KC prices go up for second time in a year:

[chriscoates81]

Its simple, Older packages allow users to download unlimited quantities of data, This is very obstructive to the network (i should know). And as a result Karoo have a very detrimental thing here and would like to get this problem resolved as soon as possible, The best way to do this is to make the new packages more appealing, And to overcharge on the old packages and make it abundantely clear to the old customers that they are going to have things negatively sent their way.

Old packages = unlimited download = strain on network core = cost/affect on stability of service to others = negative = cost increase to get rid.

let's just "do the math"...

From oldest package, to newest results given in TB/year.

Karoo Broadband 3000:
3456 kb/s max downstream, no peak time, no monthly limit
(3456 (kb / s)) * 365 day = 12.6879215 terabytes

Karoo Max (Option 4):
8128 kb/s max downstream, 6 hour peak time, 50GB monthly peak limit
(((8128 kb/s) * 18 hours) * 365) + ((50 GB) * 12) = 22.9660213 terabytes

Karoo Pro 2:
18000 kb/s max downstream, 16 hour peak time, 150GB monthly peak limit
(((18000 kb/s) * 8 hours) * 365) + ((150 GB) * 12) = 23.785454 terabytes

N.B. info taken from here http://www.karoo-user-group.co.uk/karoo_services/


I used to be on Max 3, and am now on Pro 2

I used to get ~800kB/s on Max 3, so assuming I was hammering my connection I'd be able to download 18.09TB over one year.
Now I'm on Pro 2, I max out at ~1.24MB/s, so under the same assumptions I'll be able to download 14.19TB over a year.

Really there's not much difference because the traffic shaping was (or at least seemed to be) a lot more stringent on the old Max packages, so you could rarely max it out over the whole 18 hours off peak. You'd get around 12 and then the connection would drop to ~25-50kB/s


I'm not a network engineer/manager so iunno how this is all managed, but I'm guessing they'll be wanting people off the old packages because they'll use different software, and for newer staff they'll need to teach them how to use three different systems instead of just the one..

There's nothing sinister about this at all.

But what do I know, eh...

What i find really funny is when people say 'its unlimited i dont want to change' then you find out they use less than 10gb a month . BTW thats not a dig at anyone on here, a couple of the guys i used to work with say it. Didn't the old packages get split between 16 houses or something so they would say you get 8 meg but only if your 15 neighbours arent online?

[buckr]

I have told Krapoo I will change to one of the new packages. I'll even pay a bit more a month for it. But as a long standing customer I do not want to, nor understand why i have to sign a new contract with them !
It's strange how since the announcement about the price increases speed complaints on several forums have multiplied.
My own service has dropped from 2.1meg-3.2meg to 0.3meg - 0.6meg throughput at peak times.
My line speeds are 18000down and 1320 up as we have fttb in my village.
Krapoo do not even seem to be responding to most of the complaints on thier own pages ?

[Djwindas]

who do you thinks paying for all these new cables. you the customers. lol. ill wait a few years untill you all paid for it then have my fiber. then they will offer a decent package.

[lubuntu]

Maybe this will push the prices up more - news from the Euro Commission:

It aims to get all European households on at least 30 megabits per second (Mbps) by 2020, with half the population enjoying more than 100Mbps, so as to make the continent more competitive and productive

Money is being thrown at broadband.

Will everyone in Hull get 30mb by 2020 by landline? 

[commandergc]

Will everyone in Hull get 30mb by 2020 by landline? 

Yes. KC should have at least FTTC and some parts should have FTTH by that deadline.

[MickyByte]

If taking into account the size of the project KC have to endure, I would imagine upgrading over 250,000 homes within Hull to be a bit of a complicated process especially if one these tasks involves FTTH. Whilst on this subject however I would also like to agree with DJWindas as it will be the consumer who pays for this transition from copper over to fiber (both internally/externally mind you) and not entirely KC themselves. Remember Kingston Communications is a reasonably size organization dealing within a market that is constantly evolving over time, due to this fact I suspect they sharn't be investing heavily within this project in order to cut back spending and see a faster profitable turn in once completed. Whilst this may be bad for us (the customer's) this will allow our local provider to put the money saved towards other project which hopefully will provide us a better service further in the future.

Edit: Or this could be the result of KCOMs departure with Kingston Communications where-in they did push towards them a tremendous amount of the debt.

[TJ]

I wouldn't worry about how much this costs as you won't be able to afford the electric to turn it on.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/oct/14/energy-firms-profits-rise-ofgem

[Djwindas]

ha ha thats why im going for solar panels soon and switching my car to lpg! lol