Join us now. It is free, and it takes less than 1 minute to register.
Register now
Subscribe to our daily newsletter. It is free, and it comes with many benefits.


+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: How South Africans will pick their fibre speeds online and only pay for what they use

  1. #1
    MyBroadband Newsfeed
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    4,637
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default How South Africans will pick their fibre speeds online and only pay for what they use

    How South Africans will pick their fibre speeds online and only pay for what they use

    The rapid pace of fibre growth and increasing competition in the fibre environment will lead to drastically different customer packages than what we see today.

    This is according to Dark Fibre Africa (DFA) acting chief strategy officer Vino Govender, who told MyBroadband the way consumers pay for fibre packages will be very different five years from now.

  2. #2
    Master
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    South Africa.
    Posts
    992
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The way we pay? Does he mean HOW much we'll pay vs speed? Content providers (Netflix, HBO etc..) are not really cost prohibitive...it's the network access and speed that hold the biggest cost.
    "There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action."

  3. #3
    Super Grandmaster Johnatan56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Cape Town
    Posts
    17,775
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    “Using a system like this, as an end user I could change my bandwidth from 20Mbps to 100Mbps for the two hours, and the system will configure the network automatically and configure your billing accordingly for that period,” said Govender.
    This sounds pretty dumb as setting up the link to be able to do 100Mbps burst for a random two hours every week is near the same as setting it to be a permanent 100Mbps due to client's use-case, or am I missing something?
    Quote Originally Posted by ChocolateBadger View Post
    Welcome to life. It's your life. Do what you want.
    http://beta.speedtest.net/result/6723240596
    http://www.speedtest.net/result/6964814583

  4. #4
    The Magician Tinuva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Virgo Super Cluster
    Posts
    7,659
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnatan56 View Post
    This sounds pretty dumb as setting up the link to be able to do 100Mbps burst for a random two hours every week is near the same as setting it to be a permanent 100Mbps due to client's use-case, or am I missing something?
    Naw. It sounds like the same type of billing and use as on cloud based systems, where this is the connection speed vs running a big instance for 2 hours then changing it back down to a small instance for most of the month. Scheduled scaling of your line speed.
    Cool idea, not sure if it will really work out, even when the systems are that automated.

    Also, I am fairly certain Vumatel can already do this, just its easier to leave it at one speed for billing.
    Few people can see the genius in someone who has offended them.
    - Robertson Davies

  5. #5
    Super Grandmaster Johnatan56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Cape Town
    Posts
    17,775
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tinuva View Post
    Naw. It sounds like the same type of billing and use as on cloud based systems, where this is the connection speed vs running a big instance for 2 hours then changing it back down to a small instance for most of the month. Scheduled scaling of your line speed.
    Cool idea, not sure if it will really work out, even when the systems are that automated.

    Also, I am fairly certain Vumatel can already do this, just its easier to leave it at one speed for billing.
    Yeah, but those cloud providers can scale it up/down with no significant change in hardware outside of their servers. For the last mile, all the switches etc. will have to be built to accommodate it, it's a better business model to allow for customers to have access to a permanent 100Mbps with 5% overall utilization, than charging less and having it be 20/40/100 as needed.

    Only side I see this work out all right is for the interest side, but with peering agreements/more CND/caching servers that's not as impactful anymore (e.g. most of steam is hosted in CT for CT people).

    On an e.g. Cloud Server you had to previously reserve that amount of memory etc. for the VM, having fiber + ISP is the same due to having to build it all beforehand. It's not like micro services/serverless where you can cheaply spin up a fiber connection and destroy it with near no costs.

    What Vuma charges is probably base + maximum speed that can be utilized to pay for upgraded switches etc.
    Quote Originally Posted by ChocolateBadger View Post
    Welcome to life. It's your life. Do what you want.
    http://beta.speedtest.net/result/6723240596
    http://www.speedtest.net/result/6964814583

  6. #6
    The Magician Tinuva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Virgo Super Cluster
    Posts
    7,659
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnatan56 View Post
    Yeah, but those cloud providers can scale it up/down with no significant change in hardware outside of their servers. For the last mile, all the switches etc. will have to be built to accommodate it, it's a better business model to allow for customers to have access to a permanent 100Mbps with 5% overall utilization, than charging less and having it be 20/40/100 as needed.

    Only side I see this work out all right is for the interest side, but with peering agreements/more CND/caching servers that's not as impactful anymore (e.g. most of steam is hosted in CT for CT people).

    On an e.g. Cloud Server you had to previously reserve that amount of memory etc. for the VM, having fiber + ISP is the same due to having to build it all beforehand. It's not like micro services/serverless where you can cheaply spin up a fiber connection and destroy it with near no costs.

    What Vuma charges is probably base + maximum speed that can be utilized to pay for upgraded switches etc.
    Its kind of exactly the same. Cloud providers do need the hardware around for you to spin instances up and down. Same goes for the fibre provider, they will need the hardware and backhaul, but allow you to spin your connection speed up/down.
    Few people can see the genius in someone who has offended them.
    - Robertson Davies

  7. #7
    Super Grandmaster Johnatan56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Cape Town
    Posts
    17,775
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tinuva View Post
    Its kind of exactly the same. Cloud providers do need the hardware around for you to spin instances up and down. Same goes for the fibre provider, they will need the hardware and backhaul, but allow you to spin your connection speed up/down.
    No, because the cloud providers can use that same hardware across everyone, you can have user X in Durban spin up an instance, terminate it, then have user Y use that same hardware.

    For a last mile fiber provider, you have to roll out the probably most expensive 2/3km at the last part, this merges into more users upstream, merges again, etc. but the max capacity must always be there. 5% utilization costs the same as 90% if on the already built network. For the cloud server, you can rent out the performance and swap quickly, scaling up/down the number of instances, reducing costs.
    Quote Originally Posted by ChocolateBadger View Post
    Welcome to life. It's your life. Do what you want.
    http://beta.speedtest.net/result/6723240596
    http://www.speedtest.net/result/6964814583

  8. #8
    Super Grandmaster HavocXphere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    31,343
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    “By that I mean you could, as an end user, access a portal and choose the amount of speed you want for a certain amount of time, on the fly,” said Govender.
    Nobody wants that sht. It's like that X gig night time data after hours Y if it's a full moon, but not on a thursday and you need to click on a portal button for the speed boost.

    If you can't provide uncapped at a reasonable price: Telkom had the right idea with their softcaps...give people a lot of data and then throttle for excessive usage.
    Beware weapons grade stupidity in post following this one

  9. #9
    Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    2,996
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This "Turbo Button" bullsh*t has been touted since forever by Ericsson (now fscked) and Nokia (now fscked) and it has never taken off.

    But nice try for trying to pull a dead cow "out of the sloot" Mr Govender.

    “Bandwidth is becoming so much more available, who knows whether we will even have capped and uncapped? Maybe it might be just uncapped in future.”
    The future is here already Mr Govender. Just signup with Cool Ideas.
    Last edited by TheRoDent; 14-06-2018 at 11:10 PM.
    ---
    TheRoDent

  10. #10
    The Magician Tinuva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Virgo Super Cluster
    Posts
    7,659
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnatan56 View Post
    No, because the cloud providers can use that same hardware across everyone, you can have user X in Durban spin up an instance, terminate it, then have user Y use that same hardware.

    For a last mile fiber provider, you have to roll out the probably most expensive 2/3km at the last part, this merges into more users upstream, merges again, etc. but the max capacity must always be there. 5% utilization costs the same as 90% if on the already built network. For the cloud server, you can rent out the performance and swap quickly, scaling up/down the number of instances, reducing costs.
    I agree with your reasoning that cloud providers have a much larger economies of scale and that count in their favor.

    But for FTTH its different. The network equipment will be there regardless of if everyone is on 100 or 20 or 10.
    What you will find is, that most customers will work out, they dont need 100 or 200 or 1000 lines, but will settle for the 4 or 10 or 20 lines. The equipment is still there, it can do more for every house. The only exception to this would be IPC, but luckily only Openserv is limited to that model.

    So what I see in this article, is that ISPs can make extra money, by allowing those customers that mostly only can afford 4,10 or 20 for the whole month, to up their speed for a few hours, for whatever reason, and only add a marginal cost to the customer. If many customers over the country then do this, thats extra money recouped by the ISP/Fibre provider. Remember, the equipment and lines are already installed, all this is, is a software config change on the port, that will now be automated on both the hardware config and billing side. And this is why I compared it to the cloud.

    I see the business case in this article, if you don't thats fine. I am only thinking in terms of uncapped packages here, with capped being irrelevant at this stage.
    Few people can see the genius in someone who has offended them.
    - Robertson Davies

  11. #11
    Mafia Addict GhostSixFour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rock <> Hard place
    Posts
    11,055
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If I can set this on an automated schedule, great. However, I suspect that the pricing model will be skewed towards peak time - i.e. you pay more between 18:00-22:00 - so probably even leaving it on 1mbps whilst at work for the day, probably won't recoup any pricing difference for me vs just having the line set at 20.

    If they're hoping I subscribe to better speeds cause my internet is slow - fsck em. The only reason it'll be slower is if they set it slower. 20mbps is sufficient for what I want - and working currently.
    Use my code to get R150 off your first Taxify ride: XCZYNT

  12. #12
    Super Grandmaster kianm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    9,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I was here thinking it is a great idea but i see many disagree, i still think there is a place for dynamic services though
    Have you tried a reboot?

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. South African fibre and ADSL ISP speeds and rankings
    By Newsfeed in forum Broadband and IT News
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 11-06-2018, 09:03 AM
  2. This is how many South Africans have fibre connections at home
    By BusinessTech in forum BusinessTech News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-06-2018, 12:30 PM
  3. Simple charts show why South Africans are begging for fibre
    By Kevin Lancaster in forum Broadband and IT News
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 12-02-2017, 11:17 AM
  4. Fibre ISP with the fastest download speeds in South Africa
    By rpm in forum Broadband and IT News
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-09-2016, 11:10 PM
  5. South Africans pick their favourite car brand
    By BusinessTech in forum BusinessTech News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 15-08-2016, 11:28 AM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •