iBurst - warning for excessive usage

Turning into a dictatorship, we pay a lot of money to be told what we can download or look at.

On top of that because "they" can't fix their dumb bw monitor we have to control our own usage.

My days with this company are soon coming to an end, it was an interesting experience although an expensive one.

At least I managed to put off quite a few people that I know who were considering getting iburst and will continue to do so in the future.
 
I'm quite happy with the stuffer bw monitor. I managed to remain uncapped, but I'm not going to abuse it. I'd rather download what I want, but not go overboard... I dunno, you can only watch so much or listen to so much I guess. And I'd rather have this connection for the rest of the month and download say 20-30GB, than download 70GB and get hard capped in the last week.
 
or other limitations on the iBurst Service; or puts an excessive burden on the limitations of the iBurst network;
Click to expand...

Oh you going to youtube?!?! That is burden on the network, how dare you, cuff him!

connect multiple computers behind the user terminal to set up a LAN (Local Area Network) that in any manner would result in a violation of the terms of this AUP;
Click to expand...

Anyone using a VPN is in violation! Curse my work for giving me VPN access so i can work at home!
 
Captain Slow

iBurst would benefit from redefining their throttling strategy. I am an ex-iBurst user (now 384kbps ADSL, 3GB) and I found their throttled speed to be just too frustratingly low. Let's ignore for a minute that my tower became progressively overloaded over time, leaving my maximum, unthrottled attainable speed at about 30kBps (instead of the original 80-90kBps when I first registered with them :confused:). But I understand these things and accepted it as a consequence of an increased contention ratio on my tower.

I eventually ended with long HTTP request delays and low browsing speeds that left me uninterested in even using my connection when it was in a throttled state.

I propose that iBurst raise their throttled speeds to the minimum definable broadband speed of 256kbps with a hardcap option of, say 20GB. I say 20GB because if I were to download constantly at 64kbps for the entire month, I could use up to 20GB in a month*. At that modest speed, I would have at least a minimum guarantee of acceptable performance. That's just how I feel about it. What do you think?

*Please, I'm not interested in people trolling me about constant usage. I paid for bandwidth, I should be able to use it as much as I like.
 
Zangetsu said:
iBurst would benefit from redefining their throttling strategy. I am an ex-iBurst user (now 384kbps ADSL, 3GB) and I found their throttled speed to be just too frustratingly low. Let's ignore for a minute that my tower became progressively overloaded over time, leaving my maximum, unthrottled attainable speed at about 30kBps (instead of the original 80-90kBps when I first registered with them :confused:). But I understand these things and accepted it as a consequence of an increased contention ratio on my tower.

I eventually ended with long HTTP request delays and low browsing speeds that left me uninterested in even using my connection when it was in a throttled state.

I propose that iBurst raise their throttled speeds to the minimum definable broadband speed of 256kbps with a hardcap option of, say 20GB. I say 20GB because if I were to download constantly at 64kbps for the entire month, I could use up to 20GB in a month*. At that modest speed, I would have at least a minimum guarantee of acceptable performance. That's just how I feel about it. What do you think?

*Please, I'm not interested in people trolling me about constant usage. I paid for bandwidth, I should be able to use it as much as I like.
Click to expand...

To tell the truth I feel it is really cr@p of ibust to expect people to pay for a 1mb/s service when they are on an overloaded tower an the best they can get is a dismal 100kb/s or worse. And then when you call ibust they tell you that that is the speed you can expect.

But hey, pay for 1mb/s! :eek:

A$$holes.

P.S. As for the ppl downloading 24/7, I say let 'em RIP. Go for it.
 
Zangetsu said:
*Please, I'm not interested in people trolling me about constant usage. I paid for bandwidth, I should be able to use it as much as I like.
Click to expand...

Well I'd say a 256kb uncapped connection just wouldn't be feasable for iBurst, who would bother not getting capped.. and the speed problems would just get worse.

Sure you can use it as much as you like, but it's not meant to be that fast, otherwise they wouldn't differentiate between capped and uncapped.
 
Ekhaatvensters said:
Well I'd say a 256kb uncapped connection just wouldn't be feasable for iBurst, who would bother not getting capped.. and the speed problems would just get worse.
Click to expand...

I didn't say 256kbps uncapped. I said 256kbps with a hard-cap of 20GB.
 
Zangetsu said:
I didn't say 256kbps uncapped. I said 256kbps with a hard-cap of 20GB.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I would NEVER survive with a 256kbps wireless connection! :eek:

That's less than 30kB/s on all downloads in theory, and it will be worse when congestion kicks in. Sure, 20GB is nice, but you won't even be able to use it because of your slow speed. 512K I can live with, but anything less is getting a bit slow.
 
Sorry Zangetsu, I didn't see that somehow :/

GBM, he was talking about the throttled speeds, he's saying 64kb is too slow for you to want to get capped, so rather have it throttled to useable speeds with a hardcap.

I still think that on 256kb most people would have no problem with getting capped and using up the whole 20GB because the service would still be fast enough inbetween downloads. At the moment 64kb makes people want to stay on 1mb speeds, why I think the 64 kb service isn't made for downloading all month.. but anyway.
 
Indeed, Ekhaatvensters :). Whether or not iBurst will ever change that is also debatable...
 
EHV - As I say i had a look see at their archived websites. The terms and conditions there had no reference to changes.

As for this AUP, it makes me so glad I've left them behind.
 
Zangetsu said:
Indeed, Ekhaatvensters :). Whether or not iBurst will ever change that is also debatable...
Click to expand...

With all the changes taking place inside that company, it wouldn't surprise me if we get a letter in 3 months informing us that we will now be hardcapped if we reach our bandwidth limit. If that happens, I'll just completely stop paying them. :mad:
 
GreatBigMouth said:
With all the changes taking place inside that company, it wouldn't surprise me if we get a letter in 3 months informing us that we will now be hardcapped if we reach our bandwidth limit. If that happens, I'll just completely stop paying them. :mad:
Click to expand...

Hard capping is the only way they can stop the +60GB downloaders so yes I too would not be surprised when they do just that.:eek:
 
Only reason I am with iburst is because of the 64k throttled service...I can still play wow, check mail and download the odd thing after my caps used up. So I will also leave if they decide to scrape the 64k throttled policy.
 
hehe, yes, this is nogal a contraversial issue, imo valid points from both sides...
I've got one director on iburst, normally never uses more than 2gb per month on the 3GB package, so lots of paid for megs going to waste each month....
but complaining about excessive usage is 1 thing, what wud u guys do if iburst starts complaining about what u guys do with all your downloads...
http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php?p=1117601#post1117601
 
whooa, damm.... this sucks, how do i know if this new Hardcap-law-thing was already implimented at the time when i sighed up, or better, since when is this guys?:eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X