|
I'm really glad I have Shaw out west here. I went through a TB at least last month and haven't heard so much as a peep out of them. I always go over their limits and have not heard of anyone else having issues either.
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2010 01:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 05:52 |
|
|
Shumagorath posted:It's likely an election year and the Liberals will be desperate for seats, so we have to hope.... I'd go vote for that reason alone, even if their other main policies included purging health care.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2011 02:39
|
|
|
Viktor posted:Looks like Bell Canada has all the rates up: http://www.bell.ca/shopping/PrsShpInt_Access.page God I loving hate Bell.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 17:50
|
|
|
blackswordca posted:I love that. A month ago "We wont charge for Overages!" they get a ton of signups, most probably in three year contracts, and since it wasn't in writing 'Lol, just kidding' CBC has a hardon for the CRTC. They've got a loving section about it on their website.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2011 04:33
|
|
|
God I loving hate the CRTC. There can't be any outside competition because we have to keep it Canadian enough. But at the same time, the Canadian companies have it great because of no outside competition. They've got it both ways. Protectionism keeps the competition out so we can keep our content "Canadian enough" but at the same time "Canadian enough" means the ability to bend over and be forced to listen to lovely music, be forced to choose between one of the big three who offer nothing in the cellular business and now being forced to accept [even indirectly through independent dealers] usage based billing because they're being strongarmed into it as well. If the CRTC was really concerned with protecting Canadian interests, usage based billing being forced on smaller 100% Canadian owned companies wouldn't be allowed. I realize this is a relatively broad way of looking at it, but it's really hard not to be angry about. Between our god awful cell phone plans, our lovely Canadian [Nickelback, Bryan Adams] content being forced down our throats on TV, medicore low level TV shows [Little Mosque, Corner Gas] and controlling of content [not letting in Fox News even if I would never watch it] to this. It's absolutely ridiculous and I can't imagine how people are more concerned with stupid crap like oh god Harper is going to turn us into a George Bush government with his Republican cronies. It's embarrassing to be Canadian sometimes. This is one of those times. I've never been so apathetic about politics when no major political party is willing to take this issue on seriously. I suppose the NDP has a bird in the pond but they're the first to support Canadian funding for Canadian low-level content.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2011 06:27
|
|
|
Chronicler of Dongs posted:It's just so frustrating that we are being completely hosed over and nobody else either gives a poo poo or even knows about it. I'm hoping Netflix gets a bit more vocal about their disdain for this UBB crap. They're one of the only high profile companies who have spoken out about it. The only catch is they're major competition with the ISPs who provide on demand video service which is dwindling in popularity as Netflix gets more popular. It makes a really lovely situation even worse because they can come across as sour grapes to the public if Shaw/Telus/Bell spin it that way, and people will believe that horse poo poo too. Netflix is getting considerably more popular in Canada as real content [read: not Canadian content] pulls in more and more. I can honestly say I don't know anyone who rents movies anymore unless they aren't available on Netflix.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2011 07:02
|
|
|
Funny how this is destroying apathy in the tech-savvy groups. Most of my friends from work who couldn't possibly have cared less about politics are now eyeing a vote for the Liberals or NDP solely based on this, including one who is a staunch Conservative voter and is not changing his position based on this issue alone. It'll be interesting to see what happens, and the conflicts of interest in this mess are too many to count. The CRTC being run by ex Bell corporations, usage based billing edging Netflix out from companies who provide both ISPs and the very service that Netflix competes with, and now news organizations not reporting on the issue because they're owned either by Shaw or by Bell Media. I typically hate the CBC for the CRTC circle jerk they continually put on in their editorials but I guess you can't ignore independent news sites for too long when they're getting 160 thousand signatures.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2011 06:04
|
|
|
8ender posted:Sneakernet is back: That SSD comparison is a pretty good indication of how overpriced $2 a gig is.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2011 15:53
|
|
|
blkmage posted:http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/Ottawa+quash+CRTC+decision/4214138/story.html Great news. http://twitter.com/TonyClement_MP appears to have verified it. Nairbo fucked around with this message at 04:39 on Feb 3, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 04:34
|
|
|
Haha George Berger is awesome. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ZYizoh_r6D0#t=481s Comparison between Bell charging $2 a gig and the CRTC regulating Money For Nothing. I wish TekSavvy was in my area.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 08:35
|
|
|
Pweller posted:please elaborate on how you got this Shaw deal my good man You generally pay for it all at once and it usually requires Cable TV as well, but I've heard of such a deal. You need proof of student ID as well and the Cable TV package is limited.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 09:01
|
|
|
Moist von Lipwig posted:Ughhhh, I'm getting interviewed for a CBC piece on the UBB issue. Anyone have any soundbites that wouldn't make me sound like an idiot on What's your involvement with it? Very cool either way. Emphasize on the fact that it costs a fraction of a penny to provide bandwidth and that Canadian costs to provide are actually less than American counterparts, despite our market being far less saturated. Also the fact that major telecom companies in Canada already have the highest profit margins in the world and the fact that the UBB is conveniently coming out as Netflix gains in popularity, lowering the likelihood people are going to use Shaw or Bell or Rogers on demand, especially when the price of one movie is often the same as an entire month of Netflix. There's a million points to be made, none of which benefit UBB. Nairbo fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Feb 3, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 18:29
|
|
National Television
|
Martytoof posted:in addition to the "cents per gigabyte" UBB thing. If you hit the "Well Americans have this and this, why are we so behind?", maybe it'll be sensationalist enough to give birth to a soundbite or something. If nothing else, it might just hit some nationalistic pride nerve. It seems as this is the best approach in any case. Compare Canada negatively to the USA and people get in a tiff about it very easily.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 19:07
|
|
|
Although she's on our side, this lady has no idea how bandwidth works either.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 23:03
|
|
|
The Gunslinger posted:I'm at work and can't see the stream, did they say they're going to rescind it or is the government going to have to repeal it for them? They're going to look at it for 60 days. Which is terrible.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 23:08
|
|
|
Migishu posted:"Skype won't affect the cap because Skype doesn't do streaming video" The CRTC's next plan is to let Bell restrict video calls on Skype!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 23:26
|
|
|
Jesus, with the logic they used it almost makes more sense to get a wireless internet stick and pay $60 for 5 gigs.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 23:29
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:The anti UBB groups need to tear this hearing APART with both hands. To be fair to him, he did say he believes caps are too low/etc, so at least he's not (totally) insane. On some level I feel bad for the poor bastard because he was probably told it'd be a cush job like it's been for the last few CRTC heads. They could get away with knowing nothing and going on poor information because until now, Canadians never gave a gently caress about any of their stupid decisions. If anything needs to happen before the UBB decision, both those people who mistook GB for gigahertz need to be replaced pronto. It's pretty inexcusable that my mother knows the term for data better than the head of the organization that decides who can and cannot compete in this very market.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 23:32
|
|
|
Parachute Underwear posted:This whole thing just made me so angry. This old guy who barely knows what the gently caress is going on around him is spouting all sorts of bullshit to people who may or may not have advanced knowledge on the subject. Don't forget IPTV not using the internet
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 23:32
|
|
|
teethgrinder posted:I'm pretty sure he knew that judging from his manner of speaking, and the fact that it says so at the bottom of the article. It has no business being in the Post in the first place, the NP is absolutely insane.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2011 01:34
|
|
|
univbee posted:I have no idea about Canadian IPTV specifically, but I know some US carriers do cause your internet to get slower if you watch TV (like going from 50 Mbps down to 25). Really it could be setup either way here, only the big ISPs know for sure. Telus Optik slows down a fair bit when you are watching TV, moreso with multiple HD boxes going at the same time.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2011 23:56
|
|
|
DropDeadRed posted:Yea... but to make this example REAL you have to say that the restaurant gets it's food for FREE all they had to buy was the ovens. Their only limitation is the rate at which they cook the food. When the restaurant gets busy, they just make sure the "hogs" are limited to smaller portions or fewer trips. If that hog wants to sit in the restaurant for 4 hours and eat a bit slower, they can eat as much as they bloody well want and there is ZERO additional cost. Even then it's a ridiculous analogy. Everyone wants to use an analogy or simile to compare Internet traffic to. The only one that even begins to make sense is the road traffic one. The tell tale sign someone has no idea how the Internet works when making an argument for UBB is any analogy at all, or comparing it to hydro. It's a great way to make them look like an idiot with facts even my non tech savvy parents know.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2011 06:49
|
|
|
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.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2011 17:48
|
|
|
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.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2011 17:22
|
|
|
I love that Shaw is finally recognizing there's people who don't want its TV service anymore. Broadband 50 is great so far, 50 mbps and only a handful of TV channels that I watch, CBC, NBC and Global for the News. I'd get TekSavvy if I could in my area but I really have no complaints about Shaw, they have no bullshit contracts and no fees for setting anything up. Aside from taking a while to get in touch with their phone support when I need to move, I've never once had to call them for anything and my internet hasn't once gone down in the 6 years I've been with them aside from the wildfires in our area 5 years ago.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2011 16:39
|
|
|
http://mobilesyrup.com/2012/01/25/c...ilesyrup.com%29 Bye Kondrad
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2012 18:21
|
|
|
This thread made me feel really good about my $30/month 100 Mbps SaskTel plan with no data caps. Thanks for that, I needed some reason to not hate living in Saskatchewan.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 05:52 |
|
|
Is Telus ever going to expand its 250/250 to other areas that currently have 150? I'm in Kamloops and Vernon has had it for quite a while 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2017 21:21
|
|