What does uncapped broadband really mean?

[rpm]

Broadband Guidelines: what does uncapped really mean?

ISPA recently unveiled Guidelines and Recommendations on Broadband Terminology which will assist consumers to know what they buy

 

[rpm]

An excellent initiative from ISPA – well done! This can form the foundation for advertising guidelines which will also make the ASA’s task much easier.

 

[MickeyD]

An excellent initiative from ISPA – well done! This can form the foundation for advertising guidelines which will also make the ASA’s task much easier.

Agreed - Now for them to draft a similar set of guidelines for the mobile network operators!

 

[Chevron]

ISPA defines broadband Internet access as “a service which provides access to the Internet with a minimum download speed of 256 kbps”.

I have issue with this. I think this should be changed to 1Mb/s.

 

[MickeyD]

I have issue with this. I think this should be changed to 1Mb/s.

Take it up with the Department of Communications.... seriously. They need to be petitioned if we want anything to improve in SA.

 

[dominic]

I have issue with this. I think this should be changed to 1Mb/s.

Yip - that is the official definition stated in the National Broadband Policy of South Africa and is turn based on the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) Development Sector definition.

 

[Valis]

no limit placed on the total volume of traffic uploaded or downloaded by the customer subject to the customer observing specified usage restrictions

This sentence is contradictory; If you are restricting usage you are obviously limiting the total volume of traffic!

Unrestricted, uncapped Internet access

Now they're just making up their own terms. The entire document is circular and contradictory. Is this really the best they could come up with?

 

[Qrox]

I have issue with this. I think this should be changed to 1Mb/s.

+1

What bs that 256 qualifies for broadband. I have a 384 connection and thats slow as hell. I don't consider that as broadband so how the hell do they qualify 256 as broadband. The guys that write these reports should be forced to work on ONLY 256 accounts. We will see how quickly they get pissed off.

 

[Blackhand]

256kbs is the lowest I've heard of that qualifies as broadband in a country. Its also a bit of a moving target that needs to be updated at least once every 2 years.

"Acceptable online experience" is how I personally like to define what qualifies as broadband, so I don't see anything less than 2mb as broadband (Browsing, immediate 480p video streaming, video conferencing and chat, remote desktop etc.). 256kbs is basically unusable unless there are absolutely no other alternatives (like carrier pigeons).

 

[latro]

256kbs? How can you support ISPA when they clearly still live in the dark ages? Telkom probably has a very firm grip on their sack.

But I like the concept on standardizing this.

 

[system32]

I have issue with this. I think this should be changed to 1Mb/s.

+1
Agreed - they have set the limit way too low.
Try doing any Web 2.0 stuff on anything less than 4Mbps and you will become very frustrated.

 

[r00igev@@r]

So how many GB a month do people download with these products? How about a survey?

 

[Gatecrasher]

Uncapped Internet access: No cap. Acceptable use policy can place limitations on user behaviour and define “abuse” criteria which can result in service restrictions. May be linked to a specific access speed.

This is way too broad and vague and can cover a vast multitude of sins. Uncapped until you reach the 5gb AUP and then you get a 64kbps trickle until the following month. Something like that can be advertised as uncapped? Seriously. 4MB/s uncapped subject to shaping on everything that restricts your access speed to 20KB/s. Uncapped? No way. Rather call the unrestricted uncapped "uncapped" and this category "restricted access." This new ISPA "uncapped" definition needs a mountain of work, because all it will do is cement the deplorable status quo. If there are restrictions it should not be advertised as uncapped, it should be advertised as restricted, with the restrictions clearly spelled out.

Soft capped Internet access: Service is provided on a metered basis. After the customer exceeds a “soft cap”, they still have Internet access, but significant restrictions are applied, such as limited international access or vastly reduced access speeds

How does this differ from "Uncapped?" once restrictions are applied? It doesn't.

And 256kbps is certainly not broadband. Broadband should be at least 1Mbps and probably 2Mbps.

 

[markings]

ISPA defines broadband Internet access as “a service which provides access to the Internet with a minimum download speed of 256 kbps”.

Doesn't that guarantee a minimum download speed? Where does that leave the ISP's and their "best effort" claims? Are we talking theoretical numbers only while the reality may be far from it?

 

[dominic]

256kbs? How can you support ISPA when they clearly still live in the dark ages? Telkom probably has a very firm grip on their sack.

But I like the concept on standardizing this.

As per my post above, this is not ISPA's definition, it is the definition of the country you live. Sorry about that and be sure to direct your complaint to the department of communications.

 

[dominic]

This is way too broad and vague and can cover a vast multitude of sins. Uncapped until you reach the 5gb AUP and then you get a 64kbps trickle until the following month. Something like that can be advertised as uncapped? Seriously. 4MB/s uncapped subject to shaping on everything that restricts your access speed to 20KB/s. Uncapped? No way. Rather call the unrestricted uncapped "uncapped" and this category "restricted access." This new ISPA "uncapped" definition needs a mountain of work, because all it will do is cement the deplorable status quo. If there are restrictions it should not be advertised as uncapped, it should be advertised as restricted, with the restrictions clearly spelled out.


How does this differ from "Uncapped?" once restrictions are applied? It doesn't.

I am sure ISPA will take on board constructive criticism such as this (although you may appreciate the difficulty of the exercise when you actually sit down and start to do it) - have to start somewhere in terms of trying to standardise this stuff.

The definition of broadband speed is a non-issue, certainly the ASA is not going to ignore the law of the country when faced with a complaint about whether a service is broadband

 

[dakhaas]

Unrestricted, uncapped Internet access: No cap. Acceptable use policy may only restrict illegal activity, not usage behaviour. May be linked to a specific access speed.

then why does mweb abuse department warn users if they do over 20gb a day or download for more than 9hours consecutively per day ?

 

[Decotey]

This is still as vague as it's always been so I don't really know why people are praising this initiative?

 

[Ant_Brooks]

256kbs? How can you support ISPA when they clearly still live in the dark ages? Telkom probably has a very firm grip on their sack.

Hi all,

ISPA's General Manager here -- thanks to MyBroadband for giving our discussion document some attention. I would like to stress that it is a discussion document. In other words, ISPA greatly appreciates comments on the document. We do plan to update it from time to time, and we'll take any suggestions into account. I'll try to stop by this thread over the next couple of days to read the comments from the MyBroadband community.

First, to answer latro's second concern, thus far only ISPA's members have had a chance to comment on the document. Telkom isn't an ISPA member and thus has not yet had any opportunity to comment on it. I can also assure you with confidence that Telkom has no kind of grip on any part of ISPA's anatomy!

Then, I'd like to tackle the decision to make "256 kbps" the most basic meaning for "broadband" in South Africa. It might surprise some of you to know that setting the number so low was also a key concern within ISPA. We also think that's far too low. It should be much higher. However, the goal of the document is to provide some guidance to ISPs, consumers and journalists who are marketing, buying or comparing broadband services. Given this, we decided that it would be highly problematic for ISPA to choose a number that was different from South Africa's National Broadband Policy.

Let's say we'd decided to pick 1 Mbps instead of 256 kbp, and someone decided that they wanted to market 512 kbps as "broadband" despite ISPA's recommendation. What would the ASA do in that case? Well, it's a reasonable assumption that our country's National Broadband Policy will trump anything ISPA publishes, so the ASA would be quite likely to rule in favour of the ISP advertising the slower service as "broadband", making our recommendations document a bit worthless. After a lot of internal discussion, we felt that we had to stick with the official number, and we added the following text to highlight that we think this number is on the low side:

ISPA notes that the minimum speed chosen here is quite low. It has been chosen to match the definition in the Department of Communication's published National Broadband Policy1 which is, in turn, based on the ITU's definition of broadband for developing markets. The accepted minimum speed of broadband services in many developed markets is much higher, and ISPA looks forward to being able to revise this number upwards in the future, as minimum South African broadband speeds increase.

I can guarantee that as soon as the DoC increases the national definition, ISPA will also do so.

 

[Schola]

then why does mweb abuse department warn users if they do over 20gb a day or download for more than 9hours consecutively per day ?

i agreed to what Dakhaas said. if the no cap policy says : Acceptable use policy may only restrict illegal activity, Not usage behaviour.

They can take uncapped and throw it away coz that is not what we are getting in this country.