What do you think is broadband?

Good question. I would start off with this as a minimum requirement.

1. Always on with no per minute charges
2. Super cheap to access
3. Faster than 1Mbps and after the first 12 months it should be adapted to reflect a minimum speed of 8Mbps and after another 12 months it should reflect the minimum as 12Mbps and from then on it should go up by at least 1Mbps every year...
4. No restrictions as to what you use the bandwidth for. You can opt to transport voice, video or whatever you please on it. The pipe is the provider's business, what you put in it is yours...
 
Last edited:
To be more reasonable, we're still in SA and our broadband is in its infancy but I think the speed should be set at least 768/512 up/down and monthly usage should be at least 20GB.

As far as price is concerned, I believe the best place will be a percentage of monthly earnings on an average, if an american person pays USD20 per month while he earns USD2000 then thats 1%, at current figures, we on average are earning USD6000 per year so thats like USD500 per month..... I guess this is going to be very very very hard.
 
Ag shame...

These idiots are so busy plotting their socialist takeover, it's hard for them to decide what the masses of future socialist slaves should be allowed...

Pity that the economy isn't near healthy enough yet, for a "successful" socialist takeover...

You all need to work nice and hard now, at building the country up, so they can take it all from you...

Oooohhh they're so clever... :rolleyes:
 
they staling, they don't want to lose making money
 
Without proper broadband and affordability definitions – which should include minimum downlink and uplink speeds and a relative cost value – the DoC’s plan may turn out to be: “All citizens must get access to some form of connection at some price”
Hows about the blatantly obvious:
"All citizens must get access to the best internet services provided at the best possible rates powered by strong competition".

And, then to help the formation of true competition, government will offer: "massive tax incentives to the 'competition leaders'".

But, I guess they never were for, and never will be for the creation of true robust competition, claiming that they cannot generate interest from investors to grow the competition if everything is too cheap, despite what Vodaphone just did with Vodaspam.
 
Last edited:
Good question. I would start off with this as a minimum requirement.

1. Always on with no per minute charges
2. Super cheap to access
3. Faster than 1Mbps and after the first 12 months it should be adapted to reflect a minimum speed of 8Mbps and after another 12 months it should reflect the minimum as 12Mbps and from then on it should go up by at least 1Mbps every year...
4. No restrictions as to what you use the bandwidth for. You can opt to transport voice, video or whatever you please on it. The pipe is the provider's business, what you put in it is yours...

Everyone should have the ability to access it if they so choose. In other words, whilst it should be affordable (point 2 above), there are too many people today in SA who can't get the best line speeds even if they could afford it.
 
Broadband = the cost of fuel to run a small car to work and back every day and does NOT include the HP+insurance+running costs on that small car.
Broadband = the speed the road is designed for without the speedbumps, you may jump onto the toll road at anytime you need.
 
Everyone should have the ability to access it if they so choose. In other words, whilst it should be affordable (point 2 above), there are too many people today in SA who can't get the best line speeds even if they could afford it.
This is completely and utterly impractical.
You're saying that the bloke on his rural farm MUST have a DSLAM close by to connect to.
That's like saying that he MUST have a highway right next to his driveway.

A better approach would be to allow him to build his own infrastructure to get to the nearest DSLAM, legally, and without nonsensical licensing expense.
In fact, he should be incentivised to build his own infrastructure, and share it with those around him.
 
Last edited:
This is completely and utterly impractical.
You're saying that the bloke on his rural farm MUST have a DSLAM close by to connect to.
That's like saying that he MUST have a highway right next to his driveway.

A better approach would be to allow him to build his own infrastructure to get to the nearest DSLAM, legally, and without nonsensical licensing expense.
In fact, he should be incentivised to build his own infrastructure, and share it with those around him.

+1000

Thats exactly correct I think .. let communities provide for themselves if they have a big enough demand .. those schemes can be subsidized by government in disadvantaged areas, but in general .. if you live in a city .. you have access anywhere .. if you are rural .. you can pilot a project and get access to expertise, subsidized by the government and your community .. to create an internet capable community.
 
Broadband is: If an average household can afford to stream this entire conference to their living room in full HD without buffering or being charged for the amount of data they used irrespective if the conference was held in South Africa or not.
 
Isn't this all pointless? Why do you need to legislate what "broadband" is if the market is truly efficient, competitive and cutting-edge? You can't force large companies to provide a certain service, as it might not be economical or practical. Rather focus energy on competition, tax credits for broadband and selling certain services as cost-plus on open access terms.

Saying broadband must be 1 meg and uncapped is totally rediculous.
 
Anything above and including 512KBps should be classified as broadband.
 
enough upload capacity to use skype + video..

384 down 128 up != broadband;

I thank you
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X