MWEB Uncapped Subscribers Feedback

[mR Yellow]

@ Mweb Operations

I hope you can help me out too. I've been experiencing very sub par performance of late. Currently only getting 35kb on a 4mb line.

Here's my ping test. Any ideas?

C:\Users\mRYellow>ping www.google.co.za -n 50

Pinging www.l.google.com [64.233.179.104] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=393ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=406ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=424ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=417ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=393ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=419ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=393ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=393ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=398ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=393ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=391ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=393ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=409ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=405ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=412ms TTL=50
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Request timed out.
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=393ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=404ms TTL=50
Request timed out.
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=393ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=394ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=421ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=393ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=397ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=400ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=408ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=393ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=410ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=417ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=393ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=392ms TTL=50
Reply from 64.233.179.104: bytes=32 time=409ms TTL=50

Ping statistics for 64.233.179.104:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 46, Lost = 4 (8% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 391ms, Maximum = 424ms, Average = 398ms

Your help would be much appreciated.

Thanx
mRY

 

[SabreWolfy]

@mR Yellow: looks like this from one page back:

Ok. Seems as though it isn't mweb.

Telkom just told me that my exchange is part of the 10meg trial and there is nothing that they can do.

Don't know whether to be happy or sad at this point.

Apparantly my line will keep haing issues till the 20th.

 

[MWEBHelp]

It may be true, it may not. I just can't
take seriously someone who says 100ms
is suitable for gaming.
Do you really want to play CSS with an in-
game ping of 100ms????????????????????

I'm fairly sure I said "anything that's sub 100 is playable" - if you keep misquoting me I'm going to start thinking you're doing it on purpose

Really though this is splitting hairs a bit isn't it?

Different games have different ping requirements and some players are less tolerant of the network conditions than others.

I've known gamers who could top the scoreboard for an entire evening with the worst ping on the server and I've known ones who refused to play online at all because they couldn't tolerate the 'impurities' introduced by anything other than a LAN connection.

Also I'm sure you'll agree that the ISP's network is only one of many factors that can influence somone's experience in a particular game - as was perfectly illustrated by Qwikslver's problems earlier today.

When it comes to gamers believe me I know they are a very demanding bunch - I know many gamers will maintain multiple ISP accounts so that they can switch connections based on what they're playing to reduce hops and latency to the server they're playing on. As a WoW player doing 25 man raids with European guilds I lost track of how many unshaped services I tried looking for that perfect ping.

So can I tell you that MWEB's uncapped service offers *the best* performance for customer X who likes to play game Y? No obviously not, because there are too many factors at play.

What I can tell you is:

That there are definitely many gamers making use of the service who are happy with the performance.

That we take fault reports by gamers just as seriously as we take them from any other customer and we do our best to investigate and resolve these problems.

That we listen very carefully to the feedback from our gaming customers, as seriously as we do from any other customer and that we will use this feedback to improve on the service whenever possible.


Kind Regards
MWEB Operations (Tech Manager)

 

[MWEBHelp]

@mR Yellow: looks like this from one page back:

I think Sabrewolfy is spot on with that mR Yellow - the results look almost identical. If your line is managed by MWEB PM us the details in the morning and we'll investigate it for you.

 

[I am Penguin]

I'm fairly sure I said "anything that's sub 100 is playable" - if you keep misquoting me I'm going to start thinking you're doing it on purpose

Really though this is splitting hairs a bit isn't it?

Different games have different ping requirements and some players are less tolerant of the network conditions than others.

I've known gamers who could top the scoreboard for an entire evening with the worst ping on the server and I've known ones who refused to play online at all because they couldn't tolerate the 'impurities' introduced by anything other than a LAN connection.

Also I'm sure you'll agree that the ISP's network is only one of many factors that can influence somone's experience in a particular game - as was perfectly illustrated by Qwikslver's problems earlier today.

When it comes to gamers believe me I know they are a very demanding bunch - I know many gamers will maintain multiple ISP accounts so that they can switch connections based on what they're playing to reduce hops and latency to the server they're playing on. As a WoW player doing 25 man raids with European guilds I lost track of how many unshaped services I tried looking for that perfect ping.

So can I tell you that MWEB's uncapped service offers *the best* performance for customer X who likes to play game Y? No obviously not, because there are too many factors at play.

What I can tell you is:

That there are definitely many gamers making use of the service who are happy with the performance.

That we take fault reports by gamers just as seriously as we take them from any other customer and we do our best to investigate and resolve these problems.

That we listen very carefully to the feedback from our gaming customers, as seriously as we do from any other customer and that we will use this feedback to improve on the service whenever possible.


Kind Regards
MWEB Operations (Tech Manager)

Are you saying in broad terms you offer the uncapped service with a ping of less than 100ms?

 

[I am Penguin]

Your help would be much appreciated.

Thanx
mRY

@ Mweb Operations

I hope you can help me out too. I've been experiencing very sub par performance of late. Currently only getting 35kb on a 4mb line.

Here's my ping test. Any ideas?

In comparison

Pinging www.l.google.com [196.23.168.147] with 32 bytes of data:

Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=33ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=57
Reply from 196.23.168.147: bytes=32 time=32ms TTL=57

Ping statistics for 196.23.168.147:
Packets: Sent = 50, Received = 50, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 31ms, Maximum = 33ms, Average = 31ms

True, You get what you pay for!

 

[MWEBHelp]

Are you saying in broad terms you offer the uncapped service with a ping of less than 100ms?

No Penguin.

If I made a sweeping statement like that our network engineers would be handing me their Dummy's Guide award again tomorrow morning

GingerBeer and I were discussing the finer points of gaming performance a few pages up:

I'm very happy with Mweb 4096kbps Uncapped Shaped. Get good speeds often (350kb/s - 420kb/s depending on the server I'm downloading from), Local gaming, like CoD4, MW2 etc. is decent (pings vary 30-80ms although I get the odd spike to about 200ms).
Overall, Mweb is to stay as my ISP

Gingerbeer is right those spikes can be annoying - I find that having a slightly higher ping can often be preferable if it's more stable. Anything sub 100 is really quite playable though.

Suggest you read back for full context.

Thanks and Goodnight
MWEB Operations(Tech Manager)

 

[TheYak]

My connection was fine for most of yesterday. The speed dropped every now and again and I got some unresponsiveness (page not found, etc) a couple of times during the day, but in general, it was okay. Hopefully it's because of Telkom faffing with the lines to upgrade me to 10mbps

 

[Chavez]

@mweb operations -

I'm currently in Australia on holiday and have just been informed that my uncapped account hasn't connected since 11 August. I've logged two tickets via email an no one is getting back to me to try resolving the issue. Please could you help? I can pm you my username if need be.

Thanks

 

[bullzeye.za]

I'm fairly sure I said "anything that's sub 100 is playable" - if you keep misquoting me I'm going to start thinking you're doing it on purpose

Really though this is splitting hairs a bit isn't it?

Different games have different ping requirements and some players are less tolerant of the network conditions than others.

I've known gamers who could top the scoreboard for an entire evening with the worst ping on the server and I've known ones who refused to play online at all because they couldn't tolerate the 'impurities' introduced by anything other than a LAN connection.

Also I'm sure you'll agree that the ISP's network is only one of many factors that can influence somone's experience in a particular game - as was perfectly illustrated by Qwikslver's problems earlier today.

When it comes to gamers believe me I know they are a very demanding bunch - I know many gamers will maintain multiple ISP accounts so that they can switch connections based on what they're playing to reduce hops and latency to the server they're playing on. As a WoW player doing 25 man raids with European guilds I lost track of how many unshaped services I tried looking for that perfect ping.

So can I tell you that MWEB's uncapped service offers *the best* performance for customer X who likes to play game Y? No obviously not, because there are too many factors at play.

What I can tell you is:

That there are definitely many gamers making use of the service who are happy with the performance.

That we take fault reports by gamers just as seriously as we take them from any other customer and we do our best to investigate and resolve these problems.

That we listen very carefully to the feedback from our gaming customers, as seriously as we do from any other customer and that we will use this feedback to improve on the service whenever possible.


Kind Regards
MWEB Operations (Tech Manager)

Totally agree - Not had more than one or two bad ping days on local servers, and even during the seacom issues my international ( WoW ) latency never peaked over 600+-

On average I get 550ms ping to the european WoW servers, and easily average sub-50 to local SAIX BFBC2 servers.

Definitely playable, I've tanked, healed, and DPS'ed the Lich King on this line, and had only a few days of hardship ( which I keep my afrihost backup account for ).

All in all, MWEB has really outdone themselves with this package, my downloads run at 150-200kbps overnight ( Rapidshare ), though heavily shaped during the day, but regular browsing and gaming has never been an issue, not even during peak times.

Don't change a thing!

(MWEB Uncapped Shaped 4096k)

 

[MWEBHelp]

!

Totally agree - Not had more than one or two bad ping days on local servers, and even during the seacom issues my international ( WoW ) latency never peaked over 600+-

On average I get 550ms ping to the european WoW servers, and easily average sub-50 to local SAIX BFBC2 servers.

Definitely playable, I've tanked, healed, and DPS'ed the Lich King on this line, and had only a few days of hardship ( which I keep my afrihost backup account for ).

All in all, MWEB has really outdone themselves with this package, my downloads run at 150-200kbps overnight ( Rapidshare ), though heavily shaped during the day, but regular browsing and gaming has never been an issue, not even during peak times.

Don't change a thing!

(MWEB Uncapped Shaped 4096k)

Hi bullzeye.za

Thank you for the support and feedback

Kind Regards
MWEB Operations

 

[SirFooK'nG]

Once the IPC issue is sorted out then it should be 100% (damn Hellkom !!) I have no issues with the shaping policies on my account... my gaming runs fine (when its ping is good - but thats temporarily sorted at the moment till the IPC is upgraded). MWEB dude listens to us!!! thnx

 

[Degaron]

Just very interresting to see how backbones differ, I use to use Mweb and becuase of the up and downs I had while gaming on it decided to try out IS for a month and I must say Pings are 50ms lower on all services and its stable.

Getting 60 - 80ms on most local services and 250ms on international.

Im not posting this to flame Mweb or anything, just stating thats something to look at.

 

[SirFooK'nG]

I normally get 20 to 30ms pings for local and 250+ for international on my MWeb, but not on the normal @dslmweb.co.za login... well not lately. Thats why I mentioned the IPC issue, but you cant blame MWeb for Telkom's short comings!

Today on the normal dslmweb.co.za (while an HTTP download was going)

 

[auriga1000]

@MWEB OPERATIONS

i have been playing nfs world online since launch and until recently had no problems. to bring you up to speed, nfs world utilises a setup launcher each time you launch the game where it checks for updates/patches first before launching the game. On Friday i launched the game as usual, and there was a 70meg patch. My download refused to go past 30meg before bombing out with "check if your internet connection is working" message. Contacted EA who asked me to uninstall game and reinstall. I duly did, now the download was 720meg. I couldn't go past 125meg.
After many reattempts and reinstalls, I decided to use my capped telkom account and the download proceeded from start to finish without a hitch.
what happened?

ps. I have the 4meg uncapped account.

 

[GingerBeer]

I'm fairly sure I said "anything that's sub 100 is playable" - if you keep misquoting me I'm going to start thinking you're doing it on purpose

Really though this is splitting hairs a bit isn't it?

Different games have different ping requirements and some players are less tolerant of the network conditions than others.

I've known gamers who could top the scoreboard for an entire evening with the worst ping on the server and I've known ones who refused to play online at all because they couldn't tolerate the 'impurities' introduced by anything other than a LAN connection.

Also I'm sure you'll agree that the ISP's network is only one of many factors that can influence somone's experience in a particular game - as was perfectly illustrated by Qwikslver's problems earlier today.

When it comes to gamers believe me I know they are a very demanding bunch - I know many gamers will maintain multiple ISP accounts so that they can switch connections based on what they're playing to reduce hops and latency to the server they're playing on. As a WoW player doing 25 man raids with European guilds I lost track of how many unshaped services I tried looking for that perfect ping.

So can I tell you that MWEB's uncapped service offers *the best* performance for customer X who likes to play game Y? No obviously not, because there are too many factors at play.

What I can tell you is:

That there are definitely many gamers making use of the service who are happy with the performance.

That we take fault reports by gamers just as seriously as we take them from any other customer and we do our best to investigate and resolve these problems.

That we listen very carefully to the feedback from our gaming customers, as seriously as we do from any other customer and that we will use this feedback to improve on the service whenever possible.


Kind Regards
MWEB Operations (Tech Manager)

We could do a separate poll and see who would
like to play with a 99ms ping on Counterstrike.

If you get >= 70% against you, then you sponsor
a prize for uncapped unshaped ADSL for a month.

Let's see you put your money where you mouth is.

MWEB didn't remove the "ideal for gaming" blurb
from their advertising for nothing.

 

[GingerBeer]

I normally get 20 to 30ms pings for local and 250+ for international on my MWeb, but not on the normal @dslmweb.co.za login... well not lately. Thats why I mentioned the IPC issue, but you cant blame MWeb for Telkom's short comings!

Today on the normal dslmweb.co.za (while an HTTP download was going)

Just thought you should know.
Speedtest does not show ping for games.

Games are on a different protocol and are
shaped specifically on that.

 

[SirFooK'nG]

Just thought you should know.
Speedtest does not show ping for games.

Games are on a different protocol and are
shaped specifically on that.

Agreed on that, Usually in MW2 i have a full Green bar (shows ping), but this last week there were issues and that was directly related to the IPC, because the second I change to the @mweb.co.za username, my ping was sorted. The one login utilizes SAIX network (I think MWEB has put a lot of pressure on Telkom due to the IPC). My wife and I play at the same time, and our pings are pretty good 90% of the time. Since they now shape gaming protocols tho, I host a lot less often than before. And it serioulsy peeves me off that I get told to use the addict product for gaming... seriously WTF.... I would raher use Afrihosts 1 gig unshaped for R29 for gaming then... But for now with Modern Warfare 2 its ok (but only local, forget about international - impossible to play)

 

[MWEBHelp]

@MWEB OPERATIONS

I have been playing nfs world online since launch and until recently had no problems. to bring you up to speed, nfs world utilises a setup launcher each time you launch the game where it checks for updates/patches first before launching the game. On Friday i launched the game as usual, and there was a 70meg patch. My download refused to go past 30meg before bombing out with "check if your internet connection is working" message. Contacted EA who asked me to uninstall game and reinstall. I duly did, now the download was 720meg. I couldn't go past 125meg.
After many reattempts and reinstalls, I decided to use my capped telkom account and the download proceeded from start to finish without a hitch.
what happened?

ps. I have the 4meg uncapped account.

Hi Auriga It's a bit difficult to say after the fact, but it sounds as though this could have been a caching issue. We received several reports of customers with a similar problem on a recent BFBC2 patch release however on that one it turned out to be affecting numerous EA customers globally and one of their developers went to the extent of making a standalone patch available.
It seems that it's EA's practice to no longer release standalone patch files as part of their attempts to combat piracy and if my understanding is correct that their in-game content distribution is handled by Akamai which is not always cache friendly. There are certain things we can do to try and resolve these issues when they occur, but we need to have detail such as the name of the file(s) being downloaded and the source addresses, which isn't always easy to obtain with autopatchers.

If you have a problem like this again see if you can obtain that type of detail and then let us know and we'll see if there's anything that we can do to assist.

 

[semaphore]

Totally agree - Not had more than one or two bad ping days on local servers, and even during the seacom issues my international ( WoW ) latency never peaked over 600+-

On average I get 550ms ping to the european WoW servers, and easily average sub-50 to local SAIX BFBC2 servers.

Definitely playable, I've tanked, healed, and DPS'ed the Lich King on this line, and had only a few days of hardship ( which I keep my afrihost backup account for ).

All in all, MWEB has really outdone themselves with this package, my downloads run at 150-200kbps overnight ( Rapidshare ), though heavily shaped during the day, but regular browsing and gaming has never been an issue, not even during peak times.

Don't change a thing!

(MWEB Uncapped Shaped 4096k)

550MS to wow? i would slit my wrists if my latency was that high, if mine go's above to 250 i start freaking out. You loose alot of DPS with higher ping, and if you're in a highly competitive guild that is pretty detrimental, especially if you're doing like 15K dps and you're 10th in damage on the list -_-