"Home Uncapped" accounts: What do you consider excessive usage?

Excessive usage should be obvious abuse, not some figure that's very achievable on a particular line.

What ISPs desire is no use at all. There is a conflict here and consumers are not in a strong enough position to argue about it.

We also need consistency. ie 150Gig was fine in April, and should be fine in August. That figure shouldn't change willy-nilly because your ISP is short of cash.

There's also a near block on some activities such as gaming, which should not be a factor. ISPs should ask thelselves why their customers chose uncapped. It wasn't to browse Facebook, now was it?
 
Chevron said:
Well personally I think the usage numbers that MWEB use for their Premium accounts are about right.

You will get people that fight with me, but 100GBs per MB/s of line speed is a good starting point.
Click to expand...

So I should be allowed to use 2TB of data?
 
MacAfrican said:
But to poll, I'd be dead happy with even 25gb/mbps allowance.
Click to expand...
Remember it doesn't scale 1:1 though. e.g. Me moving from 2mbps to 4mbps didn't double my usage. Also...at 125 gb you definitely have some very reasonable options available. e.g. At that usage range capped unshaped is well worth a look. e.g. AH's 150gb well likely undercut whatever package you're on at the moment. Obviously up to debate price/quality wise...just saying you're on the edge of capped/uncapped.
 
AntiGanda said:
Excessive usage should be obvious abuse
Click to expand...
Indeed. Now try defining "obvious abuse" in language that is acceptable both from a technical and legal point of view. If you manage that please PM me so that we can jointly start a new ISP that will crush all existing ISPs.
 
HavocXphere said:
Accounts are driven by external factors & pressures on the ISP...they are not designed for a specific use.
Click to expand...

I've been saying this for a while now. As customers jumped ship based on price, it forced other ISPs to also compete on price instead of a quality connection.

A customer education drive may not be a bad thing.
 
HavocXphere said:
Remember it doesn't scale 1:1 though. e.g. Me moving from 2mbps to 4mbps didn't double my usage. Also...at 125 gb you definitely have some very reasonable options available. e.g. At that usage range capped unshaped is well worth a look. e.g. AH's 150gb well likely undercut whatever package you're on at the moment. Obviously up to debate price/quality wise...just saying you're on the edge of capped/uncapped.
Click to expand...
There's a limit to how much content can be viewed/used unless you're sharing the line.

The maximum (before penalties) should be derived from a formula based on how much is achievable 24/7 on that particular line.
 
Chevron said:
A customer education drive may not be a bad thing.
Click to expand...
Yes - hard to argue with that. There is a big difference between me explaining something to you and something being explained to the public though. If you were "the public" then you'd buy 1TB of Seagate SATA "memory" for R5k from me...

Chevron said:
As customers jumped ship based on price, it forced other ISPs to also compete on price instead of a quality connection.
Click to expand...
Yep. Its all relative though - e.g. I'm seriously considering jumping to an "inferior" product. Half the price and a reasonable approximation during the times I need it (after hours).

AntiGanda said:
There's a limit to how much content can be viewed/used unless you're sharing the line.
Click to expand...
Hence it doesn't scaled 1:1? Which is what I said? Not convinced you're understanding whats happening in this thread...
 
There are some very good points here.

It's well known that bandwidth consumed after working hours is less of a burden on your ISP than during peak hours. Therefore using the internet after hours and during the off-peak period should mean less chance of personal shaping or throttling on your internet account.

I am however under the impression that many ISPs shape or throttle individual users based solely on usage rather than the user's actual burden on the ISP in question.

For example:

User 1 consumes x amount of data during peak hours at full line speed.

User 2 consumes the same amount of data during peak hours but has limited their line speed to 25%, thus making them less of a burden to the ISPs network, but for a longer period.

User 1 and 2 are both just as likely to be throttled regardless of which user was more of a burden to the network.

I'm sure there are also ISPs out there that shape or throttle users solely on usage.

But let's say for the sake of simplicity that 25% of the data is consumed between 6:00 and 17:00 and 75% between 17:01 and 5:59 and weekends.
 
An ISP gives 50+ terabytes of data off peak away. Another ISP cannot and shape 12/6.5 all the time, 24/7.
BS all around.
 
Totempole said:
There are some very good points here.

It's well known that bandwidth consumed after working hours is less of a burden on your ISP than during peak hours. Therefore using the internet after hours and during the off-peak period should mean less chance of personal shaping or throttling on your internet account.

I am however under the impression that many ISPs shape or throttle individual users based solely on usage rather than the user's actual burden on the ISP in question.

For example:

User 1 consumes x amount of data during peak hours at full line speed.

User 2 consumes the same amount of data during peak hours but has limited their line speed to 25%, thus making them less of a burden to the ISPs network, but for a longer period.

User 1 and 2 are both just as likely to be throttled regardless of which user was more of a burden to the network.

I'm sure there are also ISPs out there that shape or throttle users solely on usage.

But let's say for the sake of simplicity that 25% of the data is consumed between 6:00 and 17:00 and 75% between 17:01 and 5:59 and weekends.
Click to expand...

IS based accounts work like this. Usage after midnight doesn't count and shaping let's up after 17:00.
 
Depends on the ISPs implementation.

Its two different levels of enforcement. On a basic level the ISP will do whatever it takes to make things behave on an overall level during heavy demand (the supply/demand thing I mentioned). So they "need" to hand out X amount of shaping across their entire range of products to make it work. How they allocate that will differ - one ISP decides to bury P2P via dynamic shaping settings, the next shapes their "cheap" customers, a third might weigh it according to usage. Most ISPs seem to use a mixture...with some timing mechanisms on top of that and sometimes some manual intervention on top of that.

Totempole said:
I'm sure there are also ISPs out there that shape or throttle users solely on usage.
Click to expand...
Doubt it - but I suppose it could be done that way by some small ISPs with a death wish...
 
This is drifting away from my initial question.

As an average consumer how an ISP controls traffic is irrelevant to you. What they really want to know is how they can make the most of their connection without becoming a burden on the ISP.

How can you play the game if you don't know the rules?
How can you play by the rules if you don't know the game?

ISPs almost alway point users to their "excessive usage" when they find their internet shaped or throttled.

The problem is, because users have no real guidelines on how to be able to consistently use their uncapped accounts without becoming a burden. This results in a vicious cycle of shaping, throttling and a generally unsatisfied and frustrated customer. The customer then jumps to another ISP and experiences the same issues to a greater or lesser degree.

Solutions like "Schedule your downloads for off-peak time" or "stop using your internet for a few days" are generally just temporary fixes that frustrate the customer even further.

Sure, upgrading to a business account (throwing money at it) usually solves the problem, but is it always necessary? If the customer were properly informed about the product they're using, instead of being given a vague description of its intended purpose, then perhaps the customer might be able to make the most of their uncapped account without being a burden on the network.
 
ISPs will never ever come clean about what they consider excess usage as that will bind them. The way it is now, they an basically decide any usage is excessive depending on the bonus the CEO needs to get to maximise profits.
 
Honestly, I would be happy with a max of 140GB, problem free usage on my 4mb Uncapped. I use much less on average, but I think around 200GB a month would be fair before any sort of throttling kicks in. That's just me though.
 
kianm said:
Try openweb, you get shaped even on their so called Gold accounts. Unique to them I must say, you don't get what you pay for
Click to expand...

Been there, got the T shirt and the 1122 password ... Open web is a REALLY special case ... :D:D:D
 
I think to answer the question IMHO .....

If you pay for UNCAPPED the the data qantum should be exactly that - UNCAPPED.

When Rudi Jansen started the whole free the web thing, his payoff line was ''all you can eat internet'', but, its obvious that ISPs are putting us on diet with shaping, throttling and the like - citing Telkom as the problem, while in fact the ISPs trying to remain profitable.

Maybe better to sell UNCAPPED SHAPED MANAGED accounts ... because then we are told upfront, you can connect at any time, but at times the connectuion is worthless ... but thank you for paying ....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X