Why the CAP?

Raiders

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
215
Reaction score
17
Location
Jhb
Just a bit of a rant, if you will about CAP.

iBurst, to my knowledge is the only ISP that has a solution in place for users that wish to not have a "CAP Problem"
By this I am referring to the part where once you CAP they only drop your speed. I know of a number of households, preferring this as it still allows you to browse internationally and get to your e-mail without problems, although at only 65Kb.

Lots of households have a set amount they can spent each month. Set amounts gives you better access to your household budget.

Having both iBurst and MTN, I found that I am fearful of the MTN connection. There is nothing to prevent you from exceeding your cap. Even with a softlock you can exceed the CAP with Mb's before it is even discovered. It appears the CAP is calculated some time after the disconnection on MTN. The software that comes with the modem I find unreliable. Luckily for me, the worse to date was a pay in of about R600 after misjudging an update from the internet.

If studies are done, I am sure there would be a home market for people that want's a stable cheap solution that does not cut them off when the children gets on the internet and downloads music. Speed only being a extra rather than a requirement. Granted the speed and latency should still be good enough to VPN to work. I've done VPN on a 65Kb line and found it sufficient when connected to a terminal server on the other side.
 
Last edited:
Couldn't it be that a server can only handle a certain amount of traffic? By capping you, you think twice before downloading everything you see, thus reducing the traffic. Why else would NeoTel call you up when you push your downloading to the max?
 
Couldn't it be that a server can only handle a certain amount of traffic?
That is another problem. How can amount be a problem and not speed. It's not like the fibre links are big fright ships, coming to dock once a month to offload the monthly CAP. Internet is more like water pipes, flowing constantly. Thus it would make more sense for me if the speed was limited rather than the amount you could download per month.
I know some "downloaders" at the end of the month pushing their downloads to use up their cap, being self guilty of that mainly because if you don't use your CAP you loose it (on MTN) like it's spoiled vegetables :rolleyes: being freighted in each month.
Some time ago I talked to a ISP. Their comment about CAP was, It's to force people to work sparingly with their cap. As stated in the above text, that only works partway.
 
Personally I feel capping is necessary to a certain extent, but I too would prefer soft capping to the general hard capping among ISP's and networks in SA. But I guess it means more money for them if you are hard capped, coz in the ned if you need to do something online you will pay the extra money to get reconnected. Sad but True SA Internet, very sub-par!
 
Just a bit of a rant, if you will about CAP.

As said before, it's about greed. With iBurst however, in the past, the softcap would often not work properly and full speed downloads were available after cap, ppl ended up doing 20-60GB per month after cap.

iBurst however usually cuts you off permanently (until month end) if you download more than 20GB extra
that is 64kbps x 24 x 60 x 60 x 30. iBurst does heavily shape the P2P traffic though.

Adblockers do also help. The bw one can save is impressive, depending what you browse of course. You can end up saving 25% of your
BW.
 
Last edited:
How much does it cost to have one radio tower transmitting the wireless signals for internet?
and how much is it to keep it running for the month?
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X