True Launches Super Fast Internet Service

[joncl]

there have been problems with the TIG over the last few days but seems back to normal at the moment

[Pib]

Agree...the ping test of 33ms round trip from Bangkok to LA is definitely a false result. This is probably reflecting just the ping between the residence and True's Bangkok server/international gateway and nothing beyond that.

Preaching to the choir I know, but the laws of physics/electronics are still bound by the speed of light. To the best of my knowledge we haven't mastered traveling faster than the speed of light yet. Let's see, per the ping test it was 8,300 miles to LA....or 16,600 miles round trip....speed of light in a vacuum travels at 186,000 miles/second....light traveling in a vacuum takes 89ms to travel 16,600 miles...but since internet connection is via fiber optics, microwaves, and copper the electrons/light are not traveling in vacuum and actually traveling slower/getting slowed down....lets say the internet connection is traveling via fiber optics all the way (which it really ain't)...fiber optics has a speed of propagation of approx 1.5 (i.e., transmits light/electrons slower than in a vacuum)..therefore 89ms times 1.5 is 133ms....now take in account the actual internet connection does not follow a straight line between Bangkok and LA but instead hops here, there and definitely not in a straight line and it would not surprise me if the round trip distance traveled is at least 20,000 miles....also add in the unknown added delay caused by the relay circuits/amplifiers/routers transmitting the signal along the way, how fast servers respond, and other misc delay factors, a real world ping between BKK and LA is in the 200 to 300ms range--at least until we figure out how make the speed of light go a lot faster.

[Pib]

there have been problems with the TIG over the last few days but seems back to normal at the moment

Another false ping result.

[jfchandler]

Yep, I sure will. Because I know True isn't gaming the DSL site speed test results... unlike with some other sites....

It's no big deal for me... Except, I object when people come on here and start making a bunch of false claims, and particularly without being transparent about what they're doing.

I notice you decided to make no mention of my notice in the file you posted of what looks like a reference to 50 concurrent connections... If you're doing that, more power to you... But at least be honest with the other readers here, so they'll know what they would have to do to get similar results.

You've also conveniently managed to avoid any explanation as to why, when I used some of the speed test sites you've been posting that are known by True, I consistently get a 10 mb speed measurement, but when I go to sites that True probably isn't caching or otherwise monkeying with, I and others get 1 mb or 2 mbs to the USA...

So at least have the courtesy to other readers here to be clear about what you're doing...because it's clearly not just turning on a PC and browsing the web at 15 mb speed to USA servers.

I'll try your specific speedtest. Perhaps then you will accept it???

[jfchandler]

That's part of the reason I know the DSL Reports speed test site is a reasonable accurate one...the facts you cite below...

When the couple other speed sites mentioned above show 33 and similar ms pings to the USA, clearly something is being gamed. On the other hand, the DSL Reports site likewise shows different ms results every time, and usually for USA tests in the 200 to 300 ms range... real world results...not faked ones.

And whereas the DSL Reports site gives different speed results every time you run the test (slow in the Thai evenings and better overnight, as you might expect) at different times of the day, the sites gamed by True tend to show consistently similar results... Like I get 10 mb pretty much every time on a supposed test to L.A., when I only have nominally an 8 mb True account... That just ain't happening in the real world.

And if I was getting 10 mb speed on my web browsing to sites in the USA, I'd sure as H notice it... And there isn't anything here that's responding that fast.

... a real world ping between BKK and LA is in the 200 to 300ms range--at least until we figure out how make the speed of light go a lot faster.

[Pib]

That's part of the reason I know the DSL Reports speed test site is a reasonable accurate one...the facts you cite below...

When the couple other speed sites mentioned above show 33 and similar ms pings to the USA, clearly something is being gamed. On the other hand, the DSL Reports site likewise shows different ms results every time, and usually for USA tests in the 200 to 300 ms range... real world results...not faked ones.

And whereas the DSL Reports site gives different speed results every time you run the test (slow in the Thai evenings and better overnight, as you might expect) at different times of the day, the sites gamed by True tend to show consistently similar results... Like I get 10 mb pretty much every time on a supposed test to L.A., when I only have nominally an 8 mb True account... That just ain't happening in the real world.

And if I was getting 10 mb speed on my web browsing to sites in the USA, I'd sure as H notice it... And there isn't anything here that's responding that fast.

... a real world ping between BKK and LA is in the 200 to 300ms range--at least until we figure out how make the speed of light go a lot faster.

Please note that the DSLReport speed tests report "latency" to server which is a "one way trip" to the server; ping is round trip travel. Therefore, the latency test will reflect approx half the value of a ping test.

[jfchandler]

It occurs to me that part of the confusion going on here is related to the difference between kiloBITS and megaBITS vs. kiloBYTES and megaBYTES... Bits and bytes, of course, are not the same and not interchangeable.

As this conversion site shows.... 1 kiloBYTE (kB) is equal to 8 kiloBITS (kb).

The U.S.-based DSL Reports site I've been referencing above measures its speed in KiloBYTES per second, with 1000 kiloBYTES equal to 1 megaBYTE.

Thus, my test from home this evening on that site produced a speed test to L.A. result of 1,329 kiloBYTES per second, which is the same as 10.3 megaBITs (Mb) per sec or 1.3 megaBYTES (MB) per second.

Indeed, the ThaiVisa speed test, while measuring kiloBITS per second in the main graphic, shows the comparable value for kiloBYTES in the text below...

On the other hand, the files we download are sized in kilobytes and megabytes in size, and our hard disks are measured in gigabytes, not bits.

And of course when I download a file in my web browser, the browser shows the download speed in kiloBYTES (kB) per second.

So, under my True 8 megaBITS per second account, that would be equal to rated download speeds of 1024 kilobytes or 1 megabyte (MB) per second.

[Pib]

The U.S.-based DSL Reports site I've been referencing above measures its speed in KiloBYTES per second, with 1000 kiloBYTES equal to 1 megaBYTE.

Thus, my test from home this evening on that site produced a speed test to L.A. result of 1,329 kiloBYTES per second, which is the same as 10.3 megaBITs (Mb) per sec or 1.3 megaBYTES (MB) per second.

S

The DSL Reports site reports in kiloBITS not kiloBYTES. 1329 Kbs is reported which is the same as 166KBs (as in Bytes). In these abbreviations, when the b is lower cases it means bits; when it upper case it means bytes.

When I run the DSL Reports test to LA on my TOT 4 Megabits/Second (Mbs) package I usually get around 1000Kbs (or 124KBs as in Bytes) which is consistent with other type speedtests.

If that 1000Kbs really meant KiloBytes/Second (which it don't...it means Kilobits/Seconds) that means I'm getting around 8000Kbits/seconds (or 8Mbs) speed to an international site on my 4Mbs package--NOT...I wish! (grin)

[hml367]

If you use the time elapsed and the downloaded file size to come up with the average download speed, it probably will not be the same every time.

Or maybe your isp is consistent?

You are a proponent of downloading and streaming, just time the files of known size. As smart as you seem to be, you should realize you will not convince all the experts on Thai Visa.

EDIT: I have been trying the speedtest site you suggest without much success so far. For myself, I use speed test specific sites to get an idea if a route is working at a specific time. When I actually download something sizeable I can tell if it is coming fast or not. Other than that, the speed test, as you have said, means nothing.

Just off hand, do you have any experience with the "3G internet" in Thailand? It's perplexing to me.... to say the least.

MSPain

I'm not sure how accurate or valuable that McAfee site is...

I ran that web page test 4 times just now, and every time it produced the exact same number, 500 kbps...

And here's another example of why I'm sure True is somehow gaming the SpeedTest results...

Both of the results below (BKK to LA) were done just now, with nothing else running/downloading, from my BKK desktop with True 8mb premium... Which one do you believe???

It's easy to be deluded by silly, meaningless test results.... 10 MB, 33 ms to LA from BKK??? Sure...

Instead of running the flashplayer or java speedtests try going to McAfee's speedtest which downloads a file and tells you how long it took to download the file. http://us.mcafee.com/root/speedometer/

With different browsers, operating systems, times of day, host server, and almost any other variable you add you will get different results. If someone happens to be streaming something or using their slingbox or similar device it will affect the speed, depending on how many people are doing that at the same time. Then you have commercial and governmenal access and demands on the internet spine coming into Thailand along with the particular route used.

MSPain

[jfchandler]

I do fairly so, re 3G... I don't use it for accessing the Net with my home PCs, where I have True DSL and a wifi router.

But I use 3G services to access the Net on my smart mobile phones... I have one, a Nokia, that runs on TOT/I-Mobile's 2100 Mhz 3G service, which is only available in the BKK area... And then I just lately got a WinMo mobile that can operate on True's 850 Mhz 3G service, as well as I-Mobile's 2100 Mhz band if it ever needed to.

The only thing I haven't done is used a 3G USB stick adapter to get Net access for a laptop and such....

Just off hand, do you have any experience with the "3G internet" in Thailand? It's perplexing to me.... to say the least.

[jfchandler]

If you use the time elapsed and the downloaded file size to come up with the average download speed, it probably will not be the same every time. Or maybe your isp is consistent?

Re the McAfee web site you had suggested above, I didn't see it displaying any time or file size info... That web based speed test just did a test behind the scene, and then popped up with a download speed number, 500 exactly every time I tried it... And no, my ISP isn't THAT constant...

You are a proponent of downloading and streaming, just time the files of known size.

I can't really reconcile your comment above... I am, maybe not a proponent, but certainly a user of streaming video. And by definition, streaming, unlike traditional download and saving, doesn't involve known file sizes that can be timed. Streaming just means your PC is receiving an ongoing, and potentially never ending, stream of data... So you can't measure a file size...

There are, however, programs like BitMeter, which I use, that will measure your PC's network actvity, including monitoring the rate/speed of total incoming download data as well as upload data. That program is nice in that you can set its monitoring display to read in Kbits, Kbytes, Mbits or Mbytes...as fits your needs/purpose.

The limitation with that, however, let's say you're monitoring the rate of a single incoming stream, is that BitMeter or others similar will tell you how fast that stream is arriving...i.e. measure that stream. (And with True for international feeds, that number always bounces up and down quite a bit...it's rarely steady). But that's not exactly the same as measuring your Net connection's total speed capacity, since the stream server you're measuring could well be sending a stream at a lower rate than the maximum your Net connection can handle...

For whatever it's worth though, I was thinking on the issue you raised... So last night, I did a test download of a large file, ITunes player software. And I monitored the download rate as shown on my PaleMoon/Firefox browser. And using that reading, it showed the file downloading at just about 1 MB per second, which is about the 8000 kilobits per second rate showing up in some of the speed test results I've posted. However, while I don't know for certain, I'd imagine that file wasn't arriving from the U.S., but rather, somewhere more local and thus more quickly arrived.

[jfchandler]

Pib, ya...I think you're right about that, I was in error in my prior post.... I think the distinction between Kbits and Kbytes was one that I had not really thought about before... But now, I sure have, and accessing that handy bit/byte online conversion utility makes life much easier...

So I did another round of speed tests last night and this morning using a variety of non-Thailand related measuring sites... And here's what those results show for my 8 mbits True premium connection.

To Los Angeles, usually the top rate of speed (after midnight BKK time or mornings here) I can get tops out at around 1800 kbits per second, which equates to about 220 kbytes per sec. That also equates to about 1.8 mbits on True's 8mbit service.

However, connecting to Los Angeles in the primetime evening hours here such as about 11 pm or earlier, those number not surprisingly drop down to the 500-600 kbits per second range. At 535kbits as shown below, that equates to 67 kbytes per sec. or .52 mbits per sec.

But I wanted to confirm those results elsewhere, not affiliated with Thailand, so I found another test site run by a big DSL provider in the L.A. area, DSL Extreme. And its measurement, and a few others I tried, confirmed those general results for primetime performance.

But then, of course, there's the silly SpeedTest site which, doing a measurement at the same time about 11:40 pm BKK time... shows a vastly different rate....which pretty clearly is not international but rather local...notwithstanding what it says....

However, as I mentioned above, when I did a test download last night of the ITunes player software from Apple and measured it on my browser's download window, it was coming in at about 220 kbytes or 1+megabytes per second, which is the 8000+ kbits/8 mbits rate. Not from the U.S.A., however, I think.

The DSL Reports site reports in kiloBITS not kiloBYTES. 1329 Kpbs is reported which is the same as 166KBs (as in Bytes). In these abbreviations, when the b is lower cases it means bits; when it upper case it means bytes.

When I run the DSL Reports test to LA on my TOT 4 Megabits/Second (Mbs) package I usually get around 1000Kbs (or 124KBs as in Bytes) which is consistent with other type speedtests.

If that 1000Kbs really meant KiloBytes/Second (which it don't...it means Kilobits/Seconds) that means I'm getting around 8000Kbits/seconds (or 8Mbs) speed to an international site on my 4Mbs package--NOT...I wish! (grin)

[Pib]

Yea, 8 bits equals 1 byte. It can get confusing sometimes. Lower case "b" as in Kb/s & Mb/s means bits and upper case B as in KB/s & MB/s means bytes when abbreviated properly. Most speed test type sites use the Mbs or Kbs to show results. I see a lot of posts on ThaiVisa where bits/bytes is mis-abbreviated and this can be misleading/confusing to others unless knowing it's a typo/what the person really meant to write. I know Beer Chang really affects my writing late at night (grin).

The Speedtest.net results sure seem to give high/false download speed readings and low/false ping readings for many True customers to various international sites. Maybe the international speed/ping results are really just a "proxy cache" result from True's Bangkok server/international gateway server. Then again, on the ping test, maybe True has figured out how to accelerate its international gateway connection speed to a value greatly exceeding the speed of light.

[jfchandler]

On that last point you mention, I was doing some online reading last night about speed tests in general, and as part of that, why some or many can be wildly inaccurate...

I didn't bookmark where I read it...but I remember, basically an explanation about how things can be configured so that a speed test will end up measuring just "the last mile" (local part) of the connection as opposed to the entire route....

Stanford Univ. also has their own speed test site, which presents stuff in terms that are a bit too technical for me... But in poking around there last night, I was reassured to see that the Stanford site in fact refers to the DSL Reports site as a recommended site and one where to find good info on tuning one's Net connection settings on your PC.

FYI, here's a couple additional tidbits...

What my ITunes file download showed via my browser at around 11 pm, 1+ megabyte per sec.

The more techie readings that the Stanford speed test site showed...noting both congestion and packet queuing.

And then some background on bits, bytes and how to calculate speeds...

[negreanu]

What my ITunes file download showed via my browser at around 11 pm, 1+ megabyte per sec.[/quote]

So let me get this straight. Your downloading at the correct speed from Apples West Coast servers data centre at the correct speed you should have for your particular True product. And your not happy because?????

What is it you do with your 8mb connection? I have the feeling you think that the higher speed connection you have the fast your web browsing experience. Actually the difference between a 4mb connection and a 8mb connection for normal web browsing is pretty much zero.

[jfchandler]

What makes you think that Apple, just because they're located on the West Coast, delivers all its file downloads worldwide from there. Large international companies like that keep their content based in many server locations for ease/speed of delivery and redundancy. I don't know where the file I received comes from... Do you???

However, I do know where I'm connecting to when I do a speed test via DSL Reports or DSL Extreme's speed test servers in Los Angeles, or from Stanford Univ. in the Bay Area, and get 1.8 mbits off hours and .5 to .6 mbits in prime time... not 8 megabits or 8000 kbits per sec.

Noticed, you've still yet to post anything of yours from either of those speed tests, as you had said you would yesterday.

So let me get this straight. Your downloading at the correct speed from Apples West Coast servers data centre at the correct speed you should have for your particular True product. And your not happy because?????

[hml367]

JFC

Just as an example, which happened to come up at this time so fits with the thread. I had to download a certain update this morning. It was a 7,206 KB (I hope others don't have to start a discussion the 'b's') and it downloaded with IE8 32-bit in 1 minute and 12 seconds. That gives me a speed at that time. That is with my AIS Super 3G connected with their WiFi Router by cable to my 64 bit Windows 7 computer.

In my experience the speeds vary in Thailand from one minute to the next, as apparently the isp's in general do.

As to your discussion of the KB and Kb.... I have read quite a bit in the past on this. As far as I know there still is no agreed upon way to use these terms. It does seem to me that most reputable companies are coming more in line with a standard usage. There are still those that will play the "b/B" 's .

Another misconception (apparently) in the past and possibly still is that people would infuse the "base 2" rules into their calculations and multiply or divide their numbers by 1024, which, as I understand the kilos and megas is incorrect.

From there moving back to the McAfee speedtest, if you take the file downloaded divided by the number of seconds it took, then multply by the appropriate number, you would end up with the average download speed for the duration of that download.

I forget if I posted this before, but I once got an indicated download speed of over 30 Mbps to Bangkok with my Super 3G using Google Chrome. Obviously impossible.... I think!

Good luck!

MSPain

[jfchandler]

I had to download a certain update this morning. It was a 7,206 KB (I hope others don't have to start a discussion the 'b's') and it downloaded with IE8 32-bit in 1 minute and 12 seconds.

So, by my calculation, that kilobytes file size equates to about 56.3 megabits... And then, if you divide that by your time of 72 seconds, it equates to a speed of .78 mbits per second... Just under 1 mbit per second... Sounds like an international connection.

[jfchandler]

Yes, as Pib pointed out earlier in this thread....

Lower case "b" as in Kb/s & Mb/s means bits and upper case B as in KB/s & MB/s means bytes when abbreviated properly.

Though not all users correctly use those distinctions. But as I had not clearly thought thru before, the values for bits are bytes are NOT interchangeable.... and of course represent very different values bits vs bytes.

It seems that the most commonly accepted way of measuring net speeds from ISPs is via Kbits or Mbits... True's packages reference Mbits and Kbits...

[hml367]

Hello, JFC.

I am sure it was. It was a zip file of an update from Roxio/Sonic.

If you take 7,378,436 bytes as indicated in My Computer, divide 7,378,436 by 72 (seconds) equals 100,083 bytes per second. Now if 1 byte equals 8 bits, then 8 times 100,083 equals 800,664 bits. So about point 8 Mbps. In line with your calculations. I have never had an isp which will actually download a file at the speeds indicated on any speed test. However, I believe you are right on the mark with your post alluding to where iTunes would download from. Especially since they just "opened" Thailand for some of their downloads. Microsoft did this some years ago and it was a big differece than downloading from USA.

Each isp in Thailand purchases a bandwidth amount from someone (MCOT eventually) and their total subscribers getting information in and out at a particular moment in time cannot exceed that bandwidth. That is simplified because most isp's have multiple international spines feeding them. The maps and particulars of that are available on line. Anyway, if an isp were to allow someone (like a news agency, a conference event in Thailand, or selling some of their bandwidth to China for the Olympics coverage) to use their connection do work with video,which is very bandwidth hungry, then they have used up some of the consumers' ability to use the total bandwidth at one time. So the isp's sell "maximum download/upload" speed packages and limit a user to those package limits. Again, this is simplified because ToT, for example, would not run a slower speed physical line into an area because one person bought the slower speed package. I have personal experience on that.

Many years ago I had iPSTAR satellite. I paid for a 256K connection and got that for some years. Then the company oversold their packages and cut the speed to each person.

Now another part of the equation is if someone, a government for instance, wanted to monitor internet traffic, then the dits and dots have to make some extra hops in the traceable route (tracert). If a point doing the monitoring is inundated with traffic, well, I think you know what that could do.

And then there is he wonderful MTU setup which has to match in many places. So if someone is doing a speed test, and they are receiving packets of, say, 1492 bits, and their computer is set to handle 1200 bits, then the computer has to take 2 packets to read the 1492, and one packet wastes almost 1000 bits. Again, personal experience. I believe this MTU has an effect on latency.

Now.... having typed all that, I have no idea what I am talking about and I am full of it! If you, Tom Cruise, or any of your IMF team should be caught... this post will self destruct!

MSPain

PS Keep posting... I enjoy your stuff.

I had to download a certain update this morning. It was a 7,206 KB (I hope others don't have to start a discussion the 'b's') and it downloaded with IE8 32-bit in 1 minute and 12 seconds.

So, by my calculation, that kilobytes file size equates to about 56.3 megabits... And then, if you divide that by your time of 72 seconds, it equates to a speed of .78 mbits per second... Just under 1 mbit per second... Sounds like an international connection.

[jfchandler]

So now that we've digressed a bit...meandering back to the main topic of the thread...

True's new 30 and 50 MegaBITs per sec packages aren't available at my home, which isn't a big condo. But even if they were, I and others would face a couple of choices...

1) are you willing to pay 3600 baht+ per month for True's 30 Mbit package or 5600 baht+ for month for their 50 Mbit package... I'm not sure I would, at those prices.

and...

2) if I was so inclined, how much better than the current .5 to 1.8 mbit per sec international connections that I'm getting now would those kinds of packages provide for true (meaning REAL) international connections such as to the USA.

Right now in the Thai primetime evening times, I get about 6-7% of my package's rated capacity -- 500-600 kbits per sec. vs an 8000 kbits (8 mbit) package -- for connections to the U.S.

I don't know if the same ratios would hold. But if they did, 6-7% of 30 to 50 mbits would be 1800-2100 kbits for the 30mbit package (about what I get now in off hours) and 3000 to 3500 kbits per second for the 50 mbit package.

But I can't recall seeing any/many user reviews of anyone who's got those new packages here, as yet.

For my purposes, if I could get a consistent 1 megabyte / 8192 kilobits / 8 megabits per second download speed for all my activities, including nighttime and to the U.S., I'd be pretty satisfied.

The question is, for international use, would True's new packages achieve that?

[Pib]

Surfing at 30-50 Mbs would be great! I'm sure all the website servers in Thailand (some of which are desktop computers on the second floor of the shophouse) will be able to pump out 50Mbs to the many visitors to their sites. Then, going internationally, I'm sure the international gateways servers used by Thai ISPs are going to give 50Mbs international speed to LA, London, Singapore, etc., although they only give a fraction of that now (in real world speed tests).

OK, I'm done being sarcastic. The 30-50Mbs service would be nice to have if low cost enough and there were services/products in Thailand which could make good use of it. And if you had the 30-50Mbs plan just think of your bragging rights on ThaiVisa. (grin)

[jfchandler]

Somewhat predictably, now that True has begun marketing their 30 and 50 Mbit services (only to very few specific condo buildings) in Bangkok, they appear to have reduced their overall pricing on their traditional DSL services.

Looking at their web site today, I see their 8 Mbit service, which used to be 1199 for regular and 1399 for premium, is now priced at 899 baht. And their 10 Mbit package is now priced at 1199 baht, etc etc...

And, at least browsing thru their web site, I can't seem to find any mention of what used to be the distinction between their regular and premium packages -- if any real distinction ever existed, who knows... But it did at least on paper... Now, I see no mention about premium anything, just regular packages.

The new pricing packages web site is here: http://www.trueonline.com/en/package.aspx

And here's a screen capture of their new plans and pricing:

[Pib]

Many of the major Thai ISPs seem to be in another "ADSL package-speedup-with-price-reduction" battle. TOT and 3BB are also lowing their package prices while offering an increase in speed. Now whether a person can take immediate advantage (with or without a one time package change fee of around 1000 Baht) of the price reduction and/or speed increase will depend on the current contract they are in and/or their location.

Right now, I'm seeing if I can change over to the new TOT JetPack 6Mb package which is now the same cost as the TOT 4Mb package I signed-up for less than 6 months ago; called late last week to see if I could change...it supposedly will depend on whether the lines to my moobaan can support 6Mb...TOT is suppose to check my line and get back to me...they said I should get their response within 7 days...I'm not holding my breath...but I will be calling back on day 8 if they don't get back with me. TOT JetPack promotion link at: http://www.tot.co.th/index.php?option=com_linkcontent&Itemid=88&categoryid=42&task=detail&detail_id=1068〈=en

Even the cell phone companies appear to be into another mini package/price battle for pre-paid and post-paid service. Could some true competition actually be kicking-in on ADSL and cell phone service. Wish there was more competition for TrueVisions/UBC.

One thing for sure though, whenever you must sign up for a certain contract period "never, ever" go beyond one year...and if they offer a shorter contract period you will probably be better off if you decide to change your package later on--like a few months later when they come out with their latest and greatest plans which are cheaper and faster.

[jfchandler]

Pib, you raised an interesting comment re the contract period and penalties issue above...

I've had True DSL at home ever since I moved to Thailand (never had any other home carrier here).

There may have been a contract period for the first year I signed up (can't recall back then, now). But ever since then, I have been free to quit any time I want, and to change or upgrade my service any time I want... and I've never had any kind of fee assessed by True DSL for doing so... I always assumed they're happy to keep me as a paying customer.

Is that NOT the case for the other major ISPs? Which ones do mandatory fixed term contracts and charge fees for changing your service with the same company for a different plan???

Now that you mention it, while not an ISP, I do seem to recall that True UBC charged me some small fee one time when I decided to downgrade my existing cable TV package to a less expensive one... But even with True UBC, at least for my service, I'm free to say "adios" to them any time I choose...

[Pib]

On my current TOT 12 month contract for the Simple Basic 4Mb/512Kb plan I could downspeed or upspeed within the first three months of the contract at no charge; but for months 9-12 there would be a 1000 baht package change fee. Now on the new TOT JetPack packages they seem to indicate in their contract docs they can/would waiver any fee if switching/upgrading to the JetPack plan, but I'm not 100% sure.

And usually to flat out cancel from a TOT contract it costs a 1000 baht fee, which I did almost two years ago after being on the TOT Goldcyber 2Mb plan for only 6 weeks on a 12 month contract. I switched to JINET for about 15 months before coming back to TOT. JINET gave great service/reliability/2Mb speed, but just became non-competitive package price-wise when TOT started coming out with their newer/faster plans. The TOT 4Mb package has been very reliable and gave me 3.5Mb IP speed on in-Thailand web sites and 1-2Mb IP speed on international web sites (sometimes a little over 3Mb).

It all depends on a person's DSL contract as to what may be charged to switch or cancel before the contract end. And I'm sure a lot depends on what other ISP's can possibly offer DSL service in your particular area/moobaan (competition) as to how lenient or unlenient your current ISP may be regarding a package change fee within the contract period. For me, my ISP choices are pretty much TOT or TOT or TOT or JINET or TOT or TOT or TOT. Summary: TOT rules in my area/moobaan.