Telkom uncapped ADSL investigated

[MickeyD]

And why is it the industry norm? It's an SA norm not a world norm.

Thank Mweb for that..

 

[Sodan]

If they stick to your definition then a 2mb uncapped line would cost R2000 minimum!So thanks I think I'll rather pay R200 and have a reasonable point at which its throttled down to slower speeds and still not capped.

200mb on a 2mb line is reasonable IMO,also if you download after hours it doesn't count towards this cap btw.

That's not a 2Mbps uncapped service.
That's a 256kbps uncapped service (or whatever speed they throttle you to), with the first x amount of GB at 2Mbps.

I'll reiterate: it is not a 2Mbps uncapped service, and it is not only misleading, it is factually incorrect to advertise it is such.

 

[Rickster]

Funny how no one is lodging a complaint to the ASA about Afrihost business accounts being shaped.

 

[_TrXtR_]

Funny how no one is lodging a complaint to the ASA about Afrihost business accounts being shaped.

I thought I was the only one experiencing this. I upgraded from 4mbs uncapped + unshaped due to really bad experience. And it's still horrible. Maybe a ASA complaint is a good idea.

 

[falcon786]

The issue is that it doesn't fall within the real definition of uncapped. The ASA has redefined the term to match the product.

Yes I know by definition it should not be called uncapped in absolute terms but I somehow think they are justified in letting it slide.

True uncapped products do cost that much and are available in the market.

How much do true uncapped 2Mb /s products cost and then we can even get more technical and say that if they have any contention AT ALL then also in absolute terms they are not true 2Mb/s uncapped products right?

Telkom shouldn't be allowed to advertise a product that isn't the same as if it is and then supplement a term with ts&cs. Rather have them call it soft capped then you have your cheap internet and nobody is misled.

I think the current Telkom capped accounts are already softcapped accounts,this is definitely once step above that.

That's not a 2Mbps uncapped service.
That's a 256kbps uncapped service (or whatever speed they throttle you to), with the first x amount of GB at 2Mbps.

I'll reiterate: it is not a 2Mbps uncapped service, and it is not only misleading, it is factually incorrect to advertise it is such.

I do understand where you are coming from and in absolute terms you are correct,however if the norm is 100gb and they are giving you double that before they start throttling you then surely its not worth making a fuss over,in fact the spin of from this whole uncapped thing is that capped accounts have become much much more reasonably priced than in the past.You can get an actual 200gb account for R200 with an actual cut off these days from many ISP's.

 

[kianm]

This goes back to ISPA who have let us down

If it has a 200 gb cap, then just sell it as a 200 gb cap

Exactly

 

[Swa]

How much do true uncapped 2Mb /s products cost and then we can even get more technical and say that if they have any contention AT ALL then also in absolute terms they are not true 2Mb/s uncapped products right?

In the region of R1000. Uncapped isn't defined by contention but rather whether or not there's an artificial limitation to the whole service like capping or throttling. If this is essentially a 200GB softcap account I see no reason they can't sell it as such. At R200 there will still be plenty of demand for it. Out of principle though this is something I would avoid.