Could you give me an estimate on what speed to expect please..

[NewsreadeR]

PS - Judging by the stats of people who are now on fibre, their pings, their speed, and their line quality it is absolutely fabulous, and does away with all the gripes.

We can easily solve this issue, by all signing upto Sky Unlimited Fibre. Then we can all spend an extra £12.50 per month, for something that we are very unlikely to use to it's full potential anyway.

(Again I base that on my own views, as in very few people actually want such high speeds) As it costs more and does more than they actually need.

You wouldn't go to Morrisons, Tesco or Asda and spend £60 on a weeks shop and waste some, when you could go and spend £40 and eat everything. Argumentative I know, but in all reality, it's not the masses, it is the minority who need a perfect line. We all have that choice, (and the fibre choice as and when it is enabled at those people's exchange) and we will all sign upto the package that suits us best.

I do take onboard your POV though.

[NewsreadeR]

Here's some more proof that people do not care.

Sky Connect costs £17 per month, and according to our speedtester, that is the worst possible package that anyone could purchase. (out of over 500k results for all the ISPs listed)

Sky Everyday Lite (which is free) out performs a £17 pm product.

So logically, everyone on Sky Connect should all leave and go to a.n.other ISP as they may possibly get a better speed. (But only if BT are not in charge of the product, ie they sell it white label and the ISP rebadges it etc)

But going back to what I said before, if it does what people want, then those people are quite happy and they accept it. They are not adventurous enough to explore what is possible. Again no offence to anyone.

And every ISP will have this type of customer in the majority.

[snadge]

@ NR - the higher noise margin is what keeps line stable and free from errors, which you dont get from the lower sync rate when set by SKY cos both the low and high sync rate on same line have a 7db SNR Margin and therefore both have same level of protection and intolerance to noise which introduces errors - errors produced any other way can happen at any sync-rate and therefore being made 10-20% slower by force offers no extra protection against errors (that Iam aware of) - so the line is no more stable @ 16,000k / 7db than it is at 20,000k / 7db ...unless Iam wrong and it does somehow make it more stable, but as far as I can tell it does not.

I'm pretty sure someone will be along to point out HOW it makes it more stable

its irrespective of "who doesnt care" - only the people on this forum (and others) when they ask why their sync is lower on SKY after DLM 'care', I "dont care" about the 10,000 people who "dont care" lol.. (although I bet if you told them, a lot of them would care) - what your saying is because majority of SKY users will not know or care then its OK for SKY to reduce everyones connections by as much as 20%...?
- seems like a way to keep the speeds down a bit in an attempt to manage throughput on their networks...lol... although really I'm sure it isnt! - I would love to know why though! and if it IS for stability then how.

is that speed estimates for your line from 2 products? if so, reason for difference is probably due to ADSL vs ADSL2

[NewsreadeR]

what your saying is because majority of SKY users will not know or care then its OK for SKY to reduce everyones connections by as much as 20%...?

I am saying nothing of the sort.

You are quoting a handful of cases of people with issues, of which they are losing as much as 20% (in your examples)

Sky have nearly 4 million customers, we have 500k of speedtest results, and about 150 of them are mine. If you look at that logically also, then I would bet at least everyone has done more than one test. Therefore statistically at least approx 2.5 million customers of Sky are actually completely happy with their connection, or they haven't yet discovered this wonderful website.

I have tried all modes on my line, ADSl, ADSL2, ADSL2+ and G.DMT as I know people who work at Sky. My line produces tonnes of errors on certain modes and so I have to take the hit on losing 1 meg or so to stop the buildup of errors. I would much rather have a 7 meg line that works 24 hours a day, then an 8 meg line that works for 10 hours a day.

What I am saying, is that Sky are trying to give the best possible experience to all of their customers, and if that means lowering their sync speed so the internet works as intended, I cannot see how that could possibly be a bad thing.

4 million customers ringing every second of the day, complaining about poor browsing, lack of emails, lack of watching iPlayer etc just does not make sense.

The vast majority of people on any ISP are generally happy, or they just know no different.

[snadge]

i would agree if I could see it was for stability, but again, as far as I can see you dont have any extra protection from errors if the Noise Margin is the same ?? - Iam researching more into it now hehe

[ukdarrenfan]

I was syncing at 8188mb on O2 and that was with an SNR of 7db. I was on an up to 8mb connection and I rarely had dropouts. My SNR before we fitted the faceplate was about 9.4db and now it's 6.4. I thought it would have risen not dropped that much. I thought fitting the faceplate was to help increase my speed not make it 100 times worse.

[ukdarrenfan]

These were the router stats from this morning. It didn't do anything overnight by the looks of it. I'm really disappointed with that. I wish I'd never bothered with the faceplate now, at least I had a bit of noise margin to play with before.

System Up Time: 12:37:50

Port	Status	TxPkts	RxPkts	Collisions	Tx B/s	Rx B/s	Up Time
WAN	PPPoA	163322	196169	0	12	13	11:47:02
LAN	Up	24021	1018	0	265	6	12:37:50
WLAN	Up	274659	232279	0	8174	1268	12:37:33

ADSL Link	Downstream	Upstream
Connection Speed	5020 kbps	796 kbps
Line Attenuation	44.0 dB	25.3 dB
Noise Margin	7.1 dB	12.0 dB

[Scubbie]

Just to back up what both I and Ged have said, my statement about DLM being able to make the most of a line is based upon:

• what I have both been told by fellow members (particularly those who have or do work for Sky)
• what I have witnessed
• a good quality line

In most cases (well above 95%) people are happy with their results.

@lgbtconsortium: Your connection speed has risen compared to the previous post. You still have a little room for improvement too. Look at the upstream noise margin. DLM can reduce this and at the same time give more to the downstream connection.

[Isitme]

Could we go back to basics?
Do you have fixed phone extensions in your house? ie, boxes fixed to the wall with concealed wiring.
If so, when you remove the faceplate do these extensions still have dial tone?
Can you remove the faceplate and replace it with a plug in filter. What are the stats now?

I think the main problem with your line is that there is a lot of noise in the higher frequencies. This is shown by the high rise in your attenuation when you moved from G.DMT to ADSL2+. It is possible your connection would do much better if it was moved back to G.DMT. Your first stats, before DLM started showed you could expect 7-8Mb, with the present ones you will be lucky to get 5-6Mb.

[User05]

seems DLM always shortchanges new users by quite a bit when its finished

Not always the case. I've seen many lines profiled just fine.

DLM is primarily for stability. It doesn't just profile sync speeds, there are quite a few settings within each profile it has (INP and delays for instance). With the inevitable amount of end users who are going to have set-up/wiring issues within their premises, DLM will at least try and profile the service to keep it usable/stable until the underlying issue is resolved further down the line.