http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-10760069




A sherlock moment if there ever was one.

The big problem is, how will Ofcom going to remedy this problem?

It's interesting to hear this out of Ofcom now, after years of inaction. I can only assume they're trying to look useful, given that the Tories had pledged to scrap Ofcom...

I get 2mbps, which is a 6mbps package...

So the Germans are as bad as us then?

What is intertseting is the other graph in the article.



According to this article, Ofcom are having to distance themselves slightly from the results.

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/broadband/3 ... -than-adsl



There is a difference in what Virgin are doing and what the rest of the companies are doing. Virgin have their own network - it’s fibre based, and it is fast and reliable. There is none of this “distance from the exchange” nonsense that ADSL suffers from.

Wouldn't it be better if the other ISP's had an up to 5 Mbits so would be within 90% of it for most ISPs rather than nowhere near it, and simply mis-selling the service.

I'm getting about 9.5Mbps on a 20Mbps line, so I can understand the inaccuracy claim but, it's a pretty decent speed; and it was a free upgrade.

I know there are plenty of peeps out there getting 2Mbps on an 8Mbps line, which is piss-poor.

TBH Ofcom should be scrapped, they've been completely ineffectual for years; and their future should be determined based on that, not some last minute spit-shine effort to look good.

You must be on an “up to 20Mbps” service though despite getting less than 10. I’d be a bit hacked off if I was paying more for a speed that others were paying less for elsewhere.

I am getting 19.33 on a 20 Mbit connection. So cannot complain about that.

I'm not complaining either. I was paying for an upto 8meg connection and got a free upgrade to "upto" 20megs.

It's plenty fast enough for the four of us - I can watch iplayer whilst the missus is facebooking and the kids are playing online games.

I'm getting about 7megs on an 8meg connection because I live close enough to the exchange for the laws of physics to permit it, although speeds for low-priority data such as torrents drop to a 20th of that at peak times.

Given my high usage I think that's pretty reasonable for £16 a month, and it states quite clearly that it's a 20:1 contended product so the peak time reduced performance is right there written on the tin.

Of course I could buy a 1:1 uncontended product, but it would obviously be 20 times as expensive. No thank you!

It would be nice if I could get more internet for less money, but in no way have I been misled by bad advertising. We all want everything for free, but that's not how it works...

Yes, but you are relatively tech savvy, and your average man on the street probably wouldn't know what ' 20:1 contended product' actually means.

Yes but at peak hours I do other things so I free up the network for others. I simply browse during those hours.

You can't justify someone complaining about a product that is exactly as described, just because they're too ignorant to check what the product description means before they buy it.

That's like complaining about a public swimming pool or other any such facility being crowded at peak times, and then saying you didn't know that "public" meant it wasn't "private"...