Orcon Not Whats Advertised

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by ybakiwi, Dec 4, 2005.

  1. ybakiwi

    ybakiwi Guest

    I to agree about Orcon. I to get no where near 2mbps and most of the
    time are slower than dial up

    I will not be staying with them once my twelve months is up
     
    ybakiwi, Dec 4, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "ybakiwi" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I to agree about Orcon. I to get no where near 2mbps and most of the
    > time are slower than dial up
    >
    > I will not be staying with them once my twelve months is up


    i rarely get 2mbps from my telecom plan either. Although, using the
    jetstreamgames/speed says I am getting 2mbps, in real life websites it is
    much slower.
     
    news.xtra.co.nz, Dec 4, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "ybakiwi" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I to agree about Orcon. I to get no where near 2mbps and most of the
    > time are slower than dial up
    >
    > I will not be staying with them once my twelve months is up


    How are you measuring your speed? Speedtests? P2P? Downloading files?

    Thanks
    Craig
     
    Craig Whitmore, Dec 4, 2005
    #3
  4. ybakiwi

    Philip Guest

    ybakiwi wrote:
    > I to agree about Orcon. I to get no where near 2mbps and most of the
    > time are slower than dial up
    >
    > I will not be staying with them once my twelve months is up


    Whop will you move to that would be either faster or cheaper?

    Philip
     
    Philip, Dec 4, 2005
    #4
  5. ybakiwi

    MarkH Guest

    ybakiwi <> wrote in
    news::

    > I to agree about Orcon. I to get no where near 2mbps and most of the
    > time are slower than dial up
    >
    > I will not be staying with them once my twelve months is up


    Slower than dial up? It's been a while since you last used dial-up
    hasn't it?

    Am I the only one that consistently gets good speeds with Orcon's 2Mb
    plan?

    Sure I don't get 2Mb on every thing I access on the internet, some sites
    are very fast and others are not so fast. But purely on a comparison to
    the 256k plan that I was previously on, I am getting much better speeds
    on average.

    With 256k:
    Max speed was about 32kB/s.
    Average speed was somewhere around 28kB/s.
    Hitting 32kB/s was common.

    With 2Mb:
    Max speed is about 256kB/s.
    Hitting 256kB/s is quite rare on a single download stream.

    BUT:
    On a slow download I might get 40-50kB/s - this is still faster than I
    could ever get on the 256k plan.

    The average download from a US website might only be about half of the
    max speed - but that is 4 times as fast as the best speed on my old 256k
    plan.

    The average combined speed of 2 simultaneous downloads would easily be
    over 200kB/s - this is over 80% of my plans max speed and one hell of a
    lot better than what I got on my 256k plan.

    There are many downloads that are available from Aussie mirrors, most of
    the time I can download a single file from an Aussie FTP site and get
    220-240kB/s.


    With all this pissing and bitching, whining and moaning it seems to me
    that many posters fail to mention that 99% of their problem is just with
    P2P file sharing. Unless I am getting drastically faster speeds than you
    guys for some strange reason then downloading files from the internet
    from HTTP or FTP is generally quite fast and it is just the severely
    throttled P2P that has your panties in a bunch.

    I see a lot of lack of understanding here. The real problem is that the
    small minority that account for the majority of the traffic are doing it
    to a large degree with P2P. Unfortunately the Orcon bandwidth is
    constrained by Telecom and as far as I understand it they can not buy
    more national bandwidth from Telecom. Telecom provide Orcon with a
    fixed amount of bandwidth per Orcon client and the Telecom dictatorship
    can not be reasoned with. With Xtra the problem does not exist because
    the plans they offer are capped at 10G at the top plan and then severely
    slowed after that, they also would have many customers on the lower
    plans using much less than 10Gig. This means that the average amount of
    data used by Xtra customers is much lower than that used by Orcon
    customers. Until Telecom offers to let ISPs pay for a greater capacity
    the only solution is to encourage the very light users to switch to
    Orcon so that the average use gets lowered. A couple of thousand new
    customers that use under 1GB/month would do wonders for the internet
    speed for all of us.

    Until the heavy users are balanced out the throttling of P2P is likely
    to continue. Those that need fast P2P may need to find another ISP that
    allows large volumes of internet traffic, but don't restrict the P2P. I
    see that IHUGs top 2Mbit plan offers 40GB peak + 40GB offpeak traffic
    per month (as long as you have your tolls through IHUG), anyone here on
    that plan?

    Does anyone here use Slingshot on a 2Mbit plan? They give you 3GB/month
    then offer this:
    How much does additional data cost?
    There are various additional data options for you to choose from.
    Additional data can be purchased via your Slingshot ‘Member Services’
    section and the cost appears on your next monthly bill. There is no
    limit to the amount of data you can purchase
    Additional Data Price
    3GB $5
    10GB $10
    30GB $20
    50GB $30

    This seems like an excellent deal for the heavy users, you could pay $30
    for an extra 50GB then $30 for another 50GB - that's 103GB per month for
    $105!

    Does anyone know about their current P2P performance?

    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 5-September-05)
    "The person on the other side was a young woman. Very obviously a
    young woman. There was no possible way she could have been mistaken
    for a young man in any language, especially Braille."
    Maskerade
     
    MarkH, Dec 4, 2005
    #5
  6. ybakiwi

    steve Guest

    ybakiwi wrote:
    > I to agree about Orcon. I to get no where near 2mbps and most of the
    > time are slower than dial up
    >
    > I will not be staying with them once my twelve months is up


    Everyone is managing their networks these days......so whether or not
    bottlenecks are Orcons fault or the fault of one - or 10 - upstream
    other ISPs and entwork service providers is hard to know.

    Maybe a traceroute would shed some light...but only with a large number
    of samples to diverse destinations at regular intervals recorded over a
    resonable expanse of time (days). Otherwise, any "findings" are
    anecdotal and can be highly misleading.
     
    steve, Dec 4, 2005
    #6
  7. "Bruce Sinclair" <> wrote
    in message news:I6Lkf.5697$...
    > In article <>, Philip <>
    > wrote:
    >>ybakiwi wrote:
    >>> I to agree about Orcon. I to get no where near 2mbps and most of the
    >>> time are slower than dial up
    >>>
    >>> I will not be staying with them once my twelve months is up

    >>
    >>Whop will you move to that would be either faster or cheaper?

    >
    > .. and surely you have a contract that says what they will provide ? If
    > they are not providing it, you don't have to stick to your part of the
    > contract either .. so you should be able to terminate it immediately if
    > that's what you want to do.
    >
    >
    > Bruce
    >


    The problem is p2p. Before p2p, net traffic was bursty, meaning there
    would be bursts of data rather than continuous streams. Bursty traffic
    (assuming a random pattern) allows a set bandwidth amount to service a
    greater number of users.

    But, with p2p...the data is continuous so the advantages of 'bursty' traffic
    are negated.

    I liken this to leaving your telephone off the hook and not terminating
    calls - enough people do this and the telephone exchange will become
    blocked.

    Perhaps they underestimated the number of p2p users on their network? In my
    opinion they should ban p2p anyway since 90% usage is illegal. In this
    case, it is the bulk of people ruining p2p for the minority of people he he.
     
    news.xtra.co.nz, Dec 4, 2005
    #7
  8. ybakiwi

    ~misfit~ Guest

    news.xtra.co.nz wrote:
    > "Bruce Sinclair" <>
    > wrote in message news:I6Lkf.5697$...
    >> In article <>, Philip
    >> <> wrote:
    >>> ybakiwi wrote:
    >>>> I to agree about Orcon. I to get no where near 2mbps and most of
    >>>> the time are slower than dial up
    >>>>
    >>>> I will not be staying with them once my twelve months is up
    >>>
    >>> Whop will you move to that would be either faster or cheaper?

    >>
    >> .. and surely you have a contract that says what they will provide ?
    >> If they are not providing it, you don't have to stick to your part
    >> of the contract either .. so you should be able to terminate it
    >> immediately if that's what you want to do.
    >>
    >>
    >> Bruce
    >>

    >
    > The problem is p2p. Before p2p, net traffic was bursty, meaning
    > there would be bursts of data rather than continuous streams. Bursty
    > traffic (assuming a random pattern) allows a set bandwidth amount to
    > service a greater number of users.
    >
    > But, with p2p...the data is continuous so the advantages of 'bursty'
    > traffic are negated.
    >
    > I liken this to leaving your telephone off the hook and not
    > terminating calls - enough people do this and the telephone exchange
    > will become blocked.
    >
    > Perhaps they underestimated the number of p2p users on their network?
    > In my opinion they should ban p2p anyway since 90% usage is illegal. In
    > this case, it is the bulk of people ruining p2p for the minority
    > of people he he.


    You're in the wrong country old son. Should have been in communist Russia,
    they liked to ban things.
    --
    ~misfit~
     
    ~misfit~, Dec 5, 2005
    #8
  9. ybakiwi

    ~misfit~ Guest

    MarkH wrote:

    <snip>

    > I see a lot of lack of understanding here. The real problem is that
    > the small minority that account for the majority of the traffic are
    > doing it to a large degree with P2P.


    Mark, I believe that this is a myth. It is no longer a "small minority"
    using P2P. It may still be a minority (as in less than 50%) but if it is it
    isn't small. It may have been the case a year ago but I don't believe it is
    now. For a _lot_ of people it's the only reason they went to 2M plans or
    even ADSL in the first place.
    --
    ~misfit~
     
    ~misfit~, Dec 5, 2005
    #9
  10. In article <>, Philip <> wrote:
    >ybakiwi wrote:
    >> I to agree about Orcon. I to get no where near 2mbps and most of the
    >> time are slower than dial up
    >>
    >> I will not be staying with them once my twelve months is up

    >
    >Whop will you move to that would be either faster or cheaper?


    ... and surely you have a contract that says what they will provide ? If
    they are not providing it, you don't have to stick to your part of the
    contract either .. so you should be able to terminate it immediately if
    that's what you want to do.


    Bruce

    ----------------------------------------
    I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are the good
    people and the bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and
    only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides.

    Lord Vetinari in Guards ! Guards ! - Terry Pratchett

    Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
    (if there were any)
     
    Bruce Sinclair, Dec 5, 2005
    #10
  11. In article <meLkf.5701$>, "news.xtra.co.nz" <> wrote:
    >"Bruce Sinclair" <> wrote
    >in message news:I6Lkf.5697$...
    >> In article <>, Philip <>
    >> wrote:
    >>>ybakiwi wrote:
    >>>> I to agree about Orcon. I to get no where near 2mbps and most of the
    >>>> time are slower than dial up
    >>>>
    >>>> I will not be staying with them once my twelve months is up
    >>>
    >>>Whop will you move to that would be either faster or cheaper?

    >>
    >> .. and surely you have a contract that says what they will provide ? If
    >> they are not providing it, you don't have to stick to your part of the
    >> contract either .. so you should be able to terminate it immediately if
    >> that's what you want to do.


    >The problem is p2p. Before p2p, net traffic was bursty, meaning there
    >would be bursts of data rather than continuous streams. Bursty traffic
    >(assuming a random pattern) allows a set bandwidth amount to service a
    >greater number of users.
    >But, with p2p...the data is continuous so the advantages of 'bursty' traffic
    >are negated.
    >I liken this to leaving your telephone off the hook and not terminating
    >calls - enough people do this and the telephone exchange will become
    >blocked.
    >Perhaps they underestimated the number of p2p users on their network? In my
    >opinion they should ban p2p anyway since 90% usage is illegal. In this
    >case, it is the bulk of people ruining p2p for the minority of people he he.


    ... and all this makes sense ... but if your supply contract says 2 mbps and
    you get one or less, that is surely a simple breach of contract ? Terminate
    it and get your money back - they failed to provide what they said they
    would. Would you accept half a house if someone contrcted to byuild a whole
    one ? :)




    Bruce

    ----------------------------------------
    I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are the good
    people and the bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and
    only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides.

    Lord Vetinari in Guards ! Guards ! - Terry Pratchett

    Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
    (if there were any)
     
    Bruce Sinclair, Dec 5, 2005
    #11
  12. ybakiwi

    XP Guest

    On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 07:18:00 +1300, ybakiwi <> wrote:

    >I to agree about Orcon. I to get no where near 2mbps and most of the
    >time are slower than dial up
    >
    >I will not be staying with them once my twelve months is up




    Has nothing at all to do with Orcon..

    All links out of NZ are slow due to other reasons..
     
    XP, Dec 5, 2005
    #12
  13. ybakiwi

    XP Guest

    On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 21:20:34 GMT, MarkH <> wrote:

    >ybakiwi <> wrote in
    >news::
    >
    >> I to agree about Orcon. I to get no where near 2mbps and most of the
    >> time are slower than dial up
    >>
    >> I will not be staying with them once my twelve months is up

    >
    >Slower than dial up? It's been a while since you last used dial-up
    >hasn't it?
    >
    >Am I the only one that consistently gets good speeds with Orcon's 2Mb
    >plan?
    >
    >Sure I don't get 2Mb on every thing I access on the internet, some sites
    >are very fast and others are not so fast. But purely on a comparison to
    >the 256k plan that I was previously on, I am getting much better speeds
    >on average.
    >
    >With 256k:
    >Max speed was about 32kB/s.
    >Average speed was somewhere around 28kB/s.
    >Hitting 32kB/s was common.
    >
    >With 2Mb:
    >Max speed is about 256kB/s.
    >Hitting 256kB/s is quite rare on a single download stream.
    >
    >BUT:
    >On a slow download I might get 40-50kB/s - this is still faster than I
    >could ever get on the 256k plan.
    >
    >The average download from a US website might only be about half of the
    >max speed - but that is 4 times as fast as the best speed on my old 256k
    >plan.
    >
    >The average combined speed of 2 simultaneous downloads would easily be
    >over 200kB/s - this is over 80% of my plans max speed and one hell of a
    >lot better than what I got on my 256k plan.
    >
    >There are many downloads that are available from Aussie mirrors, most of
    >the time I can download a single file from an Aussie FTP site and get
    >220-240kB/s.
    >
    >
    >With all this pissing and bitching, whining and moaning it seems to me
    >that many posters fail to mention that 99% of their problem is just with
    >P2P file sharing. Unless I am getting drastically faster speeds than you
    >guys for some strange reason then downloading files from the internet
    >from HTTP or FTP is generally quite fast and it is just the severely
    >throttled P2P that has your panties in a bunch.
    >
    >I see a lot of lack of understanding here. The real problem is that the
    >small minority that account for the majority of the traffic are doing it
    >to a large degree with P2P. Unfortunately the Orcon bandwidth is
    >constrained by Telecom and as far as I understand it they can not buy
    >more national bandwidth from Telecom. Telecom provide Orcon with a
    >fixed amount of bandwidth per Orcon client and the Telecom dictatorship
    >can not be reasoned with. With Xtra the problem does not exist because
    >the plans they offer are capped at 10G at the top plan and then severely
    >slowed after that, they also would have many customers on the lower
    >plans using much less than 10Gig. This means that the average amount of
    >data used by Xtra customers is much lower than that used by Orcon
    >customers. Until Telecom offers to let ISPs pay for a greater capacity
    >the only solution is to encourage the very light users to switch to
    >Orcon so that the average use gets lowered. A couple of thousand new
    >customers that use under 1GB/month would do wonders for the internet
    >speed for all of us.
    >
    >Until the heavy users are balanced out the throttling of P2P is likely
    >to continue. Those that need fast P2P may need to find another ISP that
    >allows large volumes of internet traffic, but don't restrict the P2P. I
    >see that IHUGs top 2Mbit plan offers 40GB peak + 40GB offpeak traffic
    >per month (as long as you have your tolls through IHUG), anyone here on
    >that plan?
    >
    >Does anyone here use Slingshot on a 2Mbit plan? They give you 3GB/month
    >then offer this:
    >How much does additional data cost?
    >There are various additional data options for you to choose from.
    >Additional data can be purchased via your Slingshot ‘Member Services’
    >section and the cost appears on your next monthly bill. There is no
    >limit to the amount of data you can purchase
    >Additional Data Price
    >3GB $5
    >10GB $10
    >30GB $20
    >50GB $30
    >
    >This seems like an excellent deal for the heavy users, you could pay $30
    >for an extra 50GB then $30 for another 50GB - that's 103GB per month for
    >$105!





    Plus the Phone rental and the ADSL charge, you are Joking..


    >Does anyone know about their current P2P performance?




    The Internet service here is the Joke of the World..
     
    XP, Dec 5, 2005
    #13
  14. ybakiwi

    -=rjh=- Guest

    ~misfit~ wrote:
    > MarkH wrote:
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    >>I see a lot of lack of understanding here. The real problem is that
    >>the small minority that account for the majority of the traffic are
    >>doing it to a large degree with P2P.

    >
    >
    > Mark, I believe that this is a myth. It is no longer a "small minority"
    > using P2P. It may still be a minority (as in less than 50%) but if it is it
    > isn't small. It may have been the case a year ago but I don't believe it is
    > now. For a _lot_ of people it's the only reason they went to 2M plans or
    > even ADSL in the first place.


    I doubt it is a small minority, but I doubt it is many people either. I
    think - and this is also partly from people who I've encouraged to go to
    ADSL - that people switch to ADSL because:

    It frees up a phone line.

    It costs slightly more than a dedicated second phoneline + ISP.

    It is easier to share amongst multiple PCs (for some reason, people
    don't consider sharing or networking while they are on dialup). Often
    households will even take turns dialling out using a modem in each PC.

    It is always on, so checking email is quicker, as is IM etc.

    Web browsing is faster.

    So, I figure that for most people, P2P doesn't really figure - they just
    see it as a faster form of dialup.

    They seem happy with what they are getting, and I often don't point out
    p2p although sometimes kids will be into sharing (but not BT) already.

    But Orcon will have the definitive info on how many users use P2P in all
    its flavours, it would be very interesting to know. My guess is about
    20-30% tops. But if I look at my own traffic, the proportion of non p2p
    traffic (say, leaving just email and web browsing) I'd guess that it
    could be as low as 10%.
     
    -=rjh=-, Dec 5, 2005
    #14
  15. ybakiwi

    Gordon Guest

    On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 12:47:21 +1300, news.xtra.co.nz wrote:

    > In my
    > opinion they should ban p2p anyway since 90% usage is illegal.


    So baby goes out with the bath water.
     
    Gordon, Dec 5, 2005
    #15
  16. "Bruce Sinclair" <> wrote
    in message news:ciLkf.5704$...
    > In article <meLkf.5701$>, "news.xtra.co.nz"
    > <> wrote:
    >>"Bruce Sinclair" <> wrote
    >>in message news:I6Lkf.5697$...
    >>> In article <>, Philip <>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>>ybakiwi wrote:
    >>>>> I to agree about Orcon. I to get no where near 2mbps and most of the
    >>>>> time are slower than dial up
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I will not be staying with them once my twelve months is up
    >>>>
    >>>>Whop will you move to that would be either faster or cheaper?
    >>>
    >>> .. and surely you have a contract that says what they will provide ? If
    >>> they are not providing it, you don't have to stick to your part of the
    >>> contract either .. so you should be able to terminate it immediately if
    >>> that's what you want to do.

    >
    >>The problem is p2p. Before p2p, net traffic was bursty, meaning there
    >>would be bursts of data rather than continuous streams. Bursty traffic
    >>(assuming a random pattern) allows a set bandwidth amount to service a
    >>greater number of users.
    >>But, with p2p...the data is continuous so the advantages of 'bursty'
    >>traffic
    >>are negated.
    >>I liken this to leaving your telephone off the hook and not terminating
    >>calls - enough people do this and the telephone exchange will become
    >>blocked.
    >>Perhaps they underestimated the number of p2p users on their network? In
    >>my
    >>opinion they should ban p2p anyway since 90% usage is illegal. In this
    >>case, it is the bulk of people ruining p2p for the minority of people he
    >>he.

    >
    > .. and all this makes sense ... but if your supply contract says 2 mbps
    > and
    > you get one or less, that is surely a simple breach of contract ?
    > Terminate
    > it and get your money back - they failed to provide what they said they
    > would. Would you accept half a house if someone contrcted to byuild a
    > whole
    > one ? :)
    >


    It is different though to building a house. A house is a well defined
    quantity of timber, nails, and iron, with a roughly accurate estimate for
    construction.

    The dynamics of IP traffic is fluid and a single 'new' application model can
    dramatically change the nature of the data. This is nearly impossible to
    predict future applications - eg, SMS text messages were considered a
    rubbish service by the GSM providers but now is a huge source of income.

    But, I suppose, the providers should be forced to pay more attention to
    quality of service issues. QoS being the ability to route traffic according
    to their service level agreement. Perhaps they need to highlight the
    service level commitments in the advertising?
     
    news.xtra.co.nz, Dec 5, 2005
    #16
  17. "Gordon" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 12:47:21 +1300, news.xtra.co.nz wrote:
    >
    >> In my
    >> opinion they should ban p2p anyway since 90% usage is illegal.

    >
    > So baby goes out with the bath water.
    >


    well, OK, who here uses p2p for legitimate purposes? Who can say they have
    never downloaded any copyrighted material via p2p?

    Not many i bet. People think it is OK to download the latest madonna album
    or whatever. But, the same people think it is not ok to steal one from the
    shop.
     
    news.xtra.co.nz, Dec 5, 2005
    #17
  18. "XP" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 21:20:34 GMT, MarkH <> wrote:
    >
    >>ybakiwi <> wrote in
    >>news::
    >>
    >>> I to agree about Orcon. I to get no where near 2mbps and most of the
    >>> time are slower than dial up
    >>>
    >>> I will not be staying with them once my twelve months is up

    >>
    >>Slower than dial up? It's been a while since you last used dial-up
    >>hasn't it?
    >>
    >>Am I the only one that consistently gets good speeds with Orcon's 2Mb
    >>plan?
    >>
    >>Sure I don't get 2Mb on every thing I access on the internet, some sites
    >>are very fast and others are not so fast. But purely on a comparison to
    >>the 256k plan that I was previously on, I am getting much better speeds
    >>on average.
    >>
    >>With 256k:
    >>Max speed was about 32kB/s.
    >>Average speed was somewhere around 28kB/s.
    >>Hitting 32kB/s was common.
    >>
    >>With 2Mb:
    >>Max speed is about 256kB/s.
    >>Hitting 256kB/s is quite rare on a single download stream.
    >>
    >>BUT:
    >>On a slow download I might get 40-50kB/s - this is still faster than I
    >>could ever get on the 256k plan.
    >>
    >>The average download from a US website might only be about half of the
    >>max speed - but that is 4 times as fast as the best speed on my old 256k
    >>plan.
    >>
    >>The average combined speed of 2 simultaneous downloads would easily be
    >>over 200kB/s - this is over 80% of my plans max speed and one hell of a
    >>lot better than what I got on my 256k plan.
    >>
    >>There are many downloads that are available from Aussie mirrors, most of
    >>the time I can download a single file from an Aussie FTP site and get
    >>220-240kB/s.
    >>
    >>
    >>With all this pissing and bitching, whining and moaning it seems to me
    >>that many posters fail to mention that 99% of their problem is just with
    >>P2P file sharing. Unless I am getting drastically faster speeds than you
    >>guys for some strange reason then downloading files from the internet
    >>from HTTP or FTP is generally quite fast and it is just the severely
    >>throttled P2P that has your panties in a bunch.
    >>
    >>I see a lot of lack of understanding here. The real problem is that the
    >>small minority that account for the majority of the traffic are doing it
    >>to a large degree with P2P. Unfortunately the Orcon bandwidth is
    >>constrained by Telecom and as far as I understand it they can not buy
    >>more national bandwidth from Telecom. Telecom provide Orcon with a
    >>fixed amount of bandwidth per Orcon client and the Telecom dictatorship
    >>can not be reasoned with. With Xtra the problem does not exist because
    >>the plans they offer are capped at 10G at the top plan and then severely
    >>slowed after that, they also would have many customers on the lower
    >>plans using much less than 10Gig. This means that the average amount of
    >>data used by Xtra customers is much lower than that used by Orcon
    >>customers. Until Telecom offers to let ISPs pay for a greater capacity
    >>the only solution is to encourage the very light users to switch to
    >>Orcon so that the average use gets lowered. A couple of thousand new
    >>customers that use under 1GB/month would do wonders for the internet
    >>speed for all of us.
    >>
    >>Until the heavy users are balanced out the throttling of P2P is likely
    >>to continue. Those that need fast P2P may need to find another ISP that
    >>allows large volumes of internet traffic, but don't restrict the P2P. I
    >>see that IHUGs top 2Mbit plan offers 40GB peak + 40GB offpeak traffic
    >>per month (as long as you have your tolls through IHUG), anyone here on
    >>that plan?
    >>
    >>Does anyone here use Slingshot on a 2Mbit plan? They give you 3GB/month
    >>then offer this:
    >>How much does additional data cost?
    >>There are various additional data options for you to choose from.
    >>Additional data can be purchased via your Slingshot 'Member Services'
    >>section and the cost appears on your next monthly bill. There is no
    >>limit to the amount of data you can purchase
    >>Additional Data Price
    >>3GB $5
    >>10GB $10
    >>30GB $20
    >>50GB $30
    >>
    >>This seems like an excellent deal for the heavy users, you could pay $30
    >>for an extra 50GB then $30 for another 50GB - that's 103GB per month for
    >>$105!

    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Plus the Phone rental and the ADSL charge, you are Joking..
    >
    >
    >>Does anyone know about their current P2P performance?

    >
    >
    >
    > The Internet service here is the Joke of the World..
    >
    >


    I heard rarotonga is worse.
     
    news.xtra.co.nz, Dec 5, 2005
    #18
  19. ybakiwi

    Fred Dagg Guest

    On Mon, 5 Dec 2005 22:02:02 +1300, "news.xtra.co.nz"
    <> exclaimed:

    >
    >"Gordon" <> wrote in message
    >news:p...
    >> On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 12:47:21 +1300, news.xtra.co.nz wrote:
    >>
    >>> In my
    >>> opinion they should ban p2p anyway since 90% usage is illegal.

    >>
    >> So baby goes out with the bath water.
    >>

    >
    >well, OK, who here uses p2p for legitimate purposes? Who can say they have
    >never downloaded any copyrighted material via p2p?
    >
    >Not many i bet. People think it is OK to download the latest madonna album
    >or whatever. But, the same people think it is not ok to steal one from the
    >shop.
    >

    Actually, we might as well ban the Internet, as 90% of the traffic on
    it is P2P.
     
    Fred Dagg, Dec 5, 2005
    #19
  20. ybakiwi

    MarkH Guest

    XP <> wrote in
    news::

    > On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 21:20:34 GMT, MarkH <> wrote:
    >
    >>Does anyone here use Slingshot on a 2Mbit plan? They give you 3GB/month
    >>then offer this:
    >>How much does additional data cost?
    >>There are various additional data options for you to choose from.
    >>Additional data can be purchased via your Slingshot ‘Member Services’
    >>section and the cost appears on your next monthly bill. There is no
    >>limit to the amount of data you can purchase
    >>Additional Data Price
    >>3GB $5
    >>10GB $10
    >>30GB $20
    >>50GB $30
    >>
    >>This seems like an excellent deal for the heavy users, you could pay $30
    >>for an extra 50GB then $30 for another 50GB - that's 103GB per month for
    >>$105!

    >
    > Plus the Phone rental and the ADSL charge, you are Joking..


    Your maths is bad!

    ADSL charge = $45
    50GB additional data is $30
    Another 50GB is $30

    Total is $105

    Phone rental might be an issue if you didn't already have a phone, but for
    most people this is not the case.

    Clearly the price per gig is pretty reasonable, the only thing I don't know
    is what the performance is actually like.


    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 5-September-05)
    "The person on the other side was a young woman. Very obviously a
    young woman. There was no possible way she could have been mistaken
    for a young man in any language, especially Braille."
    Maskerade
     
    MarkH, Dec 5, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    725
    Arnold Nipper
    Aug 19, 2005
  2. Starkey

    whats up with orcon support team

    Starkey, Aug 24, 2004, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    32
    Views:
    844
    Chris
    Aug 26, 2004
  3. Mutley
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    301
    Dave - Dave.net.nz
    Sep 26, 2004
  4. Brendan

    changing from Orcon UBS to Orcon Jetstream

    Brendan, Feb 25, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    563
    Brendan
    Feb 25, 2005
  5. Shane

    As advertised previously by Lawrence

    Shane, Sep 29, 2007, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    338
    Shane
    Sep 29, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page