Are consumers getting a raw deal from their ISPs?—Posted on May 22, 2008
Lets face it, everyone likes getting a good deal and when it comes to internet services, there appears to be no shortage of ‘good deals’ on the market – at least on the surface. However, the way we are using broadband is changing as more and more people organise their work, home, life and leisure around online services.
The fact is, if you provide a service, people will want to use it. In the case of broadband they want to use it for data-rich video and audio applications – and why shouldn’t they! Some consumer ISPs, however, are throwing their toys out the pram as this does not fit with their “stack ‘em high, sell ‘em cheap” business model. They want to put as many customers as they can onto a network so they can sell their products cheap and undercut the opposition. This is all well and good as long as their users only want to check a bit of email or do a spot of online shopping; heaven forbid that consumers may actually want to use the Internet for something more, something that may actually require low contention and a bit of bandwidth.
So, this goes back to the age old saying - you get what you pay for. If you opt for a cheap Internet service then you need to be aware that you will be sharing your bandwidth with lots of other users. If you have a broadband connection of up to 8Mbps, then if you’re close to an exchange, theoretically that’s the download speed you’ll get. However, if all your neighbours are online at the same time playing World of Warcraft or downloading large video files then you’ll be lucky if you get 1Mbps, let alone eight!
Let’s face facts – it is the consumer ISPs’ business models that are fundamentally flawed. With strong competition between consumer ISPs all wanting to provide the cheapest broadband, the service customer’s get is going to be severely compromised. While you’re getting that cheap deal, you’ll be suffering from high contention, usually with a very restrictive fair usage policy slapped on for good measure – all working to limit the amount of content that you can download.
It is time for consumer ISPs to wake up to the reality of the modern Internet. Consumers need to be offered packages based on how they want to use it - if someone only requires basic surfing with a small amount of download capability, then offer them a basic package. If customers want to download or stream from iPlayer or similar high bandwidth services, then a different type of package is required.
Consumer ISPs need to stop focussing on offering the lowest prices to secure the most customers and need to adopt more of business ISP model, providing a scalable range of products and services that meet the needs of the customer depending on the usage that’s required. By making it clear to customers exactly what they will be receiving for their hard earned cash, ISPs can sell products that actually meet the customers needs. That’s not just a business model approach – it makes good business sense.
What about the upstream?—Posted on March 1, 2008
It is now pretty well known that when it comes to broadband speeds, what you buy is not necessarily what you get. This debate will no doubt rumble on until some sort of regulation is passed to make sure consumers know exactly what they are paying for, or what they are paying for and not getting. Still it is not altogether clear how the industry will do this.
In the midst of all the furore and indignation, it seems to me that a rather important element is being forgotten here. When a consumer or business buys a broadband package, at least they have some idea of what downstream speeds they are being promised. Sure they may not always hit these top speeds, but it is at least one way for users to compare broadband products on offer. So, here is my question, why can’t the same be said of upstream speeds?
If you look hard enough at the small print, somewhere it will tell you the upstream speeds you can expect – but they are not nearly as well publicised as the downstream speeds. In fact, no contest. This makes absolute sense for home users, who will download much more data than they will need to upload, but surely businesses should be taking more than a passing interest in their upstream speeds?
Most businesses only need sufficient download speeds to ensure that their email system works correctly, and that it doesn’t take up a lot of bandwidth. Upstream speeds are often far more important, especially if the business in question needs to send out large files on a regular basis – architects, media companies and surveyors for instance. They must ensure that their broadband can cope with sending larger files, not only so their colleagues and clients receive them promptly, but also so that it does not affect other, important applications.
If anything, upstream speeds are only going to increase in importance for businesses as new applications enter the mainstream - VoIP is a case in point. VoIP is equally reliant on upstream and downstream data flows. If a small business is using a highly contended public broadband connection while also using a large number of VoIP clients, the upstream can run red-hot and will potentially crash the system if there is not enough capacity available.
Upstream speeds are so important to many companies that installing SDSL broadband rather than ADSL, giving upstream speeds that match the downstream flow, seems like rather a good idea! This will give businesses the peace of mind that whatever their upstream needs, be it sending large files to clients, running VoIP or allowing remote access to their network for staff working from home, their needs will be met. So while the argument rages about download speeds, perhaps it is time for the industry, or customers, to start being a bit more vocal about this aspect of business connectivity.
Dan Cole, Head of Product Management
Should ISPs really be the Internet’s police force?—Posted on February 20, 2008
It is nice to remember those heady, early days of the Internet, when corporations, politicians and users alike waxed lyrical about the freest flow of information humankind has ever seen. Fast forward 17 years and we are faced with yet another call for ISPs to do more to stop file-sharing – this time with a somewhat reactionary proposal that illegal file-sharers be booted off the Internet by their service providers.
These calls are, not surprisingly, coming from those with the most to lose from a truly free Internet, with the music and film industries leading the assault. Logically it seems they may have right on their side – they own the IP rights for the tunes and movies so why should they be robbed of their profits?
But then why should it be the ISP’s job to keep its users in check? Should manufacturers of tape-decks and CD players be required to monitor their devices and report back to the government every time a copy is made? Should car manufacturers be made to remotely shut down any vehicle they produce once its driver exceeds the speed limit? Of course not – it is absurd, and so is the idea that ISPs have any businesses policing their users.
Quite frankly, as a musician and owner of copyright material myself I welcome the Internet and all it brings. Sure there's been a revolution and I'm struggling to sell as much vinyl as I once did (DJs having joined the laptop party recently). However the cost of entry into the market has dropped and I can now release more interesting and experimental material more easily.
As an artist I do like to see people buying my music. However, whilst music piracy may be theft, I am aware that the majority of people with copies are not ripping me off. They are still copies - this isn't theft that necessarily deprives me of something I would otherwise have had! Many people who copy this material are not going to simply buy it instead, even if piracy was difficult.
The music and film industries should worry less about enforcement and more about how they are going to take advantage of what is a much cheaper and more effective means of distribution. Things will change massively and profits may be insecure for a while, but ultimately the Internet provides a wealth of opportunities for artists and distribution companies – they just need to recapture some of the initial excitement of the Internet and worry less about maintaining the status quo.
Jim Credland, security consultant, THUS
Regulating an ultra-fast broadband network—Posted on November 28, 2007
The Broadband Stakeholder Group’s warning in April 2007, that the government had just two years to encourage private-sector investment to prevent the UK from falling behind the likes of the US, Germany and Japan, was a direct challenge to Ofcom. So when Ofcom published its September consultation on the matter, it made for interesting reading. Not only did it go a long way to open up the conversation as to how we go about doing this, it also injected some economic thinking into the debate. With an estimated price tag of £15bn to roll out ultra-fast broadband network across the UK, it’s important to get the timing right. Rolling out too late could hold back economic development, but rolling out too early before there is real demand would also be economically wasteful – and premature public subsidy could distort competition. These are important considerations and it was good to see them getting the kind of national attention they deserve.
Putting money and timing to one side however, there does need to be a degree of regulatory certainty to bring to life the broadband network that the UK will eventually need to stay competitive. Ofcom’s premise that our national infrastructure will need upgrading makes perfect sense. From Lerwick to Lewisham, businesses and homes the length and breadth of the country stand to benefit from such a development, so it is vital that we start talking about how to regulate this in the future.
I fully support the regulatory discourse and while the consultation itself does not provide regulatory certainty, it is a step in the right direction. However, we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that businesses can already get high-quality broadband services. THUS’s next-generation network has been operational since 1999 and businesses of all sizes, including the likes of GCap Media and GNER, are benefiting from faster and more efficient networking resources. On a personal level, it makes my working day a great deal more efficient and the ability to video-conference colleagues from home adds a nice human touch to my day! From a UK perspective, high-quality broadband is less of an issue for businesses since the main driver is likely to be entertainment services for the home.
The UK already has one of the highest penetrations of multi-channel digital TV and we also have high availability of first generation broadband and high levels of customer satisfaction. Demand for bandwidth intensive applications is growing and now is the time to start talking about practical ways to achieve this.
Richard Sweet - Director of Government Affairs