Ofcom Informs us of UK ISP's Real broadband speeds!

[nightkhaos]

Obviously where technology is the limit, then nothing can be done (apart from replace exisiting said technology - yeah right(!)). But you always hear of people sitting next to their exchange with terrible speeds.

These people are usually the ones that don't plug into the first line in the house, forget a filter on a non-esseitnal device like a Sky+ box, and don't request optimisation from the exchange because their Signal to Nosie ratio is low enough to allow them to disable some of the error correction systems which usually cut off about 10% of the bandwidth.

[Funkstar]

I wish OFCOM would stop doing these reports - we already know most ISPs don't give us the full speed that we pay for.

But thats the point, with ADSL you aren't paying for an 8mbit line. You are paying for the ability to transfer up to a xGB per month (on a capped product). You will be able to do this at the highest bandwidth your line supports.

It's like a mobile signal, you don't get money off when you can't get 5 bars, as you are paying for the services that are run over that line, not the line itself or the bandwidth available at any given time.

A lot of poeple have obviously been complaining about this to the media and ofcom, but thats usually because they have no idea how the system actually works and how they are being billed.

[dangel]

But thats the point, with ADSL you aren't paying for an 8mbit line. You are paying for the ability to transfer up to a xGB per month (on a capped product). You will be able to do this at the highest bandwidth your line supports.

ISP's advertise speeds 'up to' and claim unlimited downloads (subject to usual FUP) - they clearly advertise on the back of this and the truth is (via IPStream/Datastream) they're not billed by xGB per month by BT either. They're only in hot water when they exceed their bandwidth (which is why they're sensitive to peak times in particular - it's no coincidence). Problem is, most people tend to use it at peak times (duh). I use a lot of data per month, but never at peak times and my ISP (with FUP) leaves me alone as a result - however, this is very much ISP dependant. The problem with all of this is two fold:

1. how BT charges for use (the BT Wholesale product)
2. how the product resold to customers by ISPs.

On the latter point, I strongly agree with the view it's effectively mis-sold. To call something 'unlimited' and then er.. limit it is.. dishonest. It smacks really of bank practices of old where they'd catch you in the small print (focus on the left hand, forget what the right hand's up to).

Now whilst the size of the pipe you get from the exchange is very much dependant on the technology (length of line, conditions, prevailing wind) - the back end can be crippled by either contention or just crap infrastructure once you're onto the ISP's servers. The latter they can do something about - the former only via unbundling or waiting for BT to shift their incredibly lethargic butt. I'm not convinced that 21CN will resolve all that much - unless BT substantially alter their charging model (unlikely).

Course, on my exchange I could go with one unbundled provider - but it's Talk Talk and frankly i'd rather cut my legs off.

[nightkhaos]

Ofcom seems to have little understanding of the way technology works. They unbundle the local loop and still leave it BT to maitain the interconnects between exchanges. BT therefore is struck with a huge bill, which the other ISPs don't feel they need to maintain. The other ISPs only need to maintain the "last mile". I do hope they are charged rent, or something, by BT so BT can continue to invest. I mean think of it this way, if we have thirty or fourty ADSL2+ connections at an exchange, each which gets around 15Mbps, but the exchange is only connected to the rest of the gird at 100Mbps, everyone only gets about 3Mbps at peak times.

There is a similar issue with the power industry. Ofcom has refused to let power companies upgrade their infrasture because it will "drive up the cost to the consumer" and "prevent competition". What they don't realise is that infrastrue, which was mostly laid in the early 20th centry, is running at over 150% of capacity at some areas.

There is one case in particular that gets me, in Scotland there is a windfarm which is connected by overground wires. However, if the windfarm is running at full capacity, the lines are running above their thermal limit (they could get white hot and snap). However, because, and I quote "when it's windy it tends to be a bit chilly, so the lines can handle slightly more load" they haven't updated those lines. Nor will Ofcom let them.

Ofcom seems to think we need more generation, but we currently have a very lossy, very inefficent, danagerous, network, and the only need in europe where all maintaince is done live. If the entire infruscture was upgrade and unified (oh did I mention that monitering equipment differs from region to region, such that it is impossible to get a complete picture of the state of the network?) we would drop our generation requirements by about 10%.

[Funkstar]

2. how the product resold to customers by ISPs.

This is definitely a dodgy area at the moment. Something that ofcom should do more to try and sort out. I agree about the "unlimited" moniker being dishonest

the back end can be crippled by either contention or just crap infrastructure once you're onto the ISP's servers.

And this is another good point. There is no point in advertising any kind of speeds if they ISPs infrastructure can't cope with what is being asked of them.

Of course you are right in what you said, my explination was a bit over simplified

[LuckyNV]

Are those all BT IPstream connections?

I would like to see the "average" LLU upto 8Mbps/16Mbps/20Mbps/24Mbps/etc... services compare

I'm quite pleased I can manage 21Mbps out of my upto 24Mbps service (even though Be said i'd probably get 12Mbps only), it took a little work on my part to get this high though, my house wiring needed improvement.

[dangel]

The big difference for LLU is your not going via BT, not subject to their contention and pricing model. This means less costs for the ISP and they don't incur additional costs when the pipe is oversaturated. My ISP has never pursued people on their LLU product for overuse - only those going via the BTW network.

[nightkhaos]

That is the advantage (to the consumer) of going with an LLU. But like I said, they only handle the last mile. What about the rest of the network? Who pays for that?

[Pulse]

Yeah got similar results off of www.speedtest.net, at the end of your test you can compare uk networks and, though I haven't checked them recently, I don't remember them being too far off these results. But it's shocking to think that where getting roughly half what we pay for.

I doubt if more than 10% of customers of each of those ISP's are actually getting as much as possible.

[peterb]

IIRC, the wholesale charges BT imposes are controlled by Ofcom anyway, and kept artificially high so that teh LLU companies have an incentive to compete. That certainly was the case, and I haven't seen anything to indicate that has changed.

The advertising issue could be sorted by advertising the speed as a minimum - which would be a minimum of 512 which (IIRC) is the speed below wich BT consider unacceptable. So the advert would be "guranteed minimum speed of 512 (anything more is a bonus) - but I suspect that weould be unacceptable politically.

Alternatively they could sell by the volume - and the faster your line speed, the faster you meet that data volume limit. Pretty much the 3G pricing model.

[Lee H]

http://www.bt.com/accelerator

People should also filter and get their lines sorted to get better speed.

BT are giving the i-plate away now, just £1.20 for postage and inital reports of people replacing their old phone setup with these is they are getting better speeds.

[sammorris]

As far as I know my ISP in York (Be Unlimited) let you downgrade or upgrade any time you like. for reference we get 3.7Mbps on their 24Mbps service.

[Akhtar2]

I'm with o2 and the results here seem about right. I get about 5mb on the speed tests. 900kb on a good download if I'm lucky.

[LuckyNV]

As far as I know my ISP in York (Be Unlimited) let you downgrade or upgrade any time you like. for reference we get 3.7Mbps on their 24Mbps service.

why not downgrade to Be Value? You might get slightly better speeds since ADSL2+ increases the attenuation.

[adam1701]

http://www.bt.com/accelerator

People should also filter and get their lines sorted to get better speed.

BT are giving the i-plate away now, just £1.20 for postage and inital reports of people replacing their old phone setup with these is they are getting better speeds.

surely that'd work with an adsl isp?

[joel_spencer]

With ISPs you do have to change fairly regularly to get the best speeds - I started with PlusNet then went to Eclipse and now on 02 and the speed with each got progressively better as did their policies towards bandwidth.
But obviously not everybody can afford the time to switch ISPs every year and most lock you into a year contract and then gradually decrease the quality of service until you complain. Tiscali are the worst I've ever seen, had my mum on a service that no longer existed (far more expensive than their other packages) and only gave her 512, now she gets 7 to 8 but the speed is god aweful because too many other people use it.