Re: BROADBAND SLOW? "Providers" Say We "Know Nothing"

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by JD, Oct 1, 2009.

  1. JD

    JD Guest

    > More than half? I'd say the actual number is close enough to 100% of subscribers have slower data throughput than advertised. And SO WHAT? First, the advertisements are usually worded "up to". So you are getting what you ordered, and what you are paying for. Second, most broadband speeds (advertised, and actual) are much faster than the average Internet user needs anyway. If your cable modem is supposed to be 5M but actual data throughput corresponds to a 3M download speed, that's still plenty fast for just about anything you want to do on the Internet, legal or otherwise. So quitcherbitchin. Sheesh. -Dave

    Hi all

    Just like to make a few comments on what Dave has said:

    "the advertisements are usually worded "up to". So you are getting
    what you ordered, and what you are paying for" - yes they are worded
    like that for legal reason's and the "UP TO" part is usually in such a
    small font that you can hardly see it, its very misleading and there
    doing it to cover there own buts not to benefit you. how about taking a
    % of the price off to match the % of the speed you're not getting, that
    would sort the problem right out.

    "Second, most broadband speeds (advertised, and actual) are much faster
    than the average Internet user needs anyway" - there certainly not as
    slow as dialup , but there's a lot of households out there with more
    than one person using the internet at the same time so 3MB I'm afraid
    just dosent cut it especially when the internet is now used for watching
    TV programs, you tube, music, online gaming (console's now play a big
    part in this)

    At the moment I'm using ADSL because there are no Cable providers in My
    area,I'm paying for 8MB down and 4mb up my actual speeds are 8128Kbps
    and 448Kbps, if I could get cable I would expect speeds of 20-50mb, if I
    could get a faster connection I would, the 8MB is pretty good, but if I
    could get more speed I would.

    There's been some talk in the paper's recently about adding a new tax on
    to our phone bills this would pay for the upgrading of the phone lines
    to provide more and/or better service. I think this is a great idea I
    think people in rural area's should expect to get on-line with the same
    speeds as people in cities.

    That's my two cent's worth
    JD
     
    JD, Oct 1, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. JD

    baron Guest

    Robert Baer Inscribed thus:

    >> There's been some talk in the paper's recently about adding a new tax
    >> on to our phone bills this would pay for the upgrading of the phone
    >> lines to provide more and/or better service. I think this is a great
    >> idea I think people in rural area's should expect to get on-line with
    >> the same speeds as people in cities.
    >>
    >> That's my two cent's worth
    >> JD


    > By the "logic" of "up to", a data rate of 110bps is OK...
    > And any tax that is "sold" to "improve phone line datarate" would
    > go
    > to the politico and business supporters pocketbooks and one would be
    > damn lucky if even ten percent went to do what was "promised".


    I second that !
    Simply another way of sticking their hands into your pocket hoping you
    won't notice !

    --
    Best Regards:
    Baron.
     
    baron, Oct 2, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. JD

    JD Guest

    baron wrote:
    > Robert Baer Inscribed thus:
    >
    >>> There's been some talk in the paper's recently about adding a new tax
    >>> on to our phone bills this would pay for the upgrading of the phone
    >>> lines to provide more and/or better service. I think this is a great
    >>> idea I think people in rural area's should expect to get on-line with
    >>> the same speeds as people in cities.
    >>>
    >>> That's my two cent's worth
    >>> JD

    >
    >> By the "logic" of "up to", a data rate of 110bps is OK...
    >> And any tax that is "sold" to "improve phone line datarate" would
    >> go
    >> to the politico and business supporters pocketbooks and one would be
    >> damn lucky if even ten percent went to do what was "promised".

    >
    > I second that !
    > Simply another way of sticking their hands into your pocket hoping you
    > won't notice !
    >


    1st off I'm talking about the UK not the US secondly £6 ($9.55) a Year
    you will hardly notice (50p per month on your phone line rental bill),
    upgrading phone system's is not cheap, and for 50p a month for faster
    better more available broadband how can you argue.

    I listen to a few podcast's on-line and I'm always amazed at how
    American's pay for there phone service's, seems to be pay, pay, pay for
    very little in return, but I hear that's down to a lack of competition.

    JD
     
    JD, Oct 2, 2009
    #3
  4. JD

    Baron Guest

    JD wrote:

    > baron wrote:
    >> Robert Baer Inscribed thus:
    >>
    >>>> There's been some talk in the paper's recently about adding a new
    >>>> tax on to our phone bills this would pay for the upgrading of the
    >>>> phone lines to provide more and/or better service. I think this is
    >>>> a great idea I think people in rural area's should expect to get
    >>>> on-line with the same speeds as people in cities.
    >>>>
    >>>> That's my two cent's worth
    >>>> JD

    >>
    >>> By the "logic" of "up to", a data rate of 110bps is OK...
    >>> And any tax that is "sold" to "improve phone line datarate" would
    >>> go
    >>> to the politico and business supporters pocketbooks and one would be
    >>> damn lucky if even ten percent went to do what was "promised".

    >>
    >> I second that !
    >> Simply another way of sticking their hands into your pocket hoping
    >> you won't notice !
    >>

    >
    > 1st off I'm talking about the UK not the US secondly £6 ($9.55) a Year
    > you will hardly notice (50p per month on your phone line rental bill),
    > upgrading phone system's is not cheap, and for 50p a month for faster
    > better more available broadband how can you argue.
    >
    > I listen to a few podcast's on-line and I'm always amazed at how
    > American's pay for there phone service's, seems to be pay, pay, pay
    > for very little in return, but I hear that's down to a lack of
    > competition.
    >
    > JD


    I was talking about the UK !

    --
    Best Regards:
    Baron.
     
    Baron, Oct 2, 2009
    #4
  5. JD

    JD Guest

    Baron wrote:
    > JD wrote:
    >
    >> baron wrote:
    >>> Robert Baer Inscribed thus:
    >>>
    >>>>> There's been some talk in the paper's recently about adding a new
    >>>>> tax on to our phone bills this would pay for the upgrading of the
    >>>>> phone lines to provide more and/or better service. I think this is
    >>>>> a great idea I think people in rural area's should expect to get
    >>>>> on-line with the same speeds as people in cities.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> That's my two cent's worth
    >>>>> JD
    >>>> By the "logic" of "up to", a data rate of 110bps is OK...
    >>>> And any tax that is "sold" to "improve phone line datarate" would
    >>>> go
    >>>> to the politico and business supporters pocketbooks and one would be
    >>>> damn lucky if even ten percent went to do what was "promised".
    >>> I second that !
    >>> Simply another way of sticking their hands into your pocket hoping
    >>> you won't notice !
    >>>

    >> 1st off I'm talking about the UK not the US secondly £6 ($9.55) a Year
    >> you will hardly notice (50p per month on your phone line rental bill),
    >> upgrading phone system's is not cheap, and for 50p a month for faster
    >> better more available broadband how can you argue.
    >>
    >> I listen to a few podcast's on-line and I'm always amazed at how
    >> American's pay for there phone service's, seems to be pay, pay, pay
    >> for very little in return, but I hear that's down to a lack of
    >> competition.
    >>
    >> JD

    >
    > I was talking about the UK !
    >

    And what exactly is your point ?
     
    JD, Oct 2, 2009
    #5
    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. Steven C \(Doktersteve\)

    Flash photography. i know nothing of it, can you help?

    Steven C \(Doktersteve\), Aug 25, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    723
    Michael Meissner
    Aug 27, 2003
  2. Anon

    You say SIM, I say SEM

    Anon, Mar 17, 2006, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    581
    Randal T. Rioux
    Mar 18, 2006
  3. Mark C

    Telecom predatory say net providers

    Mark C, Jul 20, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    384
    colinco
    Jul 21, 2005
  4. 123
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    519
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    632
    Gordon
    Oct 6, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page