Broadband opinions re tiscali

Any other computer related talk.

Moderator: Operators

Post Reply
xyzzy
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 5:00 pm
Location: Kent

Broadband opinions re tiscali

Post by xyzzy »

So, my parents are finally getting broadband :D

Does anyone have any experience with tiscali as an ISP?
(They seem perfectly resonable from looking at their website.)

Also, can anyone recommend any specific router brands which are good, or which should be avoided?
elementbr
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 1:35 pm

Post by elementbr »

Oh, god no, Tiscali are to be avoided like the plague. Their customer service is awful (people say NTL are bad, which they haven't been with my experience, but Tiscali take the biscuit). There is a very unfair fair usage policy inplace which doesn't fully outline how much you can download before you get a warning, although it is guessed to be ~30gig/month. Get three warnings and you are forever put onto the badboy pipe, where your bandwidth is shared with all the other 'bad' people - i.e, your broadband reverts back to dailup speeds. There is a peaktime usage allowance in place, although again it has not be confirmed as to how much it is, most people estimate it to be 30-50meg/day from 6pm-11pm, which is pathetic. Out of these peak times download speeds are just crap, they traffic shape like a bitch making p2p a right bugger and they are just way over subscribed. Tiscali can fuck the fuck off, with all due respect.

Eclipse internet look quite good and I'm thinking of going with them when I move out.

As for routers I don't really know. We've got a well cheap dabs value one here that does the trick fine and can put up with our less than perfect phone wiring. Doesn't have QoS but I'm not too bothered about that.
User avatar
cocodude
Uber Forum Spammer
Posts: 629
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 5:29 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Post by cocodude »

You might want to see http://www.dslzoneuk.net/isp_ratings.php and see where Tiscali rates.

Cocodude
User avatar
echelon
Uber Forum Spammer
Posts: 895
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:22 pm

Post by echelon »

well I have to say I stand completely puzzled with the tiscali critic.. I have tiscali for our house here at uni. We have their unlimited package. I regularly torrent large linux isos or do complete backups of servers etc. We're talking many gigs a day sometimes. And yet I have not been warned once. So unless they have forgotten to warn me or I'm a super exception. Then I'm not sure where all that critic comes from. And for your parents. Simply for download they should be just fine. Especially since u could use some of their smaller less expensive packages with a download limit on them (since surfing isn't gonna eat away a lot of bandwidth)
xyzzy
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 5:00 pm
Location: Kent

Post by xyzzy »

Well thanks for your opinions, perhaps I am best off sticking with "you get what you pay for", and Tiscali does seem suspicously cheap.

And I'll be using it when I'm at home, also my brother still lives at home. Even so, I think a quota of 30GB per month is a reasonable amount to stick to, I do use p2p myself, but not excessively.
Zeus
Posts: 166
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 9:57 am
Location: Leamington Spa

Post by Zeus »

considering i download new tv shows on a daily basis more or less, and movies at least one or two a week, i'm still below the 40Gb download cap BT set on our connection.

Even with 12 TV shows worth downloading a week, thats just... 4-5Gb a week maximum for just p2p. Add movies, another few gigs, add youtube.com and thats another gig or two. Still under the download limit. And as far as i know, upload doesn't count.
Satan Commands Me
User avatar
echelon
Uber Forum Spammer
Posts: 895
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:22 pm

Post by echelon »

nope upload isn't supppose to count.. but then again here in the UK u can't really get many connections with a reasonable upoad anyway
ZeeC
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:45 pm

Post by ZeeC »

BT isn't bad, but the limits are HARD. You REALLY wanna go with a cable company, ADSL blows donkeys
The other penguins made me do it
xyzzy
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 5:00 pm
Location: Kent

Post by xyzzy »

A cable company?
I thought there was only the one, namely NTL, now that they've merged with Telewest. But it may be a good option considering our house is fairly near the edge of the town, I don't think we would get a particularly good ADSL connection. Although if you go with cable, you're then stuck with them, you can't switch providers so easily.
User avatar
echelon
Uber Forum Spammer
Posts: 895
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:22 pm

Post by echelon »

personally I'm not a supporter of cable companies.. for one because as u say u're kinda stuck with them. And seemingly they happen to offer the worse service/support mayb because of the first point. Then comes the added point that we don't have a tv or rather no tv license. We have been allowed to have a tv for console use only and therefore exempt from tv-license. So taking a cable company would add extra costs that we don't need without any added benefit.
Zeus
Posts: 166
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 9:57 am
Location: Leamington Spa

Post by Zeus »

Hard limits? i downloaded 40gb in the space of three days a few times thanks to firstchoice and torrent sites, and kept browsing/downloading/youtubing happily without being screwed.

Bt just flag users as high bandwith users and if the limit is constantly broken *only* then will they limit it. BT might cost a bit, but they're internet does work and their technical support exists
Satan Commands Me
firstchoice
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 8:52 pm

Post by firstchoice »

echelon wrote:Then comes the added point that we don't have a tv or rather no tv license. We have been allowed to have a tv for console use only and therefore exempt from tv-license. So taking a cable company would add extra costs that we don't need without any added benefit.
You don't need to subscribe to a TV or phone package to get NTL, but they give preferential rates if you do. I believe the contention on cable is much better than on ADSL, and connections stick at the speed they're supposed to go rather than being "rate adaptive" like ADSL now is. Also, despite its multi billion dollar debt, NTL/Telewest/Virgin is unlikely to go bust - unlike some smaller ADSL players have - leaving you with no service.

Yes their billing department is crap, and yes their tech support isn't great, but their connection speeds are better than anyone else's unless you live in London and very close to an unbundled exchange.
User avatar
echelon
Uber Forum Spammer
Posts: 895
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:22 pm

Post by echelon »

firstchoice wrote:
echelon wrote:Then comes the added point that we don't have a tv or rather no tv license. We have been allowed to have a tv for console use only and therefore exempt from tv-license. So taking a cable company would add extra costs that we don't need without any added benefit.
You don't need to subscribe to a TV or phone package to get NTL, but they give preferential rates if you do. I believe the contention on cable is much better than on ADSL, and connections stick at the speed they're supposed to go rather than being "rate adaptive" like ADSL now is. Also, despite its multi billion dollar debt, NTL/Telewest/Virgin is unlikely to go bust - unlike some smaller ADSL players have - leaving you with no service.

Yes their billing department is crap, and yes their tech support isn't great, but their connection speeds are better than anyone else's unless you live in London and very close to an unbundled exchange.
Hmmm never did realise the cable companies offered their internet without the tv included. They're still more expensive though and if you use one of the big ADSL providers you don't have the danger of them going bust either.
Post Reply