|
I'm in Windsor with MNSi DSL and I'm getting 4.2Mb down 600Kb up from a 5/800 connection. I'm surprised to hear how bad some peoples line speeds are. Mine wasn't even that bad when the line to my house was so corroded it disintegrated in the techs hand. I though 4Mb was a little slow compared to friends cable but with unlimited transfer it was completely livable and in fact preferable.
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 02:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 04:30 |
|
|
Most utilities will charge you a basic fee for service and then a usage fee. So like $10/month as a base fee then your usage on top of that at market rates. Electric utilities, water utilities and gas utilities all already do this. So isn't the problem just establishing a fair market rate for bandwidth? Why can't I see the following on my bill? $10: account and infrastructure base fee $0.25: 5gb @ 0.05/gb $10.25 total Why isn't this an option? Is it because the monopolies own the infrastructure which means they can set the bandwidth cost to whatever they want? I mean $2 per gigabyte is ludicrous and obviously being set out of thin air.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 03:01
|
|
|
Here I made you guys something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 03:45
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Here I made you guys something. This right here made my night. I've been debating getting Teksavvy cable, but I really can't justify the startup cost (you need to buy your own modem). Not until I graduate, at least.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 04:04
|
|
|
univbee posted:You mean like in Japan with its population five times Canada's where 160 megabit internet for $60 is the norm? No, although in fairness I'm not sure what constitutes normal use over there (freeish* digital over-the-air TV is available everywhere, no one games on PC, virtually all Japanese PC games are retail packages only, their rental stores are basically heaven so you really don't need to download a movie illegally, and even if you could good luck finding Japanese subtitles for it); I think in Japan they just innovated everything else so the internet was less of a priority.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 04:05
|
|
|
To follow up, in August Shaw typically offers deals to students. You need a student ID and a confirmation of enrollment to get it. I'm getting full (non HD) digital cable and 100GB @ 15Mbit for $65 after taxes. You get the special pricing for 12 months, and have the option to pay up front for the entire year. Because I was a customer prior to returning to school I had the option to continue paying monthly. Once I stop getting these deals I'll likely switch to Teksavvy just because Berger is awesome. I'll also dream of a day when you can get decent TV over the internet in Canada (never (when George finishes his next book)).
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 04:32
|
|
|
For all the crap we've given Finckenstein, he was one of the judges responsible for upholding that uploading music to the internet isn't a violation of Canadian copyright law (according to Wikipedia): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konrad_von_Finckenstein
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 04:37
|
|
|
Sashimi posted:Haven't the Japanese been doing most of their internet usage on phones for quite a few years now, by which I mean long before smartphones became all the rage over here. This of course would place much less stress on their land based broadband infrastructure compared to other nations. Yes, this is very true, to the point that any advertisement wanting to point you to a website will tell you what words to put in a search engine (although this is also partly due to the lack of japanese characters being allowed in a URL). It mostly has to do with the insane commutes Japanese people undertake (2-4 hours each way isn't that uncommon, that's why they have capsule hotels) as well as limited living space (and therefore being limited in how much "stuff" you can have), and so EVERYTHING is doable on your phone and has been for some time. Want to watch TV? Whip out your 1seg antenna and have at it, free, no bandwidth limitations. Radio? Same thing. Books/manga? They had eBooks and readers long before Amazon. Games? Ditto. Having said that, a lot of this was easily doable BECAUSE the country is so compact. Stick an antenna anywhere that's inhabitable and you'll have tens of thousands of customers in range guaranteed, if not hundreds of thousands. The 1seg video feed piggy backs off cell phone towers in the same way SMS texts do here. Finally, given how tiny the country is and how only 20% of that land is inhabitable in the first place, you don't need that many antennas in the grand scheme of things to 100% cover the country. Short of figuring something out with a high-orbit satellite (which would have TERRIBLE latency), it's pretty much impossible to 100% cover Canada; sticking an antenna in Alert, NWT isn't going to make you any money. Having said that, it's entirely viable to do something like this in at least one or two cities in each Province.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 04:38
|
|
|
teethgrinder posted:For all the crap we've given Finckenstein, he was one of the judges responsible for upholding that uploading music to the internet isn't a violation of Canadian copyright law (according to Wikipedia): He's also correct in pointing out that without the CRTC we would have no independent ISPs. Still I don't think hes very well informed, I was watching the news and he claimed that Netflix is putting a huge strain on the Internet but seemingly ignores all of the IPTV stuff that the incumbents are doing. I thought his comment about 25GB of data being fine for a family was sheer nonsense. My family barely knows anything about downloading except maybe iTunes and they need a 60GB package otherwise they go over. I still want to hear him answer directly why we are paying $1+ per gigabyte for something that costs pennies to deliver and was subsidized by the taxpayers and government in some cases.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 04:43
|
|
|
Competition minus competitive edge undermines the thing he says he wants to represent. In effect, Bell hoodwinked him into looking incompetent and ineffective, and he could have avoided it if he tried to understand the issues.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 05:21
|
|
|
The Gunslinger posted:He's also correct in pointing out that without the CRTC we would have no independent ISPs. Still I don't think hes very well informed, I was watching the news and he claimed that Netflix is putting a huge strain on the Internet but seemingly ignores all of the IPTV stuff that the incumbents are doing. I thought his comment about 25GB of data being fine for a family was sheer nonsense. My family barely knows anything about downloading except maybe iTunes and they need a 60GB package otherwise they go over. (Oddly enough, it isn't even the gigahertz thing that made it clear he doesn't know what he's talking about. It was the "3D gaming" line. That shows that he really, really doesn't understand what uses bandwidth and what doesn't. He's just going on this notion that young nerds use up internets and old grammas don't.) Nomenklatura fucked around with this message at 06:04 on Feb 4, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 06:01
|
|
|
Whimsy posted:Competition minus competitive edge undermines the thing he says he wants to represent. In effect, Bell hoodwinked him into looking incompetent and ineffective, and he could have avoided it if he tried to understand the issues.   Pick one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 06:17
|
|
|
While I think he's plainly incompetent, the 3d gaming line can be plainly explained away by referring to the downloading of the game content (steam), rather than the actual playing of the game which takes relatively little bandwidth.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 06:20
|
|
|
If anybody has the bandwidth to spare after streaming the questioning earlier, here's an interview with tony clement from tonight. http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Politics/1244504890/ID=1779426903
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 06:26
|
|
|
Tony Clement seems like the only one involved that even remotely understands the issue. Between this and the Globalive ruling, he's quickly becoming my favorite person in government.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 07:16
|
|
|
I can't believe he's getting poo poo for tweeting decisions. How much more efficient can government get? New generations will not even bat an eye at this, but it's clear who's outdated when they act all offended by tweets.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 07:54
|
|
TO UNDERAGE GYMNASTS
|
Dudebro posted:I can't believe he's getting poo poo for tweeting decisions. How much more efficient can government get? New generations will not even bat an eye at this, but it's clear who's outdated when they act all offended by tweets. How dare politicians communicate directly with the citizens, this is an outrage.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 07:57
|
|
|
Dudebro posted:I can't believe he's getting poo poo for tweeting decisions. How much more efficient can government get? New generations will not even bat an eye at this, but it's clear who's outdated when they act all offended by tweets. There was some huge issue a while ago about people tweeting during meetings, I haven't watched this new interview but people here don't like that or something v  v
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 08:02
|
|
|
Tweeting during meetings is one thing. Tweeting on your own time is another.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 08:08
|
|
|
Powershift posted:If anybody has the bandwidth to spare after streaming the questioning earlier, here's an interview with tony clement from tonight. http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Politics/1244504890/ID=1779426903 GodDAMN I love this man.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 09:10
|
|
|
univbee posted:GodDAMN I love this man. Even touched on the future need for more bandwidth too. I enjoyed this interview immensely.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 09:28
|
|
|
univbee posted:GodDAMN I love this man. I can't stand Tony Clement for his role in developing the Common Sense revolution in Ontario. I'm certain that any other MP from any other party would have done things exactly the same as he's done it. But I can't help but feel like he's the only guy who would actually understand the issue as much as he does, which I appreciate. Tony, you may be a huge bastard, but thanks for getting this one right.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 09:36
|
|
|
The interviewer perpetuated the strange fallacy where they make it sound like the independent ISPs just use Bell or Rogers' infrastructure for free. Not with bandwidth, but for maintenance and support of it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 13:30
|
|
|
Whimsy posted:I can't stand Tony Clement for his role in developing the Common Sense revolution in Ontario. I'm certain that any other MP from any other party would have done things exactly the same as he's done it. That's actually why I've been turned off of a lot of the "net neutrality" activism online always aligning itself with the left. All you're doing is alienating people who would otherwise also be supporters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 13:47
|
|
|
kuddles posted:That's actually why I've been turned off of a lot of the "net neutrality" activism online always aligning itself with the left. All you're doing is alienating people who would otherwise also be supporters. Maybe, but there's a limit to the ability of your average market-fundamentalist (at least, the ones that aren't firmly tuned into the issue like anyone posting in this thread) to accept the need for regulation to address potential market failures (see: net neutrality debate in the States, forcing competition in natural monopolies like telecom, etc, etc). On the other hand, it's easy to find a leftist who thinks corporations need to be restrained. A couple of articles yesterday (Weston at CBC, even the FP) made the point that half the reason the CRTC made the decision it did on UBB (among other things) was because Industry Canada told them in 2006 to rely on regulation less and market forces more to achieve the Telecom Act objectives. And so on, and so forth. It's not that net activists have consciously decided to ally themselves with the left. It's that the things that net activists need done to meet their objectives, at least in these cases, are more popular on the ideological left than the ideological right. But this isn't D&D, so I should stop right there. Dallan Invictus fucked around with this message at 15:56 on Feb 4, 2011 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 15:52
|
|
|
Browsing through Facebook, I see that a ton of people I went to school with or whatever have joined anti-UBB groups. I know the vast majority of these people have a cheap Bell account. Overturning UBB has nothing at all to do with Bell's rates, it's just their applying their lovely rates onto 3rd party ISPs, right? Obviously some of these people are waking up to there being other options out there, but I can't help but feel there are a ton of people who are as informed on the issue as the head of the CRTC, and are just being against UBB for the sake of being against it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 16:04
|
|
|
So I guess I should wait until March to switch to TekSavvy cable?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 17:29
|
|
|
Kreez posted:Browsing through Facebook, I see that a ton of people I went to school with or whatever have joined anti-UBB groups. I know the vast majority of these people have a cheap Bell account. Overturning UBB has nothing at all to do with Bell's rates, it's just their applying their lovely rates onto 3rd party ISPs, right? Correct - The UBB ruling was all about Bell enforcing their own usage rates and prices onto the 3rd party wholesalers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 18:11
|
|
|
XYZ posted:So I guess I should wait until March to switch to TekSavvy cable? Kreez posted:Browsing through Facebook, I see that a ton of people I went to school with or whatever have joined anti-UBB groups. I know the vast majority of these people have a cheap Bell account. Overturning UBB has nothing at all to do with Bell's rates, it's just their applying their lovely rates onto 3rd party ISPs, right?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 19:07
|
|
|
XYZ posted:So I guess I should wait until March to switch to TekSavvy cable?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 19:15
|
|
|
How slow is the 5M dsl line? I'm thinking of switching over from Videotron's 15M line. I'd rather have unlimited than a shitter 70GB cap.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 19:19
|
|
|
jizzpowered posted:How slow is the 5M dsl line? I'm thinking of switching over from Videotron's 15M line. I'd rather have unlimited than a shitter 70GB cap. It's 1/3 the speed down, I dunno what the difference is in upload since you didn't specify.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 19:28
|
|
|
My 'real-world performance' in downtown Toronto is that I download at 500 KB/sec and upload at 60.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 19:28
|
|
|
jizzpowered posted:How slow is the 5M dsl line? I'm thinking of switching over from Videotron's 15M line. I'd rather have unlimited than a shitter 70GB cap.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 19:29
|
|
|
jizzpowered posted:How slow is the 5M dsl line? I'm thinking of switching over from Videotron's 15M line. I'd rather have unlimited than a shitter 70GB cap. Well I'm with Teksavvy DSL in downtown Montreal and I'm able to get 600kb/s for Steam downloads at times. However it really depends on your location. It's not going to be as fast as Videotron, there's no way around that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 19:29
|
|
|
I have a Bell 5Mbit/512k connection. Unlimited bandwidth, but with a horrendous bittorrent throttle of 30Kb/s after 4:30pm. I'm paying $60/month. With TekSavvy Cable I can get 15Mbit/1Mbit with a 200GB cap for a little less than that. I just don't want to get that set up, only to have the cap slashed 75% in a few months time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 19:32
|
|
|
Shofixti posted:Well I'm with Teksavvy DSL in downtown Montreal and I'm able to get 600kb/s for Steam downloads at times. However it really depends on your location. It's not going to be as fast as Videotron, there's no way around that. drat that sucks, I'm in Montreal too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 19:37
|
|
|
Would is be possible for someone to give a proper rundown on all the terms that are getting thrown around during this whole issue? Like I keep hearing different comparisons of bandwith and caps and usage and congestion used in different ways that really stands out when you start seeing news articles and people for/against it that don't really seem to understand it or use it in conflicting arguments. For one, the comparisons to utilities keep coming up which makes bandwidth seem like a resource ala electricty or water. Except water can actually be consumed/recycled by plants etc, running your taps excessively uses more water etc. Likewise, electricity is actually produced from somewhere and is consumed to power devices. In these cases, charging for the amount you use makes sense, they are in effect, limited by factors such as being a natural somewhat finite resource like water, or generating capability such as electricity. As I understand it, bandwidth is simply the total "flow" of data available and has nothing to do with the actual amount of data transferred or "used" so much as the amount of data that can be transmitted at the same time. This seems glaringly out of place therefore when we have statistics coming up like 20% of users consuming 80% of the bandwidth as an argument to support UBB and enforcing caps when no matter how much the "greedy or excessive" users might be downloading, they can still only obtain the max speeds determined by their connections and would use no more bandwidth then someone downloading a lesser amount at the same speeds. It is the concurrent downloading at those speeds that would cause the congestion and lowering of bandwidth is it not? How then, do statistics like that above get released and not immediately torn apart?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 19:39
|
|
|
asmallrabbit posted:It is the concurrent downloading at those speeds that would cause the congestion and lowering of bandwidth is it not? How then, do statistics like that above get released and not immediately torn apart? Because most people don't know any better (at least most people in places where it matters).
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 20:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 04:30 |
|
|
XYZ posted:I have a Bell 5Mbit/512k connection. Unlimited bandwidth, but with a horrendous bittorrent throttle of 30Kb/s after 4:30pm. I'm paying $60/month.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2011 20:16
|
|