Have your say, vote for Data Bundle Rollover

[Prometheus]

500 votes, finally .

Now onwards towards 1 trillion votes...

Will we multiply the results by 10 like Vodacom in order to get there. Still 99,999,999,489 to go then.

Sure it will happen, but hopefully in our lifetime.

Don't count on it. How long has it been since sms bundles were introduced and is there any sign of roll-over? They would like to delude us into believing that cost is driving it but with sms's there's no significant bandwidth usage, no glogging up the network, and they can be delivered in any reasonable amount of time. Still however there is no roll-over.

What does factor into it is that Vodacom doesn't lose if you use them all within 30 days but if you don't they get more from you when you use it again or buy a new bundle. SA Economics 101: don't provide it unless you have to (meaning the other guy does).

Let me understand your reasoning;

Because UMTS provides better encoding and can deliver more bits / cycle, ON THE RADIO LINK, you deduce that the TOTAL cost to deliver an IP service must come down? Even if you agree that to carry the required increased bit-rate on the back-haul will be substantially more expensive?

So, we need to:

1) Build a new 3G network with no common equipment with the 2G network.
2) Upgrade the new network to HSDPA within 18 months of initial roll-out.
3) Increase back-haul capacity by a huge factor (~20+). Forcing transmission costs to go up by the same factor.
4) Increase international connectivity by a huge factor (~20+). Again, costs go up by the same factor.
5) Increase all in-line and real-time systems to handle the increase in capacity. Again a corresponding increase in cost.

And you actually believe it's now less expensive to deliver a bit over HSDPA compared to GPRS....

So again, please prove how UMTS is driving the total cost down to deliver a bit to you. Please explain how UMTS makes is less expensive to deliver a 1800Kb/s service vs. a 80Kb/s service.

Please give us comparative costing to deliver a GPRS service vs. a UMTS service. You can use an assumed user base of 300K, spread across the major centers.

By the way, nowhere in the links you posted can I find any information on the total cost to deliver a service. Have you actually read the links you posted?

Awaiting your financial models with anticipation.

No, I never said it will bring down the total cost. The problem with your response is that it's one sided as always, meaning only mention what make it more expensive and keep quiet about the factors that make it less expensive. If you want people to keep quiet then tell the whole story and not just the parts that are convenient rather than come down on people who do provide the information YOU do not.

What hsdpa does, and this is the opinion of the chairman of the umts forum, is to bring down costs by making more efficient use of the network and a part of that being transmission costs. If we are to believe your opinion that it requires extra to maintain it then obviously something is amiss here. In line with this Vodacom didn't upgrade the whole network when switching to hsdpa. Hsdpa speeds are in the order of ~48kB/s (3G speed) and 3G speeds ~12kB/s (gprs+ speed).

Vodacom still runs most of it's towers on the same links that were in place when it was still offering only 3G. Feel free to correct me if this is not the case but then you would also have to explain why it's as slow as a snail. Yes I know you can blame it on Telkom but I am not paying Telkom for a service. Vodacom's problems are NOT our problems and what the customer is seeing is that he's still paying the same for an inferior service.

If the network is slower it can only be because it was downgraded or from more people using it. You only require extra backhaul when usage goes up anyway. If usage goes up then so does revenue. What is Vodacom doing with it then? It is slower, we still pay the same, roll-over is nowhere in sight, and Vodacom is making even more. Hmm... yeah right, we are supposed to believe it is more expensive to provide the same service. In reality Vodacom is reaping all the benefits of hsdpa and not incurring any of the "extra" costs.

And speaking of financial models when will we see any real figures from Vodacom? You don't have to answer that.

 

[Csnoopy]

Right I agree with the above said.

Please then explain to me how did they get it right to make R6bn profit, this year. "Bliksem maar dit is baie geld" ag shame & they only gave away R100m to upgrade the sim cards. Who's money is it, foreign investments?! NO it all comes from inside our country not outside. What is the value of a Vodacom share at the moment maybe we should all club in and buy a couple. If Telkom/backhaul is the problem then buy out Telkom, problem solved.

 

[vodacom3g]

No, I never said it will bring down the total cost.

Yes, you did.

And here you do it again:

What hsdpa does, and this is the opinion of the chairman of the umts forum, is to bring down costs by making more efficient use of the network and a part of that being transmission costs.

Vodacom still runs most of it's towers on the same links that were in place when it was still offering only 3G.

Proof please, you obviously know better than me.

 

[Prometheus]

Right I agree with the above said.

Please then explain to me how did they get it right to make R6bn profit, this year. "Bliksem maar dit is baie geld" ag shame & they only gave away R100m to upgrade the sim cards. Who's money is it, foreign investments?! NO it all comes from inside our country not outside. What is the value of a Vodacom share at the moment maybe we should all club in and buy a couple. If Telkom/backhaul is the problem then buy out Telkom, problem solved.

You should know by now that everything Vodacom says is gospel truth. Don't dare question it or you are wrong. Vodacom shares are not public at the moment but when Vodafone buys it (and hopefully gives it a management overhaul) there is the possibility they may sell some (in a probably non-BEE deal).

Yes, you did.

And here you do it again:


Proof please, you obviously know better than me.

Still never said it will bring down the total cost but it plays a part in it, the reason you never mention it. And looking at the stats could play a large part in it.

You're deliberately dodging the facts here. Getting only 3G speed on an hsdpa connection where it costs less than over normal 3G. Try as I might can not see an increase in total cost here. A decrease in speed can only be one of two things and my money is on more users. More users means more money which is supposed to be used to upgrade the network but instead it just keeps getting slower and slower. Still don't see an increase here but I'll bet those pockets will show an increase when end of year figures are released.

So when are we going to get what we pay for, or pay for what we actually get (would have to be a 66% decrease then), or roll-over to slightly alleviate the problem, or a combination of these.

 

[ic]

Radio networks, such as cellular etc, use specific frequency ranges to transmit and receive data, the way in which data is encoded and transmitted within such a frequency range, affects the amount of bandwidth available, and therefore the amount of data that can effectively be transmitted within a unit of time, e.g. 1 second. This also impacts on the possible transmission speed.

2.xG based on GSM, does not make efficient use of the frequency range it uses, however 3.xG uses much more complex encoding to achieve considerably better spectral efficiency and is therefore capable of transmitting more data at higher speeds over the radio portion of a 3.xG network.

Backhaul links [lines], typically fibre optic cables, are required to link base-stations together and to the core network, which allows data to travel beyond the radio portion of the network and back to the customer over the radio network.

In South Africa, these backhaul links are rented at great expense from Telkodemonopolies, which dramatically increases the cost of delivering a bandwidth intensive service to customers.

Remove Telkodemonopolies from the equation, by heavily investing in self-provisioning of fibre optic backhaul links, and in time costs will reduce.

What the chairman of the UMTS forum was referring to, is spectral efficiency of 3.xG compared to 2.xG, but his statement fails to take into account the cost of backhaul links - especially in a monopolistic environment, as well as the fact that 3.xG requires many more base-stations clustered together in an area to provide adequate coverage compared to 2.xG.

@Prometheus, believe what you want, but that is how it is, and as v3g has pointed out to you on many occasions, your conspiracy theories are contrary to the laws of physics which do happen to apply to radio networks. Do some research for a change instead of spouting out what the chairman of the UMTS forum said and largely taking it out of context.

 

[Prometheus]

It would help a lot if you stop with this conspiracy nonsense. As if it somehow proves that everything is just fine if there's no conspiracy. Well it doesn't or as they say just because you are paranoid does not mean they're not watching you. It will also do a lot for you credibility if you actually read the points people make instead of simply believing your preconceptions and resorting to these ad hominems to "prove" them.

The cost of backhaul links would be a valid argument if things were black & white but that's not how reality works. An increase in speed does not equate to a 1:1 increase in required bandwidth. If you are providing 3G speed (384kb/s) with 3Mb/s bandwidth available you can handle 8 connections using it at the same time before seeing a drop in speed. Now keep the bandwidth the same and increase the speed to hsdpa (1.8Mb/s). You would think that now you can only have 2 connections using it and the speed will drop to 1.5Mb/s and while you would be correct this does not take into account several other factors.

1.8Mb/s is also 4.8 times as fast as 384kb/s which means you will finish whatever you are using it for in nearly the same factor of time less. This means that the link is available quicker for others to use. So where you had 8 people using it you might only have 2 or 3 now.

Let's assume you do increase the bandwidth for 3 users you would need 5.4Mb/s. This is 1.8 times what you had but your speed is now 4.8 times what you had. You can see that the bandwidth didn't go up by nearly as much as the speed and this is what is meant by making more efficient use of the existing network. If we use larger numbers the equation gets even better and with smaller numbers it gets worse.

Now consider the true reason for more required bandwidth, usage. If usage goes up by a factor of 2 then so does the bandwidth (or at least it is supposed to). But if usage goes up then so does revenue. There is therefor no reason not to use that to upgrade the network. Why does everybody running a business in this country want to make more money without investing more?

Now the real situation. Vodacom is giving 3G speed or less over a hsdpa connection. Vodacom is benefitting from the reduction in operating cost but not giving any benefit back to the customer. That's why I say Vodacom didn't upgrade most of their towers. You'll see he didn't refute it because if he does he'll have to explain the slow speed, either way it doesn't look good for Vodacom.

So refute these points like was asked many times in the past and do YOUR research instead of telling others to do what you fail to do.

 

[AirWolf]

It would help a lot if you stop with this conspiracy nonsense. As if it somehow proves that everything is just fine if there's no conspiracy. Well it doesn't or as they say just because you are paranoid does not mean they're not watching you. It will also do a lot for you credibility if you actually read the points people make instead of simply believing your preconceptions and resorting to these ad hominems to "prove" them.

The cost of backhaul links would be a valid argument if things were black & white but that's not how reality works. An increase in speed does not equate to a 1:1 increase in required bandwidth. If you are providing 3G speed (384kb/s) with 3Mb/s bandwidth available you can handle 8 connections using it at the same time before seeing a drop in speed. Now keep the bandwidth the same and increase the speed to hsdpa (1.8Mb/s). You would think that now you can only have 2 connections using it and the speed will drop to 1.5Mb/s and while you would be correct this does not take into account several other factors.

1.8Mb/s is also 4.8 times as fast as 384kb/s which means you will finish whatever you are using it for in nearly the same factor of time less. This means that the link is available quicker for others to use. So where you had 8 people using it you might only have 2 or 3 now.

Let's assume you do increase the bandwidth for 3 users you would need 5.4Mb/s. This is 1.8 times what you had but your speed is now 4.8 times what you had. You can see that the bandwidth didn't go up by nearly as much as the speed and this is what is meant by making more efficient use of the existing network. If we use larger numbers the equation gets even better and with smaller numbers it gets worse.

Now consider the true reason for more required bandwidth, usage. If usage goes up by a factor of 2 then so does the bandwidth (or at least it is supposed to). But if usage goes up then so does revenue. There is therefor no reason not to use that to upgrade the network. Why does everybody running a business in this country want to make more money without investing more?

Now the real situation. Vodacom is giving 3G speed or less over a hsdpa connection. Vodacom is benefitting from the reduction in operating cost but not giving any benefit back to the customer. That's why I say Vodacom didn't upgrade most of their towers. You'll see he didn't refute it because if he does he'll have to explain the slow speed, either way it doesn't look good for Vodacom.

So refute these points like was asked many times in the past and do YOUR research instead of telling others to do what you fail to do.

But your users went from 8 to 3?

 

[Prometheus]

But your users went from 8 to 3?

The number of users using it at the same time went from 8 to 3. The number of users with a connection is more than 8 in both cases.

 

[AirWolf]

The number of users using it at the same time went from 8 to 3. The number of users with a connection is more than 8 in both cases.

 

[vodacom3g]

The number of users using it at the same time went from 8 to 3. The number of users with a connection is more than 8 in both cases.

So, the higher the access speed, the lower the number of concurrent users using it?

Not only is that 100Mb/s service going to be free, but there'll only be one user on it!

 

[ic]

It would help a lot if you stop with this conspiracy nonsense. As if it somehow proves that everything is just fine if there's no conspiracy. Well it doesn't or as they say just because you are paranoid does not mean they're not watching you. It will also do a lot for you credibility if you actually read the points people make instead of simply believing your preconceptions and resorting to these ad hominems to "prove" them.

The cost of backhaul links would be a valid argument if things were black & white but that's not how reality works. An increase in speed does not equate to a 1:1 increase in required bandwidth. If you are providing 3G speed (384kb/s) with 3Mb/s bandwidth available you can handle 8 connections using it at the same time before seeing a drop in speed. Now keep the bandwidth the same and increase the speed to hsdpa (1.8Mb/s). You would think that now you can only have 2 connections using it and the speed will drop to 1.5Mb/s and while you would be correct this does not take into account several other factors.

1.8Mb/s is also 4.8 times as fast as 384kb/s which means you will finish whatever you are using it for in nearly the same factor of time less. This means that the link is available quicker for others to use. So where you had 8 people using it you might only have 2 or 3 now.

Let's assume you do increase the bandwidth for 3 users you would need 5.4Mb/s. This is 1.8 times what you had but your speed is now 4.8 times what you had. You can see that the bandwidth didn't go up by nearly as much as the speed and this is what is meant by making more efficient use of the existing network. If we use larger numbers the equation gets even better and with smaller numbers it gets worse.

Now consider the true reason for more required bandwidth, usage. If usage goes up by a factor of 2 then so does the bandwidth (or at least it is supposed to). But if usage goes up then so does revenue. There is therefor no reason not to use that to upgrade the network. Why does everybody running a business in this country want to make more money without investing more?

Now the real situation. Vodacom is giving 3G speed or less over a hsdpa connection. Vodacom is benefitting from the reduction in operating cost but not giving any benefit back to the customer. That's why I say Vodacom didn't upgrade most of their towers. You'll see he didn't refute it because if he does he'll have to explain the slow speed, either way it doesn't look good for Vodacom.

So refute these points like was asked many times in the past and do YOUR research instead of telling others to do what you fail to do.

Before we go any further, there is a central theme to your posts that intrigues me: you keep going on about getting a maximum of 384kbits/s on Vodacom's HSDPA network, kindly post several on-network speed test [thread=60978]results in this other thread[/thread], as well as the make & model of modem you are using.

 

[Prometheus]

Before we go any further, there is a central theme to your posts that intrigues me: you keep going on about getting a maximum of 384kbits/s on Vodacom's HSDPA network, kindly post several on-network speed test [thread=60978]results in this other thread[/thread], as well as the make & model of modem you are using.

Will do when I am able to get hsdpa again. For some reason my connection starts off on it and then drops to 3G only. Any reason this should be? Weather perhaps?

Using an E220, the original Huawei branded one. So there's nothing wrong with my hardware and it was faster when I started using it. What I mean by 3G speed is this is the general speed looking at downloads and not an absolute maximum.

 

[ic]

Will do when I am able to get hsdpa again. For some reason my connection starts off on it and then drops to 3G only. Any reason this should be? Weather perhaps?

Using an E220, the original Huawei branded one. So there's nothing wrong with my hardware and it was faster when I started using it. What I mean by 3G speed is this is the general speed looking at downloads and not an absolute maximum.

What you're describing, sounds very much like a signal strength issue in your specific location [always indoors?], use ginggs' application and first run Vodacom [on-net] speed tests outdoors & then indoors - post the results in the other thread I linked to.

 

[Csnoopy]

Dbr

What you're describing, sounds very much like a signal strength issue in your specific location [always indoors?], use ginggs' application and first run Vodacom [on-net] speed tests outdoors & then indoors - post the results in the other thread I linked to.

Hey @ic is this thread not for DBR. I was lost for a moment & then looked at the heading of the thread & realised I was in the correct place. Looks like we South African's like to highjack, that includes me.

I have just discovered that I had some data credit after I got a sms indicating that 30 day prepaid is up gone gedaan klaar etc ens. But when I went to buy some data I found I had +-210Megabyte credit. Does that now mean DBR has been implemented? or is it in lieu of the Forum meeting happening soon?

Da da da ...... da da da

 

[ic]

Hey @ic is this thread not for DBR. I was lost for a moment & then looked at the heading of the thread & realised I was in the correct place. Looks like we South African's like to highjack, that includes me.

Yes well I think Prometheus is the one doing the thread hijacking there, but it would be nice if Prometheus could sort out his 384kbits/s story as per the advice I gave.

 

[AirWolf]

The votes are ticking along slowly with a two thirds majority for DBR at no extra cost.

 

[Prometheus]

Hey @ic is this thread not for DBR. I was lost for a moment & then looked at the heading of the thread & realised I was in the correct place. Looks like we South African's like to highjack, that includes me.

I have just discovered that I had some data credit after I got a sms indicating that 30 day prepaid is up gone gedaan klaar etc ens. But when I went to buy some data I found I had +-210Megabyte credit. Does that now mean DBR has been implemented? or is it in lieu of the Forum meeting happening soon?

Da da da ...... da da da

Hehe. Actually it's not hijacked. The more we can say on the subject the better. Just a quick rundown of what actually took place.

V3g said that if Vodacom gives us rollover it will potentially increase the cost because the bandwidth is paid for according to what it can deliver and not what it actually delivers.

My point: There are many other factors involved, the cost of the different technologies for one. Vodacom does not provision based on how many bundles and how large was sold. The only difference roll over will make to the bottom line is that smaller users can buy larger bundles and pay less for their data over time. Something Vodacom obviously doesn't want when they can milk them for every cent.

My point and ic's point: Rollover will actually alleviate the month end 'constipation' everybody sees as contract bundles expire. With usage spread out more evenly (both contract and prepaid) upgrades will be fewer and further apart.

So we are well on track. I don't expect to get less than what I am paying for. Ok it may not be entirely their fault for not upgrading quick enough but their Telkom problems are not my problem. Stopping the 30 day 'amnesia' will allow the network to be used more naturally. So there are three solutions in order of increasing difficulty, roll over, price decrease, or network upgrade.

 

[vodacom3g]

My point and ic's point: Rollover will actually alleviate the month end 'constipation' everybody sees as contract bundles expire. With usage spread out more evenly (both contract and prepaid) upgrades will be fewer and further apart.

I disagree with you. Please provide your proof for this "month-end constipation". As you so often like to say, if you make a statement you must provide proof. I only need to disagree, without having to provide contrary proof. (Which I do have)

Maybe post a graph of network utlisation over the last 3 months. We can then see if there are any month-end spikes.

 

[Prometheus]

I disagree with you. Please provide your proof for this "month-end constipation". As you so often like to say, if you make a statement you must provide proof. I only need to disagree, without having to provide contrary proof. (Which I do have)

Maybe post a graph of network utlisation over the last 3 months. We can then see if there are any month-end spikes.

There are enough people that would agree with me. One thing that is unfortunate for Vodacom and that you must still learn is that the customer is always right. There is no what if the customer's wrong. If your customer tells you your bread is stale then it is stale because there is no way you will convince your customer that it is not.

The overall experience is a lot slower than back in April especially at month end as people use up their bundles. Now you can disagree with this all you want but unless something is done about the situation (roll-over/price/upgrade) people will start voting with their feet.

 

[vodacom3g]

There are enough people that would agree with me. One thing that is unfortunate for Vodacom and that you must still learn is that the customer is always right. There is no what if the customer's wrong. If your customer tells you your bread is stale then it is stale because there is no way you will convince your customer that it is not.

The overall experience is a lot slower than back in April especially at month end as people use up their bundles. Now you can disagree with this all you want but unless something is done about the situation (roll-over/price/upgrade) people will start voting with their feet.

I'm not asking you if "enough people will agree with you". I'm asking for you to provide the proof to back up your statement. A graph of network usage over time would be the accepted type of information.

And saying you're right because you're a customer must be the biggest (and weakest) cop-out I've ever heard.

So, just post your data and we can discuss. I'm really keen to see this, as would be others, I'm sure.

(You can post it together with your "Higher speeds are less expensive to provide" proof as we're still waiting for that as well. While we're at it, throw in your "Just up the bit-rate on fiber or air interface to resolve bandwidth limits" explanation.)