Orcon UBS usage page

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by -=rjh=-, Feb 22, 2005.

  1. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    I see this is finally up and running under the new interface (My Account
    -> BitStream Usage) but the figures it shows are simply not credible. Is
    anyone else seeing this? Can anybody explain what is going on here?

    For example, the meter is telling me that I have downloaded ~48GB in the
    past 7 days (and only uploaded 168MB) which I flat out don't believe.
    Lucky Orcon don't have a cap, because I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have
    a hope of monitoring it accurately.
     
    -=rjh=-, Feb 22, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. -=rjh=-

    Test Guest

    "-=rjh=-" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I see this is finally up and running under the new interface (My Account ->
    >BitStream Usage) but the figures it shows are simply not credible. Is
    >anyone else seeing this? Can anybody explain what is going on here?
    >
    > For example, the meter is telling me that I have downloaded ~48GB in the
    > past 7 days (and only uploaded 168MB) which I flat out don't believe.
    > Lucky Orcon don't have a cap, because I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have a
    > hope of monitoring it accurately.


    They're off by a factor of 10. Download the csv and load it in excel. Sum up
    the usage column and you'll find that you prolly used around 4gb. They had
    me down for 63gb dl and 17gb dl!!! LOL, I wish! I wouldn't be complaining if
    that was true!



    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
     
    Test, Feb 22, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 23:42:10 +1300, Test wrote:

    > "-=rjh=-" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>I see this is finally up and running under the new interface (My Account ->
    >>BitStream Usage) but the figures it shows are simply not credible. Is
    >>anyone else seeing this? Can anybody explain what is going on here?
    >>
    >> For example, the meter is telling me that I have downloaded ~48GB in the
    >> past 7 days (and only uploaded 168MB) which I flat out don't believe.
    >> Lucky Orcon don't have a cap, because I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have a
    >> hope of monitoring it accurately.

    >
    > They're off by a factor of 10. Download the csv and load it in excel. Sum up
    > the usage column and you'll find that you prolly used around 4gb. They had
    > me down for 63gb dl and 17gb dl!!! LOL, I wish! I wouldn't be complaining if
    > that was true!
    >


    Damn Leechers like you are slowing it down for the rest of us!
    Stop using your no cap account as though there are no limits.

    Sounds like a new sneaky method to make people feel guilty ;-0
     
    wogers nemesis, Feb 22, 2005
    #3
  4. Test wrote:
    >>I see this is finally up and running under the new interface (My Account ->
    >>BitStream Usage) but the figures it shows are simply not credible. Is
    >>anyone else seeing this? Can anybody explain what is going on here?


    >>For example, the meter is telling me that I have downloaded ~48GB in the
    >>past 7 days (and only uploaded 168MB) which I flat out don't believe.
    >>Lucky Orcon don't have a cap, because I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have a
    >>hope of monitoring it accurately.


    > They're off by a factor of 10. Download the csv and load it in excel. Sum up
    > the usage column and you'll find that you prolly used around 4gb. They had
    > me down for 63gb dl and 17gb dl!!! LOL, I wish! I wouldn't be complaining if
    > that was true!


    OMG, they can't get simply maths right??? fuk sake.
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Feb 22, 2005
    #4
  5. -=rjh=-

    Chris Mayhew Guest

    Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    > Test wrote:
    >
    >>> I see this is finally up and running under the new interface (My
    >>> Account -> BitStream Usage) but the figures it shows are simply not
    >>> credible. Is anyone else seeing this? Can anybody explain what is
    >>> going on here?

    >
    >
    >>> For example, the meter is telling me that I have downloaded ~48GB in
    >>> the past 7 days (and only uploaded 168MB) which I flat out don't
    >>> believe. Lucky Orcon don't have a cap, because I'm pretty sure they
    >>> wouldn't have a hope of monitoring it accurately.

    >
    >
    >> They're off by a factor of 10. Download the csv and load it in excel.
    >> Sum up the usage column and you'll find that you prolly used around
    >> 4gb. They had me down for 63gb dl and 17gb dl!!! LOL, I wish! I
    >> wouldn't be complaining if that was true!

    >
    >
    > OMG, they can't get simply maths right??? fuk sake.


    Hey, I posted about this a while back, and got jumped on (can't remember
    who). It was at the time that Orcon MD was pointing out that their
    problems were due to the leaches (was that late last year when they sent
    out the email?), so I though I'd go and check my usage to find that I
    had jumped from a tad under 3GB on jetsurf to 16+GB on UBS. The month
    they calculated was 69 days but the totals never added up anyway.

    Is there anything Orcon do get right these days ?

    Are (is) the SMTP server(s) working these days ?

    They seem to have fixed their virus scanning..

    Oh, I know, they ALWAYS manage to get "their" money out of my account
    each month.





    --
     
    Chris Mayhew, Feb 22, 2005
    #5
  6. -=rjh=-

    MarkH Guest

    -=rjh=- <> wrote in news::

    > I see this is finally up and running under the new interface (My Account
    > -> BitStream Usage) but the figures it shows are simply not credible. Is
    > anyone else seeing this? Can anybody explain what is going on here?
    >
    > For example, the meter is telling me that I have downloaded ~48GB in the
    > past 7 days (and only uploaded 168MB) which I flat out don't believe.
    > Lucky Orcon don't have a cap, because I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have
    > a hope of monitoring it accurately.


    I took a look at my usage last night and saw that I downloaded 12GB in 20
    hours, that's pretty good on a 256k connection. I had also managed to
    download 140GB in 167 hours and in 67 hours I downloaded 28.2GB and
    uploaded 15.9GB.

    These figures are ridiculous and can't be taken seriously, it might be nice
    if this was fixed so we could see how much we actually used.



    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 20-Jan-05)
    "There are 10 types of people, those that
    understand binary and those that don't"
     
    MarkH, Feb 22, 2005
    #6
  7. -=rjh=-

    Steve Guest

    "MarkH" <> wrote in message
    news:pXNSd.3094801$...
    > -=rjh=- <> wrote in news::
    >
    >> I see this is finally up and running under the new interface (My Account
    >> -> BitStream Usage) but the figures it shows are simply not credible. Is
    >> anyone else seeing this? Can anybody explain what is going on here?
    >>
    >> For example, the meter is telling me that I have downloaded ~48GB in the
    >> past 7 days (and only uploaded 168MB) which I flat out don't believe.
    >> Lucky Orcon don't have a cap, because I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have
    >> a hope of monitoring it accurately.

    >
    > I took a look at my usage last night and saw that I downloaded 12GB in 20
    > hours, that's pretty good on a 256k connection. I had also managed to
    > download 140GB in 167 hours and in 67 hours I downloaded 28.2GB and
    > uploaded 15.9GB.
    >
    > These figures are ridiculous and can't be taken seriously, it might be
    > nice
    > if this was fixed so we could see how much we actually used.
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    > Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    > See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 20-Jan-05)
    > "There are 10 types of people, those that
    > understand binary and those that don't"
    >


    I believe the numbers are in bits, not bytes. Would this make more sense?
    This is what was suggested to me when I was surprised about my usage report.
    It made more sense to me after that.

    Cheers.



    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
     
    Steve, Feb 22, 2005
    #7
  8. -=rjh=-

    MarkH Guest

    "Steve" <> wrote in
    news:421bb36a$1_1@127.0.0.1:

    >
    > I believe the numbers are in bits, not bytes. Would this make more
    > sense? This is what was suggested to me when I was surprised about my
    > usage report. It made more sense to me after that.


    Shit, that makes much more sense. I wonder how hard it could be for Orcon
    to have a note of what the numbers mean on the usage page.



    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 20-Jan-05)
    "There are 10 types of people, those that
    understand binary and those that don't"
     
    MarkH, Feb 22, 2005
    #8
  9. -=rjh=-

    DoggNZ Guest

    On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 23:38:05 +1300, -=rjh=- <> wrote:

    >I see this is finally up and running under the new interface (My Account
    >-> BitStream Usage) but the figures it shows are simply not credible. Is
    >anyone else seeing this? Can anybody explain what is going on here?
    >


    I don't even have it :(

    --
    BOINC SETI
    http://boinc.mundayweb.com/seti2/stats.php?userID=1469&trans=off
     
    DoggNZ, Feb 22, 2005
    #9
  10. -=rjh=-

    ~misfit~ Guest

    MarkH wrote:
    > -=rjh=- <> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    >> I see this is finally up and running under the new interface (My
    >> Account -> BitStream Usage) but the figures it shows are simply not
    >> credible. Is anyone else seeing this? Can anybody explain what is
    >> going on here?
    >>
    >> For example, the meter is telling me that I have downloaded ~48GB in
    >> the past 7 days (and only uploaded 168MB) which I flat out don't
    >> believe. Lucky Orcon don't have a cap, because I'm pretty sure they
    >> wouldn't have a hope of monitoring it accurately.

    >
    > I took a look at my usage last night and saw that I downloaded 12GB
    > in 20 hours, that's pretty good on a 256k connection. I had also
    > managed to download 140GB in 167 hours and in 67 hours I downloaded
    > 28.2GB and uploaded 15.9GB.
    >
    > These figures are ridiculous and can't be taken seriously, it might
    > be nice if this was fixed so we could see how much we actually used.


    I just checked my usage for the first time! They *only* have figures for one
    month, 23/1/05 to 23/2/05 (although they display the date in the American
    format with month first. I *hate* that) despite the fact I've been connected
    since Nov. 04 and this is what they have for me:

    Total time: 522 hours (16.8 a day? the difference between that and 24 hours
    is their downtime as I am always connected. They owe me 222 hours for that
    month. Should I adjust my next payment accordingly?)

    Uploads: 787.8MB

    Downloads: 764.2MB

    I'm not a heavy user but I have downloaded the odd large file. Those figures
    are frankly wrong. I would guesstimate a download figure of 3-4GB for the
    month, maybe less, but not that low. (Caveat: I don't know how much traffic
    extended periods of on-line gaming use but it can't be a hell of a lot as we
    could both play simultaneously on dial-up)
    --
    ~misfit~



    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
     
    ~misfit~, Feb 23, 2005
    #10
  11. ~misfit~ wrote:
    > (Caveat: I don't know how much traffic
    > extended periods of on-line gaming use but it can't be a hell of a lot as we
    > could both play simultaneously on dial-up)


    it depends on what game, Counterstrike, if given an open connection will
    use ~1Mbyte/min, but will work on dialup just fine(~.6MByte/min).

    ~36Mbyte/hour is about all dialup can use.

    Moving to more modern games, like say BF:1942, given an open connection
    will use ~10Mbytes/min, but is almost playable on dialup, but ideally
    128k(~1Mbyte/min) or more.
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Feb 23, 2005
    #11
  12. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    > Test wrote:
    >
    >>> I see this is finally up and running under the new interface (My
    >>> Account -> BitStream Usage) but the figures it shows are simply not
    >>> credible. Is anyone else seeing this? Can anybody explain what is
    >>> going on here?

    >
    >
    >>> For example, the meter is telling me that I have downloaded ~48GB in
    >>> the past 7 days (and only uploaded 168MB) which I flat out don't
    >>> believe. Lucky Orcon don't have a cap, because I'm pretty sure they
    >>> wouldn't have a hope of monitoring it accurately.

    >
    >
    >> They're off by a factor of 10. Download the csv and load it in excel.
    >> Sum up the usage column and you'll find that you prolly used around
    >> 4gb. They had me down for 63gb dl and 17gb dl!!! LOL, I wish! I
    >> wouldn't be complaining if that was true!

    >
    >
    > OMG, they can't get simply maths right??? fuk sake.


    Actually, I don't think their usage page was working sensibly even
    before the changeover to UBS, although when I first started with
    Jetstart it seemed OK.

    For example, I know at times I was pulling down about >400MB/day but
    this never seemed to show in the Jetstart stats.
     
    -=rjh=-, Feb 23, 2005
    #12
  13. -=rjh=-

    -=rjh=- Guest

    MarkH wrote:
    > "Steve" <> wrote in
    > news:421bb36a$1_1@127.0.0.1:
    >
    >
    >>I believe the numbers are in bits, not bytes. Would this make more
    >>sense? This is what was suggested to me when I was surprised about my
    >>usage report. It made more sense to me after that.

    >
    >
    > Shit, that makes much more sense. I wonder how hard it could be for Orcon
    > to have a note of what the numbers mean on the usage page.
    >

    It does, but it isn't sensible to measure usage in bits - after all, the
    cap is never specified in bits (or maybe we'll start seeing advertising
    for 100Gb caps, wow! :)

    And hard drives aren't specified in bits, either, the only situation
    where bits are used is network and transfer speeds.

    How hard is it to convert the usage meter output to something more sensible?

    That aside, there are still other issues with the usage page but I guess
    they'll fix them eventually.
     
    -=rjh=-, Feb 23, 2005
    #13
  14. -=rjh=-

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Dave - Dave.net.nz wrote:
    > ~misfit~ wrote:
    >> (Caveat: I don't know how much traffic
    >> extended periods of on-line gaming use but it can't be a hell of a
    >> lot as we could both play simultaneously on dial-up)

    >
    > it depends on what game, Counterstrike, if given an open connection
    > will use ~1Mbyte/min, but will work on dialup just fine(~.6MByte/min).
    >
    > ~36Mbyte/hour is about all dialup can use.
    >
    > Moving to more modern games, like say BF:1942, given an open
    > connection will use ~10Mbytes/min, but is almost playable on dialup,
    > but ideally 128k(~1Mbyte/min) or more.


    Ok, thanks for that. I play what is a fairly old game now, Diablo 2. As I
    said, both my lady and I could play on dial-up just fine with better results
    than we are currently getting with Orcon UBS.
    --
    ~misfit~



    ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
    ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
     
    ~misfit~, Feb 23, 2005
    #14
  15. -=rjh=-

    Krazy Bob Guest

    "Dave - Dave.net.nz" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > ~misfit~ wrote:
    >> (Caveat: I don't know how much traffic
    >> extended periods of on-line gaming use but it can't be a hell of a lot as
    >> we
    >> could both play simultaneously on dial-up)

    >
    > it depends on what game, Counterstrike, if given an open connection will
    > use ~1Mbyte/min, but will work on dialup just fine(~.6MByte/min).
    >
    > ~36Mbyte/hour is about all dialup can use.
    >
    > Moving to more modern games, like say BF:1942, given an open connection
    > will use ~10Mbytes/min, but is almost playable on dialup, but ideally
    > 128k(~1Mbyte/min) or more.


    I play battlefield on my 2mb connection and only use 30-60mb an hour!
     
    Krazy Bob, Feb 23, 2005
    #15
  16. -=rjh=-

    EMB Guest

    Krazy Bob wrote:
    >
    > I play battlefield on my 2mb connection and only use 30-60mb an hour!


    Don't tell Telecom but I think the 2Mbit usage meter is a bit sick -
    last time I pulled down a couple of 600MB iso's it showed me as using
    380MB for the entire day.

    --
    EMB
     
    EMB, Feb 23, 2005
    #16
  17. Krazy Bob wrote:
    >>Moving to more modern games, like say BF:1942, given an open connection
    >>will use ~10Mbytes/min, but is almost playable on dialup, but ideally
    >>128k(~1Mbyte/min) or more.


    > I play battlefield on my 2mb connection and only use 30-60mb an hour!


    no idea then, just what I had experienced...
    any idea on if the mods use more?
    maybe in a lan(ie, the 10MBit) it transfers more because it can, maybe
    more frequent updates as to other players locations, maybe just more
    players? 32 I think, where as on most servers I only see 16/24

    --
    Dave.net.nz
    reply addy is e
    nice! http://www.dave.net.nz/images/link.jpg
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Feb 23, 2005
    #17
  18. -=rjh=-

    Krazy Bob Guest

    "Dave - Dave.net.nz" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Krazy Bob wrote:
    >>>Moving to more modern games, like say BF:1942, given an open connection
    >>>will use ~10Mbytes/min, but is almost playable on dialup, but ideally
    >>>128k(~1Mbyte/min) or more.

    >
    >> I play battlefield on my 2mb connection and only use 30-60mb an hour!

    >
    > no idea then, just what I had experienced...
    > any idea on if the mods use more?
    > maybe in a lan(ie, the 10MBit) it transfers more because it can, maybe
    > more frequent updates as to other players locations, maybe just more
    > players? 32 I think, where as on most servers I only see 16/24


    I use the DC mod, 44 players, ping times 69 hardly any lag....very good
    gamming
    on lan..havent experienced it

    > --
    > Dave.net.nz
    > reply addy is e
    > nice! http://www.dave.net.nz/images/link.jpg
     
    Krazy Bob, Feb 23, 2005
    #18
  19. Krazy Bob wrote:
    > "Dave - Dave.net.nz" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>Krazy Bob wrote:
    >>
    >>>>Moving to more modern games, like say BF:1942, given an open connection
    >>>>will use ~10Mbytes/min, but is almost playable on dialup, but ideally
    >>>>128k(~1Mbyte/min) or more.

    >>
    >>>I play battlefield on my 2mb connection and only use 30-60mb an hour!

    >>
    >>no idea then, just what I had experienced...
    >>any idea on if the mods use more?
    >>maybe in a lan(ie, the 10MBit) it transfers more because it can, maybe
    >>more frequent updates as to other players locations, maybe just more
    >>players? 32 I think, where as on most servers I only see 16/24

    >
    >
    > I use the DC mod, 44 players, ping times 69 hardly any lag....very good
    > gamming
    > on lan..havent experienced it


    oh well, file it in the un-known basket...
     
    Dave - Dave.net.nz, Feb 23, 2005
    #19
  20. -=rjh=-

    MarkH Guest

    -=rjh=- <> wrote in news::

    > MarkH wrote:


    >> I wonder how hard it could be for
    >> Orcon to have a note of what the numbers mean on the usage page.
    >>

    > It does, but it isn't sensible to measure usage in bits - after all,
    > the cap is never specified in bits (or maybe we'll start seeing
    > advertising for 100Gb caps, wow! :)


    It does? Where does it explain that the figures are quoted in bits rather
    than bytes? I looked but couldn't see it.


    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 20-Jan-05)
    "There are 10 types of people, those that
    understand binary and those that don't"
     
    MarkH, Feb 23, 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. -=rjh=-

    Orcon "UBS" - anyone been switched yet?

    -=rjh=-, Oct 16, 2004, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    36
    Views:
    826
  2. AT
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    378
    Dave - Dave.net.nz
    Dec 15, 2004
  3. Brendan

    changing from Orcon UBS to Orcon Jetstream

    Brendan, Feb 25, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    540
    Brendan
    Feb 25, 2005
  4. Jamie Kahn Genet

    Orcon UBS 2MBit or stick with Telecom/Orcon 2MBit ADSL?

    Jamie Kahn Genet, Apr 29, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    489
    Jamie Kahn Genet
    Apr 29, 2005
  5. ~misfit~

    Orcon UBS usage page changed.

    ~misfit~, Nov 9, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    300
    ~misfit~
    Nov 9, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page