|
Godinster posted:Got an email from Shaw, now they've got a 50 megabit connection for about 50 bucks a month which isn't bad. I wish we had TekSavvy in the area but I can't even get Telus Optik right now in my apartment. I actually quite like Shaw's speeds in the area too. The only Bad thing about shaws services as far as i can tell is that it will always be bundled with cable tv you can't get internet without paying $30 a month for lovely tv.
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 17:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 06:28 |
|
|
I'm moving to a new place in a couple weeks and I'm really hoping Shaw overhauls their student plan to take advantage of these new offers. edit: Shaw used to send me emails about going over cap as early as 2002-2004. They never actually did anything, just insinuated that there may be consequences if certain bad people didn't stop "stealing" my internet. shao kong fucked around with this message at 20:07 on Jul 15, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 20:04
|
|
|
Backov posted:That's to prevent us being owned by the US. We would prefer to be owned by the Chinese instead. Somehow, I feel like it would be an improvement.  But seriously, if I had the cash, I'd be rolling fiber to your doorsteps. I can't believe there isn't a company with the capital to strongarm the market into submission. KillHour fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Jul 15, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 20:52
|
|
|
Sprawl posted:Yes that is but wouldn't the single rents of their VOD stuff count too because those also dont count against your data cap. I guess you could consider the extra cost of Shaw's offering over netflix a sort of "bandwidth surcharge" but all things being equal I don't see how Shaw adding a charge, in the form of bandwidth, to netflix's service relative to their own is anything but anti-competitive. This goes for any VOD stuff they deliver over the internet too. As a gateway to the internet they should charge everyone equally. Net neutrality and all that; suppose Microsoft gave Shaw a burlap sack with a green dollar sign on it in exchange for not charging their customers for use of Windows Live services. If you are concerned about hitting your data cap, are you going to get your HD cute cat videos from Youtube, or from Bing? I simply think that it is important lest we end up with the same four choices for our media content as we have for internet access, three for wireless.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 21:19
|
|
|
ZShakespeare posted:I guess you could consider the extra cost of Shaw's offering over netflix a sort of "bandwidth surcharge" but all things being equal I don't see how Shaw adding a charge, in the form of bandwidth, to netflix's service relative to their own is anything but anti-competitive. This goes for any VOD stuff they deliver over the internet too. As a gateway to the internet they should charge everyone equally. Because shaws service is only available to this customers that already get internet/tv/phone from them. If they sold it outside of their service yes that would definitely be anti-competitve but because they are already limiting themselves to the people on their service for a basically all you can eat version of their video on demand service i dont really see a problem. Yes but external services that can be used on any other service i would have a problem with it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 21:26
|
|
|
I've got 25/2.5 with a 250GB cap now through a Shaw reseller and I'm pretty happy with it. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 21:57
|
|
|
Sprawl posted:Because shaws service is only available to this customers that already get internet/tv/phone from them. That is exactly what makes it anti competitive.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 23:09
|
|
|
Found a post on frooglegeek (via reddit) about how comcast should be sued for their download caps. The post: http://www.frooglegeek.com/why-comcast-should-be-sued/590 And the calculator: http://frooglegeek.com/coding/bandwidth.php I can only say that i agree with that completely. Me paying Rogers 70$/month for 11.38 hours of service. Must be nice to be an ISP ....
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 23:22
|
|
|
You can use your connection for 9.10 hours before you reach your monthly bandwidth cap
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 23:25
|
|
|
Sprawl posted:Because shaws service is only available to this customers that already get internet/tv/phone from them. If they sold it outside of their service yes that would definitely be anti-competitve but because they are already limiting themselves to the people on their service for a basically all you can eat version of their video on demand service i dont really see a problem. The problem that I see is that netflix is now unable to compete with Shaw for Shaw customer's money because Shaw can make it onerously expensive for their customers to use netflix. This stifles competition, and hence is anti-competitve. You can't get your Internet from netflix if you don't like it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2011 23:47
|
|
|
I just saw an update on the arstechnica article re: shaw's VOD offering. Apparently they've now clarified via twitter that if you use VOD on your computer/phone etc it will count against your cap, it's only if you watch it on your TV through your cable box that it won't count.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2011 00:06
|
|
|
Squibbles posted:I just saw an update on the arstechnica article re: shaw's VOD offering. Apparently they've now clarified via twitter that if you use VOD on your computer/phone etc it will count against your cap, it's only if you watch it on your TV through your cable box that it won't count. Back to raging about AYB/UBB or whatever it's called this month.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2011 01:45
|
|
|
rhag posted:Found a post on frooglegeek (via reddit) about how comcast should be sued for their download caps.  The Comcast data cap is largely unenforced and if you pay attention you notice there's no actual overage fees possible. If you live in an area with bad infrastructure, it gets enforced but you pay $10-$20 extra for "business" internet to remove the cap.I'm a comcast user and I did 250 gb the first week of this month alone, no issue.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2011 02:36
|
|
|
What's Telus' position on the UBB? I know your usage with Optik doesn't get tracked, yet, but I've heard conflicting reports on whether Telus will actually charge if you go over your cap.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2011 08:35
|
|
|
Argas posted:What's Telus' position on the UBB? I know your usage with Optik doesn't get tracked, yet, but I've heard conflicting reports on whether Telus will actually charge if you go over your cap. They don't charge, and will almost certainly not start charging anytime soon. (Or ever) Their official position on it has been all over the place (I suspect mostly due to Shaw's position flip-flopping), but the most recent statement officially acknowledged they aren't going to be charging. Drakkus fucked around with this message at 17:13 on Jul 16, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2011 17:11
|
|
|
I'm home in PEI for a week and I cannot believe my parents have access to better internet than me in Montreal. 30/30 fibre to the door (a 110 year old house), 250GB a month for $79, free installation. With loving Bell. The mind boggles.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2011 20:43
|
|
|
rhag posted:Found a post on frooglegeek (via reddit) about how comcast should be sued for their download caps. I've been wondering for a long time why Comcast isn't required to get their equipment certified by each state's Department of Weights and Measures. When I log in to check what they say my usage is, I see a note that says, "Your Comcast High-Speed Internet service has a monthly data usage allowance of 250 gigabytes (GB)." That looks like the sale of a particular quantity to me. fishmech posted:
It's a soft cap, so they'll complain if you go far enough over. Try moving a couple terabytes in a month on a residential connection and let us know how things go.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2011 22:59
|
|
|
iframe posted:It's a soft cap, so they'll complain if you go far enough over. Try moving a couple terabytes in a month on a residential connection and let us know how things go. In June I did 2.5 terabytes of transfer, combined up and down, since I got every computer in the house set up with online backup services as well as streaming video services like Netflix and Hulu on most of the TVs through addon boxes or a new tv. Since I'm in an area with better infrastructure, there's been no problem. And if they ever do complain all that will happen is that they'll offer to "upgrade" the line to business class for $15 extra at this speed tier.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2011 23:18
|
|
|
How do you guys download Terabytes of data? I don't get it. What do you guys do?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2011 03:15
|
|
|
mik posted:I'm home in PEI for a week and I cannot believe my parents have access to better internet than me in Montreal. Bell Aliant is pretty much the cat's rear end when it comes to telecoms in Atlantic Canada. When I dropped Rogers, my newfie sales rep gave me a retention deal on 7/1 Unlimited DSL to help me "ease with my pain and suffering" and the tech support is from my hometown in New Brunswick.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2011 04:04
|
|
|
mik posted:With loving Bell. The mind boggles. Bell bought Aliant, a decent company. They're slowly trying to turn it to poo poo, but Aliant is still pretty good for the time being.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2011 04:36
|
|
|
less than three posted:Bell bought Aliant, a decent company. They're slowly trying to turn it to poo poo, but Aliant is still pretty good for the time being. True, I was being slightly facetious for dramatic effect. When I still lived here and Aliant was still independent (and maybe even before that when it was only IslandTel here), Eastlink Cable was running circles around Aliant's only DSL offering (which was something like 1/1) - it seems like the situation has done a 180 since then. I had always figured that when Bell bought Aliant the local tech and sales staff would soon be gone. Nice to hear they're keeping jobs in the area. mik fucked around with this message at 05:31 on Jul 17, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2011 05:24
|
|
|
Brace posted:How do you guys download Terabytes of data? I don't get it. What do you guys do? I've honestly stopped pirating completely too which is the kicker. There's just so much good streaming or download services in the US these days, and I'm not the only one in this house who uses the internet. And getting all the computers on proper online backup services uses up a lot of bandwidth too. I mean I get why you can't figure out what we possibly do with this all but then as far as I can tell apparently everyone in Canada can't get upload over 2 megabits per second if this thread's speedtest images are to be believed. Add that to you guys living with hard caps for quite a long time and thus having to maintain a certain discipline in internet usage...
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2011 06:07
|
|
|
Yep. When we hear Americans go on about the "Cloud" we tend to start wanting to smash things.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2011 07:53
|
|
|
fishmech posted:In June I did 2.5 terabytes of transfer, combined up and down, since I got every computer in the house set up with online backup services as well as streaming video services like Netflix and Hulu on most of the TVs through addon boxes or a new tv. Since I'm in an area with better infrastructure, there's been no problem. OK, I don't know how the gently caress they decide who to call then. I'm in an area that can get their 105 megabit service and I still got a call threatening to disconnect me if I went over the cap again after doing a terabyte in a month.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2011 08:18
|
|
|
iframe posted:OK, I don't know how the gently caress they decide who to call then. I'm in an area that can get their 105 megabit service and I still got a call threatening to disconnect me if I went over the cap again after doing a terabyte in a month. They've got some manner of congestion or traffic issues on your node. That's basically it. Since they have network troubles in that area, they check you. If they really wanted to just rack up extra money they'd do the Canadian model and actually enforce the cap + have overage charges.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2011 08:46
|
|
|
mik posted:True, I was being slightly facetious for dramatic effect. I do contract work for both Aliant and Rogers and I can say with confidence that Rogers is beginning to poo poo their pants in NB over Aliant's fiber to the home offering. Eastlink is feeling the pressure now as well. Once Aliant starts expanding FibreOp to rural areas the telecom situation in the maritimes will get very interesting. I have the 30/30 as well and I'm actually happy to pay my bill every month.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2011 20:00
|
|
|
Why does toronto get such bad internet compared to maritime's 
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2011 21:31
|
|
|
I have to say I'm surprised with how poo poo the internet is in Montreal. I just moved from Vancouver and while the upload speed is better with this connection (I think my Shaw connection was hosed and I never called it in) the download speed is 1/6th of what I got with Shaw and it costs MORE. Cable in Montreal has really really low limits (100 gigs is pretty much the ceiling and I've gone over that in a week even with this lovely connection) and ADSL seems to peak at 5/1 (twice as fast as my current connection, but I'm not sure that it's enough of an upgrade to warrant the move). I hope I can score Teksavvy's 25/7 offering when it's available, although ColbaNet isn't available in my area so I'm not holding my breath. As for doing terabytes a month without pirating, it's surprisingly doable depending on what kind of computer stuff you have and, if you use a service like CrashPlan or BackBlaze to backup your stuff. Someone who edits a lot of personal videos who stores things in a high-quality format will accumulate terabytes quickly. Even without pirating or online backups, going over 100 gigs is very easy to do. More to the point, the amount that overage charges cost is ridiculous (a $120 overage charge for a $10 Steam game?).
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2011 01:18
|
|
|
http://streamer.crtc.gc.ca/stream1-english The UBB/AVP debate is starting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2011 14:08
|
|
|
If someone needs recaps or PBP, follow @anotherkady on Twitter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2011 14:46
|
|
|
Maple street gotta stop streaming netflix! All these street analogies over bandwidth is disconcering because they still haven't sorted out where the congestion is. They keep moving it, or throwing in other exceptions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2011 15:29
|
|
|
Viktor posted:Maple street gotta stop streaming netflix! All these street analogies over bandwidth is disconcering because they still haven't sorted out where the congestion is. They keep moving it, or throwing in other exceptions. That's what Bell is good at. All of their arguments are getting put down so they're trying to throw random poo poo in there to confuse people. BUT WHAT ABOUT MAPLE STREET!!!
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2011 15:33
|
|
|
Even I'm having trouble figuring out who the gently caress lives on Maple Street and who lives on Elm Street.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2011 15:36
|
|
|
Hahaha these guys are full of poo poo it's disgusting. If we let the smaller ISP's use what they paid for they're going to tell their customers to use their internet ALL DAY!! Then it will slow down everything!! Yes i'm sure Videotron, if you let them use 95th percentile Teksavvy will tell all their customers to let torrents run all day just to gently caress you over.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2011 16:06
|
|
|
If the cable companies wanted to submit a letter, they'd have saved time by simply submitting it like everyone else who wants to send a letter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2011 16:06
|
|
|
Sounds like Rogers basically just conceded that they never really reach peak/saturated network usage to any end-user area of the network, in a convoluted way. Gut feeling is they're trying to confuse with technical semantics. I just tuned in but the questioning seems to be very good. e: this guy's (crtc chairman?) accent is great, I hope he has some sort of 'Professor' title or something Pweller fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Jul 18, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2011 16:58
|
|
|
jizzpowered posted:Yes i'm sure Videotron, if you let them use 95th percentile Teksavvy will tell all their customers to let torrents run all day just to gently caress you over. One day, with clouds, multiple rooms in the house using something that involves an Internet connection and all streaming done HD at high outputs, we will be using all of the Internet capacity we can support RIGHT NOW. But the idea that in five years, the ISPs are going to sit on the amount of capacity they have right now is loving retarded.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2011 17:07
|
|
|
Why hasn't the CRTC thrown these arguments out. It's quite obvious they keep moving the issue around to different parts of the network depending on the how they want to propose more issues. They should of came in with highly detailed info-graphs defining how the interconnects work and where the issues are. The CRTC council is totally confused and even asking "whats the Y axis represent" on submitted cable utilization graphs that have no bearing "It's a graph that shows the a peak but its in no way showing node exhaustion". It's really going to be a bad ruling, it's just down to how much the resellers are going to get gouged and trickle down to the consumer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2011 17:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 06:28 |
|
|
Viktor posted:It's really going to be a bad ruling, it's just down to how much the resellers are going to get gouged and trickle down to the consumer. I don't see how those who are confusing the CRTC are going to get the better ruling. So far they seem to appreciate the answers on 95th, intrigued by Primus' model and just confused by the arguments against both.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2011 17:29
|
|