UK Users Not Getting The Speed They Pay For

I can't even find the tiers anymore - they now say xMbit with Powerboost.

Imagine not getting the speed youre paying for..

That never happenes, right?

With DSL it happens ALL the time; less so with cable. And that is because DSL often runs over chicken wire telephone lines run 70 yrs ago in many rural areas.

But... but... but it's a dedicated connection, not shared like cable! Oh well, I'm glad that ship has sailed for most users. 3Mb DSL really can't compete with 15+Mb cable, unless the DSL is giving you massively lower ping times (and you are doing stuff that requires said lower ping times).

My experiences are the opposite...I paid for 10 Mbps on cable and eternally pulled around 6-7...switched to DSL a couple of weeks ago and have had a rock solid 9.5 ever since. Lucky I guess!

Never had DSL myself, and im in the states, but I pay for 60meg down and 5 meg up, and I have ALWAYS got that or more. Even tho cable is a shared connection, it all depends on the network, bandwidth overhead, other users(node congestion), and line condition. My situation may be different than others, but when I was on DSL back when I lived at home(a few years ago) we paid for 3 mbps down, and we rarely got .5 mbps down.

It all depends on if the head end can handle that speed that they are selling. IF they dont have the overhead to support ALL their users at that speed, no one will get that speed.

For example:
If a rural ISP has 100 subscribers, and they are all on the same plan of
3 mbps down
512kbps up
(these speeds are still fairly common around where I live now)

This means that at ALL times, the ISP should have
300mbps(for the download speed)+ 50mbps(for the upload, this is used bandwidth too)= 350mbps

This is a generic example, but this is the point. If the GenericISP in this case didnt have 350mbps of bandwidth overhead, not all of the subscribers would see their full speeds(theoretically if they were all on at the same time).

All ISP's track when and how much their peak usage on the headend is, and adjust their own overhead to match. This means that they would not be physically able(in most cases) to support the bandwidth demands if ALL of the users(per node on cable systems, per headend on DSL) were to demand their full bandwidths at once. This is why most connections slow down during "peak" hours, because the headend(or node) does not have the bandwidth available to support what they sold.

Currently, most ISP's do this on purpose to NOT spend money, and in turn, make more money, cause you are paying for something you aren't getting.

Overselling cable nodes, and overselling DSL headends/zones is a common practice, and will not stop untill regulatory bodies take action and hold them accountable for their poor service, and false advertising. If you think its bad in the UK, over where I live, a DSL provider is selling a 40mbps DSL line, and the people who have bought into it that I know have only been able to get 5 to 6 mbps of that "up to" speed.

The sad part is that there is no recourse for subscribers in most places because there is NO competition, and therefore, since there is no one else to move to, complaints to the ISP goes un-resolved, and complaints to the BBB(in the USA) will go nowhere(personal experience behind that). Until providers are held responsible, they will keep crapping on their "customers" without caring, because there is nothing that can be done about it, and they(the providers) know it, and abuse it.

There's nothing wrong with overselling nodes. Like you said, ISPs track peak usage and purchase bandwidth accordingly. You'll almost never get a situation where everyone gets on at the same time. However the real problem is noncompetitive ISPs purchase insufficient bandwidth knowing full well they won't meet peak usage patterns. They don't care if their customers receive substandard service, because where else will they go to receive their "20mbps high-speed connection"?