I just wondered why all of a sudden ISP's have decided to introduce
limits on bandwidth when they didn't before. Are they being charged more
at their end before it reaches us? Is it simply a ploy to get more money
and everyone's jumping on the bandwagon? Shouldn't the government get
onboard since it is basically sending us backwards.

I'm currently on the Wanadoo basic service and will expect to be on the
2Gb per month limit which is basically rubbish. I can't see myself using
not using over 2Gb per half a week let alone stretching it over a month.
(online gaming, downloading demos, napster, iTunes etc)

Are there any ISP's that aren't going to "cap" the bandwidth?

Look forward to your opinions

Regards

Sandi

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:08:25 +0000, Sandi Luney
<sandi@happylobster.co.uk> wrote:

>I just wondered why all of a sudden ISP's have decided to introduce
>limits on bandwidth when they didn't before. Are they being charged more
>at their end before it reaches us? Is it simply a ploy to get more money
>and everyone's jumping on the bandwagon? Shouldn't the government get
>onboard since it is basically sending us backwards.
>
>I'm currently on the Wanadoo basic service and will expect to be on the
>2Gb per month limit which is basically rubbish. I can't see myself using
>not using over 2Gb per half a week let alone stretching it over a month.
>(online gaming, downloading demos, napster, iTunes etc)
>
>Are there any ISP's that aren't going to "cap" the bandwidth?
>
>Look forward to your opinions

Nothing to do with fair play, most heavy downloaders never experience
problems due to contention (hence those using it less never see
massive slowdowns - it does happen, but rarely). Have you not seen BT
spokespeople )working lunch, etc) saying how they are introducing new
phone services over broadband. They want to take the free 'use the BB
net to speak to anyone in the world for free), and sell it on,
together with new services. Hence, they want more b/w available for
these 'pay extra' services. It's a commercial world, and they will try
and raise revenue however they can.

>Regards
>
>Sandi

"Sandi Luney" <sandi@happylobster.co.uk> wrote in message
news:d0vemm$egg$1@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>I just wondered why all of a sudden ISP's have decided to introduce limits
>on bandwidth when they didn't before. Are they being charged more at their
>end before it reaches us? Is it simply a ploy to get more money and
>everyone's jumping on the bandwagon? Shouldn't the government get onboard
>since it is basically sending us backwards.
>
> I'm currently on the Wanadoo basic service and will expect to be on the
> 2Gb per month limit which is basically rubbish. I can't see myself using
> not using over 2Gb per half a week let alone stretching it over a month.
> (online gaming, downloading demos, napster, iTunes etc)
>
> Are there any ISP's that aren't going to "cap" the bandwidth?

The BT wholesale prices are changing. Instead of charging for speed, they
are charging per gigabyte. This is why you see lots of new caps alongside
increase in speeds.

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:08:25 +0000, Sandi Luney
<sandi@happylobster.co.uk> wrote:

>I just wondered why all of a sudden ISP's have decided to introduce
>limits on bandwidth when they didn't before.

Because people are using more bandwidth, and its a finite resource. If
everyone in the UK used their connection at max, I believe there'd be
an oversubscription to the ENTIRE UK's outgoing bandwidth by a big
margin.

> Are they being charged more at their end before it reaches us?

No.

>Is it simply a ploy to get more money and everyone's jumping on the bandwagon?

no.

>Shouldn't the government get onboard

And do /what/? Force ISPs to sell something they don't have?

>Are there any ISP's that aren't going to "cap" the bandwidth?

I sincerely doubt it, given the physical constraints that exist.

The most likely is that (as most are inclining to) we'll get a soft
cap, with anything over the cap charged by the gig.

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:59:23 GMT, Mark McIntyre
<markmcintyre@spamcop.net> wrote:

>Because people are using more bandwidth, and its a finite resource. If
>everyone in the UK used their connection at max, I believe there'd be
>an oversubscription to the ENTIRE UK's outgoing bandwidth by a big
>margin.

"If everyone in the UK..." the possibilities of that happening are
zero. Effectively it's ISPs cherry picking their customers.

dunstonian wrote:
|| On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:59:23 GMT, Mark McIntyre
|| <markmcintyre@spamcop.net> wrote:
||
||| Because people are using more bandwidth, and its a finite resource.
||| If everyone in the UK used their connection at max, I believe
||| there'd be an oversubscription to the ENTIRE UK's outgoing
||| bandwidth by a big margin.
||
|| "If everyone in the UK..." the possibilities of that happening are
|| zero. Effectively it's ISPs cherry picking their customers.

Well I wouldn't go so far as to say "zero" but you must have noticed the net
slowdown at lunchtimes and evenings when lots more people start to browse?
Extrapolate that for a few million more people and see what would happen!

--
Interim Systems and Management Accounting
Gordon Burgess-Parker
Director
www.gbpcomputing.co.uk

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:08:25 UTC, Sandi Luney <sandi@happylobster.co.uk>
wrote:

> I just wondered why all of a sudden ISP's have decided to introduce
> limits on bandwidth when they didn't before.

There are no new limits on bandwidth. There are limits on data transfer,
though.

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 19:54:34 -0000, "Beck"
<my_bulkmail@btopenworld.invalid> wrote:

>The BT wholesale prices are changing. Instead of charging for speed, they
>are charging per gigabyte. This is why you see lots of new caps alongside
>increase in speeds.

+Net introduced a 'fair use policy'/soft cap, whatever. It is not
being charged by the amount of data used. They introduced it so they
would not have to buy in extra capacity...they have recently taken on
many new customers.

In fairness to +Net, the limits are quite reasonable for a moderate
user.

--
Cheers,

Guy

** Stress - the condition brought about by having to
** resist the temptation to beat the living daylights
** out of someone who richly deserves it.

On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 20:50:45 -0000, "Gordon"
<gordonbp1@yahoo.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

>Well I wouldn't go so far as to say "zero" but you must have noticed the net
>slowdown at lunchtimes and evenings when lots more people start to browse?

No!


--
Cheers,

Guy

** Stress - the condition brought about by having to
** resist the temptation to beat the living daylights
** out of someone who richly deserves it.

Dr Teeth wrote:
|| On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 20:50:45 -0000, "Gordon"
|| <gordonbp1@yahoo.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
||
||| Well I wouldn't go so far as to say "zero" but you must have
||| noticed the net slowdown at lunchtimes and evenings when lots more
||| people start to browse?
||
|| No!
||
||

Well you must be the ONLY person who doesn't then.

--
Interim Systems and Management Accounting
Gordon Burgess-Parker
Director
www.gbpcomputing.co.uk