The Day Canadian Internet Will Be Put on Life Support is March 1st

[N35t0r]

Did you read the whole post?

What? We're expected to read all of it?

[Fake Boris]

Of course it was.

What probably won't happen, at least in the foreseeable future:

1) the issue of bandwidth throttling will not be addressed.
2) the issue of ridiculously low caps with the major ISPs will not be addressed.

That what I mean by "it's not exactly strongarming."

[Asher]

Of course it was.

What probably won't happen, at least in the foreseeable future:

1) the issue of bandwidth throttling will not be addressed.
2) the issue of ridiculously low caps with the major ISPs will not be addressed.

That what I mean by "it's not exactly strongarming."

I understand what you meant, but that doesn't mean it's sensible.

It is absolutely strongarming for the government to force the CRTC to reevaluate and to throw the head of the CRTC infront of the MPs for a circus act.

[Fake Boris]

For instance, Videotron puts a 100GB cap on a 30Mbits connection.

What the **** do you need 30Mbits for if you're stuck at 100GB?

[Fake Boris]

I understand what you meant, but that doesn't mean it's sensible.

It is absolutely strongarming for the government to force the CRTC to reevaluate and to throw the head of the CRTC infront of the MPs for a circus act.

Whatever. It's just playing with words.

[Asher]

For instance, Videotron puts a 100GB cap on a 30Mbits connection.

What the **** do you need 30Mbits for if you're stuck at 100GB?

Shaw is similar -- 50Mbps connection, 175GB.

The 100Mbps connection has a 350GB cap. But it's $160/mo.

[kittenOFchaos]

I'm staggered Canada is so rubbish in this department. At a time when people are moving away from discs to downloading games, music and videos (totally legally) you guys are making that transition staggeringly expensive.

How could you guys even contemplate using STEAM or direct2drive?

I really hope this is sorted before I migrate to Canada in a few years with my soon to be wife (who is Canadian). If you don't, you guys lose at Internets.

[Wezil]

Oh, very nice.

Talk about bad timing.

The Bell Canada software that helps customers calculate how much bandwidth they've used each month has gone offline in the middle of a national debate over Internet pricing.

As the furor grows over so-called usage-based billing -- a regulatory change by the CRTC that would allow larger providers to charge per-byte prices to small Internet providers that lease space on their networks -- the tool that allows Bell's own customers to calculate their usage has been taken down.

A Bell spokesperson confirmed the company's software, which was provided by an outside vendor, has been pulled offline because of glitches. As they test the fix, the service remains offline but could be operational by as early as this week, the spokesperson said. Although Bell is not the only company that leases its networks to smaller Internet service providers (ISPs), as it is mandated to do by the regulator, it has found itself central to the debate since so many companies offer service over its vast network.

Some users have reported to media that Bell's usage calculator, which allows Internet customers to ensure they don't go over their monthly download limits and trigger charges that can be as high as $2.50 per gigabyte, was registering faulty numbers -- pushing them over the limit when they hadn't downloaded much.

The original notification on Bell’s website informed customers the tool had been disabled because of “an issue that may cause internet usage shown on this site to be overstated in some cases.” However, by Tuesday night, Bell changed the message slightly, replacing the word “overstated” with “incorrect.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/tech-news/ubb-internet/software-glitch-triggers-inflated-data-usage-for-some-bell-customers/article1900568/

[Asher]

Shaw also has admittedly terrible trackers. In December I was told I used 40GB of my quota, according to their tool. Now they're retroactively changed it to over 300GB in december.

[Wezil]

I didn't post the entire article. Shaw was mentioned.

[Wezil]

The cynic in me thinks the mistakes aren't accidental.

[Dinner]

Yeah, you just know all of the "errors" are always going to be in the company's favor and result in higher charges to customers.

[notyoueither]

I listened in on radio as a rep of one of the indies explained what was going on.

His company pays the major for pipe and distributes it to their customers according to their business model. I assume they turn a profit.

IIRC, Bell wants them to charge heavy users extra even though the pipe those people go through is already paid for. Very strange, and it does not seem there could be a reasonable explanation for it. Also conspicuous, none of the majors will say anything to major media except like in Telus' case to say it isn't anything they want anything to do with.

[Asher]

A friend of mine is a digital network engineer for Rogers, which is exactly the kind of **** UBB is about.

He tried to defend it to me, but it's clear he's just spouting the company line. It comes down to "it's so expensive to keep upgrading infrastructure as people use more!" Rogers wants to stop, or at least massively slow down spending on infrastructure, as it cuts into profits -- which shareholders don't like. He likened it to people needing to be more "bandwidth efficient" rather than assuming it'll always be there. The problem is, we already are bandwidth efficient and the bandwidth increases will be there for many, many years to come.

You know what, by far, the most inefficient part of Rogers' network is? Analog cable and digital cable. The internet, even including their new 100Mbps service), uses 10% of Rogers' cable bandwidth. Analog cable is ridiculously inefficient and takes up about 60% of it. The digital cable they use now is also highly inefficient using high-bit rate/low quality MPEG-2 streams at 13-19Mbps when an equivalent h264 stream could easily be in the 3-5Mbps range.

There's tons of low-hanging fruit there for Rogers to get bandwidth without upgrading all of their infrastructure, but it involves moving people to new digital cable terminals. This is because Rogers did not have the foresight to start distributing h264-compatible boxes when they first became available in 2004. They still distribute MPEG-2 only boxes in some models.

It all comes down to terrible, inept management and a sense of entitlement to profit gouge.

This is why no other country has the same problem Rogers/Bell claim they have.