Byrd
Well-Known Member
The No's are gaining - common No's!
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Which South African brand or product do you wish would make a return?
TelkomInternet confirms new ADSL capping policy
- Thread starter rpm
- Start date
ettubrute
Expert Member
Have to agree: No's are COMMON! 
Byrd
Well-Known Member
You to you frikkin brute
Anybody who votes no is an idiot. A monopoly is by nature anti-competitive - and what's worse - in this environment - a monopoly has permission (from gov) to rape, pillage and plunder.
The question is a misrepresentation: a monopoly is by definition destructive, power mongering and - there is no competition!!! FFS!!! (how can it be competitive or anti-competitive - the defininition of monopoly is exclusive of competition because there isn't any - except that which the monopoly allows to exist - in the interests of delusion.)
The question is a misrepresentation: a monopoly is by definition destructive, power mongering and - there is no competition!!! FFS!!! (how can it be competitive or anti-competitive - the defininition of monopoly is exclusive of competition because there isn't any - except that which the monopoly allows to exist - in the interests of delusion.)
ettubrute
Expert Member
The competition meant here is between TelkomISP and the other ISP's. Not the mogul itself!
There is no competition! Other isp's are only allowed to exist because telkom gives them permission. Ultimately everyone is beholden to telkom - even IS relies on telkom. Telkom has a cold - IS puts itself to bed. Sentech. Yawn.
Independant isp's are agents of telkom. They resell telkom bandwidth is all - and telkom hold all the bits. Telkom is a monopoly. Telkom is a anachronism. Telkom sucks - read my lips: s u c k s
Byrd
Well-Known Member
kilo39 said:Anybody who votes no is an idiot. A monopoly is by nature anti-competitive - and what's worse - in this environment - a monopoly has permission (from gov) to rape, pillage and plunder.
The question is a misrepresentation: a monopoly is by definition destructive, power mongering and - there is no competition!!! FFS!!! (how can it be competitive or anti-competitive - the defininition of monopoly is exclusive of competition because there isn't any - except that which the monopoly allows to exist - in the interests of delusion.)
Cum on
Really though - this kind of attitude is the problem. Put some intellegence into your argument. Certainly Telkom should have their balls cut off with regards to their business, but for this particular issue - the answer is definatly NO. Outsiders will see this kind of argument / attitude and assume we are a bunch of barbarians who's battle cry is "Death to the Telkom and damn the facts!"
hj2k_x
Honorary Master
kilo39 said:Anybody who votes no is an idiot. A monopoly is by nature anti-competitive - and what's worse - in this environment - a monopoly has permission (from gov) to rape, pillage and plunder.
The question is a misrepresentation: a monopoly is by definition destructive, power mongering and - there is no competition!!! FFS!!! (how can it be competitive or anti-competitive - the defininition of monopoly is exclusive of competition because there isn't any - except that which the monopoly allows to exist - in the interests of delusion.)
strongly agree.
ettubrute
Expert Member
Agree with you that Telkom sucks! 
hj2k_x
Honorary Master
Byrd said:Cum on
No. no, THIS kind of attitude is exactly the problem. Damn the facts?! What are you on about?!
How anyone can still support anything that telkom has to offer after all they have subjected this country to, frankly amazes me.
Vrotappel
Bulls fan
It is fact, anyone with half a brain can see it. Some customers may think they are benefiting from it but they fail to see the bigger picture.
ettubrute
Expert Member
Bigger picture being: getting shafted willingly, increasing the scums profit, etc. etc.
Byrd - your question answers itself: Certainly Telkom should have their balls cut off
End of discussion!! What more can be said?
Telkoms 'relaxed' policy? What is that? I am certainly not relaxed. I curtail my surfing because once over your 3 gigs you have no clue where you are... Aah - the giant is relaxed - so what happens when it gets a hardon and your name is on it?!!!
No way to run a business. No way to run a country. No way on this planet. Telkom is death - and that's where they should go.
Monopolistic pigs with no social conscience.
(my vent for the evening)
End of discussion!! What more can be said?
Telkoms 'relaxed' policy? What is that? I am certainly not relaxed. I curtail my surfing because once over your 3 gigs you have no clue where you are... Aah - the giant is relaxed - so what happens when it gets a hardon and your name is on it?!!!
No way to run a business. No way to run a country. No way on this planet. Telkom is death - and that's where they should go.
Monopolistic pigs with no social conscience.
(my vent for the evening)
BandwidthAddict
Expert Member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2005
- Messages
- 2,402
- Reaction score
- 252
@Byrd
I do not agree with you that congestion is the issue. I pay Telkom twice for bandwidth but I only get to use the one you say is for congestion. Ok. Let's do the math. Telkom grants me 3GB of data per month for R249. Telkom also says my ADSL connection is an "always on" connection. Bandwidth is something that must be consumed immediately, it cannot be stored. So, assuming 30 days in a month, what is my effective bandwidth:
30 days = 2592000 seconds
3GB = 25769803776 bits
That means to stretch my R249 to cover the entire month, I will have to use the internet at ... 9942.0539bps which is 1.213629 KBps. Wow, feel the speed. In all seriousness, nobody uses their home connection 24/7 so Telkom reuse that bandwidth for business purposes during office hours. The same bandwidth that I have paid for, and the business has paid for, and the bloke down the street has paid for x number of times. Luverly racket. Moving along ...
The congestion issue is about contention ratios. You are supposed to be able to use your bandwidth but, to allow for a much cheaper option, the mythical honest TelCos will give you the option of a pipe with a higher contention ratio. You then decide if it's worth the risk. Whatever the contention ratios Telkom work with, I do not hear alot of moanings about speed on this forum and a large percentage of the people here are high bandwidth users. Also consider that Telkom are looking into adding IPTV to it's portfolio at 4Mbps; I don't think Telkom have a capacity issue here.
What they have is P/E issue and they want to see their shares grow. That means the income has to grow and that means next year they must make R10 BILLION profit. Not going to happen. So expect to see some pain.
Peace.
Edit: Fixed 3GB as bits value and subsequent result.
I do not agree with you that congestion is the issue. I pay Telkom twice for bandwidth but I only get to use the one you say is for congestion. Ok. Let's do the math. Telkom grants me 3GB of data per month for R249. Telkom also says my ADSL connection is an "always on" connection. Bandwidth is something that must be consumed immediately, it cannot be stored. So, assuming 30 days in a month, what is my effective bandwidth:
30 days = 2592000 seconds
3GB = 25769803776 bits
That means to stretch my R249 to cover the entire month, I will have to use the internet at ... 9942.0539bps which is 1.213629 KBps. Wow, feel the speed. In all seriousness, nobody uses their home connection 24/7 so Telkom reuse that bandwidth for business purposes during office hours. The same bandwidth that I have paid for, and the business has paid for, and the bloke down the street has paid for x number of times. Luverly racket. Moving along ...
The congestion issue is about contention ratios. You are supposed to be able to use your bandwidth but, to allow for a much cheaper option, the mythical honest TelCos will give you the option of a pipe with a higher contention ratio. You then decide if it's worth the risk. Whatever the contention ratios Telkom work with, I do not hear alot of moanings about speed on this forum and a large percentage of the people here are high bandwidth users. Also consider that Telkom are looking into adding IPTV to it's portfolio at 4Mbps; I don't think Telkom have a capacity issue here.
What they have is P/E issue and they want to see their shares grow. That means the income has to grow and that means next year they must make R10 BILLION profit. Not going to happen. So expect to see some pain.
Peace.
Edit: Fixed 3GB as bits value and subsequent result.
Last edited:
Byrd
Well-Known Member
Rant you mean ....
Well it is all about context - in this specific instance Telkom is doing something that benefits it's clients. Lets look to the original Pole, it is addressing a particular issue - and not weather or not we think Telkom is the Devil.
My question answers itself? Didn't see any question marks in my last post./
I think that people who simply "Strongly agree" or who can't give reasoned responses are the idiots. What, do you live your life as one big Likert scale?
Well it is all about context - in this specific instance Telkom is doing something that benefits it's clients. Lets look to the original Pole, it is addressing a particular issue - and not weather or not we think Telkom is the Devil.
My question answers itself? Didn't see any question marks in my last post./
I think that people who simply "Strongly agree" or who can't give reasoned responses are the idiots. What, do you live your life as one big Likert scale?
hj2k_x
Honorary Master
kilo39 said:
Well said. Let us all pray for a lot of SNO this winter.
Dreaming and wishing for SNO - wish. (Dread to think we are going to get the same treatment from them - and still be paying telkom line fees.)
I fear SNO will not save us - while telkom exports its practises around africa and the world.
Bleed... it's the way of the land.
I fear SNO will not save us - while telkom exports its practises around africa and the world.
Bleed... it's the way of the land.
BandwidthAddict
Expert Member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2005
- Messages
- 2,402
- Reaction score
- 252
About the original issue. The anti-competitive part is that the pooling option was removed from independent ISPs on 1st November 2005. The playing field is not even with Telkom (SAIX) giving Telkom (TelkomInternet) an option that Telkom (SAIX) denies other ISPs. That's abuse of monopoly power.
Byrd
Well-Known Member
BandwidthAddict said:
I am a little confused - in the first part of your argument - the b@dwidth that everybody has paid for over and over again - this sounds like contention ratios to me. We only pay part of the cost. You call it a racket but later agree that it is a necessary evil.
All Telkom is doing is using another device to ensure low percieved contention ratio's. This is the reason we don't hear complaints about b@dwidth. In this instance though - instead of contending for bandwidth - you are contending for traffic.
PS - Before Telkom abolished the uncapped local traffic policy I was noticing slowdowns toward the end of the month. I will bet that Telkom is not expecting a great uptake of 4Mbps line and I would also bet that the reason uncapped local was removed was to make place for the new lines.
Byrd
Well-Known Member
BandwidthAddict said:
Sorry but this is not true BA. ISP's now pay per Gb. If they charge a client for 3Gb and he only uses 2Gb - the ISP does not have to pay for that Gb. The ISP then pockets the money that they did not have to pay. The ISP is more than welcome to share this bandwidth with other users but is unlikelty to want to take the risk. Telkom is at least giving this unused traffic to somebody else. It is not an exact science and is based on projections of usage. It would be easy to burn your fingers with this.