Why is Uncapped internet actually Limited connectivity in SA?

Yeah. It's the same thing in the end. In the analogue world, speed is distance over time, so in this case linespeed is number of bits per period. It's the same whichever way you wish to express it.
 
Last edited:
Chevron said:
[...] 1. The problem in SA is we have capped and uncapped options. The only way for uncapped to really work out properly for ISPs is if we banned capped accounts and all used uncapped. Then the model would work. [...]
Click to expand...

+1

My first experience with DSL was stateside. No mention was made of any type of capping, of any type. Uncapped was the default. And it is truly uncapped. (Compared to cable, DSL is just too slow to apply capping.) Nonetheless I remain skeptical as to whether there'll ever be uncapped DSL here, strictly speaking.
 
It's a physical limitation. A freeway can fit only so many cars travelling down it at a given time ... theoretically the capacity limit is all cars literally bumper-to-bumper in all lanes in both directions, travelling at full speed. Your service is like one of the many single-lane offramp+sideroads trying to get traffic into and off the multilane freeway - when the traffic to/from the sideroads exceeds the capacity of the freeway, you slow down.
 
Chevron said:
Well now you know why uncapped is shaped. Data is expensive.
Click to expand...


We know data is expensive we (By we I mean the collective of internet users in SA) are paying for it dearly. At the collective rates we (and I include the secondary and tertiary ISPs in this we) are paying for Data in SA we should have one of the best communication grids in the world, and not fast approaching the worst in Africa (never mind the world)

Just in case you ask I have some insight to what percentage of price is being leached off by sudo government monopolies that then don't use it to build better and bigger infrastructure but rather use it to pad the budget so that they can build big estates for themselves and drive big black 8 figure auto-mobiles, as I consult in this sector at that level.

The point is no matter if they do or don't shape we the end user should not be fed with words that have alterior meanings like UNCAPPED instead of LIMITED etc. and if we are throttled for what ever reason we should receive our prorata discount off what we have paid for ie if I pay for 10Mbps speed but only receive 3Mbps or less they owe me the difference back!.
 
Last edited:
Arthur said:
It's a physical limitation. A freeway can fit only so many cars travelling down it at a given time ... theoretically the capacity limit is all cars literally bumper-to-bumper in all lanes in both directions, travelling at full speed. Your service is like one of the many single-lane offramp+sideroads trying to get traffic into and off the multilane freeway - when the traffic to/from the sideroads exceeds the capacity of the freeway, you slow down.
Click to expand...
Very good analogy!
...and typical of our bureaucrats they only widen the roads or build on the communications infrastructure when the outcry and demand for upgraded services hits mainstream media and threatens to affect their comfortable job!
That is why we should not ever just capitulate and accept the status quo! No cop out!

Call a duck a duck and stop referring to it as a semi amphibious flying fowl. UNCAPPED is not uncapped but should be called LIMITED and shaping should not be used as an excuse not to reimburse for portions of services not delivered!
 
innovator said:
if I pay for 10Mbps speed but only receive 3Mbps or less they owe me the difference back!.
Click to expand...
Not possible.

Unless you are the only user of the network and have a perfect line with small distance between you and the DSLAM/MSAN and your terminal is perfect, no provider can guarantee maximum speed.

It's always "up to" with the usual constraints of physics.
 
I have the Afrihost 100gb capped account for R399, last few months they doubled it to 200gb for free... /smiling
 
SirFooK'nG said:
I have the Afrihost 100gb capped account for R399, last few months they doubled it to 200gb for free... /smiling
Click to expand...
Ditto. 100GB business capped. I get predictable and (pretty) consistent performance.

I wonder why people don't apply the stuff they learned at school and work this stuff out for themselves. Paying attention in English Comprehension and Science quickly leads to grasping that "uncapped" can mean many different things...
 
Arthur said:
Ditto. 100GB business capped. I get predictable and (pretty) consistent performance.

I wonder why people don't apply the stuff they learned at school and work this stuff out for themselves. Paying attention in English Comprehension and Science quickly leads to grasping that "uncapped" can mean many different things...
Click to expand...
But the point I make is that it shouldn't because that amounts to a lie. and the more we accept this bending of meaning the less value we will receive as consumers.
The Dictionary definition of the word UNCAPPED is:
"to free from limits or restrictions"
(I have ignored the other meanings as they refer to the removal of a cork or bottle top from a bottle)
 
Arthur said:
Not possible.

Unless you are the only user of the network and have a perfect line with small distance between you and the DSLAM/MSAN and your terminal is perfect, no provider can guarantee maximum speed.

It's always "up to" with the usual constraints of physics.
Click to expand...

So if they know that you will NEVER ever reach the maximum speed, why advertise it (even it is with the word's "up to" next to it)?
 
Arthur said:
Not possible.

Unless you are the only user of the network and have a perfect line with small distance between you and the DSLAM/MSAN and your terminal is perfect, no provider can guarantee maximum speed.

It's always "up to" with the usual constraints of physics.
Click to expand...

Athur I do appreciate the technical difficulty in measuring the resultant connection speed when it is affected by things out of the control of the ISP like "rush hour traffic" and truly that would be an issue the ISP should take up with the provider of infrastructure themselves as I am sure they do.

No what I refer to is when the ISP consciously throttle a specific end user client, for what ever reason or rational they might use, the end result is a conscious reduction of line speed and in these cases the client should be reimbursed prorata.
I don't agree with this conscious throttling on an "UNCAPPED" connection (as I have stated the service is incorrectly named) but for what ever reason they choose to lie about the service name they have named it as such and sell it at a price. This is one issue. I refer to another issue which is the line speed of the connection that you pay for as a separate service. If this speed is throttled consciously by the ISP then reimbursement should occur!
 
innovator said:
But the point I make is that it shouldn't because that amounts to a lie. and the more we accept this bending of meaning the less value we will receive as consumers.
The Dictionary definition of the word UNCAPPED is:
"to free from limits or restrictions"
(I have ignored the other meanings as they refer to the removal of a cork or bottle top from a bottle)
Click to expand...
Words without context are pretext. You can't just take a dictionary definition and apply it across contexts as you wish.

Example: to what would an "uncapped" ie unrestricted or unlimited subscription refer? Unlimited data? Unlimited speed? Unlimited price? Unlimited time? And how do you know?

A bit of reflection can dispel much mist.

In the world of buying and selling internet provisioning services, the word "cap" has come to refer specifically to the limit or restriction on the number of bits the end-user can TX/Rx on their line in a subscription billing period (typically a month). It does not refer to a certain style of headgear, for example, though the words have a common ancestry.

So-called uncapped services refer specifically and only to the fact that the ISP does not place a limitation on specifically the total number of bits up/down the line in a billing period - ie, when they parcel out who gets what and when their 'governor' doesn't consider the sum of Tx/Rx bits. And that is all. It does not mean they don't place 'speed' limits (speed here means the number of bits per second, sustained, on various protocols) or other limitations calculated without considering the sum of the bits in a month.

For various reasons, in SA, DSL services started out with a monthly limit or "cap", ie a maximum number of bits per month before the service was cut or severely constrained. As internet usage increased, this cap became a serious constraint for many users, especially those who download large files (audio, video, software). The introduction of "uncapped" services was a marketing ploy, and in a very narrow sense it is not misleading ... as long as you understand that it refers only to the sum of the Rx/Tx bits per month and nothing else.

Anyone who thinks about this for four femtoseconds will realise that there is no such thing as service that is uncapped in every respect. We live in a finite cosmos.
 
Last edited:
For the OP, I feel your anguish, at least unlike MWEB who blatantly lied and changed the ToC's and "Reasonable Use" policy for the Uncapped Premium guys. Uncapped Premium was advertised as "Never Throttled" .... well that one went down the toilet. As per ICASA and the SA Advertising Authority, all these uncapped packages maintain the "uncapped", just throttled, but not beyond what is deemed broadband speeds... so, they have you.
 
I agree.

Which is why many people have said many times on this and other forums that the term "uncapped" in this context has run its course and should be abandoned. There really isn't such a thing except in a very narrow and specific sense.

Sadly, as long as consumers think there is and buy simply because they see "uncapped" without thinking further, the term will persist. And the truth is, for many users that's all that really matters for them. And that's fine. More discerning users need to educate themselves as with any other purchase.

The last thing we need is more government interference.
 
Ok first off you say it's limited....that will always be the case no matter what. While alot(most) of ISPs shape after a certain amount even if they did not you will still reach a so called "limit" (eg. 4mb/s you can never go past 1.28TB as that is 31days fullspeed without break) so there will always be a limit, even if it's the best ISP in the world.

And if ANY ISP released a truly unlimited adsl product with no shaping,FUP or AUP expect them to either charge several thousand rand or to go bankrupt in a matter of months.(We are not a first world country nor are we even close to UK/US so ISPs in SA pay alot more from their IPC than in UK for example.)

not getting your line speed? Use a 10mb unc account use a 20mb line. No isp can do anything about overhead/congestion(and getting a higher line speed than your unc account means even on a highly congested exchange you will get most of your speed(eg. 1200KB/s on a 10mb account instead of 1000KB/s) sadly it does not help low sync rate problems(people with low sync(1mb/s) should not be looking at ADSL anyways as your sync is low for a reason.).

Alot of people like to point fingers at ISPs who say its exchange issues and/or line faults and say they are making excuses. While certain ISPs really are talking BS, It really isn't hard to prove if they are lying or not.(by testing a 1gb capped account, alot of ISPs give them away for free these days you know.)

About the whole uncapped argument........"do you get your internet turned off after a certain limit? If not it's uncapped" argument....well its BS, live with it, it is just marketing nothing you can do about it. (I would love to know the difference between a softcapped account and an uncapped account)
(note:Everything i say does not apply to a OpenWeb. They are just a bunch of con artists who take advantage of the masses inability to read fine print, google, hellopeter or read myBB ISP forums.)

@ambroseg1: You still lurking around complaining about your speed issues......there isn't a single person on these forums who has seen your traceroutes that tries to blame an ISP....Your exchange is congested....your beef should be with telkom not with ISPs(and still waiting for you to show a trace route with any other ISP to prove your issue is not exchange based.)
They say up to because it's what the account is capable of: Every single person has different situations, would you rather they say "1.0-4.0mb/s uncapped account based on how much telkom hates you." on all ADSL products
 
Last edited:
slasherjdc said:
@ambroseg1: You still lurking around complaining about your speed issues......there isn't a single person on these forums who has seen your traceroutes that tries to blame an ISP....Your exchange is congested....your beef should be with telkom not with ISPs(and still waiting for you to show a trace route with any other ISP to prove your issue is not exchange based.)
They say up to because it's what the account is capable of: Every single person has different situations, would you rather they say "1.0-4.0mb/s uncapped account based on how much telkom hates you." on all ADSL products
Click to expand...
luckily I don't owe you proof. So stop trolling and jog along.
 
ambroseg1 said:
luckily I don't owe you proof. So stop trolling and jog along.
Click to expand...
Trolling?I honestly wanted to see what the problem you were having was. I asked nicely right after you posted your CW traceroute and then you started calling fanboi left and right for a while then when everyone called you out you ran away....Right now you just seem ignorant and i feel sorry for anyone who thinks you know what your talking about.
 
MickeyD said:
http://mybroadband.co.za/news/adsl/89837-mweb-uncapped-adsl-claims-win-at-asa.html
Click to expand...


Yup I have read this before and I still feel that the use of the word UNCAPPED, even though sanctioned by a governing body (who would even accepted the word Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious if had been used to describe the ISP's package) still does not change the dictionary meaning of the word. The word UNCAPPED is being used incorrectly to intentionally dupe new subscribers. I feel that the word LIMITED is better suited to describe this package and that a very specific description of the Limitation should be included into the description such as:
50/10 LIMITED (to mean 50Gig maximum over a 10 day measured period before throttling)
or
100/30 LIMITED (to mean 50Gig maximum over a 10 day measured period before throttling)

or something like that so that the user is left in no doubt what he is purchasing and what to expect. But this doesn't suit their advertising depts idea of modern sales pitch you see.

Their acturists have done a calculation of the capital gains over the cost to addressing the multiple unhappy client support calls and have found they are happy with the present ratio, but if more of us bombarded them with complaints over this issue their support expenses would rise and they would be forced to re evaluate that calculation..

and then there is the issue of not reimbursing customers for intentionally dropping a specified paid for line speed down for 10 or 30 days or however long. This is definitely fraudulent.
So whilst the ISPs have got away with changing the meaning of a dictionary defined word UNCAPPED because some governing body accepts this misdirection I don't see it defined anywhere that the ISP may charge for one line speed and deliver another! These are two completely separated issues are generally paid for separately and should be addressed separately under law!
The ISPs are getting away with theft because no one has taken the time to separate the two issues and see it for what it is!
What do you guys think?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X