cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

N/A

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

Ok, so we all know bandwidth restrictions (fair useage) policies are in place (well not till next month but anyways) and were all gonna get free speed upgrades to the fastest our lines support. We all know that the policy is basically 3 strikes and your out.

So the situation is; if we want to totally hammer our downsteam, we do it every other month?

So the question I ask is; whats the point.

Instead of the odd few on 512 hammering the downloads all the time, were gonna have peeps on the fastest speed their line allows hammering it every other month, without additional charges!
And with unlimited upstream as well (that'll keep 'em up with thier BT ratios.)

If I'm paying a set amount for the bandwidth I use, why should others buck the system and be able to exceed their useage as much as they like as long as they stay whithin their limits in the following month?
25 REPLIES
pgudge
Grafter
Posts: 102
Registered: 30-07-2007

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

Interesting point. I was discussing this last night with a friend (also plusnet).

This is exactly what will happen, people with have a "download month" and a "chill month" this would work for PlusNet if people alternated them, which of cause is impossible. But I also dont see what this will achieve if 90% download like mad in month 1 and do little in month 2, the "favorite low bandwidth" users are still going to suffer once a month anyway.

I think they will get funny about this, when people start to action the month on month off tactic, and start giving out warning for the serious downloaders. I mean if I can download 200GB in one month on current plan (£29.99/50GB) and next month do 40GB, then 250GB next month, what is the point. We will still get what we pay for.

And didn't plusnet bank £9m last year!!! give some back you greedy people.

In true devotee style though, Well done PN on those figures 90,000 BB Users
N/A

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

Hi there,

Surely though this situation is better than the current one of some users dowloading these amounts every month?

Also it is anticipated that the heaviest of users will not want to adhere to this usage pattern and so will leave to an ISP with an "unlimited" account.

Regards,

Rich
Community Veteran
Posts: 2,322
Registered: 01-08-2007

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

I dont know if it will be better or not...

Say a bad boy now downloads 200GB every month for six months running - that 1200GB in six months.

Now - that bad boy may be able to get 4mb or even 8mb in a couple of months time - so he could download up to 4x as much - so say for arguments sake he only doubles his downloading 400GB in a month - perfectly capable of doing that on an 8mb connection.

if he had a month on, month off, month on etc... Then that would be the same 1200GB in six months, just downloading alternate months. If he sticks religiously to the FU limits on the other three months - he will actually download more in a six month period than before.

So in the above example then more bandwidth would be used - so no it wouldnt be better.

Plus - another thought thats has crossed my mind...

I think that the service will get hammered in the first few months after April - there will be many many people on 512k that will get bumped up to 2MB that download say 5 to 10 GB a month currently. (as they didnt want to pay any more for a faster connection)

I think that having a 2mb connection will tempt some users to download larger files, simply because they can. In a similar fashion to all "new toys". There may be a sense of - lets see how fast I can downlod that now... just for the hell of it.

That will increase bandwidth usage considerably too. Thousands of people who have got used to their 512k connections, will spend hours in front of the pc with their shiny new fast conection.

It will be interesting to see the usage charts/graphs before April and after - I personally would expect them to go up.
pgudge
Grafter
Posts: 102
Registered: 30-07-2007

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

Quote
Hi there,

Surely though this situation is better than the current one of some users dowloading these amounts every month?

Also it is anticipated that the heaviest of users will not want to adhere to this usage pattern and so will leave to an ISP with an "unlimited" account.

Regards,

Rich


Ahhhhh, its becoming more and more clear now (PN dont give a t**s about its customers, just the pennies and no hassle from us). Even though no ISP wants heavy users, they dont normally tell you to go to a better ISP.

I suppose PN has taken the jump from the "cool" ISP that it was to being one of the big boys now, I am really happy for your success, but cutting the people off that got you there is pretty annoying.

And with quite a lot of ISPs now offering free migration, its easier and free to move ISPs. Its getting like mortages, first month or first few months are great, then the company stiffs you, so you leave for a new one.

I just hope Pizza Hut dont start either, All you can eat pizza for a £5 Max 6 slices. Smiley
N/A

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

Just a thought here - from when and to when does this "fair usage" start ------- 1st of month for all, or from the date of billing each month?


Egremont
Community Veteran
Posts: 14,469
Registered: 30-07-2007

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

This has not been decided yet. There are some internal changes needed and a new View My Usage page to complete before the fair usage can be implemented.
N/A

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

I don't see a problem with it.

As I see it we're allowed to download 22gb on peak and 220 gb off peak ...... anyone downloading more than that is kinda hoging the service for themselves.

I download a fair bit of stuff and have downloading over 30 gb in a few months. BUT mostly at night off peak.

I think plusnet's limits are fair BUT would be unhappy if they began to lower again.

Don't really see much of a problem here. There will be teething problems no doubt though.
N/A

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

Totally agree with Dangeruss - too many soap boxes on this thread .....
N/A

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

nildrams new limits.....
Quote
The price cuts and regrades come with a clarification of the fair usage policy. Nildram is to introduce a 50GB per month fair usage limit for non-business customers during the hours of 8am till midnight, seven days a week. For people who exceed the 50GB limit, the service will continue to run, but at a lower speed of 64kbps. Extra capacity can be purchased for 99p per GB. What is very different compared to other providers, is that is you have unused allowance in a month, you can carry it over to the next month. So for example if you use 40GB in August, your September allowance will actually be 60GB. Nildram has stated that it believes only 1% of its userbase will be affected by the 50GB fair usage limit, in other words 99% of people are using under this level per month.

now thats not a bad idea...... Cheesy
you get to carry over the unused bandwidth.....
N/A

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

PN saying they'll be glad to loose customers, Nildram having sense to carry bandwidth over.....even more people realising how stupid the FUP actually is (8mbit, 4x as much in the first month,capped in second, 4x as much in 3rd)....ahahah this is actually becoming amusing now more than anything; apparently the people at PN who think out the business plans weren't hired for rational thinking ^^
N/A

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

Quote

now thats not a bad idea...... Cheesy
you get to carry over the unused bandwidth.....


When I suggested this to PlusNet it was immediately dismissed by two members of staff who quoted various reason why it can't be done. See here.

I would imagine that to regain the trust and start healing the ill feeling caused recently by PlusNets handling of recent events that a move to roll over unused bandwidth would be not only make commercial sense, it would also be much fairer to the customer base.
N/A

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

Looks to me like all ISP's are going to be introducing download limits. And to be honest, anybody who needs to exceed these limits is probably doing something against the law anyway, like downloading movies and software.

Take this page for example, 70k odd, so to use the 220 gig off peak someone mentioned, you could view over 3.2 million pages like this one, bit of a job to do that in a month! Even if you downloaded a 3cd linux distro each month, that's not even 2gb!

I am a bit annoyed since I work from home over a VPN and of course use most of my allowance during the 'peak' time, but hopefully not going to get too close to the monthly limits.
Community Veteran
Posts: 14,469
Registered: 30-07-2007

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

Hmm... are you using a homeworker or teleworker or even a business account for that VPN into work? Sounds like you may not be and if you're not, you should be.

Also homeworker/teleworker's fair usage allowances have no been decided yet.
N/A

Fair usage=Bandwidth hammerage?

If it seems appropriate in future, then that is something I will consider, but for the time being my current connection caters for all I need.

The purpous of my previous post was mearly to point out that people who exceed the rather generous limits imposed are quite likley to be downloading things that they shouldn't be.

My annoyance is due to the fact that I believe the definition of broadband internet access should not include download restrictions. I do however understand that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, and if you have 20% of people using 80% of your bandwidth, then of course you have to impose restrictions.

I think the majority of people who complain about download restrictions are probably not even likley to exceed those restrictions, but are simply unhappy about the fact that they originally (in most cases) signed up for an unlimited service, which is now limited.