FTTH - Blairgowrie - Vumatel

Chevron said:
Household means not getting 1 fibre line and sharing it with your neighbours.
Click to expand...

Yes, but some households are bigger than others.

Some will be a couple. Some will be a commune.

Some households are 7 people.

Some are more.
 
DERoestorf said:
I am not sure where you will be able to store all 60 Terabytes worth of data. Dont actually think it is possibly to do that unless you are running a server at your home or something.
Click to expand...

Not the point, 100mbps for a month is approximately 30 Terabytes of Data.

So assuming up and download, streaming, backups (whatever) the question stands. You cannot claim (WE HAVE NO LIMITS - WE DON'T SHAPE), then at some arbitrary number that is unknown is reached suddenly you have a crippled connection
 
requiem said:
Not the point, 100mbps for a month is approximately 30 Terabytes of Data.

So assuming up and download, streaming, backups (whatever) the question stands. You cannot claim (WE HAVE NO LIMITS - WE DON'T SHAPE), then at some arbitrary number that is unknown is reached suddenly you have a crippled connection
Click to expand...

I made no such claims. And just said not sure how you would do it. I did not assume it is possible or not.

I believe cool ideas mention that they don't place any restrictions on the line, other than the speed you are paying for. But PBCool will have to answer.

My only question on how you would use 60tb of data. I would also like to know if you can use 60tb in a single month
 
DERoestorf said:
I made no such claims. And just said not sure how you would do it. I did not assume it is possible or not.

I believe cool ideas mention that they don't place any restrictions on the line, other than the speed you are paying for. But PBCool will have to answer.

My only question on how you would use 60tb of data. I would also like to know if you can use 60tb in a single month
Click to expand...

I personally cannot. However I can think of a few households that certainly can. I just want to know what the actual limits are, not the "It's uncapped for almost all of you"
 
requiem said:
Yes, but some households are bigger than others.

Some will be a couple. Some will be a commune.

Some households are 7 people.

Some are more.
Click to expand...

Then you answered your own question.
 
Chevron said:
Then you answered your own question.
Click to expand...

No, it is an arbitrary definition. Of course some will use more than others, which is why I followed it up to ask if the line can be maxed out for the month....
 
I have 3 people in my household, who will all be streaming for the most part as I'll be cancelling my DSTV. The fact that CISP says one household is the limit is good enough for me to at least try out the service.

If there are concerns Im sharing my line based on the data usage, the least I will expect from CISP b4 any limitations are applied is a call from them. If they persist and limit the line after the discussions, I will terminate my service and simply move to another ISP. That's the joy of month to month contracts.

The point of me going for uncapped is so that I don't have to worry about monitoring my usage AT ALL.
 
requiem said:
No, it is an arbitrary definition. Of course some will use more than others, which is why I followed it up to ask if the line can be maxed out for the month....
Click to expand...

How is it arbitrary?

A household doesn't depend on the amount of people living there.

household
ˈhaʊshəʊld/
noun
a house and its occupants regarded as a unit.
Click to expand...

See? No mention of number of occupants.
 
Chevron said:
How is it arbitrary?

A household doesn't depend on the amount of people living there.



See? No mention of number of occupants.
Click to expand...


Yes dear, the exact point. So how can they define the usage is unlimited for 1 household, which could be any number of people using data.

Take for example the 6 person household (Mom, Dad, 4 Children) - all 6 actively using the internet, streaming, gaming, downloading, etc etc.
vs.
2 people living in 2 separate townhouses but sharing the connection. (Assuming each of these 2 people use the same bandwidth as 1/6 of the household example above).

The first is fine but the second is not?

Thus it is an arbitrary definition that gives ZERO idea of how much bandwidth can be used before the non specified FUP kicks in.
 
requiem said:
Yes dear, the exact point. So how can they define the usage is unlimited for 1 household, which could be any number of people using data.

Take for example the 6 person household (Mom, Dad, 4 Children) - all 6 actively using the internet, streaming, gaming, downloading, etc etc.
vs.
2 people living in 2 separate townhouses but sharing the connection. (Assuming each of these 2 people use the same bandwidth as 1/6 of the household example above).

The first is fine but the second is not?

Thus it is an arbitrary definition that gives ZERO idea of how much bandwidth can be used before the non specified FUP kicks in.
Click to expand...

Now you're just trying obtuse.

The distinction is obviously there to prevent abuse.

From those using cool ideas there hasn't been one complaint of restrictive FUP.

So please take off your tinfoil hat.
 
Chevron said:
Now you're just trying obtuse.

The distinction is obviously there to prevent abuse.

From those using cool ideas there hasn't been one complaint of restrictive FUP.

So please take off your tinfoil hat.
Click to expand...

I asked a straightforward question. No one else has complained is a meaningless measure. There are certain people who never experience issues with Vox, yet a whole geographic region who are miserable with them....

I asked if it is truly uncapped or if there is an actual limit not being advertised.... Saying unlimited for one household is meaningless, as shows in the examples in previous posts.

Again, can I max the line or can't I? If I can't what is the limit?
 
requiem said:
Yes dear, the exact point. So how can they define the usage is unlimited for 1 household, which could be any number of people using data.

Take for example the 6 person household (Mom, Dad, 4 Children) - all 6 actively using the internet, streaming, gaming, downloading, etc etc.
vs.
2 people living in 2 separate townhouses but sharing the connection. (Assuming each of these 2 people use the same bandwidth as 1/6 of the household example above).

The first is fine but the second is not?

Thus it is an arbitrary definition that gives ZERO idea of how much bandwidth can be used before the non specified FUP kicks in.
Click to expand...

CISP rep will be in a better position to answer but I don't see what is arbitrary about their household limitation. As long as you're one household, there are no limits. Which means you can use the line as you see fit provided you are a household.

Perhaps their household limitation is not only based on limiting the data used for a household (which is what you're assuming) but also on ensuring that more ppl sign up to the service instead of ppl sharing lines. Which in turn will translate to more money for CISP to handle households with "above average use." Whatever they expect that "average usage" to be in their business case.

I think you're asking a fair question, it's just the "arbitrary" portion of your statement which seems unjustified. Regardless of what other ISPs do, as CISP shud be judged on its own merits.
 
mozez said:
CISP rep will be in a better position to answer but I don't see what is arbitrary about their household limitation. As long as you're one household, there are no limits. Which means you can use the line as you see fit provided you are a household.

Perhaps their household limitation is not only based on limiting the data used for a household (which is what you're assuming) but also on ensuring that more ppl sign up to the service instead of ppl sharing lines. Which in turn will translate to more money for CISP to handle households with "above average use." Whatever they expect that "average usage" to be in their business case.

I think you're asking a fair question, it's just the "arbitrary" portion of your statement which seems unjustified. Regardless of what other ISPs do, as CISP shud be judged on its own merits.
Click to expand...

Very good point.

I'll await an answer from CISP
 
requiem said:
Define household?

So if I take the 100/100 line I can transfer 60 Terabytes a month - and will still have full speed?

From my experience with every single ISP in SA that seems highly unlikely.
Click to expand...

Yes technically you can, so long as you are not running business services over the line or aggregating that is correct.
 
A commune is still a single household, if it is a single property with 4 cottages then you would require 4 lines for example. The same as a complex would need a line per tenant.
 
requiem said:
Yes dear, the exact point. So how can they define the usage is unlimited for 1 household, which could be any number of people using data.

Take for example the 6 person household (Mom, Dad, 4 Children) - all 6 actively using the internet, streaming, gaming, downloading, etc etc.
vs.
2 people living in 2 separate townhouses but sharing the connection. (Assuming each of these 2 people use the same bandwidth as 1/6 of the household example above).

The first is fine but the second is not?

Thus it is an arbitrary definition that gives ZERO idea of how much bandwidth can be used before the non specified FUP kicks in.
Click to expand...

There needs to be a definition somewhere along the line and the simplest is per household, and not allowing aggregation. If you are a large household you take a larger connection for more money to service everyone. If you are a small household with 2 people you take a smaller package for less of the money. You would still get unlimited use of each service.
 
PBCool said:
A commune is still a single household, if it is a single property with 4 cottages then you would require 4 lines for example. The same as a complex would need a line per tenant.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming though that if a complex wanted you guys, they could contact you directly for some type of special rate.
 
@Chevron yes it's a bit more complex, excuse the pun.

To get to a specific complex we would use DFA's national backhaul network which has a distance based and capacity cost associated to it, we would then need to fibre the complex which is a CAPEX investment, and then we would still like to be open access so would offer services to other ISPs. The amount of units you need for the above to make sense is quite a few.
 
Sorry @requiem, @mozez, @DERoestorf and @Chevron I hope I have given a clearer explanation?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X