Telstra never throttled DSL1???
in [Computers]
|
Prev: Windows 7
Next: How does Win7 update other software?
From: Marts on 27 Dec 2009 02:57 In another thread which has since been purged from my newsreader's message base Rod Speed claimed that I was lying when I said that Telstra used to limit its DSL1 speeds. Below is an article from the SMH which would seem to support what I was saying. http://www.smh.com.au/news/wireless--broadband/telstra-turns-on-high-speed-network/2008/02/06/1202233888690.html RS (now there's an appropriate set of initials for this guy) said that it was up to me to do the proving. While I argue that I don't have to do squat, I found this article while looking for something else, so I thought that I'd post it up. Now, if RS wants to argue the toss then I'll be glad to see where I'm wrong here. ie. that Telstra never throttled DSL1 from 8 mbit/sec down to a max of 1.5mbit/sec. Further, the standard for ADSL1 varies, but the minimum unthrottled upload speed is around 1 mbit. ADSL ANSI T1.413-1998 Issue 2 ADSL 8 Mbit/s 1.0 Mbit/s 1998 ITU G.992.1 ADSL (G.DMT) 12 Mbit/s 1.3 Mbit/s ITU G.992.1 Annex A ADSL over POTS 12 Mbit/s 1.3 Mbit/s ITU G.992.1 Annex B ADSL over ISDN 12 Mbit/s 1.8 Mbit/s 2005 ITU G.992.2 ADSL Lite (G.Lite) 1.5 Mbit/s 0.5 Mbit/s (Source: Wikipedia) But Telstra sees fit to limit this to a max of around 0.256 Mbit/s for 1.5 Mbit services and 0.384 Mbit/s for the 8 meg service.. There are technical reasons for limiting the upload speeds, mainly cross talk issues but this is usually for speeds max'ing out at 1.3Mbit, depending on the service/standard. Telstra, however, takes it a lot further. And for what reasons I know not why. Perhaps RS may know, but I doubt it.
From: annily on 27 Dec 2009 03:13 Marts wrote: > In another thread which has since been purged from my newsreader's message base > Rod Speed claimed that I was lying when I said that Telstra used to limit its > DSL1 speeds. > > Below is an article from the SMH which would seem to support what I was saying. > > http://www.smh.com.au/news/wireless--broadband/telstra-turns-on-high-speed-network/2008/02/06/1202233888690.html > > RS (now there's an appropriate set of initials for this guy) said that it was up > to me to do the proving. > > While I argue that I don't have to do squat, I found this article while looking > for something else, so I thought that I'd post it up. > > Now, if RS wants to argue the toss then I'll be glad to see where I'm wrong > here. ie. that Telstra never throttled DSL1 from 8 mbit/sec down to a max of > 1.5mbit/sec. > How does the article support that Telstra throttled DSL1? In fact it says: "In exchanges where no other competitors had installed equipment, Telstra throttled the speeds to ADSL1 - with maximum connection speeds of 8 megabits per second." So in effect, they throttled what should have been ADSL2+ speeds to ADSL1 8000 kbps. That seems to me to be quite different from your assertion. -- Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia, which may or may not influence my opinions.
From: Rod Speed on 27 Dec 2009 14:56 Marts wrote: > In another thread which has since been purged from my newsreader's message base How convenient. Even someone as stupid as you should be able to use groups.google to find it. http://groups.google.com/group/aus.computers/msg/8a4c59939f38950e?hl=en > Rod Speed claimed that I was lying when I > said that Telstra used to limit its DSL1 speeds. I never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like that. http://groups.google.com/group/aus.computers/msg/8a4c59939f38950e?hl=en I JUST said that you were lying when you claimed that the PRICE they were charging for DSL1 when it was still limited speed wise was nothing like 'charged an absolute fortune for it' $30 per month is nothing even remotely resembling an absolute fortune. > Below is an article from the SMH which would seem to support what I was saying. > http://www.smh.com.au/news/wireless--broadband/telstra-turns-on-high-speed-network/2008/02/06/1202233888690.html I never ever said that it wasnt initially capped speed wise. > RS (now there's an appropriate set of initials for this guy) > said that it was up to me to do the proving. On the PRICE, you silly little pathological liar. http://groups.google.com/group/aus.computers/msg/8a4c59939f38950e?hl=en > While I argue that I don't have to do squat, I found this article > while looking for something else, so I thought that I'd post it up. > Now, if RS wants to argue the toss then I'll be glad to see where I'm > wrong here. ie. that Telstra never throttled DSL1 from 8 mbit/sec > down to a max of 1.5mbit/sec. That clearly wasnt even being discussed, you silly little pathological liar. http://groups.google.com/group/aus.computers/msg/8a4c59939f38950e?hl=en > Further, the standard for ADSL1 varies, but the > minimum unthrottled upload speed is around 1 mbit. > ADSL ANSI T1.413-1998 Issue 2 ADSL 8 Mbit/s 1.0 Mbit/s 1998 > ITU G.992.1 ADSL (G.DMT) 12 Mbit/s 1.3 > Mbit/s > ITU G.992.1 Annex A ADSL over POTS 12 Mbit/s 1.3 Mbit/s > ITU G.992.1 Annex B ADSL over ISDN 12 Mbit/s 1.8 Mbit/s > 2005 > ITU G.992.2 ADSL Lite (G.Lite) 1.5 Mbit/s > 0.5 Mbit/s > (Source: Wikipedia) > But Telstra sees fit to limit this to a max of around 0.256 Mbit/s > for 1.5 Mbit services and 0.384 Mbit/s for the 8 meg service.. > There are technical reasons for limiting the upload speeds, mainly cross talk issues Have fun explaining how come some offered 512/512 etc. > but this is usually for speeds max'ing out at 1.3Mbit, depending on the service/standard. > Telstra, however, takes it a lot further. And for what reasons I know not why. They did it so everyone they decided could have DSL would be able to get the maximum speed Telstra offered. They did later offer DSL to some while not even offering 1500, due to technical limitations with those services. > Perhaps RS may know, but I doubt it. Wota terminal fuckwit.
From: anm on 28 Dec 2009 05:28 On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 06:56:25 +1100, Rod Speed wrote: > Marts wrote: >> In another thread which has since been purged from my newsreader's >> message base > > How convenient. Even someone as stupid as you should be able to use > groups.google to find it. > http://groups.google.com/group/aus.computers/msg/8a4c59939f38950e?hl=en > >> Rod Speed claimed that I was lying when I said that Telstra used to >> limit its DSL1 speeds. > > I never ever said anything even remotely resembling anything like that. > > http://groups.google.com/group/aus.computers/msg/8a4c59939f38950e?hl=en > > I JUST said that you were lying when you claimed that the PRICE they > were charging for DSL1 when it was still limited speed wise was nothing > like 'charged an absolute fortune for it' > > $30 per month is nothing even remotely resembling an absolute fortune. errr sorry Rod To some people, particularly retirees, $30 IS a lot!!
From: SG1 on 28 Dec 2009 06:39
"Dyna Soar" <dynasoar..REMOVE..THIS..(a)ozdebate.com> wrote in message news:7prggpFkapU1(a)mid.individual.net... > anm wrote: >> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 06:56:25 +1100, Rod Speed wrote: > >>> http://groups.google.com/group/aus.computers/msg/8a4c59939f38950e?hl=en > >>> I JUST said that you were lying when you claimed that the PRICE they >>> were charging for DSL1 when it was still limited speed wise was >>> nothing like 'charged an absolute fortune for it' > >>> $30 per month is nothing even remotely resembling an absolute >>> fortune. > >> errr >> sorry Rod >> To some people, particularly retirees, $30 IS a lot!! > > Talk about twisting what is said! > > I'm a retiree. I agree, $30 is a lot, but it isn't an "absolute fortune" > in the context used here. What did Helstra charge when they did the throttle? That is relevant to the arguement not what they charge now. > > -- > Dyna > > All rights reserved. All wrongs avenged. > |