[Gibbs]

I hate all these advertisements for unlimited broadband. My bandwidth is now shared with other "heavy users" during peak hours. My 2.2mb connection can reach up to speeds of an amazing 30kb during these hours! Yes, that's maximum! 5.5kb is the usual download speed I get. It's annoying!

So my point is this. Why advertise unlimited broadband if it isn't unlimited? If the big ISPs who, funnily enough are the richest, can't cater the needs of their customers or upgrade their capacity why offer it in the first place?

It really confuses and frustrates me. I'm looking for an ISP that can actually provide me with unlimited bandwidth.

What's happening? Broadband is such a huge success because of the speed it can provide. You don't need 2mb + connection to decrease page load times. You need it for downloading, uploading and file sharing. A 512k connection is more then enough for web browsing.

What do they expect!? I don't remember all these caps and policies with dial-up.

So, from what I can see, it means two things. Either they haven't prepared, or aren't able to, manage heavy usage or they can't be bothered to.

It's so annoying grrr.

/endrant

[Stoner]

I don't know of the experience you have in the UK.
Myself, in the US, subscribe to Road Runner and have enough download and upload speeds under peak times that I'm more delayed by the server load at the 'other end'.

I'm not aware of any advertising in the US that presents 'unlimited' bandwidth.
Usually there are specs posted........and the arguments seem to often be about the ISP not living up to those specs.

Myself, I seem to get what I pay for, so no complaints here with my connection.

[diablo75]

The bandwidth cap limits are happening because the cable companies are conducting a petrie dish test on their users to see what their reaction would be, and if they would loose a few customers. This is done only on the highest downloading users on their subscribers list, and just a few from time to time. LOTS of people use high bandwidth apps on their computers, file sharing and such. And if not file sharing, browsing google video, download.com, porn sites, etc. The bandwidth needed by the customers is there. But caps can be put in place by hardware configuration, not engineering. It could sustain faster speeds very easily, but not too easily.

Anyway, the cable companies are testing this kind of restriction out on some of it's users to see how they react, and they're doing this because they're thinking about limiting the amount of bandwidth to a certain level to discourage using the internet as a replacement for a digital cable TV subscription. You can download all the shows you want off of the internet, and the producers of TV shows are actually digging this "hyper distribution" model of people downloading their TV shows, instead of waiting for them to come on. Cable companies don't want that because they'd loose money. The producers do want that because it cuts down one of the middle men, or in this case, a portion of it (Cox's Cable TV Division, which is replaced with high bandwidth usage of their cable internet, saving the customer from 40 bucks a month to whatever).

I can see Cox getting even more restrictive with this kind of limited bandwidth policy used against it's subscribers, and it's not a good idea. Too much backlash. Lots of people would be openly complaining about their cable internet, and may influence each other and decide to switch to some sort of alternative internet access. I saw recently that SBC is intending to sell Naked DSL (You don't need a phone line subscription, so it'd be their basic 1.5 Mbps package for 20 bucks a month or something close to that). This might sound nice to some people, but I hate AT&T. Alright?! Their customer service is terrible, their extra bs fees they charge. I feel better without them. But I wouldn't be surprised if Cox got on my nerves somehow. So what then? I'm not exactly sure. Perhaps widespread Municipal broadband? WiMax? Maybe a cell phone company might start selling high bandwidth access to the internet (for a cheaper price for once). Perhaps some sort of community driven and organized ad-hoc wi-fi network hybrid. Lots of stuff could happen.

Whatever you do, don't get a satellite dish. You thought bandwidth restrictions on cable were bad? Look those dishes up and your jaw might drop.

[Gibbs]

Good to hear it extends beyond the Great British Con (sorry I feel evil now). I switched from BT because 7 days on the phone was a joke but my new ISP is even worse (Tiscali). If I'm a heavy user then then the majority of their customers must be.

Your theory (diablo75) is interesting. If it's true then they are certainly achieving it with me. It may also be why I got this in my email:

If you wish to seamlessly migrate to another service provider using a
MAC Code please call the cancellation line <number>, advise the
agent you have received this communication to obtain your MAC Code.
You will be permitted to migrate away regardless of whether you are
in contract or not.

Heres a prime example of this in action:http://www.tiscali.co.uk/products/br...ome.html?code=

Under the scary ladies face (whos obviously just found out unlimited is limited) you can clearly see "Unlimited Broadband...". If you read further you will find something like:

A very small number of customers use Peer to Peer or file sharing software, which constantly sends and receives video and other very large files, throughout the day. This type of activity uses a lot of bandwidth and can significantly reduce the speed at which other customers can access the internet during peak hours. Approximately 1% of customers use more than 30% of the available bandwidth during peak hours. We don't believe this is fair to the vast majority of our customers.
This fair usage policy automatically identifies the very small number of extremely heavy users and manages their bandwidth only during peak hours (6pm to 11pm Monday to Sunday), to protect the service for all our other customers. Outside peak hours, the use of the internet by these heavy users is unaffected.

"Unlimited; having no limits in range or scope"

These people need a dictionary or something done about their false advertising.

[diablo75]

The definition will reset itself when they start to realize their customers are getting smarter on things like P2P and the associated political battles. Unlimited MEANS unlimited, by means of a service agreement (contract they're obligated to follow just as much as you). Now, they can get away with inserting little clauses in the legalese of their agreements with you that exempt them from giving you a foundation to complain from. But eventually, lots of people will start to examine these policies more closely, and demand their unlimited bandwidth be secured. If it isn't, they'll just take their money somewhere else.

Also, for them to say "Approximately 1% of customers use more than 30% of the available bandwidth during peak hours. We don't believe this is fair to the vast majority of our customers." This is a lie, and the lack of fairness has nothing to do with those who are wanting to use their unlimited bandwidth. The only people who are being unfair are the ones who AREN'T using that unlimited bandwidth. Not using anywhere near as much as they paid for. THAT'S a waste of paid bandwidth. (They're being unfair to themselves) Not someone who is actually taking exactly what he paid for fair and square. It's the cable companies legal obligation, IMO, to secure their customers bandwidth, lest they make them a dissatisfied customer.

It's funny. These cable companies behave as though they are the ONLY form of high-bandwidth access to the internet. They'll learn the hard way in the end. Soon, they'll have customers who subscribe to DSL or something other than cable downloading TV, so not only did they lose a Internet customer but potential a cable TV customer as well in one fell swoop.

[person]

Originally Posted by Gibbs

I hate all these advertisements for unlimited broadband. My bandwidth is now shared with other "heavy users" during peak hours. My 2.2mb connection can reach up to speeds of an amazing 30kb during these hours! Yes, that's maximum! 5.5kb is the usual download speed I get. It's annoying!

So my point is this. Why advertise unlimited broadband if it isn't unlimited? If the big ISPs who, funnily enough are the richest, can't cater the needs of their customers or upgrade their capacity why offer it in the first place?

It really confuses and frustrates me. I'm looking for an ISP that can actually provide me with unlimited bandwidth.

What's happening? Broadband is such a huge success because of the speed it can provide. You don't need 2mb + connection to decrease page load times. You need it for downloading, uploading and file sharing. A 512k connection is more then enough for web browsing.

What do they expect!? I don't remember all these caps and policies with dial-up.

So, from what I can see, it means two things. Either they haven't prepared, or aren't able to, manage heavy usage or they can't be bothered to.

It's so annoying grrr.

/endrant

My understanding of Unlimited Broadband meant no cap of the amount you can download, not anything to do with the speed.

[WarC]

Originally Posted by person

My understanding of Unlimited Broadband meant no cap of the amount you can download, not anything to do with the speed.

Bingo.

[ChrisJones]

Not that I'm defending the ISP's, as I'm similarly peeved with my provider (also Tiscali). The problem is all about total network bandwidth available for users. A recent study revealed that something of the order of 40-50% of ALL internet traffic was BitTorrent related, as such the ISP's and BT are fighting a losing battle to keep ahead of demand for bandwidth.

BT is charged by the government with providing the backbone infrastructure for the UK internet. Since the unbundling of the local loop services (i.e. from the BT exchange to your house) ISP's have been allowed to rent bandwidth at wholesale prices from BT hence the recent(ish) explosion of ISP's available. However by forcing BT open to more competition the government has actually reduced the revenue BT generates from providing it's own ISP services, and thus reduced the money BT has available for investments in exchanges. So while it may be good for the consumer, it is actually detrimental to BT and the wider UK internet.

Because of the huge bandwidth demands placed by BitTorrent and other peer to peer sharing tools, the ISP's have to rent larger and larger amounts of bandwidth capacity from BT, this obviously hit's their profits. As only a small minority of users are classed as "high usage", it is easier for the ISP to place limits on how these users can download at "peak" times than purchase more bandwidth and raise the price for all users.

I agree that advertising a product as "unlimited" and then placing a limit on what the users can download is somewhat dishonest on the part of the ISP's however most ISP's do draw particular reference to their "fair usage" policy when you sign up to their service. I understand that the issues surrounding these fair usage policies have been taken to court and subsequently thrown out as you agree to abide by the Fair Usage policy when you sign up to the service. I'm not sure if it's been brought up on a false advertising claim though...

Unfortunately it's a case of you get what you pay for, if you go with someone like tiscali and pay £17.99 a month for 2meg, you have to expect that there will be limits on what they download. If you are a serious internet user and expect a truely unlimited service you have to pay more. If you're prepared to pay for the service I can recommend Zen Internet (www.zeninternet.co.uk). I think their unlimited 2 meg service is something like £40 a month but speaking from my experience, zen don't limit bandwidth. All through Uni I used them as I was sharing a house with ten others so as you can imagine downloads were high!

Chris

[ChrisJones]

Originally Posted by person

My understanding of Unlimited Broadband meant no cap of the amount you can download, not anything to do with the speed.

Originally Posted by WarC

Bingo.

While indeed that is true in countries like Australia and the US, here in the UK unlimited broadband services are advertised as being both unlimited in volume and speed, and are advertised as being specifically for downloading lots of music and video up to the point you pay for. i.e. 2meg, 4meg etc. etc. I think this is the point that irks Gibbs and I do understand his/her (sorry I don't want to assume anything!) point. However most adverts now carry a disclaimer allbeit in microscopic writing that services are subject to a fair usage policy.

[Gibbs]

Originally Posted by person

My understanding of Unlimited Broadband meant no cap of the amount you can download, not anything to do with the speed.

It's not unlimited in downloads when certain programs using certain ports get blocked during "peak" hours.

And er... I'm male (I think, Tiscali probably has a policy to change that too).

[ChrisJones]

Originally Posted by Gibbs

And er... I'm male (I think, Tiscali probably has a policy to change that too).

Sorry I kinda gessued you were a bloke but it wouldn't have been the first time I'd made that assumption and got it wrong!!

[person]

Originally Posted by ChrisJones

While indeed that is true in countries like Australia and the US, here in the UK unlimited broadband services are advertised as being both unlimited in volume and speed, and are advertised as being specifically for downloading lots of music and video up to the point you pay for. i.e. 2meg, 4meg etc. etc. I think this is the point that irks Gibbs and I do understand his/her (sorry I don't want to assume anything!) point. However most adverts now carry a disclaimer allbeit in microscopic writing that services are subject to a fair usage policy.

Didn't realise it was different over in the UK.

[person]

Originally Posted by ChrisJones

Sorry I kinda gessued you were a bloke but it wouldn't have been the first time I'd made that assumption and got it wrong!!

So do you think I am a male or female? I don't care if you get it wrong, my user name is ambiguous after all.

[Rockn]

Originally Posted by Gibbs

I hate all these advertisements for unlimited broadband. My bandwidth is now shared with other "heavy users" during peak hours. My 2.2mb connection can reach up to speeds of an amazing 30kb during these hours! Yes, that's maximum! 5.5kb is the usual download speed I get. It's annoying!

So my point is this. Why advertise unlimited broadband if it isn't unlimited? If the big ISPs who, funnily enough are the richest, can't cater the needs of their customers or upgrade their capacity why offer it in the first place?

It really confuses and frustrates me. I'm looking for an ISP that can actually provide me with unlimited bandwidth.

What's happening? Broadband is such a huge success because of the speed it can provide. You don't need 2mb + connection to decrease page load times. You need it for downloading, uploading and file sharing. A 512k connection is more then enough for web browsing.

What do they expect!? I don't remember all these caps and policies with dial-up.

So, from what I can see, it means two things. Either they haven't prepared, or aren't able to, manage heavy usage or they can't be bothered to.

It's so annoying grrr.

/endrant

Get DSL...it pays to do some research before getting a broadband account!

[ChrisJones]

Originally Posted by person

So do you think I am a male or female? I don't care if you get it wrong, my user name is ambiguous after all.

50:50 guess.... I'm going with...... you're a lady?