubles the time it takes to download something, that implies you've lost half or more than half of your speed. But I don't recall you going from 24Mbps to 12Mbps.

Presumably you meant dial-up not ADSL, I'm pretty sure a 70MiB file does not take all day to download on ADSL.

Is it going to help Openreach if the "truth" you helpfully point out to them is full of errors?

[Chrysalis]

Does it make any actual difference to your usage of the Internet? Has it changed what you can and cannot do online?

If he answers no does that make it ok?

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.

The excessive strain on openreach by ofcom has contributed (but isnt necessarily the sole cause) to decisions that driven to spend the absolute minimum on infrastructure as to what can be gotten away with to remain reasonably competitive in the market and nothing more.

Of course this isnt just something we have seen in this country with broadband infrastructure, but also in other fields and is one of a few reasons why the UK is falling behind other countries in various sectors.

[sevenlayermuddle]

Those figures don't make any sense. If losing 12Mbps doubles or more than doubles the time it takes to download something, that implies you've lost half or more than half of your speed. But I don't recall you going from 24Mbps to 12Mbps.

I also find this odd.   Why should a circa 10-15% reduction in download speed lead to a doubling in the time taken to download a file?   

There are of course many factors that can cause fluctations in actual file download time, over and above the limitation of underlying line speed.   But these factors would still be present, and still be causing annoying fluctations, even if we all had FTTP.