From The Register:-

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02...er_isps_broke/


Included link from Telco2:-


http://www.telco2.net/blog/2008/02/b..._can.html#more


Included link from Plusnet:-

http://community.plus.net/blog/2008/...dth-explosion/




All good reading and a foretaste of future price rises or restrictions.

Mike

The sooner ISPs start charging by amount of data transferred the better.

At the moment most are saying they are unlimited but in practise they
throttle at peak times or simply sabotage things that use lots of bandwidth.

--

Brian Gregory. (In the UK)
ng@bgdsv.co.uk
To email me remove the letter vee.

"Brian Gregory [UK]" <ng@bgdsv.co.uk> wrote in message
news:JvmdncOmCYz_JCHanZ2dnUVZ8uqdnZ2d@pipex.net...
broadband packages, and offer a special broadband service for those who need
access to such rubbish. Charge users 40-50 quid a month for a service that
gives access to BBC iPlayer services. Has no-one got a video or PVR
anymore? I thought that was why people bought those things... to record and
watch TV at a time when it suited them.

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:01:26 -0000, "Ren" <96878678006500@000.00>
wrote:


km

"Ren" <96878678006500@000.00> wrote in message
news:623tbnF1pbto5U1@mid.individual.net...
special service for those that need access to such rubbish"...

Mike P

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:01:26 +0000, Ren wrote:

Which orifice did you pull that figure out of? Usage-based charging is
way more sensible than blocking specific services and then charging for
access to them.

--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm@ale.cx)
09:11:57 up 12 days, 12:14, 2 users, load average: 1.05, 1.04, 1.00
Convergence, n: The act of using separate DSL circuits for voice and data

m wrote:

And with the price of copper escalating beyond belief, how long before
its fibre to the home?

I personally don't mind paying fr Internet. I'd pay double for a
symmetrical DSL link at 3megs each way..compared with other costs -
taxes, fuel bills, food - Internet is CHEAP.

alexd wrote:
telco links at all.

What are they?

MASSIVE capital cost infrastructure and almost ZERO running cost. Sure
occasionally the roads need digging up again to fix broken wires, and
the odd DSLAM/ATM router needs replacing, but by and large its totally
dominated by capital cost.

So, put one user on it and t costs a fortune. Put a million users on it
and its peanuts.

The real problem is that its ALL owned by BT. By and large. Only they
have cables into EVERY exchange, and a datacoms network capable of
backhauling that to the ISP.

That's where the issues all reside.

the ISPs will all have to order new backhaul pipes, and until OFCOM gets
around to rapping BT's knuckles for the pricing, they will be raking it
in. At virtually NO extra expense to themselves.

BT are not a nationalised company: They wont reduce their prices nor
invest in infrastructure they cant see a profit in, unless OFCOM makes em.

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 10:44:38 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I'm interested to see what impact WBC will have on this - ie buying
capacity at multiple aggregation points rather than one or more Central.

--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm@ale.cx)
12:40:48 up 12 days, 15:43, 2 users, load average: 1.13, 1.13, 1.09
Convergence, n: The act of using separate DSL circuits for voice and data

"km" <osb@all.co.uk> wrote in message
news:attpr39pj844gcvfhsr53rcaaf4cnq7i9i@4ax.com

[snip]

: : why have a car when there are buses and trains?

Since you asked.. To get to my workplace by bus would take three buses and
an hour and a half of my time, whereas in the car it takes 25 minutes.

Also when I finish work at 1am the buses and trains aren't running any
more.


Ivor

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 12:55:25 -0000, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@thisaddressis.invalid> wrote:

think that choice should be made more difficult.

km

Ren wrote:
Only problem is that the news is now just giving highlites stating if
you want to know more then goto etc......I'm not saying that they are
the only people as Time Team also tend to do the same thing (I don't
watch a lot of terrestial TV as you can see).

So it's not only time shifting it's also supposedly giving more
grounded imformation as well. I suppose it just comes down to the
producers getting bloody lazy...

"alexd" <troffasky@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:47bd73d8$0$511$bed64819@news.gradwell.net...
it doesnt - since the tradeoffs depend on the charges.

FWIW the same happened for modem traffic several years back

It was cheaper to pick up traffic from BT "closer" to the users on a per
call basis, but a telco had to balance the cost of build out to the various
BT exchanges or aggregation points against prospective income.

the other way of looking at it is that BT needs some income to build & run
whatever will be the next network, so it must cost something......
Regards

stephen_hope@xyzworld.com - replace xyz with ntl

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 22:46:16 +0000, stephen wrote:

Fair enough - BT are the last place I'd expect to get a free lunch from
anyway.

--
<http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) (UnSoEsNpEaTm@ale.cx)
08:35:43 up 13 days, 11:38, 2 users, load average: 1.17, 1.12, 1.04
Convergence, n: The act of using separate DSL circuits for voice and data

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 10:36:05 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c>
wrote:

I agree. However I wish my ISP would just charge for bandwidth used
and not do traffic "shaping".

M.

Mark wrote:
can 'top up' if necessary, or move to a higher bandwidth tariff.

In article news:<623tbnF1pbto5U1@mid.individual.net>, Ren wrote:
It would help if the TV companies could manage to broadcast things at the
advertised times, and to broadcast every episode of a series at the same time
on the same day of the week rather than bouncing them around for no
adequately-explained reason. Recording off-air is becoming such a hit-and-miss
operation that I'm hardly surprised that people are trying out alternatives.

Cheers,
Daniel.

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:33:07 GMT, Daniel James
<wastebasket@nospam.aaisp.org> wrote:

marks up the programme you want and chases it to whatever time it's
broadcast.

No, I don't work for Humax...just watch a lot of TV.

--
peter
--
Peter

On Feb 21, 9:13 am, alexd <troffa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
What's wrong with shopping around to find ISPs that have a suitable
serviceability? If all the criminals who run ISPs were washed out,
suitable infrastructures would be implemented or the panel on the
front page of ISPReview would see a massive change.

Rather than fining the user fine the abuser:

Top 10 Land-Line Broadband ISPs

1. Fast.co.uk
2. SurfAnyTime
3. Naims
4. TitanADSL
5. Vispa
6. Aquiss
7. ICUK
8. ADSL24
9. IDNet
10 UKFSN

Top 10 ISPs By Subscriber Size

1. BT Retail 4,251,000
2. Virgin Media 3,590,000
3. Carphone Warehouse 2,604,000
4. Tiscali (Pipex) 2,000,000
5. Sky Broadband 1,199,000
6. Orange 1,138,000
7. Kingston Comms 195,255
8. Tesco.net 132,000
9. THUS Group (Demon) 126,000
10. Entanet

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.shtml

"Peter" <peter@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:n0g7s3h6pc3u73535bja2585sl677mtuf1@4ax.com...
With on-line services you don't need to know in advance what you want to
watch - you can respond to friends' recommendations. That is a great
benefit.

Still I think that the tie-up with Phorm by three major ISPs could be a sign
that they are getting desperate for cash. (For those who haven't noticed,
they are selling all their customers' web browsing data, including the
complete content of all non-secure pages visited.)

--
Tony W
My e-mail address has no hyphen
- but please don't use it, reply to the group.