Broadband Report - What do you think?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gatecrasher

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2005
Messages
6,278
A draft report of "Broadband Ratings - The MyADSL guide to South African Broadband Services - March 2005" can be viewed on the following link:

http://home.telkomsa.net/rudolph/march_br.pdf

Basically, broadband services are rated as follows:

Service___________ price - speed - reliability - Support = Total%

ADSL HOME 384_______7 - 8 - 10 - 4 = 73%
ADSL HOME 512_______6 - 9 - 10 - 4 = 72%
ADSL HOME 512 U/Sh__3 - 10 - 10 - 4 = 62%
MY Wireless 256______7 - 4 - 7 - 6 = 62%
My Wireless 128______9 - 2 - 7 - 6 = 54%
Vodacom 3G_________8 - 3 - 9 - 8 = 52%
Iburst______________7 - 3 - 3 - 6 = 41%

The Iburst verdict: Stay away until the service improves.
Pros: None.
Cons: Poor reliability, Speed and Cap.

Is it fair comment? Worse price than Vodacom 3G? :D Slower than MW256? :D Totally unreliable, less than half the score of mywireless, despite virtually no downtime in over 3 months? :confused:

On the whole, my experience has been exceptionally good, and I cannot think of any other SA broadband service I'd rather be using, both on cost and performance grounds.

Personally, I think the writers of the report are living in some strange parallel universe and need to do a lot more research. What do other Ibursters think?
 
Last edited:

slimothy

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2005
Messages
4,808
wtf is that? you can't compare a service that hasn't launched with ones that have been launched for ages, those guys are idiots.
 

Gatecrasher

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2005
Messages
6,278
slimothy said:
those guys are idiots.
I wouldn't say that, but I do think they need to select a larger and more representative sample of users/testers. And perform some tests more appropriate for this platform and which suit local conditions. Yes, latency on Iburst is not its most stable feature, but to use a test that treats high latency as an error is inappropriate.

No way will you get 1mbit/s international on a single thread - on any platform. On multithreads, however, Iburst will beat the pants off every other local service. Most people use multithreaded download managers, so why shouldn't multithreaded downloads be a factor in the testing. And why no local bandwidth tests?

Sorry, but I think they may be doing themselves, WBS and potential broadband users a gross disservice if this the final form of their report.

They need to re-examine their results and find out why it differs so remarkably from the actual experiences of many Iburst users on this forum.
 
Last edited:

slimothy

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2005
Messages
4,808
Gatecrasher said:
No way will you get 1mbit/s international on a single thread - on any platform. On multithreads,
Thats crap, when I'm in SuSe linux I can get 1mbit off a single thread local and international, windows is a diff story though
 

Gatecrasher

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2005
Messages
6,278
According to the report Iburst download speed is +-120kbps or 15KB/s. So how does one explain the following quotes from this forum:

04-03-2005: Raithlin: downloading a 690MB ISO at an average of 125kB/sec.
05-03-2005: ghostim: i'm getting speeds up to 120 kbytes/sec. Downloaded a knoppix iso in 3 hours
05-03-2005: LandyMan: downloading a 6Mb file from Microsoft at 46KB/sec
06-03-2005: FISHborn: i've got... dl speeds of 120kb. (10mb Telkom test.file in 1:25. And a total dl and browsing of 210mb in 17min
06-03-2005: UnUnOctium: I get full signal when idling and my local and international DL speeds average at +-120 KB/s
08-03-2005: Daveogg: (To the Rodent) I get 116 KB/s so next time you are in a rush for that latest ISO give me a call and i will download it for you on my Iburst.
09-03-2005: crash: I'm downloading CentOS iso files from a UK server and it going at about 60 Kbytes / sec.
10-03-2005: Pan: I get... Your line speed is approximately 943.1 Kbps or 115.6 kBytes/sec
10-03-2005: Slimothy: its not all fun and games downloading at breakneck speeds, I fill up harddrives, run out of things to download etc etc.
12-03-2005: Arthur: I'm getting 800k regularly on the Telkom http speed test
14-03-2005 hentie: Flying at 919kbps as per telkom speed test.
14-03-2005: cAde: it realyu flies!!! , like 120KB/s , signal does do everything
15-03-2005: aborg: 90.4 KB/s local speedtest and 35 KB/s international single thread
15-03-2005: BeLgaRiOn: Been getting fairly constant downloading speeds of 120KB/s. Pretty good
15-03-2005: Swoosh: Happy chappy me!! My connection Just Do it!! like Nike!!
15-03-2005: DaveBuchanan1337: I regularly achieve 0.5mbit on a single threaded international download
17-03-2005 rudids: all my tests are now consistently above 1000 Kbps (international is slightly slower but not significantly), with no latency issues whatsoever:
17-03-2005: BillyBoy: Just downloaded at 87 KBytes/sec.
17-03-2005: Swoosh: doing 1028kb/s at the moment.
17-03-2005: limnos: Connected to Indaba Hotel (5.16km) and i get 900-1000KBp/s
17-03-2005: scavern: Plumstead tower is pretty good as well. I get speeds of up to 120KB/s average is about 90KB/s
17-03-2005: jpd: I have been using iBurst in Cape Town for 3 weeks now - connected to the Belville tower - speeds are averaging between 80 - 100 KB/s
17-03-2005: Vowthorn: getting speeds of about 100KB/s which um... makes sentech look stupid...

The fact of the matter is that Iburst is way faster than any other SA broadband service. Come on, rpm, you really need to find out what went wrong with your research, and fix it.

I saw a thread in the Sentech forum today. Those guys are telling each other not to complain because their horrible 4-6KB/s service is better than Iburst .... and wait for it.... its "official", because it's in your report !?! Yeah, right!
 

jpd

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
113
I agree 100% with you - I have used both ADSL and am also a 3G user and iBurst beats the pants off both of these. The authors of the report are misinformed and have clearly not actually done any substantial testing over a period of time. They also fail to mention how easy and quick it is to get iBurst up and running. No red tape, you can walk into the reseller's shop, pick up the equipment right there, plug it in and it works.

ADSL - if they service your area and assuming you don't have fibre running to your premises you are still looking at weeks before you get the line installed etc.

3G - sure you can walk into Vodacom SP store and sign your life away but then u have to wait hours before your service is activated.
 

JayT

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Messages
505
stop complaining and next time make sure you and all your friends take part in the tests. Also, make sure you do a few tests a day as once a day when you and everyone else isnt using the connection doesnt give accurate results.
 

stepper

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
1,765
Gatecrasher, wassup?
I understand what u r saying but then its our fault we iBursters we didn't heed (sp?) the call to testings that were announced by RPM. Maybe next time all of us (iBursters) who have the problem with the report we will do our best to 'show' how good is our iBurst.
Ok?
 

TheRoDent

Cool Ideas Rep
Company Rep
Joined
Aug 6, 2003
Messages
3,874
You do realize that the MyADSL report is based on am empirical electronic test, done across all the providers right?
 

bb_matt

Executive Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
5,616
I don't think they do Rodent.

In fact, I think they were totally unaware that rpm asked for people to run the bandwidth tests on which part of the report is based.

Yep, we were all asked to participate - did you slimothy or gatecrasher ?
 

rpm

Admin
Staff member
Joined
Jul 22, 2003
Messages
65,098
Hi Gatecrasher and others

I can appreciate that somebody with an iBurst connection that is working well does not find the broadband report information to be accurate. Unfortunately we do not have any other information apart from the testing results, and it will indeed be completely unjustified if we ever use information other than that. I am confident that the testing data is quite accurate (exactly the same methods were used for all services), and it is indeed the same methods etc. that placed iBurst on top of the wireless offerings the previous time. The previous time there were no complaints, but obviously the service has deteriorated since then. Many of the same testers, far worse results.

We will adapt the report to indicate that this is a soft-launch service etc., but the results will stay the same. If you have additional comments please let us know. Your input is of great value as usual.

Regards,

RPM
 

Gimli

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
355
I would like to see the demographics of the test sample, how many people participated and to which towers they connected to. People have a tendancy to participate if they are unhappy. So if all the unhappy ones on the effected tower participated.... you get a bad result. Next time as you all say we need to get a more representitive sample.

Once this report is released officially it will be damaging to iBurst (something they have to take blame for because there has been some issues). I have seen i.e. Telkom quoting the results of this report in the past in advertisements.
 

martin

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
3,405
I personally know two people who's experiences with iBurst very closely match the findings in the broadband report. I'm not at all surprised with the rating it received.
 

Vio

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2004
Messages
1,678
People have a tendancy to participate if they are unhappy.
Then there must just be many more unhappy ADSL/MyWireless users right? :p
 

slimothy

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2005
Messages
4,808
the problem is that the broadband report was done with software available for windows, so its not suprising that off single thread tests on windows it came up short, but I do think if software was provided for linux as well next time or there was a web test that stored the result data in a database (not hard at all to do) that iburst would come up significantly faster but definatly lose in the ping time arena.
 

TheRoDent

Cool Ideas Rep
Company Rep
Joined
Aug 6, 2003
Messages
3,874
Ahem. What OS do you think 80% of .za Internet users use? Besides, multithreaded downloads isn't something you should have to resort to in order to get decent performance.
 

slimothy

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2005
Messages
4,808
yes but linux performance is better, i mean theres no doubt, so the people that do use linux that would have evened the score out were not included, what about mac users too. You can't go ahead and say you're doing a broadband test but only on the largest demographic. All that coupled with the fact that the service hasn't launched and during the first week of march when the tests were going on we had basestation upgrades and stuff. You need a neutral test (web based), it needs to include only launched services. I hope theres another one in april.
 

bb_matt

Executive Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
5,616
It's a guide slimothy, "The MyADSL guide to South African broadband services"

rpm could leave iBurst out, but that wouldn't help people trying to decide what service is best for them.

Linux is not an issue here, as Rodent indicates.

We may as well ask people to indicate what firewall software they are using, or what browser they used for the web based tests in case they "effect the results" ;)
 

hArTh

Expert Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2004
Messages
1,114
Slimothy and gatecrasher

Did you take part in the tests? If not, quit your whining.

Your non-constructive whining and calling the people who run MyBroadband "idiots" makes YOU look like an idiot.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top