The problem is this. Your internet speed is slow so you contact your ISP.
They do the following:
- Check your line from their end, which is fine.
- Ask you to do an isolation test.
- Ask you to scan your computer for viruses.
- Ask you download the speed test file they point you at and all is fine.
It is very frustrating because you know their is nothing wrong with your connection, you suspect they have a network congestion issue but you have no way to prove it.
TFlow is a small program to collect data on your download speed over time. It's very easy to use just create a text file with one url per line and run:
TFlow.exe -l linkfile.txt -o outfile.csv
It generates a report it CSV format that you can load into your favourite spreadsheet program and produce graphs.
There are more advanced command line options available just run
TFlow.exe --help
This is a graph I generated using TFlow: http://www.kared.net/tpg-18-11-2010.png
Download: https://github.com/downloads/
Source: https://github.com/jkells/tflow
nice tool, although at the end of the day the ISP still has to accept the findings and agree to do something about it. given TPG oversell their network as a method of keeping their prices low, this will prove difficult.
nice tool, although at the end of the day the ISP still has to accept the findings and agree to do something about it.
I agree with you there 100%, packetstorm. Nice tool, which will serve to highlight the discrepancy between what is actually being offered for sale by ISPs, and what consumers (rightly or wrongly) expect to get for the money they're paying.
there's two statements there.
are ISPs failing to deliver the product they have sold? maybe.
are users expecting something other than what they've actually bought? quite likely.
what this argument boils down to is not that ISPs are failing to deliver what they should be, but whether what they do – and can – deliver is actually what people want. the problem has several facets; for starters, most people fail to define what they actually want ("I just want it to work" is not doing so), and then people fail to recognise that promises cost money if they are to be delivered.
at the moment the vast majority of the industry runs on a residential grade, comsumer market based, best effort, little or no guarantees, no SLA product. people don't understand that, and that's OK – people aren't used to buying a product in this way. it's a new experience.
what needs to happen is either that users get themselves educated about what they're actually buying, and how it works. at the same time, it would be great if the industry offered a range of more performance-guaranteed products, but I'm willing to bet that people won't pay for them. my webhost costs me $40 a year and I'm quite happy with their performance. I don't expect five nines for that sort of money, but the general public does of their internet connection, and all in an industry where rampant consumerism has driven the market to the lowest denominator like Dodo and TPG.
are users expecting something other than what they've actually bought? quite likely.
I think you have to take basic customer expectations into account. In my case I am paying for a broadband connection.
- I understand my connection is limited to 8MBit because of my distance to the exchange.
- I understand that my ISP has no control of conditions outside their network.
- I understand that a consumer grade connection has a higher contention ratio than a business grade connection and it may be a bit slower during peak times.
- I understand there is no SLA I don't mind if there are occasional outages.
That said there are certain expectations for a broadband connection. With an 8Mbit sync speed.
- I expect to be able to download files faster then 20kb/sec even during peak hours. If it slows down occasionally that's fine but every day from 5pm to midnight is not acceptable.
- I expect to be able to make voip calls and international skype calls, if there are occasional issues that's fine but not being able to make skype calls from 5pm to midnight every day is not.
- I should be able to watch youtube videos. If it bufferers once in a blue moon thats OK but not every time. This an 8Mbit connection for gods sake in 2010.
- My latency to the US should be about 300ms most of the time. 500ms is ok. 1000ms occasionally is ok but 1000ms to the US every night from 5pm to midnight is not.
I don't want to turn this thread into another TPG speed thread but I think my expectations are reasonable.
The point of this thread and the tool I have created is to provide a way for customers to measure those expectations.
Here's another 24 hours using TFlow
http://www.kared.net/tpg-19-11-2010.png
You can see right where they changed my line profile. Didn't realize how much difference it made.
are users expecting something other than what they've actually bought?
No.
Just a commitment to provide a useable minimum speed (110).
Which is NOT being maintained.
Stop the:-
market based, best effort,
Bullsh*t waffle, and meet your commitments.
Just a commitment to provide a useable minimum speed (110).
you have not bought such a product.
Bullsh*t waffle, and meet your commitments.
repeat – you have bought a best-effort, no-SLA product.
I think you have to take basic customer expectations into account. In my case I am paying for a broadband connection.
and my point is that people set their expectations based on... nothing other than their own expectations. what they need to do is set them based on the capabilities and guarantees of the product they have purchased.
all of your bullet points are a nice wish list, but that's all they are – a wish list. the product you have purchased don't come with any guarantee it can do that.
I don't want to turn this thread into another TPG speed thread but I think my expectations are reasonable.
And if your ISP simply cannot meet those expectations what is your expectation that they should do?
And if your ISP simply cannot meet those expectations what is your expectation that they should do?
If they are really unable to meet those expectations which are very reasonable then they should let me leave without penalty.
you have not bought such a product.
Disagree
repeat – you have bought a best-effort, no-SLA product.
Hence why my expectations are so reasonable. I am fine with service disruptions and slow speeds up to a point.
and my point is that people set their expectations based on... nothing other than their own expectations.
Not really true, if my ISP are selling an internet connection the internet should work.
If they were selling what i'm getting it would be called an Australian local internet connection where you can only access internet sites hosted in Australia.
all in an industry where rampant consumerism has driven the market to the lowest denominator like Dodo and TPG.
"rampant consumerism" is not wot's done it.
For years it seems the local market has been squeezed between the regulatory gaming being applied at the top, and the ability of a few weeds to sprout and temporarily flourish at the bottom.
In this situation the market might have benefitted from more consumerism (finding and supplying the needs of customers?) rather than less.
you have not bought such a product.
YOU do not know what I have bought.
I have NO problems, my clients do.
If you just posted what you DO know, your post count
would be very close to zero.
people set their expectations based on...
Based on the figures quoted by ISP's as what would be a reasonably
expected performance.
The figure of 110 is clearly stated as the minimum "expected" speed.
The fact that "small print" says "up to" is just a plain cop out.
This is used as a get out by ISP's and supported by pedantic twats with
little experience of reality.
repeat – you have bought a best-effort, no-SLA product.
Repeat.. you don't know what I've bought.....
Repeat.. if you are going to sell a product as "broadband" then it
should be that ....all the time... not just sometimes.
There
We
Are
Then.
The fact that "small print" says "up to" is just a plain cop out. This is used as a get out by ISP's and supported by pedantic twats with little experience of reality.
But do tell us what you really think! You are on a very good point here.
It seems that the promotion and marketing approach of some providers is based more on what the legalistas claim they can get away with, rather than any genuine attempt to inform customers about what is being offered.
Disagree
it doesn't matter whether you agree or not.
YOU do not know what I have bought.
yes I do, because I know what the industry sells.
The figure of 110 is clearly stated as the minimum "expected" speed.
no, it doesn't. that fact that you can't take that on board illustrates my point precisely about your lack of understanding.
if your connection exceeds that threshold, there is considered to be no fault.
you are assuming that the opposite exists, that below that point there is considered to be a fault. this is not the case. it's a trigger point for an investigation to determine why it is the case, not a guarantee that that level of performance can or will be guaranteed.
but go ahead and knock yourself out trying if you like. it's your head, and the brick wall is unlikely to be adversely affected either way.
I know what the industry sells.
Yes, I think all of us here know that.
You seem to be attempting to obfuscate one of the main issues, which is the use of marketing jargon to non-tech endusers. This can sometimes create an impression which differs considerably from what is then delivered.
It sometimes appears that the legalistas love writing reams of fine print, which is largely incomprehensible to the average person, and then saying things like "Well, we told you, right here in part 7, sub-clause 47e, at the bottom of page 14."
I am attempting to educate people. the reality of what they have purchased has not changed. their understanding of it needs to.
This can sometimes create an impression which differs considerably from what is then delivered.
I could not agree more, however the disparity is with the expectations of the purchaser – not the seller.
then saying things like "Well, we told you, right here in part 7, sub-clause 47e, at the bottom of page 14."
then you were told.
like many other people here, you would do well to understand the difference between comprehending the current state of affairs, and campaigning for something different. that's two very different discussions. the former is worth discussing here. the latter is a waste of bandwidth on Whirlpool.
I could not agree more, however the disparity is with the expectations of the purchaser – not the seller.
And what is it that the purchaser uses to form an impression of what they are being offered? Why, the promotional material produced by – ta-dah – the marketer.
then you were told.
Not in a form which is likely to be comprehensible to the average non-tech, non-legalista end user.
comprehending the current state of affairs... is worth discussing here
Why thank you, that's very gracious of you.
campaigning for something different... is a waste of bandwidth on Whirlpool.
And that's not at all gracious. Whether you like it or not, pointing out some current, and longstanding, problems is not "campaigning" for anything other than to try to clean up the few shonky activities involved which still happen in some areas.
And what is it that the purchaser uses to form an impression of what they are being offered? Why, the promotional material produced by – ta-dah – the marketer.
that's an argument based around product advertising, which is a separate argument. lobby the ACMA for improved truth in advertising, in the meantime the industry largely complies with the environment its given.
Not in a form which is likely to be comprehensible to the average non-tech, non-legalista end user.
the end user is purchasing a complex technical product. if they expect to distill a description of the technical performance of that product down to a couple of bullet points – which often forms the basis of their complaint – they are sadly mistaken.
you can't expect to pull the "it's all too technical for poor me" card when you purchase something, then form a complaint based on precisely the opposite argument later.
And that's not at all gracious. Whether you like it or not, pointing out some current, and longstanding, problems is not "campaigning" for anything other than to try to clean up the few shonky activities involved which still happen in some areas.
direct your complaints to the ACMA. whinging here doesn't form the basis of their policy.
I long ago abandoned grace. it's wasted on people without the ability to appreciate it, and lost on the people who chose to ignore it when it doesn't support their argument. I prefer to rely on fact, which is immutable regardless of preference, opinion, or all but the most zealatrous and one-eyed rabid belief. of which there a few adherents here. ;-)
the most zealatous and one-eyed rabid belief. of which there a few adherents here. ;-)
Oh packet, you shouldn't have! Fancy creating a whole new word just for me.
More seriously, you still are not adressing the issue, which is not whether most of the industry does the right thing most of the time. They certainly do.
The discussion, which is not "whinging", is about the practices followed in a few cases by some providers, and if you still don't think there are ever any problems, then you might follow your own advice and have a look at what has been going on in the ACMA, ACCC and TIO areas.