-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Will you be subscribing to the new Disney+ R49 streaming package?
What broadband users want
- Thread starter rpm
- Start date
This is what I want and I probably cover most people with this:
1) Lower cost per gigabyte + therefore increase in cap size (largest atm ~10GB)
2) Higher transfer speeds both up and downstream
3) ISP-level intl/local splitting
Now the question is when do we get it?
1) Lower cost per gigabyte + therefore increase in cap size (largest atm ~10GB)
2) Higher transfer speeds both up and downstream
3) ISP-level intl/local splitting
Now the question is when do we get it?
Uncapped with a fair use policy - like most other countries in the world.
Yes, yes, yes, always wanted this. Note, this need only arose due to excessive prices.
I do not see why caps do not roll-over as a standard feature [on all product]. My petrol stays in the car's petrol tank after month end.
sunsoffun
Expert Member
So true. Just a way to rob us of our money.
We request all these things, but it just falls on deaf ears. I cant think of one major service provider being proactive with what the users want. There are a couple smaller ISP's that are trying with the current conditions, I must admit.
Vrotappel
Bulls fan
60 Gb a month at a reasonable speed and price.
Pitbull
Verboten
better latency,
better latency,
better latency,
o yea and
better latency
better latency,
better latency,
o yea and
better latency
better latency,
better latency,
better latency,
o yea and
better latency
Are you talking locally or internationally?
If local, then it's up to the ISPs to peer with each other.
International latency is a different kettle of fish.
Pitbull
Verboten
International ofc.
Local is around 40 ms that is fine. International there is a problem, a serious problem.
why would you guys want to split international/local? the internet is the internet anyways most of your servers are overseas
My house in the UK has cable to Virgin. The speeds are something else, but let's not go there now. The important thing is they don't ask me which countries I want to browse and they don't cap me once I've downloaded 1GB, 2GB or 100GB.
Instead they ask me one simple question: What speeds do you want.
I think what South African internet users need most of all is a change in the way they buy their IP. Speed based, rather than volume based.
1. A stable connection. I don't care if it's 1Mb or 24Mb, as long as it keeps on giving me that speed.
2. Latency should be as low as possible, and not fluctuate, or increase, over time.
3. No distinction between local and international. I want internet access. Why should I have to worry about the physical location of a server?
4. If I buy 4G of data, I expect to be able to use the whole 4G, even if it is over 5 months. Some ISPs do offer it already.
5. I'm willing to pay for a service, but please provide me with that service. I cancelled my ADSL at home because Telkom could/would not understand that a 100byte/s upload speed, is a problem, although the download speed was as expected.
I want to get what I pay for. Is that too much to ask for?
2. Latency should be as low as possible, and not fluctuate, or increase, over time.
3. No distinction between local and international. I want internet access. Why should I have to worry about the physical location of a server?
4. If I buy 4G of data, I expect to be able to use the whole 4G, even if it is over 5 months. Some ISPs do offer it already.
5. I'm willing to pay for a service, but please provide me with that service. I cancelled my ADSL at home because Telkom could/would not understand that a 100byte/s upload speed, is a problem, although the download speed was as expected.
I want to get what I pay for. Is that too much to ask for?
Three problems:
1. SAT cable is oversubscribed so high 200's instead of middle 100s - as you would expect from Europe to the US West Coast.
For example, compare a trace route from your computer to news.bbc.co.uk (in my case 216ms
) with this.2. ISPs who have satellite uplink and downlink have to contend with 600ms going up and 600ms coming down. The signal's travelling 32,000km x 4.
3. ISPs who use supplementary sat downlink (aka simplex satellite) have to contend with an extra 600ms coming down. Not much can be done about that. The signal's just traveled 32,000km x 2.
The only possible way to fix it is to have higher capacity international cable with first world routing equipment at all points where the cable lands.
Mercurious
Well-Known Member
Uncapped local would be great. That would also encourage innovation in the country.
Three problems:
1. SAT cable is oversubscribed so high 200's instead of middle 100s - as you would expect from Europe to the US West Coast.
For example, compare a trace route from your computer to news.bbc.co.uk (in my case 216ms
2. ISPs who have satellite uplink and downlink have to contend with 600ms going up and 600ms coming down. The signal's travelling 32,000km x 4.
3. ISPs who use supplementary sat downlink (aka simplex satellite) have to contend with an extra 600ms coming down. Not much can be done about that. The signal's just traveled 32,000km x 2.
The only possible way to fix it is to have higher capacity international cable with first world routing equipment at all points where the cable lands.
My ping every were in the world is under 60ms on BeThere Isp except for Asia were's its 120ms and the highest Africa being 190ms, so your right about the SAT cable running at full capacity, But hopefully Seacom will change that. what i think you guys need is high quality lines along with speed and no bandwidth limit.
stoke
Honorary Master
Three problems:
1. SAT cable is oversubscribed so high 200's instead of middle 100s - as you would expect from Europe to the US West Coast.
For example, compare a trace route from your computer to news.bbc.co.uk (in my case 216ms
2. ISPs who have satellite uplink and downlink have to contend with 600ms going up and 600ms coming down. The signal's travelling 32,000km x 4.
3. ISPs who use supplementary sat downlink (aka simplex satellite) have to contend with an extra 600ms coming down. Not much can be done about that. The signal's just traveled 32,000km x 2.
The only possible way to fix it is to have higher capacity international cable with first world routing equipment at all points where the cable lands.
Or, ISP's could mirror the content being sought from international routes and release some of the congestion on the underwater cables.
Couple this with cheaper high-volume local hosting facilities, so that all of the souith africans who host overseas can return to home .. and - hey .. le differance!
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Technology/Pix/pictures/2008/02/01/SeaCableHi.jpg
look how small the bandwith is around africa compared to other places on earth. We will never have relative speeds to europe. The best thing we can get is a flat rate connection speed hopefully 1 mbit and Not to be raped anymore by the concept of ''per data used'' charges.
look how small the bandwith is around africa compared to other places on earth. We will never have relative speeds to europe. The best thing we can get is a flat rate connection speed hopefully 1 mbit and Not to be raped anymore by the concept of ''per data used'' charges.
Most ISPs already do that. Besides local file mirrors and FTP sites most of the local ISPs use transparent HTTP proxies (which can be a real pain sometimes like when a proxy gets blacklisted) to cache HTTP traffic.
It's impossible to cache traffic that contains dynamic data such as VOIP calls, video conferencing, multiplayer gaming, etc.
Web 2.0 is unfortunately too interactive for that to be an option. A page on this forum that gets cached is outdated seconds later.