|
I like how they sell it at a $1.00+/GB
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2010 01:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 21:37 |
|
|
Nomenklatura posted:I think the big barrier is that SOMEBODY needs to price out exactly how much it costs them to provide it. As long as they can claim that they need to meter, and carefully avoid how much their profit margin per GB is, they'll get sympathy from people who think that bits should cost money. If somebody can prove that Rogers pays 0.01 cents per GB, and we pay two bucks a GB, then you just need to tell the public that Rogers get a 2000% markup. Pull out a number like that and they'll rampage through the streets.. You want to know something. For the most part, transfer of data across their peers actually costs nothing because of the peering contracts they have in place. That's the really big kicker there.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2010 02:39
|
|
|
The Gunslinger posted:Rogers just submitted an amended TPIA tariff for UBB rates for wholesale apparently though. Cogeco is basically ignoring the CRTC and only letting Teksavvy connect where they will drop dark fiber which means the rollouts will be glacial. In the end resellers cannot compete with Bell and Rogers while the CRTC is in their pocket. In a year there will basically be no reason to go with a reseller over Bell and Rogers since they will dictate the rates and often give better bandwidth options to their own customers. For example Bell lets you buy a 40GB block for $5 if you're a Bell customer but Teksavvy customers won't have that option, they will have pay the new rates. The speed matching prices were a joke too. It's a lovely situation, I don't know what anyone can do about it though other than get some lawyers involved because the CRTC is literally just doing whatever the hell Rogers and Bell ask for. At this point I'm not sure why the competition bureau of canada isn't involved or something, it's become ludicrous to the point of total transparency. It's because the majority of customers don't give a poo poo. Canada == Apathy, and all that 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2010 23:41
|
|
|
It's sad that I had to drop a reseller DSL provider and move back in with Rogers, because they will actually be CHEAPER in the long run  What kinda crazy world do we live in when Rogers is the cheapest and fastest in my area 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2011 19:10
|
|
|
My MP is Peter Kent, totes the company line pretty hard core. I've sent him a bunch of my concerns and the responses I get back are pretty much what you'd expect for someone toting the company line.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2011 20:08
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I expect nothing less from David Sweet, but I'll be damned if I don't try On the bright side, they no longer send me all their junk mail propaganda. Small victory I guess 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2011 20:15
|
|
|
Found a half way decent one template Canadian ISPs have "just become a collection agency for the monopolies" according to the CEO of the Canadian Internet service provider TekSavvy Solutions. On January 25th, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) gave the go-ahead to allow Bell Canada to charge Usage-Based Billing (UBB) to local Internet Service Providers (ISPs), such as Mega-Quebec here in Quebec City. Starting in February any data over your cap will be charged extra. Despite being charged per gigabyte (GB) when you exceed your cap, if you use less than your cap you will not receive a discount. According to an employee of TekSavvy, bandwidth costs to your ISP are "1 to 3 pennies per gig". Your local ISP is now obligated to charge you $1-4 per GB, more than a 10000% markup, and pass that money directly to Bell. This is a disaster for everyone who is currently using the Internet; your Internet bill will almost certainly go up. It is trivially easy to pass the 25-50 GB caps that will come into effect next month. Watching a low-end HD movie on the Internet will set you back 4-6 GB, and a single episode of television could be as much as 1.5 GB. Downloading 2-3 games per month off Steam that will set you back 25 GB a month alone. Streaming just 30 minutes of 720p videos on YouTube every day could use over 30 GB. Even if you are already on a plan with a cap, this gives leeway to your current ISP to raise your prices in the absence of competition. So why the sudden push to impose UBB? The answer is Netflix Canada, an online DVD-rental and movie streaming service that recently became available, and Hulu, an online TV streaming service that is very popular in the united states. Bell is the owner of the CTV television network, as well as offering monthly television subscription services. Bell has decided that the best way to ensure that you cannot cancel your television service (and watch shows online at your convenience) is to make online streaming of TV shows and movies too costly by over-charging for bandwidth. And through the CRTC, to force competing ISPs to do the same. That the CRTC would ignore such a huge conflict of interest is surprising, until you realize that some of its members have previously worked at Bell or Rogers and are unfit to regulate an industry they are beholden to. There are three possible solutions that we can implement to stop our Internet access from dropping to third-world levels: 1. Disband the CRTC and replace it with an organization directly responsible to parliament, fill it with members who won't rubber-stamp every anti-competitive request made by our monopolies. 2. Create a provincial crown corporation here in Quebec, similar to Sasktel, which has pledged to keep providing the citizens of Saskatchewan with unlimited Internet access at affordable rates. 3. Adopt a system similar to the one in Japan, where the owner of last mile infrastructure (Nippon Telegraph and Telephone) was broken up into competing companies. They were also forced to lease their lines to smaller competitors at wholesale rates. Thanks to government regulations mandating competition, Japanese citizens now enjoy un-capped 160 Mbps Internet speeds for $60 a month, speeds unheard of here in Canada, at any price. http://www.antiubb.com/why-should-we-oppose-ubb/ also has a lot of great key points that could be easily copy/pasted into an email.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2011 20:49
|
|
|
The kicker is that the CDN used to send those over to you is probably nextdoor and costs your ISP NOTHING to send to you. In fact, having worked for a certain large ISP I can assure you that most peering contracts within North America are in fact cost neutral.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2011 21:06
|
|
|
Sashimi posted:Sup fellow Thornhillian. His office is always good at getting back to you, I'll give 'em that. I just sent him a quick email with an "I'll keep it short this time, What's your stance on UBB". We'll see how he reponds. So far he's 0/4 with concerns I've needed adressed. I'm not expecting a reply until March 1st :p
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2011 22:04
|
|
|
Wafulz posted:Hahaha goddamn I laughed way too hard at this. Yeah I did too  Got a response from Mr. Kent, looks like it was sent from his BB (or his assistant, or assistant's assistant) because the formatting got all messed up. P. Kentizzie posted:
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2011 02:32
|
|
|
To be honest I hope the line between lovely caps and UBB gets blurred to the point that they not only reverse UBB but force ISPs to either abolish caps, or charge the actual cost of bandwidth (~ $0.12/GB).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2011 03:52
|
|
|
My figure is a rather generous one, but hey I'm also looking out for the poor corporations here as well. I want them to be able to afford the upgrades to their network. Even at 12 cents/GB; 1 TB of data would only be twelve bucks and not $1200. Wholesale rates are cheaper, but you're not going to get those as a consumer.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2011 04:31
|
|
|
orange lime posted:Your figure is extraordinarily generous, because the "poor corporations" make money on every bit they charge you for regardless of how much it is. They pay literally nothing for the transfers because nearly all the ISPs in North America have peering agreements where they don't pay anything to transfer on each others' networks. A 1 cent charge is equal to a 1 cent profit. Oh poo poo yeah, maths.  Would still be cheaper than what I pay using up around 500GB You'll never, ever get 2-3 cents/GB though unless you run your own data centre and have some pretty good peering connections. Some of the better pricing I've seen has been around the 5-10 cent/GB depending on connection type, co-location, etc. Now the actual costs incurred by the ISPs really is close to 0 since there are some very sweet peering contracts between the big ISPs/Telcos in place. The only time it might cost them money is if you pull stuff overseas and even that's pretty drat cheap for North America. edit: Seems to have gone over people's heads, but my "generosity" towards the telcos comment was sarcasm... v v
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2011 07:31
|
|
|
Suniikaa posted:This was really refreshing to watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYizoh_r6D0&t=304s That was so amazing I'm speechless. The second Teksavvy cable is ready in my area I'm signing up and driving over and giving George a lil sum sum 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 06:50
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I agree that most tech savvy people would likely be anti UBB, but that's not to say they couldn't be reasonable. Like I'm not against UBB per se, I'm against UBB at a 5000% markup. I'm not against bandwidth caps per se, I'm against bandwidth caps that would have been shameful in 2006. I'm not set against UBB either, like you said %5000 markup is what gets most of us. I'd be in favour of a small ($5-10) monthly fee and then paying for what I use based on the actual cost of bandwidth. That douchenozzle @acoyne on twitter actually said there's a scarcity of bandwidth 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2011 00:47
|
|
|
Everytime I see and hear Mirko talk I just want to  him non stop. Fairness, fairness, fairnes.... uuugh... more like MONEY MONEY OMG I WANT SWIMMING POOLS OF MONEY....
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2011 23:46
|
|
|
I want to hug George Burger if I ever see him. Dude keeps his cool and always fires off the good questions/rebuttals.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2011 00:38
|
|
|
Godinster posted:Seems like Telus is in the same boat, they're not doing anything at all about this and haven't made a few pages on their website trying to defend it like Rogers has. Rogers even used the same "Fair" verbage that Bell is so famous for.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2011 18:23
|
|
|
Whimsy posted:Internet Greed. Hahahaha amazing. Caps and UBB are in the crosshairs, it's only a matter of time before the majority of people are on board to bring it to Rogers and Bell.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2011 14:44
|
|
|
Nomenklatura posted:Tony clement sperging out over it on twitter was a sight to behold, I tell you what. I found your comment of no immediate competitor quite amusing  Too bad we don't have real competitors in a number of fields here in the great white north
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2011 22:05
|
|
|
Yeah Speedtest always shows bogus numbers for me. I can only dream:  
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2011 16:59
|
|
|
Dudebro posted:So many lies... Yeah, whoever you spoke to was lying out their rear end on a number of points. They certainly aren't the only Docsis 3 provider, or ... or ... or ...
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2011 23:28
|
|
|
Godamnit when the gently caress is Thornhill/Vaughan gonna get some non Rogers' cable Internet. I'm tired of blowing $120+/month on just my Internet  Oddly enough when I called Distributel the rep said sorry Rogers has a monopoly there and are blocking all others or some such....
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2011 19:23
|
|
|
gently caress the CRTC man. gently caress them. I'd kill for some solid competition.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2011 00:26
|
|
|
OMG Teksavvy Cable is finally available in Thornhill! Calling them just to be sure and switching from Rogers today 
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2011 15:07
|
|
|
kuddles posted:Well, cancelled with Rogers and transferring over to Teksavvy Cable on June 10th. I'm hoping the service is good because while in the long run it's certainly going to be cheaper, buying a new modem and router will be quite the sting if I end up dissatisfied. This is me in a nutshell as well. June 8th is my install date. Can't wait, and frankly losing 10Mbps is nothing compared to the ~$70 I'll be saving each month. I have a very heavy bandwidth using household. Between my wife and myself we use on average 400GB/month. Hulu, Netflix, Steam games, etc add up really fast, especially when you've completely ditched cable/sat TV.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2011 12:56
|
|
|
Rogers called me yesterday because I finally managed to ditch the last service I had with them. They asked why they are losing me as a customer and what they could do to keep me. I told em that I wanted truly unlimited Internet, to which their response was that they don't offer that. I countered with "Well that would be why you're losing me as a customer  " We both got a nice chuckle out of that and wished each other a nice day.Also, what's this speedboost people are talking about?
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2011 16:21
|
|
|
The only thing is that 250GB isn't that much to begin with and easily reached when your household uses Netflix, Hulu, etc. Not to mention that 250GBs usually costs the ISP next to nothing as most of that content is provided by a local CDN. On top of that, most of the peering contracts between ISPs and the US tend to be cost neutral.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2011 01:46
|
|
|
Teksavvy Install went without a hitch Decent speeds, nearly gonna save me 1/2 of what Rogers was costing me monthly. Speed test to something more local  Upload speed kinda sucks but w/e
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2011 16:19
|
|
|
Yeah Bell somehow manages to be about 1000x worse than Rogers. If my Tek Savvy install went south I'd just have to call my old manager @ Rogers and yell at him for loving up provisioning.. then have one of my buddies who still works there set it all up 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2011 18:59
|
|
|
The Wndr3700 is a great router. I'm running it with OpenWRT and it's been solid.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2011 22:42
|
|
|
Squibbles posted:Oh, the other thing is that apparently DOCSIS 3.0 modems won't do "channel bonding" if you connect them to a 10/100 port on your router. That means they won't go full speed unless they are connected to a 10/100/1000 WAN port I think. Channel bonding happens on the CMTS and Edge Card, it should have 0 to do with your home equipment. edit: outside of your cable modem that is. Stanley Pain fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Jun 10, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2011 23:34
|
|
|
Squibbles posted:I was reading on the dslreports forum that for some reason a lot of docsis 3.0 modems will refuse to enable channel bonding unless they are connected to a gigabit device. There was mention of the lights changing to a different colour to indicate this and such. I have no idea why that would be though, other than a lot of 10/100 routers not supporting a full 100mbps of throughput. I think I'm gonna call BS unless the firmware in the modem is purposely set up that way. I guess stranger things have happened though. I'm almost positive I had my D3 SMC modem hooked up to a 100Mbps port and I still had channel bonding (blue light on the modem was lit up). GigE stuff is dirt cheap and any good router has GigE on it anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2011 19:17
|
|
|
Here's a quote for the Database. My switch from Rogers to Teksavvy went flawlessly. Not only was I up and running within an hour of the switch, I'm saving over $70/month because you actually have an UNLIMITED Internet plan. NO MORE OVERAGE CHARGES!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2011 12:40
|
|
|
Hey is Teksavvy looking for talented people? Ex Rogers Network Engineer here
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2011 15:00
|
|
|
For anyone who's gotten the WNDR3700 I can't really recommend dd-wrt or OpenWRT. I found them to be MUCH less stable than the stock firmware. Could just be my router YMMV.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2011 21:46
|
|
|
Squibbles posted:I haven't had any stability issues (yet) after hooking mine up yesterday but I did see a bunch of threads on the DD-WRT forum with people complaining about broken features such as dynamic dns updates, QoS and a few other things. I guess it'll stabilize over time but stock firmware is probably best for now. With OpenWRT it would run fine for 3-4 days. Then WIFI would magically stop working. No clients could connect and reseting the router, removing/re-adding the interfaces, etc wouldn't fix it. Then DHCP would randomly stop working, so on and so forth. There's definitely some bugs to work out in those builds, which is a shame because I liked some of the extra features I can install with the *WRT builds.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2011 22:39
|
|
|
Squibbles posted:Sure enough, didn't get back to reverting my firmware last night and now my wife reports the wireless is not working this morning. Weee Definitely something with the builds then. Sucks
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2011 21:10
|
|
|
You can dual and triple provision a premise with cable as well. If he has Rogers cable and you want to get Teksavvy/Cable for yourself, you can.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2011 05:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 21:37 |
|
|
I honestly wonder what kind of horrible pro telco ruling the CRTC is going to lay down upon us heathens.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2011 02:47
|
|