New virgin media Ceo: Net neutrality is a load of b*****cks

[nichomach]

I already have video on demand via cable. I neither need nor want iPlayer or 4oD or any of the other P2P based video downloading apps (basically Kontiki). I certainly don't want to either a) have the connection that we currently pay for choked by them, or b) have the amount that we pay jacked up to pay for the additional bandwidth needed to support these apps.

[TheAnimus]

I already have video on demand via cable. I neither need nor want iPlayer or 4oD or any of the other P2P based video downloading apps (basically Kontiki). I certainly don't want to either a) have the connection that we currently pay for choked by them, or b) have the amount that we pay jacked up to pay for the additional bandwidth needed to support these apps.

The question is, is P2P really hte most cost effective way of transfering this infomation.

The anwser of course is no, not by a long shot.

Do we need this hudge level of redundancy on the network? P2P is great for if you wanted to expose a government or some other thing where a power might try to shut you down.

But HD tv content. Not really efficent with p2p.

[Niall]

Unfortunately I doubt they will realise this until the damage is done.

And lets face it, the general public aren't really going to care, because it only costs x amount a month.

It'll be the tech savvy they lose, and I've got to say, they probably aren't that worried, as they tend to be the heavier users, not the ones that check their email once a month.

I agree with this. The real problem is, high bandwidth consuming people on slow connections will be affected, as well as high bandwidth consuming people on faster connections. If packages were as simple as "slow(2mb) connection - regular internet use £6/month" and "slow(2mb connection - heavy internet use £10/month" with only the formal package being capped if they go over a limit, broadband would be better, you should be able to pay for what you get, not pay a fixed price and have it capped because your a heavy user.

[Nickg]

Yes but these companies ADVERTISE features and benefits of their connection, like "download MP3 in 20 secs" on a 2MB line, they in no way state that this is only applicable at 12am midnight and only from certain vendors.

Similarly they all (adsl too) list download Video's, blazing fast internet -actually sell the service to you on promises that they choose not to deliver.

Problem is that both incumbents with the infrastructure to support Nationawide Broadband both seem to operate the same policy, oversubscription - underperform.


I dont know how OFCOM or whoever is meant to regulate this monopolistic practice can refrain from looking into these "sharp" practices. ISP's are setting peoples expectations and then failing time and time again to deliver.

This cannot be allowed to continue indefinately.

[Stewart]

Whats he saying then?

I'm on 20mb Virgin cable, its going to get slower? More expensive?

[j1979]

cough cough

Bull**it

[Output]

It makes sense that there'd be ISP's willing to prioritise traffic to their customers for a fee, but I didn't expect they'd be so openly admitting it.

[Agent]

I just wish VM would be honest about their Trafiic Shaping policy. It's supposed to be 4pm-9pm but there are a million and one people on CableForum who report it outside of those hours. My connection was "shaped" (i.e. slowed) last night and only "freed" at 11pm on the dot. Hardly 9pm!!! VM are not gonna keep customers if they keep spouting "bollocks" (to quote Mr Berkett!!)

A lot of people seem to be confused by this sadly. Its 5 hours, from the point you go over your limit. Even if that means it goes past the switch off point, it still has to run its course.

For example, if you hit your cap 3 minutes before 9pm (the cut off point), then it'll be +5Hours before it ends, hence 2am before it goes back to normal

Virgin Media eases off bandwidth throttling | The Register

[nichomach]

Whats he saying then?
I'm on 20mb Virgin cable, its going to get slower? More expensive?

Well, realistically, one of three things is going to happen; VM traffic-manage VoD over IP into the dirt, so unless you're using it, you'll be fine - that said, if you're on cable for your TV as well, why would you want iPlayer? Or VM do nothing to traffic manage it, in which case it starts swamping the available bandwidth and things start to slow up for you. Or they spend a shedload of cash upping capacity to cope, in which case your speed may stay the same or if you're very lucky increase a bit, but they'll want to recover the cash from somewhere....

[acrobat]

Weird. He says, "If they (BBC) don't pay a premium to gain access to Virgin Media customers"... but that would affect VM customers gaining access to BBC... It works both ways. So if he puts the BBC in the "bus lane" and slows them down because they refuse to pay a premium, it's not really going to affect the BBC... it's going to affect VM customers should they want to use the BBC iPlayer.

So he is trying to make out like the ball is in BBC's court, and if they don't pay up they will be punished. But in reality, he is extorting money from them and holding all his existing VM customers as hostage.

I don't think I've ever heard anything so blatant from such a big company.

p.s. Also, surely bus lanes are quick?... A bus in a bus lane has it's own special road with no traffic.

Unfortunately I doubt they will realise this until the damage is done.
And lets face it, the general public aren't really going to care, because it only costs x amount a month.
It'll be the tech savvy they lose, and I've got to say, they probably aren't that worried, as they tend to be the heavier users, not the ones that check their email once a month.

But those "check email once a month" type people either don't have broadband at all, or have the low end service. It's only this "tech savvy" bunch that are paying for the expensive top of the line services. So losing those people is a big deal, and those customers do care.

[nichomach]

Said this before, and I'll say it again - why would anyone on cable need iPlayer to start with? We already have an on-demand service available that's more than adequate, doesn't choke our Internet connection, and has stuff from a shedload of channels including the Beeb. Sorry acrobat, but VM can traffic manage iPlayer into the dirt on the cable network, and I'll be applauding.

[Hicks12]

there catch up tv(virgin) is annoying me recently, it will have stuff like east enders(that right?) and bargin hunt etc but NOT my family, im sure that should of been on there because its a new series and hasnt been on for awhile and alot of other things dont get on there too, only the soaps which they do repeats constantly anyways.

I used i player a few times but only for my family and a couple of programs not on virgin catch up.

[alsenior]

Said this before, and I'll say it again - why would anyone on cable need iPlayer to start with? We already have an on-demand service available that's more than adequate, doesn't choke our Internet connection, and has stuff from a shedload of channels including the Beeb. Sorry acrobat, but VM can traffic manage iPlayer into the dirt on the cable network, and I'll be applauding.

Because i have sky tv. and i know i'm not the only one.

[Agent]

Said this before, and I'll say it again - why would anyone on cable need iPlayer to start with? We already have an on-demand service available that's more than adequate, doesn't choke our Internet connection, and has stuff from a shedload of channels including the Beeb. Sorry acrobat, but VM can traffic manage iPlayer into the dirt on the cable network, and I'll be applauding.

Because, as a VM customer I don't subscribe to their TV service.

Not only that, but when I get my own place in the near future I don't plan to own a TV either (hence no licence to go with it either).

The Iplayer does not require a licence for watching non-live content (yet).

BBC Internet Blog - iPlayer Doesn't Require A TV Licence... Yet

[Zak33]

I don't see why I should subsidise someone downloading 24/7 or have my connection slowed down because of them. I also dont expect my higher than average use to be subsidised by those that just use their broadband for a bit of web and email.
Of course if this makes the average punter into a bandwidth hog, even better! It will bring the issue of ridiculous contention ratios and insufficient capacity to the front and maybe get the telecoms infrastructure of this country up to date.

I for one would prefer it if we all paid for bandwidth costs. I don't like people downloading films 24/7 when I want a good fast connection for a few updates, and for gaming, and we pay similar amounts.

But HOW to do this? Transparently and without prejudice?

[Lucio]

But HOW to do this? Transparently and without prejudice?

Surely you should have an "internet meter", in the same way you have gas and electricity meters. Ok, it's a bit harder to make it robust enough that your typical techie can't break into it, but it must be possible.