best ISP that offers uncapped/unthrottled p2p downloads?

[crackerchalk]

But if people start abusing the connections then they too will be forced to take measures just like the other ISP's.

There's just no real reason why most people need to constantly download such huge amounts of information continuously.

Yes i agree theres no reason
But Its about greed the human nature
I think someone is telling porkies 2000 dvds in a year
Guess you watch em 1 after another or trader killing the film industry LOL

Bandwidth within the boundaries of a particular provider is relatively cheap but once you start crossing those boundaries onto the wider internet it can be pretty expensive.

ISP's factor everything based on average usage. Agreed, there are going to be customers who use less and customers who use more but the average takes this into account. Problem is, at the moment the average requirement is rising much quicker than the present local infrastructure can cope with and VM's debt burden simply doesn't let them invest any faster.

Hang on
Is this why VM dont have a prob with newsgroups offering em free
But P2P would cost em loads
As for the idea of charging via bandwith
That would confuse the average joe like with mobile phones
Now back 2 VM i thought their structure was more up to date
Than the old trunklines of the PostOffice that BT use or am i wrong?
But i have to agree the credit crunch stops investment

 

[demonx]

Hang on
Is this why VM dont have a prob with newsgroups offering em free
But P2P would cost em loads
As for the idea of charging via bandwith
That would confuse the average joe like with mobile phones
Now back 2 VM i thought their structure was more up to date
Than the old trunklines of the PostOffice that BT use or am i wrong?
But i have to agree the credit crunch stops investment

VM do have a faster network but the actual backbone to the internet is supposedly limited, hence STM.

VM's network was never designed to cope with P2P but client to server applications.

But with P2P your uploading as well as downloading, and its the uploading thats slowing the network. When your uploading at max speed you will notice that your download speed gets crippled. This is a limitation of the docsis network.

 

[nozzer]

Hang on
Is this why VM dont have a prob with newsgroups offering em free
But P2P would cost em loads

Partly, yes !

VM offer an internal text newsgroup feed and an external binary feed via a dedicated pairing. They also offer various ftp mirrors (things like linux distro's etc). The reason is mostly to reduce bottlenecks and costs associated with VM's relatively narrow internet peering.

As for the idea of charging via bandwith
That would confuse the average joe like with mobile phones

Dont really see why. If the package was sold with a reasonable bandwidth (ie 100Gb per month say) and then costed at a cost per Gb afterwards its not too hard to understand. It really wouldn't affect your average user at all but would make the heavy abusers pause for thought.

Now back 2 VM i thought their structure was more up to date
Than the old trunklines of the PostOffice that BT use or am i wrong?
But i have to agree the credit crunch stops investment

The difference between BT and VM is basically only the last mile. VM connect you to box maybe a few hundred yards away with a length of co-ax whilst BT connect you to the exchange using some very cheap and nasty cable (wont even say copper - half of it is aluminium or even copper coated nylon).

Other than that data is pretty much handled the same on the fibre backbones. The BT network does have a much fatter basic backbone than the VM network though. If BT ever roll out there fibre-to-the-kirb or even fibre-to-the-door systems then its likely to make VM's system look positively antiquated.

 

[janobi]

The difference between BT and VM is basically only the last mile. VM connect you to box maybe a few hundred yards away with a length of co-ax whilst BT connect you to the exchange using some very cheap and nasty cable (wont even say copper - half of it is aluminium or even copper coated nylon).

Other than that data is pretty much handled the same on the fibre backbones. The BT network does have a much fatter basic backbone than the VM network though. If BT ever roll out there fibre-to-the-kirb or even fibre-to-the-door systems then its likely to make VM's system look positively antiquated.

True enough, but the BT system is shot. They dont have the monies to invest in the new fibre network. BT have just had to put the fibre network on the back burner, due to the credit crunch. Also there is rumours that BT will soon be nationalised again, due to its poor performances recently.

With regards to the VM network, I am pretty sure that 99% of it is fibre optic, which is completely different to BTs copper network. The problem BT has, is that the copper pairs were never designed for adsl, and frankly the pairs are crap, and a lot of them wont even support a dialup connection, nevermind an adsl connection. Also due to the condition of the cables, the SNR goes through the roof, if your more than like 3km from the exchange.

Best thing both companies can do, is to create a brand new fibre network from scratch, and then charge other ISPs for the right to pass traffic through it.

 

[nozzer]

With regards to the VM network, I am pretty sure that 99% of it is fibre optic, which is completely different to BTs copper network.

BT's main backbone is fibre, just like VM's. BT actually has far more bandwidth available than VM but also has a lot more usage.

Main physical difference is the last segment. BT's twisted pair vs VM's Co-ax.

 

[janobi]

But the pairs from the exchange to the house is the problem, they are what carries the speed, and further you are, the worse they work. VM dont have that issue, as its fibre optic all the way.

 

[nozzer]

But the pairs from the exchange to the house is the problem, they are what carries the speed, and further you are, the worse they work. VM dont have that issue, as its fibre optic all the way.

Agreed, except VM's fibre ends in the main cabinets and magically turns into coax, which is whats causing most of their problems. If they upgraded to true fibre-to-the-door then we'd all have 100Mbps up & down as a minimum !

BT could provide a much better service if they upgraded the twisted pair conductors (last mile) to something more able to handle the high frequencies needed for fast data transmission. Saying that though, ADSL & ADSL2 are marvels considering what they have to work with !

 

[janobi]

lines are like

BT could provide a much better service if they upgraded the twisted pair conductors (last mile) to something more able to handle the high frequencies needed for fast data transmission. Saying that though, ADSL & ADSL2 are marvels considering what they have to work with !

Yes mate, I think its called black fibre. We should be using that, over 100mbps speeds then.

As for BT mate, it would take more than 1 mile of fibre for there speeds to increase. There is way to much aliminium in the network for a start, and also most of the pairs are shot. As I said, lines are not suppose to take adsl, I used to be an engineer mate, so I know what the and how shit the cables are.

 

[Matt-LivUniSkydivers]

I am paying £15 a month for O2 20Mb Unlimited, and it is insanely fast! Pushing 17Mb most of the time, and that is when checking over WiFi on my Fiance's laptop. Not tried a speedtest on my hardwired machines, and I don't need to.
Regularly see 1.2Mb+ downloads via uTorrent etc.

I can't fault them at all. I cane the connection and haven't had any letters telling me to take it easy (As I have with other ISP's on 'Unlimited' deals).

As a comparison I was on Bulldog 16Mb last year, and never saw anything over 7Mb. The customer service was absolutely shocking, consistently over charging me, and the connection was lost on a number of occasions for 8+ hours whilst they were fixing 'faults'. Useless.

 

[gingchew]

On the discussion of large bandwidths being used, in excess of x-TB it is not exactly difficult for these sort of bandwidths to be achieved and as we bring in more data intensive internet applications we will be filling up bandwidth pipes more often. Affecting each other unless the main infrastructure of the country is improved with such things a FTB (fibre to box). For example here is a break down of my net usage :-

Basic Internet Browsing - 15GB
Gnutella Ultrapeer - 2-3GB
Gnutella 2 Hub - 5GB
Gnutella Downloads - 60GB
Edonkey Traffic - 40GB
Torrent Downloads - 700GB
Iplayer - 90GB

I am aware that i am a rare extremely heavy user but my point stands. And before i get critised i have a special Virgin media line installed 2x 50MB Links into speciliased router. Therefore stopping my connection affecting anyone in the local area (as it runs on seperate circuitry in the box). Most of the bandwidth is not to "rip off" industry's but to keep sharing networks alive and operating well with out large scale Shares. Typical Speeds would be crawl speed.

Oh and on a good Note Yep its not traffic shaped or port blocked. However if this sort of thing is bothering the people who do have extremely bad shaping. May i suggest using VPN secure tunneling which with the latest versions can stay undetected by the ISP and therefore boost your throttling speed up to 5x

Knew that was essay XD
Just making Point
x:BLOBBY:

 

[cdstack]

o2 never had a problem with capping always great service

 

[AnLyGi]

I turned my back on torrents a long time ago.

Usenet is far better. No uploading, no sharing and best of all no throttling. When it's SSl encrypted i get the full line speed all day long (8/900kb/s), when i use an unencrypted server it slows to about 80kb/s.

Get an astraweb subscription, about £16 for 180gb.

news.astraweb.com - Usenet News Server - $10/month

Then download either GrabIt or Newsbin Pro and a copy of quickpar.

Use newzleech to search for files and open the .NZB in GrabIt

Newzleech.com - Usenet Search

Go to the download folder and open the parfile in Quickpar, once its done extract the rar and enjoy.

Yes you are paying for it, but its worth it. I remember the old NTL days when you got free unrestricted usenet access, was brilliant.