Search results

"Without even a single rupee revenue"... mmmm... unless you've hacked our billing system and are thus confessing to a crime, how exactly could you possibly claim to know that? I'm happy to let you sit there in Hyderabad and make these accusations, it works out better for me :)

Depends on your area. There are lots of old connections still pending (some of them since 2011) but most of them are in areas we don't cover. In other areas there is a waiting list due to capacity issues but most of those on that list would be newer orders and people are warned about the same...

Your definition of throttling does not actually mean there is throttling. Run a glasnost test during peak hours and it will tell you. Run a traceroute to Youtube or some other website or the speedtest.net IP addresses and see if there's a jump in pings somewhere. Has it occurred to you that...

1.6-1.8mbyte/s sounds about right on a 15mbit/s plan. As for your torrents - maybe their torrent cache needs an upgrade, or maybe simply they need to upgrade capacity somewhere. If they were throttling, do you really think they would only throttle by <30%? 80-90% reduction in speed sounds more...

I stand corrected. My information on TDN must be a bit out of date. It used to be the case because the guys who started Tikona are all ex-Reliance, but I guess they stopped getting a good deal. Maybe RIL had something to do with it (needing all RCOMs bandwidth), I don't know. Eh...

The only "big" ISP I can think of that buys a significant amount of Reliance bandwidth is Tikona (off the top of my head), and it should also be noted that the FLAG system as a whole only has a very small amount of capacity, even compared to just one of the above mentioned cables (we're talking...

Because some people were arrested by the Egyptian coastguard and stuff http://gigaom.com/2013/03/28/egyptian-coastguard-arrests-divers-over-major-broadband-cable-cut/ Reliance wouldn't have been affected because they own the FLAG network which is a different set of cables, FALCON being the...

Not quite, but almost exclusively. As of late last year they had about 200 STMs from Tata. Not that it makes a difference - Airtel and all ISPs buying Airtel bandwidth would also have been affected because other than the (allegedly intentional) cut of SMW4, SEACOM (Tata) and IMEWE (Bharti)...

Maybe, but it's insignificant since Orlando is closer to India via Europe but only marginally so. If we assumed that ping works at the speed of light (it doesn't), calculating the shortest distance as the crow flies as being 14474km (+/- 50km) the best time you could hope for (in a straight...

Considering the US-based server in question is in Orlando, a ping time of 300 odd milliseconds should be expected. The cable cut would affect people on ISPs who source bandwidth from Airtel as well. Redundant cables aren't very useful when they're in maintenance mode.

Well... there are a lot of things that need to be done, of course. There's the people with vision & the people with money - pairing those two up would be an important step. There's the existing leadership which may require either a little changing or some arm-twisting to get things done -...

Sounds like your friend is on Virgin Media (which as mentioned, has just been sold to a big multinational conglomerate of ISPs). Most of Europe is excellent. The UK is probably one of the worst countries on the continent, in part because of BT, but now BT is doing a big push to get fibre closer...

...to whom are you referring? Disagree. India is trying to push improvements for it's tech infrastructure in a big way. Unfortunately, they're not allowing foreign companies (Alcatel, Motorola, Cisco, Juniper, Zhone, Ciena, Huawei, ZTE et al ad infinitum) to do it, instead pushing for only...

No, NIXI is only responsible for peering. ISPs still have to pull their own fibre in to a NIXI datacentre or lease it from someone else. The problem is that everyone who has domestic fibre thinks it's a golden cow that needs a helluvalot of milking, and they try to charge WAY more than it's...

I have to wonder therefore if they are in fact connecting at 1Gbit/s as they've told me and are in fact still using 100mbit/s uplinks only. If that's the case, yeah, I'd understand :) I've been testing a bunch of different providers, including Comcast. I still have Verizon FiOS, Google Fiber...

Slight disagreement there. WiMax being a shitty medium killed WiMax. Why do you think it never caught on pretty much anywhere in the world except India and a little bit of like, Africa? This I would agree a bit more on. Delivering 25mbit/s on existing networks is already possible and easily...

Of course, but this happens on *any* network, irrespective of what type of network it is. In the case of Youtube, it's probably a simple matter of capacity between Beam and Youtube. The only way they can really fix it is to obtain more capacity to Youtube, however that may be achieved...

This would be a false syllogism - you're focusing on the wrong part of the argument. Upgrading a piece of hardware which turns out to be faster due to the inherent and inevitible improvements in technology comes under my fixed costs as mentioned earlier, for which I am already charging you as...

Now why would you want to go and do a thing like that?

Maintaining ARPU = easy. The customer can't negotiate the price of your product and all customers pay the same amount of money according to their plan (don't get me started on discounts)... Maintaining profit = way not as easy. Variables like usage (in the case of your below unlimited plans)...