TechCentralTechCentral
    Facebook Twitter YouTube LinkedIn
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn YouTube
    TechCentral TechCentral
    NEWSLETTER
    • News

      Signs Eskom crisis is creating diesel shortages

      30 June 2022

      Management shake-up at Absa

      30 June 2022

      Eskom ramps up load shedding as crisis deepens

      30 June 2022

      Alviva shares leap higher on R3-billion take-private offer

      30 June 2022

      Huawei, MTN to help build 5G-powered ‘smart mine’

      30 June 2022
    • World

      Graphics card prices plummet as crypto demand dries up

      30 June 2022

      Bitcoin just had its worst quarter in a decade

      30 June 2022

      The NFT party is over

      30 June 2022

      Samsung beats TSMC to 3nm chip production

      30 June 2022

      Napster plots crypto comeback

      29 June 2022
    • In-depth

      The great crypto crash: the fallout, and what happens next

      22 June 2022

      Goodbye, Internet Explorer – you really won’t be missed

      19 June 2022

      Oracle’s database dominance threatened by rise of cloud-first rivals

      13 June 2022

      Everything Apple announced at WWDC – in less than 500 words

      7 June 2022

      Sheryl Sandberg’s ad empire leaves a complicated legacy

      2 June 2022
    • Podcasts

      How your organisation can triage its information security risk

      22 June 2022

      Everything PC S01E06 – ‘Apple Silicon’

      15 June 2022

      The youth might just save us

      15 June 2022

      Everything PC S01E05 – ‘Nvidia: The Green Goblin’

      8 June 2022

      Everything PC S01E04 – ‘The story of Intel – part 2’

      1 June 2022
    • Opinion

      Has South Africa’s advertising industry lost its way?

      21 June 2022

      Rob Lith: What Icasa’s spectrum auction means for SA companies

      13 June 2022

      A proposed solution to crypto’s stablecoin problem

      19 May 2022

      From spectrum to roads, why fixing SA’s problems is an uphill battle

      19 April 2022

      How AI is being deployed in the fight against cybercriminals

      8 April 2022
    • Company Hubs
      • 1-grid
      • Altron Document Solutions
      • Amplitude
      • Atvance Intellect
      • Axiz
      • BOATech
      • CallMiner
      • Digital Generation
      • E4
      • ESET
      • Euphoria Telecom
      • IBM
      • Kyocera Document Solutions
      • Microsoft
      • Nutanix
      • One Trust
      • Pinnacle
      • Skybox Security
      • SkyWire
      • Tarsus on Demand
      • Videri Digital
      • Zendesk
    • Sections
      • Banking
      • Broadcasting and Media
      • Cloud computing
      • Consumer electronics
      • Cryptocurrencies
      • Education and skills
      • Energy
      • Fintech
      • Information security
      • Internet and connectivity
      • Internet of Things
      • Investment
      • IT services
      • Motoring and transport
      • Public sector
      • Science
      • Social media
      • Talent and leadership
      • Telecoms
    • Advertise
    TechCentralTechCentral
    Home»Opinion»Nathan Jeffery»Vodacom, MTN want to break the Internet

    Vodacom, MTN want to break the Internet

    Nathan Jeffery By Nathan Jeffery27 January 2016
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn WhatsApp Telegram Email

    nathan-jeffery-180As you might have seen, the networks are at it again, on a drive to get the government to regulate Web services, which these network operators like to call “over-the-top” (OTT) providers.

    Regulating Internet services will have a huge ripple effect throughout the economy. I don’t even want to start thinking about how badly this could be implemented.

    How on Earth would such regulation even be managed? Can you imagine Facebook opening offices in every city or appointing officials in small towns to do Rica just so South Africans can talk to each other online?

    I can’t see this happening, though. It is counterintuitive and anti-Internet to add such labour-intensive processes. If Vodacom and MTN have their way and companies such as Facebook and Google are somehow forced to add complex and unnecessary red tape to the sign up and account-creation process, all that will happen is they will pull out of the country.

    Fighting for regulation instead of innovation

    While organisations like Digital Village, Project Isizwe and the Western Cape government are making an effort to get more people online and bring communication costs down, companies like Vodacom and MTN are publicly making an effort here to screw the South African consumer.

    These big companies are pleading poverty while the CEO of Vodacom was paid R10,9m in 2015 and the CEO of MTN R28,1m in 2014. Who are they trying to fool?

    They sell bandwidth to consumers and then, if you don’t use it within a certain amount of time, you lose it. Imagine buying a hamburger, but because you don’t eat it fast enough, the restaurant throws it away. There is no way we would accept that from anyone in retail, so why on Earth is it acceptable from a cellular service provider?

    Meanwhile, forward-thinking network operator Cell C is embracing OTT players and says regulation could hurt the industry. That’s stating the obvious.

    I’ve been a Vodacom customer for going on 18 years now and I’ve generally been happy with the service, even if I haven’t been happy with the pricing. I have, however, reached the point where I feel we need to start threatening to cancel our contracts and moving to operators like Cell C that have embraced the future.

    Networks like MTN and Vodacom need to realise that they are nothing more than utilities. The only value they have to offer us in the long term is faster connectivity and wider network coverage. There is, however, nothing stopping them from investing in Internet start-ups or creating their own OTT services.

    Why not rather be productive and contribute to society by incentivising innovation or establishing and running accelerators or incubators? They could even create investment vehicles to push our economy forward, in new directions, leveraging their core network and embracing new technologies instead of spending time, effort and money on slowing down progress with legal or regulatory proceedings and attacking companies offering services that benefit the community and economy.

    Let’s debunk some myths

    Service providers make some blanket claims that indicate they don’t understand how the Internet or hosting business works. Worse, it seems that the CEOs of these companies that make the claims don’t understand how the billing systems work at their own companies.

    Part of what is so infuriating about this whole situation and some of the accusations being thrown around is that both Vodacom and MTN are also commercial Internet service providers, operating data centres, home to what they themselves refer to as OTTs. As a result of hosting and bandwidth utilisation being a source of revenue for network operators, they should know that anyone operating a cloud service (an OTT service) pays for hosting and bandwidth utilisation.

    Myth 1: OTT operators are ‘free riders’

    Every cat picture and meme you look at on Facebook costs both you and Facebook money to transmit over the Internet. The same goes for watching videos on YouTube and Netflix.

    Every website and Web service pays to stay online. Companies such as Facebook, Twitter, Google, Microsoft and Apple pay enormous amounts of money to run servers in countries around the world.

    They either rent data centre space or set up their own data centres. They need to pay to connect to Internet service providers and either pay for bandwidth used or for dedicated bandwidth/pipe.

    Think of it this way. At home, you can either have capped or uncapped ADSL. If you have capped ADSL, you pay for data used; if you have uncapped ADSL, you pay for the size/speed of your data pipe/connection. In other words, the amount of data you can transmit per second.

    Uncapped connections usually come with a fair-usage policy, which sets an upper limit on how much bandwidth you may transmit either via upload or download during a 30-day period before being throttled. These same concepts apply to the tech giants, but on a massively different scale. Instead of needing to worry about megabytes, they’re working with terabytes and petabytes. All of this costs real money.

    Myth 2: OTT services are being used for free

    The cheek and audacity of network operators to complain that accessing OTT services is free is unbelievable.

    Users — also known as paying customers — access the Internet either through purchasing data bundles from Internet service providers or mobile networks or paying for network access in the form of a monthly subscription. Once on the network, users can access hosted websites and services, all of which use bandwidth for which they have paid.

    Below I outline some differences between the traditional and modern (Internet) engagement and billing models.

    Traditional model ... initiator pays
    Traditional model … initiator pays

    In the old model, the person initiating the phone call or sending the message is the only one who pays for the communication¹.

    Take the “please call me” service.

    A “please call me” allows someone without airtime to send a free message to someone else (presumably with airtime) to call them back. The reason this works and is viable is because the person who initiates the call pays for it so the person being called, in this case the person who sent the “please call me”, does not need to have any airtime as their participation in the conversation is free. They could both listen and speak without incurring any cost.

    Internet-based voice and messages ... everyone pays
    Internet-based voice and messages … everyone pays

    There is a big difference in how Internet-based services work compared to the traditional model².

    In the modern Internet world, the networks being operated by the telecommunications companies, whether they be cellular or fixed line, provide a data conduit through which devices can communicate with each other. All devices on the big interconnected network, also referred to as the Internet, pay to participate and pay for data traffic in both directions.

    With this in mind, any OTT operator doing their job properly will be using compression and efficient encoding to reduce the bandwidth being used by their service as it costs them money to operate. This leads to less strain on the network and smaller data packages being sent between devices. As a result of this, modern, Internet-based communication is more efficient and generally uses the least possible amount of data required to get the job done. This is good for everyone, even the traditional Internet service providers, as it reduces the load on the networks. It might not result in a surge in data usage (and revenue) upfront, but in the long term it results in faster Internet adoption and more users spending money to get online and do business online.

    Due to both directions of traffic being billable, all parties pay to be part of a conversation. Whether it is a voice-over-Internet protocol call or a group chat via instant messaging, users pay to both send (upload) and receive (download) data. This means the more people participating in a conversation, the more bandwidth is being invoiced, even if only one person is sending the messages or speaking.

    Regulation will affect everyone

    Tell your friends and your family. Help them understand the far-reaching impact should Vodacom and MTN get their way. This is an issue that will affect us all. The definition of OTT is vague and could eventually be twisted and applied to this very website you’re reading.

    1. Calls made to networks, other than the user’s home network, are handled through interconnection, which is a complex issue on its own.
    2. This only covers the high-level concepts; the billing structure is actually more complex. I’m just trying to illustrate that it’s a multi-payer situation now and that same packet of data is being paid for multiple times by different parties. There are other more complex issues such as peering which this Ars Technica article covers quite nicely.
    • Nathan Jeffery is a technology strategist who invests in and consults for technology start-ups on product development and infrastructure. He is founder and CEO of software development company MyEcommerce, co-founder and director of the Garden Route ICT Incubator, and chief product officer for construction project management software-as-a-service company Hlalani IQ
    Apple Cell C Facebook Google Microsoft MTN Nathan Jeffery Twitter Vodacom
    Share. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn WhatsApp Telegram Email
    Previous ArticleNgcaba warns against OTT regulation
    Next Article Google’s Go triumph a milestone for AI research

    Related Posts

    Huawei, MTN to help build 5G-powered ‘smart mine’

    30 June 2022

    Samsung beats TSMC to 3nm chip production

    30 June 2022

    Arm aims for leg-up in smartphone games with new chip tech

    29 June 2022
    Add A Comment

    Comments are closed.

    Promoted

    Billetterie simplifies interactions between law firms and clients

    30 June 2022

    Think herding cats is tricky? Try herding a cloud

    29 June 2022

    How your business can help hybrid workers effectively

    28 June 2022
    Opinion

    Has South Africa’s advertising industry lost its way?

    21 June 2022

    Rob Lith: What Icasa’s spectrum auction means for SA companies

    13 June 2022

    A proposed solution to crypto’s stablecoin problem

    19 May 2022

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the best South African technology news and analysis delivered to your e-mail inbox every morning.

    © 2009 - 2022 NewsCentral Media

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.