Business Day article

[buffalobill]

Article in Business Day today (26 July). So now we know that there are 2 000 (or perhaps close to 2 500?) subscribers which means that exactly 120 are abusers. I hope you grow hair on the palms of your hands!

http://www.bday.co.za/bday/content/direct/1,3523,1666612-49567117-0,00.html

Could someone please explain to me, that if you are using excessive bandwidth on a 128k package, how upgrading to a higher package would solve Sentech’s bandwidth problems? Surely you would still be using the same or even more bandwidth?

In plain language, please.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I have an inferiority complex. But it's only a little one.

 

[arf9999]

"MyWireless has had problems with sluggish performance statistics show that 6% of its 2000 users chew up 50% of its bandwidth. MyWireless works by sharing <b>international</b> bandwidth between its users, so the performance varies according to how many people are using the network simultaneously and what they are actually doing."

So why is my <b>LOCAL</b> speed so SH1TE????

MW128, Tower 50 (Northpark Plaza), Signal:12%,S-N-L: 5, BER: 40%

 

[dorris]

BIG BUCKS=BIG BANDWIDTH
the more you pay, the more bandwidth sentech can purchase!!!

 

[hardye]

I agree, this makes no sense at all. They came up with that figure about 6% of users using 50% of bandwidth before the open proxy was discovered - is it possible they actually thought the traffic from outside was actually from internal sentech users? It would make sense as that would mean that about 150 512K adsl users on the open proxy would be equivalent to 6% of the sentech users and they could have been using theoretically as much as 75mbs of bandwidth if sentech had that capacity, if not they would surely have been dominating the bandwidth.

The other thing about this that really doesn't make sense to me is how 6% of users would be able to "crowd out" the other 94% on their network and dominate 50% of the bandwidth?? Surely the bandwidth of those mythical 6% of users would also drop in proportion to how many other people start utilising the bandwidth? It's like saying that just because 6 cars continuously use the highway, the other 94 can only use half the available road at any one time. Remember "bandwidth" is time specific - i.e. it is defined as the amount of data that can be transmitted in a fixed amount of time - so what's so special about that 6% of abusers that allows them to transmit/receive more bandwidth in a fixed amount of time than the others???

 

[Kai]

they are STILL blaming us!?! HOLY CRAP! wake the hell up guys! Telkom's ISDN is contended 50:1, if I'm not mistaken, and it still outperforms this piece of sh.. of a supposed 256k connection!!!

Your point is ABSOLUTELY valid hardye - if the 6% of users used all the bandwidth, then EVERYONE would feel it! Not just that 6% of users! The bandwidth should be redistributed EVENLY between users, not willy-nilly like they're doing now!

Sentech: Wake up! Stop blaming your customers and get your house in order - you're the laughing stock of the ENTIRE IT community!

what a load of crap!

<hr noshade size="1"><font size="1"><i><div align="right"><font color="red">i haven't lost my mind, it's backed up on disk somewhere...</font id="red">
tower12.randparkridge.jhb|13-21% signal|256k package, running at 0.3 - 3k/s </div id="right"></i></font id="size1">

 

[gripen]

Lets do some calculations. 6% of 2000 = 120 users. For abuse purposes we can say they are maxing out their 512kbps accounts somehow. That means about 61Mbps (as a group) which due to the 50% figure is 120Mbps for the entire country.

So...
What does 120Mbps from IS cost? Lets be nice to Sentech and assume 50% of our costs are for bandwidth. Thus, R750 / 2 = R375 each * 2000 = R750000. So effectively there is R750000 paying for the 120Gbps. I would think it would cost more than that. Probably something wrong with the figures.

If we avg it out to 256kbps per ab(user) thats now 60Mbps for the country. Which means about 30kbps for each of the 2000 users. Obviously quite a bit higher than 4.26kbps. I could accept 30kbps as an absolute minimum much like a lower cap if you will. Now if the abusers are all 512k'ers that double to 60kbps per user. Think about it.. But ok if they werent maxing but rather at 75% that would be (for 512k'ers) 46kbps or 23kbps for 256k'ers. STILL above 4.26kbps.

How can one user download the same as 10 users? at 4.26kbps maybe BUT that user (as an abuser we must always assume 512k) can act like 4 128kbps users if maxing out considering that its unlimited. Its not about average users. Your average road user drives at 8:00. So what? That doesnt mean he cant drive all day if he wants.