Telkom plans uncapped local bandwidth

[jetpacman]

I can't believe that Telkom have said what they did, this truly is the saddest, pathetic and most childish way for them to handle it. I mean whats the big deal with the local cap, or are they worried that it will damage Telkom Media's efforts. Imagine if others start streaming TV content over the local connection in competition to Telkoms.

If thats the problem then Telkom please at least give us some kind of shaped local bandwidth please man

 

[StrontiumDog]

Beam us up Mr Branson

So we cancel our DSL, then what?

Go back to the technological dark ages then we won't be inclined to visit MyADSL anymore and be insulted by people who's blood is boiling

 

[Glordit]

W-T-F??
Ucapped local but you still pay after you are capped!? R E D U N D A N T ! ! !
*Sigh* Welcome to South Africa

 

[mancombseepgood]

What does uncapped actually mean?

 

[Nocturne]

I take it to mean either "unmetered" or "unlimited".

If Local Bandwidth is "unmetered", then it means that any local bandwidth used will not count towards any usage limits. I think that this was the intent of the ICASA regulations (But please don't quote me on that, as there are many different interpretations). If this was the case, you would pay for (e.g.) 3GB of International Bandwidth per month, and perhaps a small fixed fee for local bandwidth. Once you had reached 3GB of International bandwidth, you would not have any more access to international web sites/internet services. However, you could happilly pull down hundreds and hundreds of gigs of local content, and that would not affect your International bandwidth or the price you'd pay in any way at all.

If local bandwidth is "unlimited" but not "unmetered", then the example changes. You buy 3GB of bandwidth (Local vs. International is irrelevant) per month. Whether you used local bandwidth or international bandwidth, it would eat up that 3GB just the same. Once your 3GB is exhausted, you will no longer have any access whatsoever to international websites or services. However, you could continue to use local websites and services to your heart's content... BUT (!) just because it's unlimited does not mean it's free. You may never be forbidden from using local websites and services, but your telecoms/internet provider reserves the right to charge you for any local bandwidth used after you've reached your 3GB limit. This second option (INCLUDING making you pay extra) is what I believe Telkom is going for.

 

[kris860911]

You buy 3GB of bandwidth (Local vs. International is irrelevant) per month. Whether you used local bandwidth or international bandwidth, it would eat up that 3GB just the same. Once your 3GB is exhausted, you will no longer have any access whatsoever to international websites or services. However, you could continue to use local websites and services to your heart's content... BUT (!) just because it's unlimited does not mean it's free. You may never be forbidden from using local websites and services, but your telecoms/internet provider reserves the right to charge you for any local bandwidth used after you've reached your 3GB limit. This second option (INCLUDING making you pay extra) is what I believe Telkom is going for.

But what has changed then? We can have as much internet as we want now?!? We just have to pay for it. Then everything in life is unlimited. That is just stupid.

But if Local is unlimited (In the example's definition), then that means International is not unlimited (Correct?) and therefore we cannot buy any more International bandwidth a month, other than our 3 Gigs?

That is utterly stupid. Brain-dead morons can come up with something better than that. (Oh, wait, Telkom.. I C....)

 

[Nocturne]

I think the difference is that now, we buy 3GB, and we can't buy more (From TelkomInternet, anyway) when we hit it. We have to open an account. I.e. we decide at the outset how much we want. With my second example, you won't decide how much you plan to use, and they will never cut you off. You'll just get a really big surprise come month end when you get your bill. Which is worse that capping, in my opinion.

 

[ldmelsa]

Hey, at least we'll still be able to chat on MyADSL after cap.

 

[Scooby_Doo]

A good idea i just thought of, (well good in that it would be nice for us).

Since we pay for the ADSL line at Rxxx per month just for having an ADSL line all adsl subscribers should get a local only account, uncapped? 30gigs? And then if we want to get international we can keep the current system. Then of coarse have conbined accounts with local and international and we can buy that from XYZ ISP which would include our ADSL rental.

 

[Xarog]

Im confused with that article.

"Consumers will be charged for any local bandwidth usage after the service has been capped."

so you can buy a 1gig saix account and not use the international, and still have unrestricted local?

but then if you use the 1gig international you will be charged for all local bandwidth used??

Have i got this right?

I dunno.

Right now I kinda think it will go like this :

You get your adsl line, and you go to your ISP, and you get your monthly cap or whatever...

And then Telkom charges you every time you get your email, and your cap doesn't get used.

 

[Xarog]

Actually, on second thought, one should just burn the crap out of the local account and refuse to pay at the end of the month. Then when Telkom cuts you off you haul them straight back to the CCC for capping your local connection.

 

[kevinswan007]

problem is, its ICASA (CCC) against Telkom.
Its like bringing a knife to a gun fight.

 

[Gatecrasher]

The intention of the ADSL regulation 3.4 is very clear (except to Telkom). The cost of Local access should be fully recoverable from the ADSL access rental. All local access should be free. There should not be a seperate charge.

Local bandwdith costs virtually nothing. IS charge R2/Gb. (Unfortunately, they have to pay Telkom the silly IPConnect fee, which pushes the cost to the consumer up.) The actual cost is probably only a tiny fraction of that.

If there was no monthly access fee then Telkom would have a case. Let's just hope that ICASA sees it that way.

 

[Debbie]

Actually, on second thought, one should just burn the crap out of the local account and refuse to pay at the end of the month. Then when Telkom cuts you off you haul them straight back to the CCC for capping your local connection.

Yes we could do this.

 

[stoke]

What local account? Teklom Internet don't sell local accounts.

 

[HavocXphere]

Current TelkomInternet subscribers are not immediately capped when reaching their monthly limit – typically 3 GB - but Maritz said that this will happen in future.

So predictable. I knew they would kill the 200% cap thing.

 

[bekdik]

Under the expected definition, what is a local 30 Gb account from Telkom?

 

[feo]

Under the expected definition, what is a local 30 Gb account from Telkom?

A pipedream.

 

[boramk]

In the beggining....

30GB international cap and uncapped local

then 30GB international and no local.....

then 3GB and no local....

now 3GB + Local Costs = More $$$ we have to pay

 

[ldmelsa]

I think Telkom did not prepared for the bandwidth demand. Like boramk says, they had this stuff in the beginning. There were only a small number of people on ADSL back then.