Poor Slingshot Broadband Speeds

Forums › 2degrees (including Slingshot, Orcon, Flip, Stuff Fibre, MyRepublic, 2talk and Vocus) › Poor Slingshot Broadband Speeds

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | ... | 16

26 posts

Geek

#388918 6-Oct-2010 20:38

Hiya, I've used slingshot since the 256/256k plans and upgraded over the years, Initially, they were really good, no limiting on downloads, or youtube, was awesome

as I've upgraded over the years...my internet hasn't gotten much faster, It always did for a couple months after upgrading to a new plan, but quickly slowed back down to its original speed

Now days slingshots actively blocking torrent trackers, my wow connection has a 2k ping and is unplayable, and youtube is slow

I have 7 different adsl modem/routers here, all the stats show my line connection is good, it can handle 7mbps/3mbps

I also know this due to when I was with telecom, before I joined slingshot, I got max speed, I changed to slingshot during a few months when I had no job, and got stuck in its contract, and a new one every time I upgrade the plan for hopefully better speeds, as soon as this contract runs out, im changing ISP, my building is a block of apartments, and my next door neighbour gets great speeds with a diff ISP.

currently paying 85$ for 25$ worth of internet,

Expecting to get what your paying double for(we pay alot for the crap internet we get), when theres no reason for it, isn't being greedy, New Zealand's international link isn't even getting close to using its max bandwidth, ISP's are just not buying more bandwidth when they get more customers, so they can squeeze out more money

this is proven by the rivial company pacific fibre putting a new fibre optic link in for NZ/AUS, and the current links owning company stating in a press release that it won't make a difference to NZ internet, because NZ isn't currently using anywhere near all the bandwidth it could, its just being ripped off for more money by the isp's(not actual wording, look up pacific fibre 2013 on google, and southern cross, you should eventually find the article, I can't post links here yet as I'm new to these forums)

so yea, way to go slingshot, jumping on the rip of NZ band wagon.

scottr

262 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#388935 6-Oct-2010 21:13

It's not about utilisation, it's about cost. You might want to have a look at the cost of bandwidth on that cable. If another company can build a completely new cable for hundreds of millions of dollars and still compete, clearly there's a problem with what the current one is charging.

You really believe the only company providing the service when they say competition wouldn't make a difference?

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#388951 6-Oct-2010 21:31

Another point.

In the US a significant amount of traffic is local, naturally they tend to go to US sites. Same in Japan, Korea, China, Europe. Down Under we all go to international sites a huge amount. If we all used 90% NZ sites hosted in NZ, speeds would be higher, costs to provide a 10Gb 20Gb 50Gb plan would be lower. We have the speed here, those who downloaded Windows 7 beta and RC at your connect rate as I have done a few times (16Mbit here) will realise this. These 2.7Gb files were cached and therefore local, therefore fast. 21 minute download for 2.7Gb

If all US sites were in NZ, and they had to pay international rates and the 10000km latency then their speeds and costs would be like ours. Its all a numbers game and for us the numbers are often 000,s of km and international traffic costings

darkcon

26 posts

Geek

#388970 6-Oct-2010 21:52

tdgeek: Another point.

In the US a significant amount of traffic is local, naturally they tend to go to US sites. Same in Japan, Korea, China, Europe. Down Under we all go to international sites a huge amount. If we all used 90% NZ sites hosted in NZ, speeds would be higher, costs to provide a 10Gb 20Gb 50Gb plan would be lower. We have the speed here, those who downloaded Windows 7 beta and RC at your connect rate as I have done a few times (16Mbit here) will realise this. These 2.7Gb files were cached and therefore local, therefore fast. 21 minute download for 2.7Gb

If all US sites were in NZ, and they had to pay international rates and the 10000km latency then their speeds and costs would be like ours. Its all a numbers game and for us the numbers are often 000,s of km and international traffic costings

Aye all def true, but I'm not asking for US speeds for the overcharged prices we get, I'm simply asking for what they say we'd be getting for the price, my plan advertised max my line can handle, my line can handle a hell of alot more than they are providing it. thats a rip off, not even my http plain old fashioned port 80 downloads run anywhere close to the max my line can handle when on slingshot

Ragnor

8220 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#389250 7-Oct-2010 16:12

tdgeek: Another point.

In the US a significant amount of traffic is local, naturally they tend to go to US sites. Same in Japan, Korea, China, Europe. Down Under we all go to international sites a huge amount. If we all used 90% NZ sites hosted in NZ, speeds would be higher, costs to provide a 10Gb 20Gb 50Gb plan would be lower. We have the speed here, those who downloaded Windows 7 beta and RC at your connect rate as I have done a few times (16Mbit here) will realise this. These 2.7Gb files were cached and therefore local, therefore fast. 21 minute download for 2.7Gb

If all US sites were in NZ, and they had to pay international rates and the 10000km latency then their speeds and costs would be like ours. Its all a numbers game and for us the numbers are often 000,s of km and international traffic costings

While that's true adsl port cost and domestic backhaul and handover is also very expensive or we would see un metered national or at least plans with 100GB national and 20GB international

webwat

2036 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#389307 7-Oct-2010 19:24

We need real competition on the national backhaul, instead of commerce commission claiming there is competition when in reality BUBA customers cannot escape the telecom backhaul to the handover and for Telecom hosted stuff that isn't peered.

Time to find a new industry!

ekud

263 posts

Ultimate Geek

#389554 8-Oct-2010 13:16

"Pro plan"

Sign here

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

pogobull

20 posts

Geek

#389557 8-Oct-2010 13:23

bugger , sum one wishes they had stayed with telecom???????? all the other ISP are useing telecoms lines.
why change.
Link to this image to share your results

ekud

263 posts

Ultimate Geek

#389664 8-Oct-2010 18:14

pogobull: bugger , sum one wishes they had stayed with telecom???????? all the other ISP are useing telecoms lines.
why change.

I see your amazing speed and raise you this freshly taken speedtest

Sign here

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79279 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#389670 8-Oct-2010 18:30

Ok, please disregard the pictures - this is actually the TelstraClear 100 Mbps HFC trial (discussed here), but it's an example of a non-limiting ISP. It was actually very good on my previous 25 Mbps plan as well.

My point though is that any "unlimited" plan with "management" is not "unlimited" at all. From the start, when Telecom closed Big Time it was clear the era of "unlimited managed" was over. It was tried by WorldxChange, Telecom Go Large, Telecom Big Time. ISPs have to spend a lot of time and money to keep managed traffic within reasonable levels of usability. It just doesn't happen.

If I were not in a TelstraClear area I would never fall for an "unlimited" plan. There are some ISPs that offer metered plans with "pay what you use" offers - this is what people that want "unlimited" should be looking at.

ekud

263 posts

Ultimate Geek

#389682 8-Oct-2010 18:57

u has the real internetz!! *stares jelously as i hope my page reloads*

Sign here

wuzy

18 posts

Geek

#389689 8-Oct-2010 19:18

It's no good when people are going to blow that 120G cap in less than 14 days with that sort of speed.

raab

262 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#389691 8-Oct-2010 19:23

I'd be more impressed he was actually achieving 100mbit as opposed to just above half that.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79279 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#389694 8-Oct-2010 19:27

raab: I'd be more impressed he was actually achieving 100mbit as opposed to just above half that.

That's pretty much an impossibility... I was actually testing against a server other day and then was told the server couldn't even handle my connection speed.

After some level you have to rely on multiple download streams instead of single connections. Speedtests are flawed from the start, I believe.

pogobull

20 posts

Geek

#389736 8-Oct-2010 21:46

wow. yeah thats awesome

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | ... | 16