South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
Vodacom charges R1,50 per megabyte and MTN charges R2 per megabyte for normal data traffic, but they reserve the right to charge R10 and R25 respectively per megabyte for Voip traffic.
He says the rate was a precautionary measure to prevent the MTN network being swamped with Voip data, which would lower the quality of service.
It's all total hogwash. They are just trying to maintain their inflated tarrifs. How can they complain about the VOIP using too much bandwidth when they happily do MMS's and even Mobile Television. Compare the Mobile television bandwidth to skypes lowly VOIP usage and then they can tell me that story again with a straight face. There are even VOIP solutions that will work on GPRS.Anyone actually believe this??
It's all total hogwash. They are just trying to maintain their inflated tarrifs. How can they complain about the VOIP using too much bandwidth when they happily do MMS's and even Mobile Television. Compare the Mobile television bandwidth to skypes lowly VOIP usage and then they can tell me that story again with a straight face. There are even VOIP solutions that will work on GPRS.
Cheers
Abe
Very true. Rather corner a new market then become locked in the stone age.Then again if this chases the subscribers away, who will lose in the end? VoIP is going to happen whether people like it or not, if I was an operator, I would prefer that it happens on my network.
It's something which comes around every month, I think they are trying to condition the market so that when it does actually happen and people are charged R25.00 per MB then it's something we all knew would happen.
Then again if this chases the subscribers away, who will lose in the end? VoIP is going to happen whether people like it or not, if I was an operator, I would prefer that it happens on my network.
Rudolph Muller from consumer activist group MyADSL, says the high tariffs are just a safeguard to protect against new phones that may be Voip-enabled.
Hi GatecrasherRPM, I hope you've been taken out of context here. You make it sound like these dual tarriffs are acceptable. You are beginning to sound more and more like a spokesman for the major cellular operators and less and less like a consumer activist.![]()
Regarding QoS, I am not sure if you all have tried Skype, but in many instances the voice and sound quality is quite good. What's more Skype has had over 300 million downloads of their software, so what's the future R&D spend going to look like? and what's the chance they develop better codecs and QoS
I've been reading this VoIP debate and I only have one question....
What is Cell-C and Virgin's stance on the matter? So far I've only seen Vodacom and MTN's negative side.
E
I've been reading this VoIP debate and I only have one question....
What is Cell-C and Virgin's stance on the matter? So far I've only seen Vodacom and MTN's negative side.
E
They will probably only voice their opinions once they have 3G available. The latency on GPRS/EDGE is a bit much for VOIP.
I think you may be interpreting it incorrectly. What I said is that the reason for these rates is for the cellular operators to safeguard themselves against new phones and technologies making VOIP more feasible. This is definitely the case…
I made it clear on many occasions that MyADSL is against any form of shaping or even capping.
Seligmann says ... the rate was a precautionary measure to prevent the MTN network being swamped with Voip data, which would lower the quality of service.
There's not much in the article to interpret. Its just unfortunate that MyADSL is reported as giving the reasons for the dual tariffs rather than its opposition to them.
To the uninformed "just a safeguard to protect against new phones" makes the dual tariff sound like a wise and sensible thing.