anyone telkmointernet capped yet (DEC)

[Geek_wannabe]

Thanks, I thought that this pool thing meant something like that.

As for the 'power users' that abuse the system...well...maybe they shoudl stop....don't go above 10 gigs max and then just think how happy we all will be. You get to download a fair amount and we might not get capped.

 

[Nick333]

As for the 'power users' that abuse the system...well...maybe they shoudl stop....don't go above 10 gigs max and then just think how happy we all will be. You get to download a fair amount and we might not get capped.

The funny thing about a statement like this is: why 10 gig ?
Seeing as none of us know Telkoms contention ratios or the size of the supposed pools that theyve got us in, any amount you throw out is just arbitrary.

10 gigs obviously sounds good to you but to someone else it may sound pitifully small, and to another still, rediculously to much.

The fact is caps are an unfair way for Telkom(or any company anywhere) to make sure that they will have adequate bandwidth in the years to come with out having to invest in more. Anyone sitting here discussing how we should regulate ourselves within the boundries that the Almighty Telkom sets for us, is buying into the slave mentallity that Telkom has been spending so much time and money trying to instill in its customers .

Incedently until the UK went through their whole LLU debacle a couple of years ago BT was the British equivilant of what Telkom still is for us, with all the anti-competitive behaviour that goes along with it. Google "most expensive adsl " and youll still find articles about it.

People who use only 1.4 gig s a month are giving Telkom all the ammo they ll ever need against arguments for higher caps. You are slaves to Telkoms greed.

Im over 27 gigs for the month and still uncapped.

 

[sh1]

Like I said before I can see the point of both parties. Personally I don’t see anything wrong with capping, as long as the cap is closer to say 40GIG at an affordable price.
I only need about 15GIG myself at this time per month. I'm sure some need a 100+, but really if we come up with stuff like:

People who use only 1.4 gig s a month are giving Telkom all the ammo they ll ever need against arguments for higher caps.

who the hell is going to take an argument like this seriously. Really did you fell on your head coming up with something like that?

I’m over 27 gigs for the month and still uncapped...

Are you over 27 - congratulations?

 

[Nick333]

who the hell is going to take an argument like this seriously. Really did you fell on your head coming up with something like that?


Are you over 27 - congratulations?

Actually im a bit concerned that people dont take that argument seriously, so ill elaborate.

We've got this amazing technology that was designed to facilitate high bandwidth internet applications such as streaming audio and internet gaming etc., Yet 96%(according to Telkom) of the users of this technology use it for email and some light surfing.

To my mind these users are just ignorant, theyre like the little old lady who is sold a brand new pentium PC with a gig of ram and a fancy new graphics card who only uses it for typing and printing letters and playing sollitaire. In fact shes been told thats all she can use it for.

Then , after instilling that sort of mind set shes told "oh and dont print more than ten letters a month else it ll stop working."
The point is one way to sink Telkoms 'most users use less than 1.4gigs a month' argument, is to let people know what else they can use their broadband connections for.
Google earth for one thing is the most brilliant educational tool which is rendered practically useless by Telkoms capping system.

If everyone was using there 3 gigs a month Telkom could no longer claim that it was more than enough for the average user.

Oh and as for me falling on my head, I may have i dont recall. Perhaps Im suffering memory loss as a result. It hasnt seemed to have effected my abillity to argue a point to the extent that i would substitute a reasonable counter argument with a lame insult.

 

[Vrotappel]

So capping is becoming a world trend? Give us more examples than Telkom or BT.

 

[sh1]

So capping is becoming a world trend? Give us more examples than Telkom or BT.

Call it capping, call it user management. Use google and search for some. NTL for one.

 

[Antonio]

Nope I cant see it being that way.

What if 2 individuals in that pool use 200gigs (like I've seen on this forum) everyone will be capped? even if some only used a few megs?

the 100 people pool was a simplified example, but I'll use it again

there're 100 people in a pool and they are assigned 300 Gigs a month

Telkom monitors their usage and if it progresses normally during the month nobody gets capped, but (yet again simplified) if on the 10th of the month 180 Gigs have been used instead of the expected 100 Gigs the heavy users who are way over their 3Gigs individual limit get capped

 

[sh1]

Actually im a bit concerned that people dont take that argument seriously, so ill elaborate.

We've got this amazing technology that was designed to facilitate high bandwidth internet applications such as streaming audio and internet gaming etc., Yet 96%(according to Telkom) of the users of this technology use it for email and some light surfing.

To my mind these users are just ignorant, theyre like the little old lady who is sold a brand new pentium PC with a gig of ram and a fancy new graphics card who only uses it for typing and printing letters and playing sollitaire. In fact shes been told thats all she can use it for.

Then , after instilling that sort of mind set shes told "oh and dont print more than ten letters a month else it ll stop working."
The point is one way to sink Telkoms 'most users use less than 1.4gigs a month' argument, is to let people know what else they can use their broadband connections for.
Google earth for one thing is the most brilliant educational tool which is rendered practically useless by Telkoms capping system.

If everyone was using there 3 gigs a month Telkom could no longer claim that it was more than enough for the average user.

Oh and as for me falling on my head, I may have i dont recall. Perhaps Im suffering memory loss as a result. It hasnt seemed to have effected my abillity to argue a point to the extent that i would substitute a reasonable counter argument with a lame insult.

It's impossible to say anything useful to a stone. The argument about the old lady and her PC are so lame it's just not funny.
If you knew anything about managing Bandwidth worldwide, you should know that it is because of these 1.4 GIG users that some ISPs worldwide can offer 100 GIG or unlimited accounts. It's called user management. The ISP has a certain amount of bandwidth they would use - say eg. 40 GIG per user. User a uses only 3 GIG - now they can allow user b to use his 40 + 37 of user a’s - hence manage your users.

I myself use about 15 GIG a month but to blame the guys using less is not crazy – it’s plain stupid.

Some people have the ability to see a thing from both points – the others (seemingly like yourself) can only storm in and look at a thing from one angle – these are also the people that belongs to things like ‘youth leagues’, etc and go thoi-thoi on every occasion humanly possible, just so they can be seen as trying to make a point. These people usually do the case more harm as they come up with such silly ideas that they can’t ever be taken seriously.

 

[adsl3g]

Capping is not something new - it's becoming a world trend. I find nothing wrong with capping at all (as been done in the UK by BT - 40GB), what I do have a problem with is ridicules capping (as done by Telkom 3GB WTF).

But then BT didn’t cap from the beginning – they’ve just started – mostly because of “power users” or “abusers” – whatever you want to call them.
Off course you will get people that really need 150+ Gig per month for work, some play or what ever – but then you’ll always get the people that will download as much as they can just because they can – look up all kinds of **** and just download it for the sake of downloading.

Unfortunately it is this people that will be used as an example the next time ICASA have a sit down with Telkom. I can hear Telkom already – “we let them have it for a month and the fcukers went crazy”.

This debate has been done a million times on MYADSL, and I can agree with both sides. You’ll get the guys that really need 250 GIG a month for work and some play and then you’ll get the guys that always storms to the front with “I will download as much as I can because I paid for it” (These are normally the guys that pay R200 to go to a function and argue they must now eat all the “free” food on all the tables – “because I paid for it”).
It’s just a human norm – give some people the little pinkie and they will grab you fcuking arm.

Unfortunately whatever the end result – Telkom will keep screwing us for years to come, and some people will always give them an excuse to use when ICASA is trying to do something.

SH1 - well put - i agree with you totally

 

[nonick]

So I got the email from Telkom saying that I'm capped, but my speeds are fine, thank goodness that we're going on holz tomoz!, anyway, merry christmas and the lot to you okes

 

[rickswinley]

28gb on a 2gb account.....and it's free!!!!

I'm at 28gb on a free telkom account which I have for taking part in the mnet on demand trial. No cap in sight yet

 

[Nick333]

Some people have the ability to see a thing from both points – the others (seemingly like yourself) can only storm in and look at a thing from one angle – these are also the people that belongs to things like ‘youth leagues’, etc and go thoi-thoi on every occasion humanly possible, just so they can be seen as trying to make a point. These people usually do the case more harm as they come up with such silly ideas that they can’t ever be taken seriously.

Then of course there are some people exactly like yourself who, instead of actually arguing a point, throw insults around.

I have to wonder if you would be this aggressive and offensive if we were having this discussion face to face. I some how doubt it. I think youre probably the timid type in the real world.

You should work in PR for Telkom, you have that abillity to attack and label anyone who disagrees with you, that they've become so famous for.

 

[sh1]

Then of course there are some people exactly like yourself who, instead of actually arguing a point, throw insults around.

I have to wonder if you would be this aggressive and offensive if we were having this discussion face to face. I some how doubt it. I think youre probably the timid type in the real world.

You should work in PR for Telkom, you have that abillity to attack and label anyone who disagrees with you, that they've become so famous for.

Wow that was great - I shed a couple of tears and this will now change my life forever. And yes the discussion would have been the same. If you find THIS to be offensive - then really mate – grow up, and stop crying every time someone disagrees with you.
Don’t take every little disagreement that gets a little hot as such a huge insult – for pete sake, are you 10.

And as for Telkom’s PR section – they don’t attack or label people – mostly they just sit back and do nothing, as the rest of Telkom does.

Oh, and if I was a bit harsh - then sorry - I'm not here to hurt anyones feelings.

 

[jabulani]

The ISP has a certain amount of bandwidth they would use - say eg. 40 GIG per user.

As I understand things, this is not precisely correct. The tier 1 ISPs pay per line speed at their overseas connections, not per gig or terabyte. Capping is a cost control mechanism to limit the contention on these lines, so that less line speed is required. The peering-type connections they have in the foreign country cost the same as anyone else connecting there. The only additional cost is the cost of getting the data there and back via SAT-3, SAFE or satellite. And this does not appear to be as high as they ( Telkom especially ) like to make us think it is from what people here have calculated, except maybe for satellite. If this is correct, low caps, or even caps at all, are just super-profit generators for a company like Telkom.

I might be wrong here about some of the stuff, but I don't think so.

I do think that we are conditioned by Telkom propaganda in a massive way though, and agree with Nick333 about the little old lady. We get excited when ICASA talks of raising the cap, but in reality caps are just rubbish. You can do your "user management" still, just buy more line speed so that the little old ladies can do their 700 Mb, and the leeches can do their 100Gb. You can still make good profit without raping everybody.

Any rational replies - I see the flames are heating up around here sadly.

 

[sh1]

As I understand things, this is not precisely correct. The tier 1 ISPs pay per line speed at their overseas connections, not per gig or terabyte. Capping is a cost control mechanism to limit the contention on these lines, so that less line speed is required. The peering-type connections they have in the foreign country cost the same as anyone else connecting there. The only additional cost is the cost of getting the data there and back via SAT-3, SAFE or satellite. And this does not appear to be as high as they ( Telkom especially ) like to make us think it is from what people here have calculated, except maybe for satellite. If this is correct, low caps, or even caps at all, are just super-profit generators for a company like Telkom.

I might be wrong here about some of the stuff, but I don't think so.

I do think that we are conditioned by Telkom propaganda in a massive way though, and agree with Nick333 about the little old lady. We get excited when ICASA talks of raising the cap, but in reality caps are just rubbish. You can do your "user management" still, just buy more line speed so that the little old ladies can do their 700 Mb, and the leeches can do their 100Gb. You can still make good profit without raping everybody.

Any rational replies - I see the flames are heating up around here sadly.

I don’t think it's even worth going into this again. Agree; disagree as you wish, as long as it makes your life a bit happier - I'm happy.
All this has been explained 100s of times in this forum - so just read through all of them or google a couple of searches.

 

[jabulani]

Thanks for that well argued and rational response. I think your "agree, disagree" stance results from your having a different understanding of the real issues, and you clearly do not wish to enlighten us - I understand Nick333's frustration with your posts. And I certainly HAVE read many of the arguments here, and believe that there are many others who do not understand the basis of international traffic costing.

 

[sh1]

Thanks for that well argued and rational response. I think your "agree, disagree" stance results from your having a different understanding of the real issues, and you clearly do not wish to enlighten us - I understand Nick333's frustration with your posts. And I certainly HAVE read many of the arguments here, and believe that there are many others who do not understand the basis of international traffic costing.

I'm really happy for you understanding everything so clearly.
Since you are so enlightened and obviously believe that an ISP with 2000 users using 200GIG each per month will be as good of managing thier users as an ISP with 2000 users - 50% using 200 GIG and the other 1.4 GIG.

To explain something to you would be a total waste of time as you obviously also believe that ADSL prices are going to come down if everyone uses 200GIG per month and blame the guys using 1.4 - I mean are you fcuking crazy with an argument like this.

As for Telkom using the 1.4 GIG as a excuse, do you really want to tell me that you believe they’re not going to use the 250GIG heavy users as an excuse to cap/hardcap – they already used them as a excuse and will do it again, but since you obviously cant see it, it’s not really worth explaining anything to you until you do a bit of research yourself.

 

[jabulani]

To explain something to you would be a total waste of time
<snip some incorrect stuff>
I mean are you fcuking crazy with an argument like this.

Thanks man, I'm feeling real enlightened now.

You see I don't particularly want to be banned again, so suffice it to say you have driven me to agree with Nick333's opinion of you a few posts up.

 

[sh1]

Thanks man, I'm feeling real enlightened now.

You see I don't particularly want to be banned again, so suffice it to say you have driven me to agree with Nick333's opinion of you a few posts up.

Shot mate as long as you believe a user using 1.4 GIG costs an ISP the same as a user using 300 GIG - I can see how great your logic is.

 

[jabulani]

Shot mate as long as you believe a user using 1.4 GIG costs an ISP the same as a user using 300 GIG - I can see how great your logic is.

Oi there matey - don't attribute your muddled thinking to me here now. I might just take offence!