OFCOMS Report

[#1]

we didnt do to well
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-10760069
in 2009, he said, when actual speeds for broadband were 4.1mbps, the average that those services were being advertised for stood at 7.1Mbps. In 2010, when people are generally getting 5.2Mbps out of their broadband, ISPs are claiming they will support speeds up to 11.5Mbps.

below, my OFCOM/SamKnows results from April

[#2]

Interesting read Pierre-Pierre.

[#3]

Yeah I saw the same thing on the BBC site yesterday. I don't really see how ISPs can advertise a particular "average speed" when the real average speed is lower. It's all very well saying "up to 8 megs" (which is theoretically possible) but the average speed is the average speed - you can't lie about it.

[#4]

@pierre_pierre Looking at your graph the speeds are slightly better than mine - my best quiet time figure is 5.48Mbps.
We are both, however, above the overall test average for an up to 8Mbps connection.
I'm puzzled as to why BT had higher figures on the same infrastructure.

[#5]

Small sample size?
It's a shame we don't have any standard deviations to do some accurate analysis.

[#6]

Personally I don't think averages will be any less inaccurate. They depend too much on the distribution of their customers. I also suggest that ,where LLU providers, Sky especially, are available with packages subsidized from other sources,other ISP averages will be degraded.

[#7]

Can't see that degradation would be the case as there are 8 LLU providers on my exchange and I'm about 3km from that exchange with an above average figure.

[#8]

Folsk, we all know this is to do with line length and we know it, ADSL is affected by line length, it is a fact.
My connection is sold as 'upto 8Mb', but clearly the modem syncs at about 1.7Mb in reality. I understand the reasons for this, but most punters just dont and probably never will.
It is also more expensive for an ISP to provide higher speeds, due to infrastructure costs, so those on low sync speeds should pay less than those on higher sync speeds.
If most people had HTTP rate limited to 1Mb, but allowed 'other things' to go faster, most people would not greatly notice ... of course it would be jumped on by the media though, so no ISP is going to do it.

[#9]

It's not the fact that Average Joe doesn't understand what makes a line slow, it's the fact that ISP's have been advertising speeds faster than they actually are. They've even been embellishing the average speeds as being faster than they actually are.
I agree with your point about people on slower lines paying less. Personally, I think there should be a sliding scale, where by everyone pays a small fixed fee, then depending on what percentage of the 8mb you actually get, you pay a little more on top. So we could all pay £5 per month to cover basic costs, then on top of that, people with a 1mb line could pay an extra £1, whereas people who get the full 8mb might pay an extra £8.
The numbers might be different in reality, but you get the idea.

[#10]

From Plusnet's angle its actually cheaper to have a customer getting 10Mbps on 21CN that to have me on 20CN with a 6000kbps profile.
Over copper it's never going to be possible to provide the maximum end of the "up to" figures. The media knows this, or should, but it make good press every so often to complain.

[#11]

and PN for a long time have advertised up to 8M, but judging by some of the idiots we get on here, they dont understand what the word up to means, they also dont know about profiles, synch speed, and download speed bing different because of the line overheads

[#12]

After investigating a bit further, Ofcom used a fairly rigorous 2σ to report their variances so it seems sound.

[#13]

and for those who dont know it is explained here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation

[#14]

Quote from: nadger

Can't see that degradation would be the case ...

Hi! I did not mean actual performance, but that in an area with LLU, the averages reportable by non LLU ISPs might well be reduced (degraded) by the fact that those with most to gain by migrating to LLU. Then the BT based ISPs' customers could become biased toward low performing lines.

[#15]

Nice i'm allot faster than that