ADSL Provider

Can anyone recommend a decent supplier i am a heavy user so want unlimited
downloads, no fair usage policy crap, i am with tiscali and they are
throttling my account all the time even though its supposedly unlimited and
was started before the fair usage policy was thought of, bloody disgrace.
Looking for a good reliable service with no limits ever, cant get cable in
my area, anyone???

Thanks
Chris

start here
www.adslguide.org.uk


"Bobby Bob" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:43d20018$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Can anyone recommend a decent supplier i am a heavy user so want
unlimited
> downloads, no fair usage policy crap, i am with tiscali and they are
> throttling my account all the time even though its supposedly unlimited
> and was started before the fair usage policy was thought of, bloody
> disgrace. Looking for a good reliable service with no limits ever, cant
> get cable in my area, anyone???
>
> Thanks
> Chris
>


----------------------------------------
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 0 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!

On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 09:34:00 -0000, "Bobby Bob"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Looking for a good reliable service with no limits ever,

Nildram or Demon 1:1 contention broadband ?

Otherwise AOL.

Phil
--
Tiscali - dialup speeds at Broadband prices, see
http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/postlist...&Board=tiscali

AOL - the unlimited ISP of choice for heavy downloaders.

Bobby Bob wrote:
> Can anyone recommend a decent supplier i am a heavy user so want
> unlimited downloads, no fair usage policy crap, i am with tiscali and
> they are throttling my account all the time even though its
> supposedly unlimited and was started before the fair usage policy was
> thought of, bloody disgrace. Looking for a good reliable service with
> no limits ever, cant get cable in my area, anyone???
>
> Thanks
> Chris

Zen

On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 09:34:00 +0000, Bobby Bob wrote:

> Can anyone recommend a decent supplier i am a heavy user so want unlimited
> downloads, no fair usage policy crap, i am with tiscali and they are
> throttling my account all the time even though its supposedly unlimited and
> was started before the fair usage policy was thought of, bloody disgrace.
> Looking for a good reliable service with no limits ever, cant get cable in
> my area, anyone???
>
> Thanks
> Chris

Get an ADSL router and go with AOL.

Dave

Bobby Bob <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Can anyone recommend a decent supplier i am a heavy user so want unlimited
> downloads, no fair usage policy crap, i am with tiscali and they are
> throttling my account all the time even though its supposedly unlimited and
> was started before the fair usage policy was thought of, bloody disgrace.
> Looking for a good reliable service with no limits ever, cant get cable in
> my area, anyone???

The basic problem is BT changed the charging scheme, introducing new
ones that make bandwidth from the user to the ISP MUCH more expensive.


Either the ISP has to charge all customers several pounds more than the
competition (and much higher for >512K), go LLU only (and limit to a few
exchanges) or bear the loss of customers who may be using several
hundred GB of traffic a month.

A 1Mb user maxing out their link could easily cost the ISP well over a
couple of hundred pounds a month (as a proportion of the total pipe
cost).
And with the ISPs recieving maybe 7 pounds more than the cost they pay BT
per user, and having to pay salaries, ... out of that 7 pounds, unless
they are willing to subsidise from other buisnesses, high users are kind
of a problem.

On 25 Jan 2006 00:11:21 GMT, Ian Stirling <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>The basic problem is BT changed the charging scheme, introducing new
>ones that make bandwidth from the user to the ISP MUCH more expensive.

the other side of the same coin is that they drastically cut the price
of end user links especially the higher speeds, so instead of
£38/month for a 2M end user connection its about £8.

Nobody was forced to change to capacity based charging, but without it
you wouldn't have 2M ADSL for less than £50/month.

Phil
--
http://www.notspot.info/ - if you can't get the Broadband you want.

Phil Thompson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 25 Jan 2006 00:11:21 GMT, Ian Stirling <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>The basic problem is BT changed the charging scheme, introducing new
>>ones that make bandwidth from the user to the ISP MUCH more expensive.
>
> the other side of the same coin is that they drastically cut the price
> of end user links especially the higher speeds, so instead of
> ?38/month for a 2M end user connection its about ?8.
>
> Nobody was forced to change to capacity based charging, but without it
> you wouldn't have 2M ADSL for less than ?50/month.

Effectively they were.

The ISP cannot mix both charging schemes, it has to pick one or the
other.

The cynical might suggest that BT looked at a graph of bandwidth usage
per unit time, and decided to take a short term loss, in order to rake
in more and more cash as bandwidth usage goes up.

On 25 Jan 2006 11:01:32 GMT, Ian Stirling <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Effectively they were.
>The ISP cannot mix both charging schemes, it has to pick one or the
>other.

but that still doesn't force them to change, its their choice.

The reality is that Standard charging was uncompetitive for the higher
speed end user services, so most ISPs moved over fairly quickly.

Phil
--
http://www.notspot.info/ - if you can't get the Broadband you want.

Phil Thompson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 25 Jan 2006 11:01:32 GMT, Ian Stirling <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>Effectively they were.
>>The ISP cannot mix both charging schemes, it has to pick one or the
>>other.
>
> but that still doesn't force them to change, its their choice.

True, but if you were in the ISP buisness, with say 500K customers, and
face being unable to competitively offer speeds >512K, you're kind of
stuffed if you diddn't.


The only possible way round this would be to setup a seperate (from the
point of view of BT, I don't know how seperate it'd have to be in
reality) buisness operation to offer uncapped services.

> The reality is that Standard charging was uncompetitive for the higher
> speed end user services, so most ISPs moved over fairly quickly.
>
> Phil