Telecom's conklin/mini dslams - false advertising?

Forums › New Zealand Broadband › Telecom's conklin/mini dslams - false advertising?

lonney

85 posts

Master Geek

#10288 14-Nov-2006 19:43

Just switched over to a FS/FS plan from Orcon.

What I find most amusing is Telecom advertising adsl as fast as your line supports.

Well, my line syncs up at 7616/768, and because I'm on a conklin/mini dslam, downloads max out at 240kb/s (tested using wget to grab a file from ftp.citylink.co.nz) due to the 2mbps backhaul.

If that isnt false advertising I dont know what is!

I can live with what amounts to a 2mbps downstream, but why should I have to pay for a FS/FS plan just to get a half decent upstream? The ridiculous FS/128 plan should be dumped for a more practical 2mbps/512kbps option (at a reasonable price) for users that cant get a *real* FS/FS because of Conklin's or the distance from the dslam/exchange.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#52318 14-Nov-2006 19:55

That same copper will deliver 24Mbps once ADSL2+ is rolled out - does that mean the current 7Mbps is false advertising because the line does allow faster speeds? :-)

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#52319 14-Nov-2006 19:57

YAWM !!!!!!!!!!

antoniosk

2358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#52322 14-Nov-2006 20:26

Dear Sir

This SS commodore will do 240km/h.

But you can't on NZ's public highways, where you will breach the laws of the country.

Dear Sir

Your line is at maximum speed - and it is by your stats.

But from there to anywhere useful, we don't guarentee that.

I am SO over this internet debate. I wish people would just accept that until Telecom announces it's going to upgrade it's entire backhaul transmission network, their broadband will be slow.

Is it false advertising? I think so - expectations are being set and clearly not being met. But it will be cheaper and easier for Telecom to give you a credit than upgrade the backhaul, only to be forced to let their competition use it.

________

Antoniosk

Fraktul

836 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#52338 14-Nov-2006 21:22

Actually I think he has a point. The speeds are advertised as peak speeds for up to whatever rate your line can obtain, but in this case there is no condition where the peak speed, being 7.6mbps in this case, could ever be obtained. Even under ideal conditions, conjunction of all the planets and you killing ever other Telecom user to ensure plenty of ATM backhaul it wont exceed 2mbps.

antoniosk:
Dear Sir

This SS commodore will do 240km/h.
But you can't on NZ's public highways, where you will breach the laws of the country.

No, this is rather more like the car manufacturer claiming your car can do up to 240km/h but then they selling you the car with only 1st gear so you cannot go over 60 without redline'ing and 80 without blowing up your engine.

grant_k

3539 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#52347 14-Nov-2006 21:38

antoniosk: But it will be cheaper and easier for Telecom to give you a credit than upgrade the backhaul, only to be forced to let their competition use it.

That's a lame excuse if ever I heard one.

It's not just the competitors' customers who are suffering due to lack of backhaul, it's Telecom's own customers as well.

lonney

85 posts

Master Geek

#52350 14-Nov-2006 21:41

antoniosk:
Dear Sir

This SS commodore will do 240km/h.

But you can't on NZ's public highways, where you will breach the laws of the country.

So running my dsl at 7616kbps is breaking the law? amusing analogy you have there.

antoniosk:
I am SO over this internet debate. I wish people would just accept that until Telecom announces it's going to upgrade it's entire backhaul transmission network, their broadband will be slow.

Debate? sounds like a moan to me. For one I was not whining about the backhaul so much, and I at least offered a constructive idea in my post. That being, a plan more realistic to what the network can offer a (large?) number of customers.

cokemaster

Exited
4929 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#52351 14-Nov-2006 21:46

I think he was referring to previous debates held here on geekzone about connection speeds and how evil Telecom is for not making their broadband 5c a TB.

webhosting

Loose lips may sink ships - Be smart - Don't post internal/commercially sensitive or confidential information!

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

sat

142 posts

Master Geek

#52352 14-Nov-2006 21:50

I have an idea for you all,

Why dont all you whingers get togther and start your own Telecommunications network and offer a service to nearly all address's in NZ and offer unconstrained Broadband 24/7 for $1 per month, and also maintain the network, employ staff, and make some money yourselves

The basic anwser is you cant , so stop complaining and put up with it, is is not going to change, Telecom does things when Telecom wants, and if you think unbundling will make a difference it wont, it is all about TAX(the money the govt makes from Telecom)

grant_k

3539 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#52354 14-Nov-2006 22:05

satellitesam: Telecom does things when Telecom wants, and if you think unbundling will make a difference it wont...

Wait until a few months have passed after ULL is implemented on April 1 next year, and then we'll see who is right about this.

The reality is that at present, no one can say, but we live in hope of a better future under the ULL regime. Time will tell...

Fraktul

836 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#52355 14-Nov-2006 22:42

Getting off topic...

cokemaster

Exited
4929 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#52356 14-Nov-2006 22:49

lonney:

Well, my line syncs up at 7616/768, and because I'm on a conklin/mini dslam, downloads max out at 240kb/s (tested using wget to grab a file from ftp.citylink.co.nz) due to the 2mbps backhaul.

If that isnt false advertising I dont know what is!

Were you not warned when signing up, that you were on a conklin and thus may not get the full connection speed?

webhosting

Loose lips may sink ships - Be smart - Don't post internal/commercially sensitive or confidential information!

lonney

85 posts

Master Geek

#52362 15-Nov-2006 05:30

Were you not warned when signing up, that you were on a conklin and thus may not get the full connection speed?

Nope, not at all.

This 2mbps bottle neck doesnt bother me so much, I wanted a decent upstream speed. The only way to get that now is to pay the premium for a FS/FS connection.

I was more interested in what people's thoughts were on Telecom offering a more realistic 2mbps/512kbps plan as a better alternative to FS/128 (which is a waste of time) for those on conklins or a bit further out from the dslam/exchange.

antoniosk

2358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#52366 15-Nov-2006 07:44

lonney:

Were you not warned when signing up, that you were on a conklin and thus may not get the full connection speed?

Nope, not at all.

This 2mbps bottle neck doesnt bother me so much, I wanted a decent upstream speed. The only way to get that now is to pay the premium for a FS/FS connection.

I was more interested in what people's thoughts were on Telecom offering a more realistic 2mbps/512kbps plan as a better alternative to FS/128 (which is a waste of time) for those on conklins or a bit further out from the dslam/exchance.

In a perverse way Telecom isn't misleading - the ads say they've taken the restraints off the lines meaning they will all run as fast as they possible can. Using my car analogy, it's like taking the governors off. The fact that in some places the connection to the internet is pretty slow doesn't mean it isn't running as fast as possible - just not fast full stop.

Some of the other ISP's considered offering 2048/512 - very easy to achieve with rate-shaping - but it doesn't look very attractive compared to advertising screaming 'full speed'. So everyone using Telecom's network is kinda forced by market pressure to offer similar products.

ADSL2+, if it ever goes out, will just exacerbate the speed problems.

________

Antoniosk

Bung

6489 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#52368 15-Nov-2006 08:35

antoniosk: In a perverse way Telecom isn't misleading

If the Conklins were ever rate limited it was perverse to make changes to let them run line rates higher than their bearers could support. The advertising in general was foolish to only concentrate on the copper line rate.

antoniosk: ADSL2+, if it ever goes out, will just exacerbate the speed problems.

Reportedly the ADSL2+ will be connected to a new backhaul network rather than tacked on to the existing one. Does that mean that relief for the existing network will only come as connections migrate to ADSL2+?

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79295 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#52374 15-Nov-2006 09:17

And at what rate migrations would occur? Being a new technology, with new features, higher speed, I'd image it will be priced accordingly, that is more expensive than the current offerings.

I can't imagine people moving in droves to ADSL2+ initially.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5