cheap alternative to plusnet

I want to leave plusnet due to poor c/s. i pay 14.99 a month for 4gb peak
(4pm - midnight) unlimited off peak. I use on averege 2 gb peak 2gb off
peak.

Where shall i go ?

Tiscalli £14.99 2mb unlimited download but i will probably be LLU as my
exchange is LLU'd
F2surf lite 14.99 8mb 5gb + 99p per gb
Eclipse have various options which may suit but confused over their
"bandwich" alocation per tarrif. + i belive they LLU with tiscalli.


I would perfer not to be LLU'd as it restricts future options. I don't need
email as have own domain. quite like news group access. Cause everyone is so
help full !


Coment and advice very welcome.

Thanks adam




dylan30

On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 20:28:08 +0100, "dylan30" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I want to leave plusnet due to poor c/s. i pay 14.99 a month for 4gb peak
>(4pm - midnight) unlimited off peak. I use on averege 2 gb peak 2gb off
>peak.
>
>Where shall i go ?
>
>Tiscalli £14.99 2mb unlimited download but i will probably be LLU as my
>exchange is LLU'd
>F2surf lite 14.99 8mb 5gb + 99p per gb
>Eclipse have various options which may suit but confused over their
>"bandwich" alocation per tarrif. + i belive they LLU with tiscalli.
>

It is pretty pointless looking for another ISP at the same price
point.

If it is better now, the odds are it won't be in a few months.

If you want a better service, you will have to pay a bit more for it.

Not necessarily *much* more, but some more.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Wisdom is knowing what to do with what you know.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

On 15 Oct 2006, Alex Heney <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>If it is better now, the odds are it won't be in a few months.

Might be a more plausible statement if you actually put some of your
reasons for making this statement. Otherwise I suggest it be taken as
a useless comment. Why do I query this statement? It is clear that in
the eyes of the public, (many of whom have been made aware of packages
that offer phone calls and internet access, whether from some bigger
mobile networks like Orange, or firms like Carphone Warehouse) one
can "get internet access 'free'" and will likely consider moving to
one of these other companies.

BSkyB is another "major player" (even if the service could later be
problematic). Meanwhile BT is pushing a deal for 'mobile' access (the
wireless access minutes) with their Home Hub packages, so some other
portions of the market will be tempted by such combinations, leaving a
wide range of other (smaller) ISPs that will want to keep or attract
customers, without spending as much as these "big boys" on TV ads.

So is there any substance behind your suggestion that things will be
changing 'for the worse' in the next few months? I think not.


>If you want a better service, you will have to pay a bit more for it.
>Not necessarily *much* more, but some more.

I am paying 14.99, and whereas the majority of accounts offer fairly low
allowances for traffic, on Eclipse the 'peak hours' (6 hours each evening)
have a monthly allowance of 20 GB. As this is the lowest priority account
it might sometimes suffer slower speeds, however, I use streaming services
most afternoons and evenings and have no problems with the services I use
so it doesn't necessarily need one to spend more (indeed, I spend less).

Of course, I've only been using them for 6 months, and while some users
did complain about poor speeds, I've yet to see any similar problems from
the service I get, and I do push a good portion of most days (approx 4 GB
of traffic in around 18 hours over the period up to midday yesterday, for
example)...

I don't routinely run speed tests, but have no complaints (and for the
connection reliability, can only remember about 2 hours 'down time' one
Sunday a few weeks ago - but it also hit various other ISPs as well).

--
Change to DSL Max the way I did: switch ISP <http://www.dslmax.info/>

On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 23:10:39 +0100, NoNeedToKnow <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>On 15 Oct 2006, Alex Heney <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>If it is better now, the odds are it won't be in a few months.
>
>Might be a more plausible statement if you actually put some of your
>reasons for making this statement.

Experience mainly.

I have seen a number of low end ISPs recommended at various times. All
of them have gone downhill as their customer base has increased.

Largely, I believe, because they get more of the "you said unlimited
so I will max out my connection" type of customer.Whereas the business
model of ALL cheap providers is predicated on most customers not using
anywhere near the maximum allowed.

> Otherwise I suggest it be taken as
>a useless comment. Why do I query this statement? It is clear that in
>the eyes of the public, (many of whom have been made aware of packages
>that offer phone calls and internet access, whether from some bigger
>mobile networks like Orange, or firms like Carphone Warehouse) one
>can "get internet access 'free'" and will likely consider moving to
>one of these other companies.
>

Sorry, but the fact that people "expect" it does not mean it is
practical to give it. And that is a large part of the reason why the
cheap providers cannot continue to provide a good service.


>BSkyB is another "major player" (even if the service could later be
>problematic). Meanwhile BT is pushing a deal for 'mobile' access (the
>wireless access minutes) with their Home Hub packages, so some other
>portions of the market will be tempted by such combinations, leaving a
>wide range of other (smaller) ISPs that will want to keep or attract
>customers, without spending as much as these "big boys" on TV ads.
>

While BT (One of the cheap providers) are pushing their Home Hub
package, I can't recall seeing many other adverts for broadband ISPs
on TV in the last few months.


>So is there any substance behind your suggestion that things will be
>changing 'for the worse' in the next few months? I think not.
>

No, but you seem to think that "customers want free" means that free
(or very low price) is commercially viable.

It is only commercially viable if you *severely* restrict the amount
of usage customers can make.


>
>>If you want a better service, you will have to pay a bit more for it.
>>Not necessarily *much* more, but some more.
>
>I am paying 14.99, and whereas the majority of accounts offer fairly low
>allowances for traffic, on Eclipse the 'peak hours' (6 hours each evening)
>have a monthly allowance of 20 GB. As this is the lowest priority account
>it might sometimes suffer slower speeds, however, I use streaming services
>most afternoons and evenings and have no problems with the services I use
>so it doesn't necessarily need one to spend more (indeed, I spend less).
>

That is now.

At any given time, you will find a number of ISPs offering a decent
service at the low end of the market.

But they will soon find, if they are offering more capacity than
others at the same price level, that they will get too many customers
using most of that capacity, and it will become unsustainable.

If you are willing to change ISP fairly often (probably at intervals
of between 6 months and two years), then you will be able to keep
getting a decent service for a while yet.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Shin: A device for finding furniture in the dark.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

agree with the guy who says if you dont raise your budget only expect the same.

companies like sky and talk talk arent selling a viable product sky eg. have set a budget to cover their expected losses over the next 2 years, they not going to keep it at a loss for a period much longer after that so will do something to raise revenue from those customers.

isps like plusnet are poor because they selling at a low price mass market a product at that price is generally ok for low users who just do web browsing and use email if you fit into that type of usage profile then a budget isp is fine.

aol allows unlimited and is reliable but clearly the pricing wasnt high enough to keep it long term as aol have just bitten someones hand off to take their customers.

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 00:21:49 +0100, Alex Heney <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>While BT (One of the cheap providers) are pushing their Home Hub
>package, I can't recall seeing many other adverts for broadband ISPs
>on TV in the last few months.
>

Sniggering birds, the tall one going for Tiscali, no?

--
brightside S9

On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 20:28:08 +0100, "dylan30" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I want to leave plusnet due to poor c/s. i pay 14.99 a month for 4gb peak
>(4pm - midnight) unlimited off peak. I use on averege 2 gb peak 2gb off
>peak.
>
>Where shall i go ?

AOL, obviously.
Support is more often than not abysmal, but the connection is solid
and unlimited.
Same price.
If you join with a MAC code you are not bound by the usual 12 months
contract.
If an existing AOL member recommends you, you both get 25 quid gift.

HIH

L

PS Caveat, no usenet on AOL. Get it from (say) claranet
PPS I do have a couple of AOL disks for the 25 pound offer, if you
want one
PPPS and NO, you don't need to use their software, once you have
joined.

[L.]

On 16 Oct 2006, brightside@replyto_addy_is_not.invalid wrote:

>Sniggering birds, the tall one going for Tiscali, no?

Watch little TV anyway, but Toucan "sponsored" some series of TV shows
on one commercial channel for months (years?) and I do not know if all
regions still show different adverts, but I think it's still the case.

On 16 Oct 2006, "[L.]" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>PS Caveat, no usenet on AOL. Get it from (say) claranet

Usenet is not meant to be supported on Evolution 1 or 2, works fine for me
(though longer retention is available for some groups on APN/Supernews).

For binary groups Astraweb may be a good deal, if using some ISP with
no news service "included" (or which doesn't offer binaries) as the
deal of 90 GB for US$25 is still on (no expiry time, and with the
current exchange rate, one could 'bank' a few hundred GB to last
the next few months/years :-) http://www.news.astraweb.com/

At US$6 /month one service offers 2 GB/day (usenet-access.com) and others
such as APN (forteinc.com) or newsgroup-binaries.com that charge $2.95 /
$2.50 for 7 GB / 5 GB a month, on the lowest tiers, if monthly fees are
deemed less of a risk (some hate to pay up-front for services).

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:41:15 +0100,
brightside@replyto_addy_is_not.invalid wrote:

>On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 00:21:49 +0100, Alex Heney <(E-Mail Removed)>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>While BT (One of the cheap providers) are pushing their Home Hub
>>package, I can't recall seeing many other adverts for broadband ISPs
>>on TV in the last few months.
>>
>
>Sniggering birds, the tall one going for Tiscali, no?

No, I don't recall that one.

I don't really watch all that much TV, so there may have been others I
am not aware of.

But I think if any were being pushed heavily on HTV or S4C, I would
have seen them.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Oxymoron: Rap Music.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom