Do you hog bandwidth?

djrwb said:
One little thing you are all overlooking

Their definition of a bandwidth hog is a user that does twice the average bandwidth and is then throttled down to 512K

Unfortunately for all you "bandwidth hogs" out there SA has a low usage (average around 20Gig per month?) so by this definition anyone using more than 40Gig a month is a" bandwidth hog" and should be throttled.
Click to expand...

No, the real thing everyone is overlooking is that 40GB on a 4Mbps line is roughly 124kbps over 30 days, i.e. a shocking 3.1% of line capacity!!
Even a more realistic 250GB per month means a utilization of less than 20% of your advertised line speed. Do the math, on a 10Mbps line you're idling
along at 7.7% while grabbing your 250GB.

So you want to call me a bandwidth hog for using less than 20% of my advertised line capacity? Please!

The whole old argument boils down to one thing .. advertising.

ISP's introduced 'uncapped' services to attract subscribers and it worked, Mweb for example signed up 70000 new subsribers. Everyone reasoned they undersold with the idea of making up the loss as bandwidth prices fall further. Do you honestly think that was their business plan all along? What they're doing now is to introduce price discrimination, an opportunity to up their profits by calling you a hog and pressuring you into migrating to a more expensive package.

Another thing. One could call a bandwidth hog someone who uses so much resources that it creates unfair traffic congestion for other users. ISP's on the other hand simply takes the total downloaded per user, list the top 5% and call them hogs. The hogs get throttled or migrated onto more expensive products and next month there's a new batch of "bandwidth hogs" to be throttled or migrated.

Clever marketing, that's all. They are overselling their capacity .. there is no such thing as a "bandwidth hog".
 
Last edited:
Granted its called uncapped, but the simple fact is, download over 300gig's a month is pathetic (everyony and again i understand), but ok fine do it, but don't bitch like a little girl when you get throttled. Cause I feel people who do so much should be throttled far more and a lot more than people like me who only does 25 a month.
 
foX2delta said:
Granted its called uncapped, but the simple fact is, download over 300gig's a month is pathetic (everyony and again i understand), but ok fine do it, but don't bitch like a little girl when you get throttled. Cause I feel people who do so much should be throttled far more and a lot more than people like me who only does 25 a month.
Click to expand...

So people who know how to use the internet should be punished while those who have little use for it should be rewarded?

Or to put it another way.... you punish your most frequent and prolific customers?

In my business I have some customers who buy and use lots of product and some who buy only a little. I give my biggest discounts and greatest service to the former and I charge the most and spend the least time on the latter.

The ISPs have it the other way around. And they have convinced you that it is the normal way of doing things.
 
foX2delta said:
Granted its called uncapped, but the simple fact is, download over 300gig's a month is pathetic (everyony and again i understand), but ok fine do it, but don't bitch like a little girl when you get throttled. Cause I feel people who do so much should be throttled far more and a lot more than people like me who only does 25 a month.
Click to expand...

e-penis envy much?
 
evilstebunny said:
No, the real thing everyone is overlooking is that 40GB on a 4Mbps line is roughly 124kbps over 30 days, i.e. a shocking 3.1% of line capacity!!
Even a more realistic 250GB per month means a utilization of less than 20% of your advertised line speed. Do the math, on a 10Mbps line you're idling
along at 7.7% while grabbing your 250GB.

So you want to call me a bandwidth hog for using less than 20% of my advertised line capacity? Please!

The whole old argument boils down to one thing .. advertising.

ISP's introduced 'uncapped' services to attract subscribers and it worked, Mweb for example signed up 70000 new subsribers. Everyone reasoned they undersold with the idea of making up the loss as bandwidth prices fall further. Do you honestly think that was their business plan all along? What they're doing now is to introduce price discrimination, an opportunity to up their profits by calling you a hog and pressuring you into migrating to a more expensive package.

Another thing. One could call a bandwidth hog someone who uses so much resources that it creates unfair traffic congestion for other users. ISP's on the other hand simply takes the total downloaded per user, list the top 5% and call them hogs. The hogs get throttled or migrated onto more expensive products and next month there's a new batch of "bandwidth hogs" to be throttled or migrated.

Clever marketing, that's all. There is no such thing as a "bandwidth hog".
Click to expand...

wqel think bout it mweb made lots of extra cash with then cancelling so many accounts, and not refunding the clients that where disconected by MWEB's choice not their own, if they cancelled 400 users they then have pocketed on 4mg lines at R499-- R199 600.00 in profit, and how many of those people did between 200-600gb a month
 
foX2delta said:
Granted its called uncapped, but the simple fact is, download over 300gig's a month is pathetic (everyony and again i understand), but ok fine do it, but don't bitch like a little girl when you get throttled. Cause I feel people who do so much should be throttled far more and a lot more than people like me who only does 25 a month.
Click to expand...

/facepalm

Here we go again. :cry:
 
GforceD said:
Hell based on that I am not even a piglet.
Click to expand...

It's not whether you're a piglet or a pork .. it's whether you use your piggy head and shoulders to aggressively shove away the other piggies at the trough so as to get the biggest share of nom-noms when the farmer's not around..

Erm .. I think I've just described the ANC.
 
evilstebunny said:
It's not whether you're a piglet or a pork .. it's whether you use your piggy head and shoulders to aggressively shove away the other piggies at the trough so as to get the biggest share of nom-noms when the farmer's not around..

Erm .. I think I've just described the ANC.
Click to expand...

ROFL :D Nice analogy
 
Garyvdh said:
So people who know how to use the internet should be punished while those who have little use for it should be rewarded?

Or to put it another way.... you punish your most frequent and prolific customers?

In my business I have some customers who buy and use lots of product and some who buy only a little. I give my biggest discounts and greatest service to the former and I charge the most and spend the least time on the latter.

The ISPs have it the other way around. And they have convinced you that it is the normal way of doing things.
Click to expand...


It isnt about a discount. If the network is being maxed out because of a few people, then they should be stopped/limited first.

If pick n pay has a special on coke can you buy a 100 bottles, no, you can only have 4-6 because everyone wants a piece of the pie
 
foX2delta said:
It isnt about a discount. If the network is being maxed out because of a few people, then they should be stopped/limited first.

If pick n pay has a special on coke can you buy a 100 bottles, no, you can only have 4-6 because everyone wants a piece of the pie
Click to expand...

That's a bad analogy. At Pick and Pay you only have to pay for the bottles you actually take.

If the ISPs were running the show they would advertise 100 Bottles of Coke for R500 *


* limit... each customer can only carry away 5 bottles even though you paid for all 100.
 
Garyvdh said:
That's a bad analogy. At Pick and Pay you only have to pay for the bottles you actually take.

If the ISPs were running the show they would advertise 100 Bottles of Coke for R500 *


* limit... each customer can only carry away 5 bottles even though you paid for all 100.
Click to expand...

Agree almost fully with your point, but my point is, if the network is at 100% who should you limit first??

If you go to pick n pay to get the coke on special only to find out that you get NONE because of one person who got bought the lot, the shop should have stopped/limited him cause he is the reason you get nothing.

So if one client buys Sooooooooooooooo much bandwidth from you and uses your network to its full, since after all he pay'd for it, is that fair to your other customers, no, you will have to limit him a little to let your other clients have some network capacity as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X