Internet Solutions ADSL Capping Kicks In

Does this only apply to home users? I don't see Business ADSL mentioned anywhere in the article.
 
Hate to say it but this brings that 'drug dealer' analogy to mind again, as it did with Telkom and the 30 gig accounts then the hard cap.

Get people hooked/dependant on or accustomed to the volume of bandwidth for a while, then take it away, forcing them to dig deep and purchase more. :(
 
IS hardcapping

What bs is this. They give you such bad speeds during business hours already and now they are making it worse.IS is more like telkom than anyone thinks
 
Would it not be cheaper and easier to swap DVD's via couriers rather than sit for hours on end leeching stuff from each other via local DC++ hubs ???.

I mean why else would people be crying over this local cap nonsense ???.

The number of local websites I visit and is really worthwhile I can count on my one hand.

I have no sympathy for fu*kers who leech 100GB per month.
 
tibby.dude said:
I have no sympathy for fu*kers who leech 100GB per month.
Click to expand...
While everyone is entitled to their opinion at least get the terms right. The majority of people using 100gb per month do so because they're not leeching but contributing as well.

There are few people more annoying that the pious self-appointed bandwidth police.
 
;) Thanks bwana! So now I'm part of a "secret" police force?

What it really amounts to, when you use more than your alloted bandwidth, you're stealing. Now don't get me wrong, I think the ISPs are the biggest thiefs, but to fight crime with crime is just wrong!
 
I agree with you tibby.
My argument though is one of tangible limits, not unknowns.
I have 2 x 3 gig accounts myself, both SAIX but not TelkomISP. None IS.

TelkomISP is also doing a similar thing with their flexible capping policy, and at the end of the day the consumer never knows where they stand really.
If something is supplied for a long time a certain way, that naturally becomes the norm, any movement away from that std becomes substandard, irrespective of the contractual agreement.

If we were not working off such a low bandwidth base (3gig) to start with, not to mention the cost thereof, then this would be a non argument.
These companies can only really blame themselves for the flak they take when they enforce something different to what they have been supplying that has now become the norm.
 
Totally with bwana on this get off your high horses - who are you to judge someone else's BW use?

That said 30GB is somewhere near fair for home use.
 
reech said:
Totally with bwana on this get off your high horses - who are you to judge someone else's BW use?
Click to expand...
High horse? :) I'm just saying it's stealing if u use more than what u pay for! :)

reech said:
That said 30GB is somewhere near fair for home use.
Click to expand...
Agree 100%
 
tibby.dude said:
Would it not be cheaper and easier to swap DVD's via couriers rather than sit for hours on end leeching stuff from each other via local DC++ hubs ???.

I mean why else would people be crying over this local cap nonsense ???.

The number of local websites I visit and is really worthwhile I can count on my one hand.

I have no sympathy for fu*kers who leech 100GB per month.
Click to expand...


good to know where u stand tibby. You are gonna be a great help in the fight against telkom/capping/anything that has to do with improving dsl in this country.

Just FYI people who are using 100GB in a month are invariably upping at least 50GB as well. So go and look up the term leech in a dictionary the next time you use it.
 
I'm just wondering, what are the physical limitations that the entire network (Telkom, IS, ect) in SA can carry, if were not even close to that physical limit, why cap? The servers are there, the lines are there, AFAIK the lines dont have to be replaced more often because they are being used, so what's the issue?
 
There's nothing wrong with the infrastructure... In actuall fact its not being used to its full potential. There is sooooo much more space on those lines.
 
moosag said:
There's nothing wrong with the infrastructure... In actuall fact its not being used to its full potential. There is sooooo much more space on those lines.
Click to expand...

That is interesting. Can you back this up with some evidence of some kind? A link perhaps...or do you just know it to be the case?
 
Here we go again with the abuse allegation BS. While I dont use anywhere near 100Gigs, Im obviously using the 25 gigs or so I consume per month on something other than surfing local sites, so who am I to judge those who use 4 times as much. If IS are happy to give me that much local connectivity to use on what ever I want (and who does 25 gigs of surfing in a month?) then accusing peope who use more is utter BS.

Anyway the fact is IS arent claiming that they are trying to protect international copyright laws. Theyve said, quite clearly as far as I can see, that their network cant handle that much heavy traffic and its no secret that their international bandwidth is a fraction of Telkoms.

IS is a business and has no reason to risk capital on more bandwidth when there only real competition is lagging miles behind in terms of product and service delivery.

3 gigs international and 30 gigs local still beats the carp out of 3 gigs across the board and then waiting to be randomly capped.
 
ettubrute said:
;) Thanks bwana! So now I'm part of a "secret" police force?

What it really amounts to, when you use more than your alloted bandwidth, you're stealing. Now don't get me wrong, I think the ISPs are the biggest thiefs, but to fight crime with crime is just wrong!
Click to expand...
Its up to the ISP alone to decide their hard capping policy and to implement it - what gets on my jiggly bits is someone thinking its any of their business what someone else uses the internet for.

If you pay telkomInternet for 3gb yet they allow you to download 10 does that mean you've stolen the extra 7gb? :confused: Personally I'm not buying IS's claim that the hard capping has been in place for months as its only being noticed now so if people treated it as an uncapped local account then so be it.
 
bwana v.9 said:
Its up to the ISP alone to decide their hard capping policy and to implement it - what gets on my jiggly bits is someone thinking its any of their business what someone else uses the internet for.

If you pay telkomInternet for 3gb yet they allow you to download 10 does that mean you've stolen the extra 7gb? :confused: Personally I'm not buying IS's claim that the hard capping has been in place for months as its only being noticed now so if people treated it as an uncapped local account then so be it.
Click to expand...

I STRONGLY AGREE
 
hj2k_x said:
good to know where u stand tibby. You are gonna be a great help in the fight against telkom/capping/anything that has to do with improving dsl in this country.

Just FYI people who are using 100GB in a month are invariably upping at least 50GB as well. So go and look up the term leech in a dictionary the next time you use it.
Click to expand...

Improving DSL in South Africa has absolutely nothing to do with enabling you to behave like a pig eating from the trough the latest crap that Hollywood shovels out.

All over the world ISP's (BT and Tiscali) are cutting down on the minority of their subscribers (the 3l33t warez idiots no doubt) who clearly are behaving like pigs who go beyond what is clearly reasonable.

ISP's should CLEARLY spell out their terms of service up front and stick to it and not change their minds willy nilly when it does not work out like in the case of IS now esp for people who comitted to long term contracts.

Now that is not fair either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X