-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: How often do you receive spam calls?
Comments on SAFM interview - Please read rpm.
- Thread starter Gamos
- Start date
louiss
Active Member
Couldn't have said it better Gamos.
DigitalSoldier
Honorary Master
but telkom didnt even mention port capping or slow intl bw only went on about 3gb cap which aint even bothering most users
Karnaugh
Banned
The whole point is, if you do things that require highly reliable 24/7 connection for things like international stock trading, I personaly feel that Telkom make it perfectly clear that ADSL is not an effective solution for that.
There is nothing binding you to keep the connection so you really have no room to complain about that.
Personaly I agree with Telkom 100%.
There is nothing binding you to keep the connection so you really have no room to complain about that.
Personaly I agree with Telkom 100%.
DarkHelmet
Well-Known Member
Karnaugh, I think you are missing Gamos' point. He is not saying 24/7 highly reliable connection.
He is basically saying, if he wishes to use his 3GB up in the first week let it be so, do not limit him on what he can use the 3GB on. If he wants to download 3 full length movies at the advertised speed, let him do so. If he wants to talk to his beloved on a Video feed, let him do so... that is not currently happening. Read a webpage, or download your mail. That is all that the service is slightly good for.
Good post Gamos
He is basically saying, if he wishes to use his 3GB up in the first week let it be so, do not limit him on what he can use the 3GB on. If he wants to download 3 full length movies at the advertised speed, let him do so. If he wants to talk to his beloved on a Video feed, let him do so... that is not currently happening. Read a webpage, or download your mail. That is all that the service is slightly good for.
Good post Gamos
Karnaugh
Banned
I do agree that trying to offer a 512/256 service on SA's network was slightly over zealous.
I don't see Telkoms PR, I see the fact. The fact is people knew about the cap from the start, therefore have no reason to say it was false advertising to implement it. I do agree that it is too low, and probably implemented incorrectly. I mean, if you use up your 3gb with local content then you can no longer use international content? The 3gb cap should really be only applied to international traffic and international traffic alone.
As for port prioritization, I wont mention MWeb's screwed up transparent proxies [xx(]
I don't see Telkoms PR, I see the fact. The fact is people knew about the cap from the start, therefore have no reason to say it was false advertising to implement it. I do agree that it is too low, and probably implemented incorrectly. I mean, if you use up your 3gb with local content then you can no longer use international content? The 3gb cap should really be only applied to international traffic and international traffic alone.
As for port prioritization, I wont mention MWeb's screwed up transparent proxies [xx(]
Agree 100% with Gamos.
By fighting conditions that were there from day one, does indeed make this group as a bunch of users who did not do their homework before getting ADSL, which Telkom will conviniently stress in every reply.
This group of people should concentrate on what was promised and what was never mentioned initially.
AFAIR, the following was said from day one.
1) There will be a 3Gb limit. IMHO, this should never be mentioned, as it will give the (Telkom) person a foot in the door in his reply.
2) Port prioritisation. This was never said, So this should be the main theme
3) International Bandwidth. It was mentioned from day 1 that international speed will not be 512/256, but rather similar to a dial-up.
4) Also, IMHO, in any response to Telkom, no mention should be made as to the HelpDesk staff comment about ADSL.
5) Also, From day 1 it was mentioned this is a "no guarentee" service. (I still battle to figure out exactly what this imply). So the theme should be the CONSTANT slow response.
RPM, this is not a personal attack on you, rather a few ideas.
By fighting conditions that were there from day one, does indeed make this group as a bunch of users who did not do their homework before getting ADSL, which Telkom will conviniently stress in every reply.
This group of people should concentrate on what was promised and what was never mentioned initially.
AFAIR, the following was said from day one.
1) There will be a 3Gb limit. IMHO, this should never be mentioned, as it will give the (Telkom) person a foot in the door in his reply.
2) Port prioritisation. This was never said, So this should be the main theme
3) International Bandwidth. It was mentioned from day 1 that international speed will not be 512/256, but rather similar to a dial-up.
4) Also, IMHO, in any response to Telkom, no mention should be made as to the HelpDesk staff comment about ADSL.
5) Also, From day 1 it was mentioned this is a "no guarentee" service. (I still battle to figure out exactly what this imply). So the theme should be the CONSTANT slow response.
RPM, this is not a personal attack on you, rather a few ideas.
visualhawk
Member
Well said Gamos, I have downloaded at close to the 512kbit limit from fast overseas servers, so that is not the issue. The issue is that if I decide to video chat with my sister in Canada or listen to web radio I MUST also get the full bandwidth - up to the 3Gb CAP. (Which by-the-by I've never even came close too - not even after downloading two CDs worth of SAP front end installation)
This %#%$# about Telkom deciding what I should use my bandwidth for is just another flippen monopolistic farce. I am pretty sure that if I had the money to take them on, I could win this one in court !!.
This %#%$# about Telkom deciding what I should use my bandwidth for is just another flippen monopolistic farce. I am pretty sure that if I had the money to take them on, I could win this one in court !!.
Side note:
A issue related to the 3Gb cap that could be raised is the tracker correctness.
One or two other people here complaint about it as well. I've just compared my tracker mails. Yesterday morning 07:00 my connection was reset. At 20:00 last night, my connection status indicated that I have downloaded 55Mb, yet if I compare this morning's mail with yesterday's, it indicates that my usage (down) for yesterday was 5Mb
A issue related to the 3Gb cap that could be raised is the tracker correctness.
One or two other people here complaint about it as well. I've just compared my tracker mails. Yesterday morning 07:00 my connection was reset. At 20:00 last night, my connection status indicated that I have downloaded 55Mb, yet if I compare this morning's mail with yesterday's, it indicates that my usage (down) for yesterday was 5Mb
dojob
Well-Known Member
Why dont we approach TV media. Maybe 3rd Degree (ETV) or Special assignment (SABC). Put our case forward and have Telkom exposed. We can have actual footage of the crap service we are given!
DarkSkies
Active Member
Have to agree with Gamos. Something else is that you need to stay away from technical terms such as Port Prioritization. If you mention it explain what it means in layman terms i.e. ANY program other than a web browser or e-mail is unusable. Don't metion the word gaming to the general public, the view of the public is that people who play computer games are irresponsible teenagers, gaming is not viewed as a legitimate hobby in this country.
A good thing would be to mention that the rest of the world doesn't quite agree with Telkom's description of broadband. It was developed to address increased bandwidth issues from demanding users not to be a 24/7 solution for someone who uses the Internet 3hours a day for surfing and e-mail.
IMO you should stick to
1. Port Prioritization (Bandwidth Shapping)
2. Speed
3. Service
You also can include the fact that Bandwidth Shapping is the responsibility of an ISP and not a Telecommunications Carrier, they are hijacking a potential sales point away from the ISPs.
You might also mention that we are not the only ones who are unsatisfied and that all the ISPs have an issue with Telkom's rollout of ADSL. ISPA has already entered a complaint with ICASA due to Telkom's monopolistic behaviour in this regard.
Just my 2 cents.
BTW good Job on getting onto SAFM, more than most of us can say who are complaining.
A good thing would be to mention that the rest of the world doesn't quite agree with Telkom's description of broadband. It was developed to address increased bandwidth issues from demanding users not to be a 24/7 solution for someone who uses the Internet 3hours a day for surfing and e-mail.
IMO you should stick to
1. Port Prioritization (Bandwidth Shapping)
2. Speed
3. Service
You also can include the fact that Bandwidth Shapping is the responsibility of an ISP and not a Telecommunications Carrier, they are hijacking a potential sales point away from the ISPs.
You might also mention that we are not the only ones who are unsatisfied and that all the ISPs have an issue with Telkom's rollout of ADSL. ISPA has already entered a complaint with ICASA due to Telkom's monopolistic behaviour in this regard.
Just my 2 cents.
BTW good Job on getting onto SAFM, more than most of us can say who are complaining.
Karnaugh
Banned
I didnt feel safm gave a propper impression by not leaving room for a debate of any sort.. One side gave their complaint and telkom gave some half hearted cover up. Telkom didnt even have to make a real argument, the DJ didnt have a clue about it so its easy for the telkom rep to convince him and the audience who cant respond.
Ultra-L0rd
Member
Well i think it is shocking that telkom gets away with sharing 1 port with 3 users . its just not done..
And i fully agree with Gamos.. i wrote an email 2 telkom (posted it on the site) asking them y a 512kb connection is more unstable than a 56k?? at 3am
and i have not gotten a reply yet..
bcuz they cant reply
And i fully agree with Gamos.. i wrote an email 2 telkom (posted it on the site) asking them y a 512kb connection is more unstable than a 56k?? at 3am
and i have not gotten a reply yet..
bcuz they cant reply
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Karnaugh</i>
<br />The whole point is, if you do things that require highly reliable 24/7 connection for things like international stock trading, I personaly feel that Telkom make it perfectly clear that ADSL is not an effective solution for that.
There is nothing binding you to keep the connection so you really have no room to complain about that.
Personaly I agree with Telkom 100%.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I know there was a 3gig cap when I considered ADSL, I was using a dial-up moden (56k modem) to download from Kazaa and didn't worry that after my 3gigs I would have a slower speed. What I didn't know was:
a] How slow the throttled connection would be. Am I being unreasonable to excpect at least a performance on par with my old modem ?
b] That Telkom had implemented a network structure that actively renders my P2P usage to almost nothing.
If Telkom had this information on the site at the time I was researching ADSL viability I would of not subscribed and rather gone the ISDN route. I can't see Telkom removing the network shaping, so I ask they remove the cap. Without the cap the users are still protected from P2P users due to the port prioritisation.
<br />The whole point is, if you do things that require highly reliable 24/7 connection for things like international stock trading, I personaly feel that Telkom make it perfectly clear that ADSL is not an effective solution for that.
There is nothing binding you to keep the connection so you really have no room to complain about that.
Personaly I agree with Telkom 100%.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I know there was a 3gig cap when I considered ADSL, I was using a dial-up moden (56k modem) to download from Kazaa and didn't worry that after my 3gigs I would have a slower speed. What I didn't know was:
a] How slow the throttled connection would be. Am I being unreasonable to excpect at least a performance on par with my old modem ?
b] That Telkom had implemented a network structure that actively renders my P2P usage to almost nothing.
If Telkom had this information on the site at the time I was researching ADSL viability I would of not subscribed and rather gone the ISDN route. I can't see Telkom removing the network shaping, so I ask they remove the cap. Without the cap the users are still protected from P2P users due to the port prioritisation.
DigitalSoldier
Honorary Master
i didnt bother about the 3gb cap i knew about it when i subscribed 2 telkom but what i didnt knew was about the p2p slow dls and i myself dl anime eps from kazaa as we cant really find any anime in sa
DigitalSoldier
Honorary Master
yip but last time i went there there werent really anything that was for sale at the time
Heres my 2c worth, again 
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by DarkHelmet</i>
<br />
If he wants to download 3 full length movies at the advertised speed, let him do so. If he wants to talk to his beloved on a Video feed, let him do so... that is not currently happening. Read a webpage, or download your mail. That is all that the service is slightly good for.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
To a large extent telkom are completely right in prioritizing P2P ports, the main purpose of software such as Kazaa, E-Dokey, Overnet etc is to pirate software, movies, games, audio etc etc. Wether or not this media is available in South Africa (refering to Anime hear), it is still copyrighted and therefore against the law. I believe that gaming should not be affected and should be allowed full un-priotized bandwidth usage, if a user would rather spend his cap and hours playing on overseas servers that should be his/her decision.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Ultra-L0rd</i>
<br />Well i think it is shocking that telkom gets away with sharing 1 port with 3 users . its just not done..
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
LOL, a 3 to 1 ratio is acctualy very good. Telkom are not the only people using ratios like these. I can't believe people are still expecting a 1 to 1 ratio on a service that is costing them +/- R200pm. Guaranteed bandwidth is big money. My view on the the whole cap issue is that users should still recieve a usable service for at least surfing and mail with d/l speeds of 4-5K/s after they haev reached there limit. Maybe instead of giving users 512k down untill they reach 3gb, why not give them 64k or 128k for the full month or with a considerably higher cap ??
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by DarkSkies</i>
<br />
You also can include the fact that Bandwidth Shapping is the responsibility of an ISP and not a Telecommunications Carrier, they are hijacking a potential sales point away from the ISPs.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Last time i checked Telkom is an ISP, they are supplying the bandwidth therefore they are your service provider. This on the other hand does not give them the right to prioritize certain ports without giving customers notification on exactly what ports will be affected before the customer has payed for the service. Is anyone clear on exactly what ports are affected/unaffected ?
Hopefuly Telkom will come to their senses and realise that ADSL users do want the service to work and are willing to compromise to achieve a stable usable service that will make everyone happy.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by DarkHelmet</i>
<br />
If he wants to download 3 full length movies at the advertised speed, let him do so. If he wants to talk to his beloved on a Video feed, let him do so... that is not currently happening. Read a webpage, or download your mail. That is all that the service is slightly good for.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
To a large extent telkom are completely right in prioritizing P2P ports, the main purpose of software such as Kazaa, E-Dokey, Overnet etc is to pirate software, movies, games, audio etc etc. Wether or not this media is available in South Africa (refering to Anime hear), it is still copyrighted and therefore against the law. I believe that gaming should not be affected and should be allowed full un-priotized bandwidth usage, if a user would rather spend his cap and hours playing on overseas servers that should be his/her decision.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Ultra-L0rd</i>
<br />Well i think it is shocking that telkom gets away with sharing 1 port with 3 users . its just not done..
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
LOL, a 3 to 1 ratio is acctualy very good. Telkom are not the only people using ratios like these. I can't believe people are still expecting a 1 to 1 ratio on a service that is costing them +/- R200pm. Guaranteed bandwidth is big money. My view on the the whole cap issue is that users should still recieve a usable service for at least surfing and mail with d/l speeds of 4-5K/s after they haev reached there limit. Maybe instead of giving users 512k down untill they reach 3gb, why not give them 64k or 128k for the full month or with a considerably higher cap ??
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by DarkSkies</i>
<br />
You also can include the fact that Bandwidth Shapping is the responsibility of an ISP and not a Telecommunications Carrier, they are hijacking a potential sales point away from the ISPs.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Last time i checked Telkom is an ISP, they are supplying the bandwidth therefore they are your service provider. This on the other hand does not give them the right to prioritize certain ports without giving customers notification on exactly what ports will be affected before the customer has payed for the service. Is anyone clear on exactly what ports are affected/unaffected ?
Hopefuly Telkom will come to their senses and realise that ADSL users do want the service to work and are willing to compromise to achieve a stable usable service that will make everyone happy.
cwayjone
Active Member
When i subscribed i knew about the possible cap, but i never thought they would completely eliminate international bandwidth after the cap. I thought they would restrict the bandwidth to the level of a 64k isdn line or something. But, now you can't even open international web pages.
Major complaints:
No International bandwidth after the cap.
No real isp options ...telkom has all the cards.
I should be able to do what i like with my bandwidth.
Inaccurate bandwidth usage measurements.
Cap should only measure international bandwidth.
Major complaints:
No International bandwidth after the cap.
No real isp options ...telkom has all the cards.
I should be able to do what i like with my bandwidth.
Inaccurate bandwidth usage measurements.
Cap should only measure international bandwidth.
DarkSkies
Active Member
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Last time i checked Telkom is an ISP, they are supplying the bandwidth therefore they are your service provider.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Actually Telkom is not an ISP. They got into hotwater a couple of years ago because they control the telecommunications infrastructure and have an unfair advantage when operating as an ISP. ISPA was formed to fight the inception of Telkom Internet (at that time they were Intekom I think). If I am not mistaken the issue was resolved with some guidelines set down by the IBA (now ICASA).
Anyway to make a long story short, it's SAIX doing the bandwidth shaping and not Telkom Internet. Even if you change your ISP to World Online, M-Web, Imaginet etc., bandwidth shaping is still taking place. In essence SAIX is prioritizing ports before the traffic even hits the ISP. If you read the press release you will see that they mention it in there as well and I quote
<i>"The volume capping and prioritisation of the international pipe is done at the wholesale level to ensure that all ISP customers enjoy the ADSL experience of fast always-available Internet." </i>
Actually Telkom is not an ISP. They got into hotwater a couple of years ago because they control the telecommunications infrastructure and have an unfair advantage when operating as an ISP. ISPA was formed to fight the inception of Telkom Internet (at that time they were Intekom I think). If I am not mistaken the issue was resolved with some guidelines set down by the IBA (now ICASA).
Anyway to make a long story short, it's SAIX doing the bandwidth shaping and not Telkom Internet. Even if you change your ISP to World Online, M-Web, Imaginet etc., bandwidth shaping is still taking place. In essence SAIX is prioritizing ports before the traffic even hits the ISP. If you read the press release you will see that they mention it in there as well and I quote
<i>"The volume capping and prioritisation of the international pipe is done at the wholesale level to ensure that all ISP customers enjoy the ADSL experience of fast always-available Internet." </i>