Canadian internet access gets shittier

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > Canadian internet access gets shittier

StealthArcher: Jan 10, 2010

Lone Rouge, any even slightly possible chances of unlimited versions of those delicious 12/15/25 DSL pacakges coming out even in the not so near future? 5mbit is way too slow to be stuck on your whole life.

# ? Nov 14, 2011 06:07

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 29, 2024 03:08

Paper Jam Dipper: Jul 14, 2007; by XyloJW

StealthArcher posted:

Lone Rouge, any even slightly possible chances of unlimited versions of those delicious 12/15/25 DSL pacakges coming out even in the not so near future? 5mbit is way too slow to be stuck on your whole life.

One of two things could happen:

1. TekSavvy could get enough money to lay down their own fiberwire all over Canada so they can decide their own bandwidth and pricing.

2. Bell allows for re-negotiation and puts an unlimited package for the fibrewire on the table at a reasonable price.

Consider the likelihood of either. Your best bet is to go MLPPP and pay for two DSL unlimited packages.

# ? Nov 14, 2011 06:25

kuddles: Jul 16, 2006; Like a fist wrapped in blood...

Constellation I posted:

What e-mail? I guess if I choose in the sign-up form that I have Rogers and it asks for my disconnect date, that it's explicit that I'm doing a transfer of service isn't it? If not, I'll try to find a form to put that in I guess.

I just meant you should make it clear that you already got a disconnection date from Rogers when you sign up with TekSavvy.

quote:

Yeah, this is what was confusing me. Seems like from what I've read online, a lot of people switched to TekSavvy the way you did. But I've also read that for some of them, a Rogers tech actually came and physically cut the line at their cable box during/after their disconnect date.

That's why I'm suggesting not to have two lines at once because that seems to be what's causing a lot of the recurring issues.

i.e. If you connect the same day, then all TekSavvy has to do is order Rogers to merely transfer the service to them through the exact same connection line except using the info regarding the new modem. There is a potential for something to still go wrong in the paperwork but it's less likely and under most circumstances nobody needs to be sent to your cable box.

Alternately, if you keep both lines running, the following issues could pop up:
- The day of your connection to TekSavvy, a contractor is sent to your house with an order to connect you to cable service and finds you are already connected, is confused and thinks there was a mistake, so instead of giving you a seperate line he just leaves it as is and marks the job as completed on the form.
- The day of your disconnection to Rogers, another contractor goes to your house with a brief form that probably just tells him that you need to be disconnected from cable with no other info. Seeing as having two seperate cable connections going through the same line to the same building is extremely unorthodox, disconnecting you from it completely seems like the rational thing for him to do.

That's why I think the people on DSLReports that insist on overlapping them are probably creating the headache they think they are mitigating.

As for disconnections after the fact, it's probably because they are doing work in the area, and again, all their report says is that you no longer subscribe to Rogers so they mistakenly think someone forgot to shut you off. That could happen either way. I also put a note on my cable box that says something along the lines of "TPIA SUBSCRIBER. DO NOT DISCONNECT. CALL XXXXX FOR MORE INFO" as some people have suggested.

kuddles fucked around with this message at 20:51 on Nov 14, 2011

# ? Nov 14, 2011 17:25

StealthArcher: Jan 10, 2010

Okay, is anyone else honestly getting some bad throughput on TSI DSL lately? For the last four nights we've had pretty poo poo speeds, testing at anywhere from .8 to 2 mbit, when we have the 5mbit plan. We have a Static IP, so we shouldn't at least in theory, be getting throttled.

For reference, we are getting our full upload of 800kbps. So it's only affecting our DL speeds and giving us quite lovely ping to anything, even Ontario based Minecraft servers.

# ? Nov 15, 2011 02:53

Yeast Confection: Oct 7, 2005

StealthArcher posted:

Okay, is anyone else honestly getting some bad throughput on TSI DSL lately? For the last four nights we've had pretty poo poo speeds, testing at anywhere from .8 to 2 mbit, when we have the 5mbit plan. We have a Static IP, so we shouldn't at least in theory, be getting throttled.

For reference, we are getting our full upload of 800kbps. So it's only affecting our DL speeds and giving us quite lovely ping to anything, even Ontario based Minecraft servers.

No issues felt here.
Hamilton, dry loop.

# ? Nov 15, 2011 04:55

Paper Jam Dipper: Jul 14, 2007; by XyloJW

For those who like to read, the CRTC decision: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2011/2011-703.htm

Otherwise, follow michaelgeist.com and wordsbynowak.com for an actual breakdown.

# ? Nov 15, 2011 22:09

thexerox123: Aug 17, 2007

Lone Rogue posted:

For those who like to read, the CRTC decision: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2011/2011-703.htm

Otherwise, follow michaelgeist.com and wordsbynowak.com for an actual breakdown.

I got so distracted by what's going on with Occupy Wall Street, I totally forgot about this...

CRTC posted:

The Bell companies, Cogeco, MTS Allstream, RCP, and Videotron filed tariffs in this proceeding based on a billing model with separate access and usage rates. Accordingly, the Commission approves on a final basis the tariff notices filed by these companies (see Appendix 2) as modified by this decision, including the approved capacity model and the rates listed in Appendix 1, effective 1 February 2012. The Commission directs each of these companies to issue, by 19 December 2011, tariff pages that reflect this decision and the rates listed in Appendix 1.

I can't really make heads or tails of this... is it as bad as I think it might be? :ohdear:

CRTC posted:

To ensure that competition in retail residential Internet service markets remains sufficient to protect the interests of retail customers as service speeds increase, the Commission has approved billing models that significantly increase flexibility as compared to a per-customer wholesale UBB model. These approved models enable independent service providers to design and price their retail services in the manner they find most appropriate for their retail customers. Consistent with its findings in the essential services decision (Telecom Decision 2008-17), the Commission considers that the provision of wholesale high-speed access services, according to the billing models and at the rates established in this decision, neither deters economically efficient competitive entry into retail Internet service markets nor promotes economically inefficient entry.

So, did they make their own model, or go with another one? I guess I should just wait for Michael Geist to sum it up.

thexerox123 fucked around with this message at 22:16 on Nov 15, 2011

# ? Nov 15, 2011 22:14

thexerox123: Aug 17, 2007

I'm liking Appendix 3, Table 1... it seems to be calling the telecoms out on some of their bullshit.

Edit: Openmedia seems to be touting it as a good ruling!

thexerox123 fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Nov 15, 2011

# ? Nov 15, 2011 22:22

Mr.48: May 1, 2007

It seems like they went for the logical decision of allowing the big providers to charge re-sellers based on how much bandwidth capacity they use instead of data. In other words, the prices re-sellers will pay will depend on how many users they have and what bandwidth they offer those users, and not how much data those users consume. Meaning that unlimited data plans should still be possible from Techsavvy and whatnot.

Edit: Hopefully I didnt just misunderstand the ruling.

# ? Nov 15, 2011 22:33

Sprawl: Nov 21, 2005; I'm a huge retarded sperglord who can't spell, but Starfleet Dental would still take me and I love them for it!

Its still a bullshit ruling anyways. It allows bell/rogers etc. to double bill for the same thing depending on how much data their wholesale customers use at a group.

# ? Nov 15, 2011 22:39

Paper Jam Dipper: Jul 14, 2007; by XyloJW

TekSavvy's statement (for those curious):

http://teksavvynews.com/

quote:

TekSavvy Disappointed by CRTC Billing Practices Decision

Chatham, Ontario, November 15, 2011 � TekSavvy Solutions Inc. (�TekSavvy�), one of Canada�s leading independent internet service providers, is disappointed with the rates for the wholesale high-speed services that the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (�CRTC�) approved today. The rates are for services that Internet service providers need to purchase from the large telephone and cable companies, such as Bell and Rogers, in order to provide Internet access services to their own retail customers.

In Telecom Regulatory Policies CRTC 2011-703 and 2011-704 issued today the CRTC the CRTC implemented new rate structures and rates for wholesale services.

TekSavvy is pleased with the rate structure adopted, but the actual rates will increase the cost of Internet for Canadian consumers.

�The CRTC decision is a step back for consumers. The rates approved by the Commission today will make it much harder for independent ISPs to compete�, said Marc Gaudrault, TekSavvy�s CEO. �This is an unfortunate development for telecommunications competition in Canada�, he added.

-30-

About TekSavvy Solutions Inc.

TekSavvy Solutions Inc (TSI), is one of the leading independent providers of telecommunications services in Canada. Founded in 1998, TSI provides residential, business and wholesale Internet and phone services in Canada. Today, TSI�s services are used by tens of thousands of Canadians. Based in Chatham, Ontario, TSI operates offices in Chatham, Sudbury and Ottawa. TSI is a privately held company that is in the forefront of protecting Canadian consumers� rights online. For more information, visit https://www.teksavvy.com.

For more information contact:
Kate do Forno, Director of Government and Public Relations
519-360-4739
media.relations@teksavvy.com

# ? Nov 15, 2011 22:40

Paper Jam Dipper: Jul 14, 2007; by XyloJW

Michael Geist statement.

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6132/125/

quote:

The CRTC's UBB Decision: Bell Loses But Do Consumers Win? PDF | Print | E-mail
Tuesday November 15, 2011
The CRTC released its much anticipated decision on usage based billing this afternoon, rejecting the wholesale UBB model that came within weeks of taking effect and Bell's revised Aggregated Volume Pricing model, in favour a capacity-based approach that is closer to that proposed by the independent ISPs and MTS Allstream. The decision is a clear loss for Bell - its hopes to charge based on volume are out (which keeps the door open for independent ISPs to offer unlimited plans) - but the bigger question is whether Canadian consumers are winners.

On the specific decision, the CRTC rejected the UBB model it approved less than a year ago, acknowledging that it was too inflexible and could block independent ISPs from differentiating their services. The issue then boiled down to Bell's preferred model based on volume and the independent ISPs' approach who preferred capacity based models. The Commission ruled that capacity-based models are a better approach since they are more consistent with how network providers plan their networks and less susceptible to billing disputes.

With Bell's preferred approach out of the way, the Commission was left to choose between two capacity models - the independent providers' "95th percentile" solution and MTS Allstream's capacity model. The Commission chose a variant on the MTS Allstream model that involves both a monthly access fee and a monthly capacity charge that can increase in increments of 100 Mbps. That model is even more flexible than what MTS proposed, suggesting that the Commission was primarily focused on building in as much flexibility for independent providers as possible. In addition to this model (which the Commission calls an approved capacity model), the large ISPs can continue to use flat rate models which provide for unlimited usage.

During last summer's hearing, it became evident that the claims of network congestion simply did not stand up to scrutiny and so Bell's basis for arguing for a volume approach did not make sense. This fight was about competition and the desire of large incumbents such as Bell to turn independent ISPs into resellers unable to differentiate their services. As CRTC Vice-Chair Len Katz noted during the hearing:

I guess I come from the position that we, the Commission, have already recognized there is a need to create competition, more competition in order to protect Canadians, and facilities-based competition is not yet here. So it's our job to find a vehicle to create that competition and, in the simplest terms, it is to create an environment where broadband would be made available to a third party through a lease arrangement.

It is clear that Katz's approach guided this decision and the CRTC has tried to craft a vehicle to create much-needed competition. That is a good first step. Yet the reality is the overwhelming majority of Canadians will still be left waiting for measures that will address data caps at the retail level. The wholesale UBB fight attracted national attention, but it always was about six percent of the marketplace. That six percent - the current marketshare of independent ISPs - is absolutely necessary to inject some competition into the Canadian broadband market, yet the large players are most responsive to what the other large players are doing.

In a nutshell, solving wholesale UBB was never enough. The retail issues that truly sparked the public outrage have been left largely unchecked. It is the broader competition issues that have left Canadian broadband slower, costlier, and more capped than many other countries require political attention. Last February, then Industry Minister Tony Clement indicated that the government would intervene if the CRTC did not reverse its UBB decision. The CRTC complied, but this is only step one. Possible future steps include:

�open the Canadian market to greater competition by removing foreign investment barriers, particularly for wireless broadband services that play a key part of the forthcoming spectrum auction
�work with provinces and municipalities to develop community-based broadband networks that are not reliant on the dominant ISPs
�work with CANARIE, Canada's research and education high speed network, to link local communities and provide alternatives to the dominant providers (I am a Canarie board member)
�impose open access requirements in new spectrum allocation and build open access requirements into new residential developments, municipal construction, and other initiatives
�ensure the Competition Bureau becomes active on this file to guard against anti-competitive behaviour
�pressure the CRTC to tackle the retail UBB issue. This would include stronger enforcement of the net neutrality rules and considering the prospect of Internet Billing Usage Management Guidelines.
The wholesale UBB issue is remarkable story of grassroots activism that stopped a dangerous regulatory ruling in its tracks, but there remains much work to be done.

# ? Nov 15, 2011 22:42

less than three: Aug 9, 2007; Fallen Rib

Sprawl posted:

Its still a bullshit ruling anyways. It allows bell/rogers etc. to double bill for the same thing depending on how much data their wholesale customers use at a group.

What? They ruled on the side of capacity based billing, not volume. The new billing model is a win for the independent ISPs.

TekSavvy may have issues with the rates set but the billing model is sound.

less than three fucked around with this message at 01:02 on Nov 16, 2011

# ? Nov 16, 2011 00:58

Scylla: Sep 20, 2001

Sorry... I've tried, but there's no way in hell I'll go through all this bullshit and actually figure out what they actually agreed on. Is there an actual ruling/conclusion?

# ? Nov 16, 2011 01:17

less than three: Aug 9, 2007; Fallen Rib

CRTC rejected Bell's AVP/UBB proposal and went with the MTS Allstream Capacity model. Wholesale ISPs can now choose between two pricing models:

1. Pay per subscriber for last mile connection + a monthly fee based on how many 100mbps of throughput is required overall. Essentially TekSavvy or whoever can buy a (for example) 1000mbps pipe and divide it up to their customers as they see fit with or without transfer caps. It puts the power in TekSavvy's hands to design plans that work for them.

2. Pay a flat rate per subscriber for unlimited access.

less than three fucked around with this message at 01:29 on Nov 16, 2011

# ? Nov 16, 2011 01:24

some kinda jackal: Feb 25, 2003; �
�

Now I just need TekSavvy to start reselling Cogeco's cable in Hamilton

........ soon, right? :suicide:

# ? Nov 16, 2011 01:55

Yeast Confection: Oct 7, 2005

Martytoof posted:

Now I just need TekSavvy to start reselling Cogeco's cable in Hamilton

........ soon, right?

Right there with ya....

# ? Nov 16, 2011 02:11

some kinda jackal: Feb 25, 2003; �
�

I'm looking for a NetEng type job in Toronto and I 100% believe that'll happen first so I'll have my precious TekSavvy before too long :cool:

# ? Nov 16, 2011 02:13

Dudebro: Jan 1, 2010; I TO UNDERAGE GYMNASTS

I still can't get cable other than from Rogers/Cogeco in my area. And there are currently no options for >5Mbps unlimited DSL. Does this ruling do anything to change that? I can't get a clear answer on why Distributel can't get me cable access. I've been told something about quotas.

# ? Nov 16, 2011 02:46

Paper Jam Dipper: Jul 14, 2007; by XyloJW

Dudebro posted:

I still can't get cable other than from Rogers/Cogeco in my area. And there are currently no options for >5Mbps unlimited DSL. Does this ruling do anything to change that? I can't get a clear answer on why Distributel can't get me cable access. I've been told something about quotas.

Likely has to do with unable to reach a good deal with whoever in the area runs the lines.

# ? Nov 16, 2011 03:43

StealthArcher: Jan 10, 2010

And my internet is back to poo poo again. Seems to be a night thing.

# ? Nov 16, 2011 04:00

The Gunslinger: Jul 24, 2004; Do not forget the face of your father.; Fun Shoe

Martytoof posted:

Now I just need TekSavvy to start reselling Cogeco's cable in Hamilton

........ soon, right?

I don't get how some random guy (iktel) in Niagara Falls is reselling Cogeco but Teksavvy and etc can't seem to reach a price agreement. This has been going on for the better part of two years with a resolution always around the corner but never arriving. My Cogeco bills are insane and I've been ready to jump ship for awhile now.

# ? Nov 16, 2011 15:35

Paper Jam Dipper: Jul 14, 2007; by XyloJW

The Gunslinger posted:

I don't get how some random guy (iktel) in Niagara Falls is reselling Cogeco but Teksavvy and etc can't seem to reach a price agreement. This has been going on for the better part of two years with a resolution always around the corner but never arriving. My Cogeco bills are insane and I've been ready to jump ship for awhile now.

I don't know for sure and this is just an assumption, but look at the numbers for Cogeco Chatham compared to the numbers for Ontario Cable on the Teksavvy website. Teksavvy wants all of Ontario to have the same. Cogeco is willing to agree to something else. It's already confusing for some Quebec cable customers who don't know how to change the region and find out they cannot get 300GB for cable already.

# ? Nov 16, 2011 16:01

8ender: Sep 24, 2003; clown is watching you sleep

The Gunslinger posted:

I don't get how some random guy (iktel) in Niagara Falls is reselling Cogeco but Teksavvy and etc can't seem to reach a price agreement. This has been going on for the better part of two years with a resolution always around the corner but never arriving. My Cogeco bills are insane and I've been ready to jump ship for awhile now.

Cogeco will resell but wont let anyone have anything better than a 100 mbit line at the POIs because they are being assholes and following some obscure CRTC ruling to the letter. The good news is that the CRTC issued some sort of ruling this year that will force Cogeco to offer more bandwidth at the POIs.

# ? Nov 16, 2011 16:20

Sprawl: Nov 21, 2005; I'm a huge retarded sperglord who can't spell, but Starfleet Dental would still take me and I love them for it!

8ender posted:

Cogeco will resell but wont let anyone have anything better than a 100 mbit line at the POIs because they are being assholes and following some obscure CRTC ruling to the letter. The good news is that the CRTC issued some sort of ruling this year that will force Cogeco to offer more bandwidth at the POIs.

Yea that was the Transition from disaggregated POIs to aggregated POIs stuff they talked about in this ruling too.

quote:

IV. Other matters
Transition from disaggregated POIs to aggregated POIs
148. The high-speed access decision mandated aggregated POIs but did not establish a transition period after which disaggregated POIs would no longer be offered.
149. The cable carriers submitted that they are prepared to maintain disaggregated POIs during a transition period of up to six months after the date of the Commission�s decision in this proceeding. They also submitted that independent service providers with interconnections at the disaggregated POIs will be permitted to establish additional backhaul facilities,[48] provided that the contract term for such facilities does not extend beyond the termination date for facilities already in use. The cable carriers stated that the implementation of such a transition period will facilitate a clean cut-off date by which all facilities and customers must be migrated to aggregated POIs.
150. CNOC submitted that existing TPIA customers should not be penalized by the new aggregation regime by being forced to migrate to aggregated POIs when they (a) have entered into multiple-year contracts with providers of transport services between cable carriers� POIs and the TPIA customer�s network, or (b) have signed retail customers up for longer-term contracts for retail high-speed access service, which cannot be re-priced or terminated to reflect any costs of migrating to aggregated POIs.
151. CNOC submitted that TPIA customers should have the choice of interconnecting to existing or any new disaggregated POIs at existing TPIA rates. CNOC further submitted that it is necessary to retain alternative local POI arrangements. It argued that, unlike the ILECs� wholesale high-speed access services, which often offer many interconnection points, TPIA services do not typically offer customers a choice of multiple convenient interconnection locations in a cable carrier�s operating territory.

Commission�s analysis and decisions
152. The Commission considers that a transition period is necessary to give independent service providers the time necessary to fulfill or modify their existing term contracts and to modify their business and marketing plans in order to take advantage of the new aggregated POIs. The Commission also considers that implementing a transition period that is too long would result in cable carriers having to make investments to maintain disaggregated POIs.
153. The Commission decides that the transition period for the migration of customers from disaggregated POIs to aggregated POIs will be two years, beginning the date of this decision. Independent service providers that currently interconnect at an existing disaggregated POI will be allowed to add retail customers and POI capacity at that POI during the transition period. After the transition period, the cable carriers will only be required to provide service at aggregated POIs.

# ? Nov 16, 2011 17:34

mediaphage: Mar 22, 2007; Excuse me, pardon me, sheer perfection coming through

michawle geist posted:

Michael Geist statement.
�work with CANARIE, Canada's research and education high speed network, to link local communities and provide alternatives to the dominant providers (I am a Canarie board member)

UNF UNF UNF

Yes, please, but I really don't see that happening (coommme on, just let Waterloo sign up; I'm happy with that).

# ? Nov 16, 2011 19:33

Guitarchitect: Nov 8, 2003

how do I find out what POI I'm on? I tried google but couldn't find anything... want to know if my GTA location would be better served by cable or DSL (I'm near dovercourt + dundas)

# ? Nov 19, 2011 02:40

8ender: Sep 24, 2003; clown is watching you sleep

Guitarchitect posted:

how do I find out what POI I'm on? I tried google but couldn't find anything... want to know if my GTA location would be better served by cable or DSL (I'm near dovercourt + dundas)

Try this:
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&msa=0&msid=217733622216399728186.0004a22b570480c3d07cb

Now bear in mind that this is just a rough idea. Rogers has been known to do some strange provisioning when it comes to the Toronto POIs.

# ? Nov 19, 2011 07:01

Vintersorg: Mar 3, 2004; President of
the Brendan Fraser
Fan Club

Shaw working for anyone? I'm on my phone posting this. It went down apparently last night but rebooting router and modem seemed to work. Was fine this morning but coming home it's down again.

Tried all the rebooting, direct connection to the computer and niente. Using Netgear WNDR3700 with Motorola SB5102 modem. Friend in Calgary said hers was down. This in Winnipeg up in the Maples.

# ? Dec 1, 2011 21:14

neongrey: Feb 28, 2007; Plaguing your posts with incidental music.

Vintersorg posted:

Tried all the rebooting, direct connection to the computer and niente. Using Netgear WNDR3700 with Motorola SB5102 modem. Friend in Calgary said hers was down. This in Winnipeg up in the Maples.

Seems to be working fine over in St James. I'll take a look when I get back home but my IRC connections from there are still good.

# ? Dec 1, 2011 21:20

Oh My Science: Dec 29, 2008

Vintersorg posted:

Shaw working for anyone?

Edmonton seems to be fine.

# ? Dec 1, 2011 22:30

quaint bucket: Nov 29, 2007

Is there a reason why I should not switch to Telus Optik TV and internet bundle from my Shaw TV and internet bundle?

I'll be saving approximately $20 a month in difference ($10 + bc hydro employee plan, and not the promo price), get a free tablet, and sell my shaw hd pvr with the 1tb addon.

Also, is the "free rental" good for 3 years or is it moontalk for 1 month and bump you in the butt afterward?

I was gonna ask this in canadian cellular but figured this topic might be more appropriate...

e: if this topic was not the right place to ask, tell me that I'm stupid and help me go the right direction. Thanks!

e2: I know Telus has a contract thing working against them but I figured I can learn to deal with it for 3 years since I will be living in my place for the next 5-8 years anyway so contract is really moot to me unless Telus will definitely jerk me in the middle of my contract and force me to not get out without paying a huge fee.

quaint bucket fucked around with this message at 01:55 on Dec 2, 2011

# ? Dec 2, 2011 01:49

Vintersorg: Mar 3, 2004; President of
the Brendan Fraser
Fan Club

Problem seemed to fix itself. I have been reading Shaw was upgrading/fixing lines across certain areas so that explains some things. Just sucks to have it go down out of nowhere but uptime has been near constant for like, ever. I was worried it might have been the router crapping out too. But my phone could still see the signal, PC was able to connect and the router itself reported just having no Internet.

# ? Dec 2, 2011 02:05

less than three: Aug 9, 2007; Fallen Rib

quaint bucket posted:

Is there a reason why I should not switch to Telus Optik TV and internet bundle from my Shaw TV and internet bundle?

I'll be saving approximately $20 a month in difference ($10 + bc hydro employee plan, and not the promo price), get a free tablet, and sell my shaw hd pvr with the 1tb addon.

Also, is the "free rental" good for 3 years or is it moontalk for 1 month and bump you in the butt afterward?

e2: I know Telus has a contract thing working against them but I figured I can learn to deal with it for 3 years since I will be living in my place for the next 5-8 years anyway so contract is really moot to me unless Telus will definitely jerk me in the middle of my contract and force me to not get out without paying a huge fee.

Do it. Optik service is awesome.

Yeah the PVR rental is free for the entire term and the cancellation fee (if you happen to cancel early) isn't ludicrously punishing like cellular.

The cancellation fee is $10 per month remaining for the PVR, $13 per month for the tablet. (So keep this in mind you'll pay more to cancel if you take the tablet.)

Do you have a landline at your place too? I didn't have one so Telus converted my phone jacks to Ethernet jacks, which was awesome. Try and see if they'll do it for you too.

vvv: The amount of HD/SD streams you can have is based on the line quality. The best is 3HD/2SD I believe.

less than three fucked around with this message at 02:32 on Dec 2, 2011

# ? Dec 2, 2011 02:24

priznat: Jul 7, 2009; Let's get drunk and kiss each other all night.

I have the Telus Optik internet + TV and I quite like it, although I wish my area had Turbo. I didn't care about the contract that much either since I'd had an uninterrupted subscription with shaw for about 10 years so no biggie. It was just time to try something new I figured.

Even with the non-turbo downloading stuff from Steam is quite fast, and no issues with gaming etc. Can only watch or record one HD channel at a time, though. 90% of my tv watching is via the internet from tv station websites and netflix anyway though. Just got the basic cable and sports channels and I'm good!

priznat fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Dec 2, 2011

# ? Dec 2, 2011 02:26

quaint bucket: Nov 29, 2007

One more thing I forgot to ask: is the rumour that "you can't use telus tv and telus internet at the same time" true or utter BS?

priznat: what? Can you at least record one HD channel and one SD channel? I'm a little surprised about that since I've recorded two HD shows at the same time with shaw.......

# ? Dec 2, 2011 02:39

less than three: Aug 9, 2007; Fallen Rib

quaint bucket posted:

One more thing I forgot to ask: is the rumour that "you can't use telus tv and telus internet at the same time" true or utter BS?

priznat: what? Can you at least record one HD channel and one SD channel? I'm a little surprised about that since I've recorded two HD shows at the same time with shaw.......

I'll answer both. Telus sends both TV and internet down the VDSL line. Depending on line quality and distance from CO impacts your link sync speed.

The sync speed determines how many TV streams you can watch/record as well as what internet speed you can get.

An HD stream is 5.6mbps, an SD is like 1.5 or 2 or something.

If the line coming into your house is 32mbps this would allow the maximum profile 3HD (16.8mbps) 2 SD (3mbps) and that would leave 12.2mbps downstream for your internet.

I think the maximum sync speed is somewhere around 36-38mbps.

Telus will just tell you "You can have X HD, Y SD, and [High speed|High speed turbo]"

# ? Dec 2, 2011 02:58

priznat: Jul 7, 2009; Let's get drunk and kiss each other all night.

Yeah I think if I whined I could get 2 HD streams, I notice no difference in internet speed while watching HDTV.

They just locked me into a single stream for whatever reason. The installer told me I should call them up to pester them about upgrading to turbo but I'm lazy.

# ? Dec 2, 2011 04:04

quaint bucket: Nov 29, 2007

less than three posted:

I'll answer both. Telus sends both TV and internet down the VDSL line. Depending on line quality and distance from CO impacts your link sync speed.

The sync speed determines how many TV streams you can watch/record as well as what internet speed you can get.

An HD stream is 5.6mbps, an SD is like 1.5 or 2 or something.

If the line coming into your house is 32mbps this would allow the maximum profile 3HD (16.8mbps) 2 SD (3mbps) and that would leave 12.2mbps downstream for your internet.

I think the maximum sync speed is somewhere around 36-38mbps.

Telus will just tell you "You can have X HD, Y SD, and [High speed|High speed turbo]"

I had to reread it a second time but that definitely makes a lot more sense now. Seriously, thanks!

I just realized I might be too late to get in on the tablet deal but w/e $20 savings and more HD channels is cake to me. I'll have to look more into it.

Is it a call-in, order online, or can I walk into a Telus storefront? I will have to call Shaw first to see if they can match it. I want my TSN in HD, dammit! I had to watch the BC Lions win in SD...

e: vvvv thank you! vvvv

quaint bucket fucked around with this message at 04:42 on Dec 2, 2011

# ? Dec 2, 2011 04:29

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 29, 2024 03:08

less than three: Aug 9, 2007; Fallen Rib

quaint bucket posted:

Is it a call-in, order online, or can I walk into a Telus storefront? I will have to call Shaw first to see if they can match it. I want my TSN in HD, dammit! I had to watch the BC Lions win in SD...

I'd recommend calling in. Ordering online just has their outbound department call you.

# ? Dec 2, 2011 04:33

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > Canadian internet access gets shittier

«‹›223 »