|
The Dark One posted:Great move on Bell's part to use the same branding for both ADSL/VDSL and FTTH. No matter where you live and how lovely their offerings in that area are, they can use the sheen of fiber almost being in the name to make it sound good. The same bell that's desperately trying to coin the term "superphone"?
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 04:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 20:24 |
|
|
mewse posted:The same bell that's desperately trying to coin the term "superphone"? I think thats more because they hate paying Apple a cut to sell iPhones are would rather shovel out some shithouse cut rate android handsets for the same price.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
Well that didn't take the shitheels long:quote:The notice falsely warns that the recipient could be liable for up to $150,000 per infringement when the reality is that Canadian law caps liability for non-commercial infringement at $5,000 for all infringements. The notice also warns that the user’s Internet service could be suspended, yet there is no such provision under Canadian law. Moreover, given the existence of the private copying system (which features levies on blank media such as CDs), personal music downloads may qualify as private copying and therefore be legal in Canada.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:27
|
|
|
spoof posted:Well that didn't take the shitheels long: Remember that the Voltage court case made it so the wording of any communication that is sent to end users must be approved by ISP's. An ISP that passes on such false information would probably find itself in hot water in any resulting court case, so expect boilerplate notices like this to never actually make it to consumers. I know, for instance, Teksavvy has rejected this template as being false and misleading.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
I may have the chance to be part of a committee with the mayor of Victoria to raise issues affecting the tech industry here. Municipally-owned internet infrastructure is one idea I'd like to investigate but I am not super clear on how it's been successfully deployed and the kind of outcomes that have resulted. Does anyone know of any resources I could read up on or any other related ideas that could help improve internet access in Canada at the municipal level?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
Mantle posted:I may have the chance to be part of a committee with the mayor of Victoria to raise issues affecting the tech industry here. Municipally-owned internet infrastructure is one idea I'd like to investigate but I am not super clear on how it's been successfully deployed and the kind of outcomes that have resulted. While I don't have any resources on hand, the only successful system that I've heard of working (when the government is involved) in a larger city environment, is a wholesale model for (dark) fiber infrastructure. Reasoning was that having 5+ conduits under the street all for telecom was becoming a hassle to manage. But even then, you'll find management is generally outsourced to someone else (like bell/hydro/etc), so in reality, there's nothing to be gained by the government doing it other than giving money to a company. Small towns are generally where you'll find government provided internet being "successful" due to the low number of end customers. (Low number = no reason for a company to do it since they'll lose money). The local govt is willing to lose $1k per customer just to give a reason for kids to stay in the town and make sure the town doesn't die. Look into the regulations regarding conduit trenching and common pole access in your area, and learn why those regulations are like that. Many people don't understand why things are done the way they are at the government level. An interesting exercise would be to figure out how to get services from building X to building Y down the street assuming there's no existing infrastructure in place that you can use (but lots of stuff like water, sewage and power to get in the way). Why does a build cost $30k, and did you really get permission from every building owner, what happens if you gently caress up the road and break it, etc. Don't forget that if you give someone any reason to sue the government, they've got no issues doing it. Also, the larger the community, the less likely people are willing to work as a whole when it comes to deploying services. (Think "why does bob across the city get 1gbps FTTH, and I have to wait 10 years?, gently caress spending my tax bucks on that! I'm voting my Councillor our of office!") Conceptually community/government internet is awesome, realistically it's a whole lot harder to do.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
I really need a new wireless router. It really chokes my unlimited 100/100 for $45/mo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
The Dark One posted:Great move on Bell's part to use the same branding for both ADSL/VDSL and FTTH. No matter where you live and how lovely their offerings in that area are, they can use the sheen of fiber almost being in the name to make it sound good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
unknown posted:Your "Fibe" isn't DSL (note the 25 upload), so there's no TPIA access to it. (Cable on the other hand does have TPIA). Yeah, sorry, didn't mean to imply it was DSL. Just reminded me of how it makes (business) sense to shut out Teksavvy from selling DSL in a new building if you run the lines and also sell service on them. At least I actually am getting fibre.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
Mantle posted:I may have the chance to be part of a committee with the mayor of Victoria to raise issues affecting the tech industry here. Municipally-owned internet infrastructure is one idea I'd like to investigate but I am not super clear on how it's been successfully deployed and the kind of outcomes that have resulted. I am on a tablet so it is awkward for me to search and link, but I strongly recommended you research what Olds, Alberta did.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 02:19
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Everyone has clambered on to the fiber marketing bus. Whether they call it fibe, or hybrid-fiber it is generally bullshit. If it's not last mile fiber optics then it's not fiber. My water company can't claim that I can get 4,000L/s flow rates on my taps because there is a huge pipe somewhere upstream so I'm not sure why Rogers/Bell is allowed to claim that their lovely copper/coax last mile is fiber just because the node has a fiber optic uplink. Probably because their marketing is always careful to indicate that the advertised speed is the "maximum speed" - not sure why that is tolerated either. In no other industry is service defined as the maximum - it is defined as the minimum. Some factory doesn't care about your ability to deliver up to 2MW of power, it cares about whether you can deliver reliably the 100KW of power it requires for day to day operation. I spent a good part of my holidays explaining this to family members. Some are still on some really bad grandfathered connections from Bell/Rogers (think 10Mb/768Kb for $70 or more) and want to go with Netflix/Hulu. Been doing a bunch of reading and our true fibre options are basically either move into a spiffy building that has a symmetrical connection like slush, move to Muskoka, or wait until at least 2030.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
Only way you're getting FTTH is if you buy in to a new development. It will never be routed to existing single occupancy dwellings aside by individuals by either the companies or the government.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Only way you're getting FTTH is if you buy in to a new development. It will never be routed to existing single occupancy dwellings aside by individuals by either the companies or the government. Unless your city promises to vouch for the company to the crtc? http://www.tricitynews.com/news/277229332.html?mobile=true
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Only way you're getting FTTH is if you buy in to a new development. It will never be routed to existing single occupancy dwellings aside by individuals by either the companies or the government. Or you live in Olds, AB http://o-net.ca/ I think you're being pretty naive. There will be fiber to the house in the next 5 years in most markets that are currently getting dsl or cable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 07:26
|
|
|
Nitr0 posted:I think you're being pretty naive. There will be fiber to the house in the next 5 years in most markets that are currently getting dsl or cable. I think they're going to milk cable and dsl for all its worth before even thinking of doing any sort of upgrades. Some of the smaller towns that saw cable or DSL investment in the 70's and 80's just aren't getting fibre period.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 07:30
|
|
|
Fiber has been coming to the house since 1996. Its clearly in no rush to get here. I had a well to do friend in the 90's tell me that his family was not getting a computer until 'fiber optics' were a thing. I still wonder if he ever got one and how he has managed since.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 07:50
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Only way you're getting FTTH is if you buy in to a new development. It will never be routed to existing single occupancy dwellings aside by individuals by either the companies or the government. Not really. If you happen to live in Atlantic Canada, or a Bell Aliant serviced region of Ontario or Quebec, then Bell Aliant has overlaid most of their urban copper network with FTTH. I'd expect Bell to eventually do the same thing in some "competitive" urban markets in Quebec and Ontario too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:Shaw did what everyone found out even after they said they wouldn't. My Shaw bill went up, I'm on 25 Mb, went from $60 to $67 in Manitoba
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
slush posted:Not really. If you happen to live in Atlantic Canada, or a Bell Aliant serviced region of Ontario or Quebec, then Bell Aliant has overlaid most of their urban copper network with FTTH. I'd expect Bell to eventually do the same thing in some "competitive" urban markets in Quebec and Ontario too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
mewse posted:My Shaw bill went up, I'm on 25 Mb, went from $60 to $67 in Manitoba Exact same thing here in Vancouver. Sigh.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
Shaw is wanting to up the rate it charges Teksavvy by 88% http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r29774626-quote:got the Shaw tariff notice yesterday.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
The death throes of a company slowly becoming irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
I love the way Teksavvy publish all this stuff so it is clear to consumers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
Septimus posted:The death throes of a company slowly becoming irrelevant. What?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 02:56
|
|
|
Decairn posted:I love the way Teksavvy publish all this stuff so it is clear to consumers. Yeah, and the CEO actually interacts with his customers on a forum. Can't imagine any of the big 3 CEOs ever giving a gently caress about that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 04:24
|
|
|
slidebite posted:What? Sorry, I've just got it in my head that cable companies are slowly becoming irrelevant due to widespread "cord cutting". Are these price raises by shaw an indication of internal financial issues or just typical monopolistic behavior?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 17:28
|
|
|
Septimus posted:Sorry, I've just got it in my head that cable companies are slowly becoming irrelevant due to widespread "cord cutting". Are these price raises by shaw an indication of internal financial issues or just typical monopolistic behavior? Its the third way. Its just typical oligopolistic behavior trying to kill the companies that are outside the webs of collusion between the giants
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
Cable TV service is hosed but residential internet service is in a position to gently caress whoever it wants. If it were not for national ownership rules I have no doubt that Goldman Sachs would right now own 2 out of the Rogers Bell Telus 3 and be cranking hard on the price increase wheel every quarter. Sort of like they do with municipal water companies in the US. The regulator is captured so who cares, its limitless revenue with no possible competitor on the horizon. In fact i'm surprised they don't have a shell corp going on to own and hold them until they can get the law changed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
Septimus posted:Sorry, I've just got it in my head that cable companies are slowly becoming irrelevant due to widespread "cord cutting". Are these price raises by shaw an indication of internal financial issues or just typical monopolistic behavior? I thought you were talking about Teksavvy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
I was talking with my aunt over Christmas break, and it looks like she dropped Cogeco and is now with Wightman Telecom for internet and TV out in Fergus. Looks like they're rolling out FTTH this year, which is p. sweet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
Nitr0 posted:Or you live in Olds, AB http://o-net.ca/ Hahahahahaha. Not a chance in major markets. They've barely paid off the investment in the FTTN gear at the moment, and haven't even leveraged it to profit properly. Amortization schedules in the telco/cable world are measured in decades, and only just starting to be reduced down (wonder why prices are going up? - that's a fundamental reason). In 10 years you'll start seeing momentum building, 20 for general deployment. Basically the cost of true FTTH is so high that they won't replace gear unless they absolutely have to. Will there be new developments with it? Sure, because it's easy/cheap and you don't have legacy issues. Existing ones? Probably not for a long time until there's a market reason to. Note that 100mbps internet isn't it - market share loss is though (and that can be 'solved' by buying out the competitor and closing them - see FCI broadband/Futureway and Rogers 10 years ago) Anyways, cost of installation is only the first thing (gear+cables). Imagine the cost of training every one of those repair guys to do fiber splicing in your unique house layout when you want to make a change... Some of them can barely handle doing bix punch downs and coax termination - and copper (be it twisted pair or coax) is much more forgiving than fiber.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
unknown posted:Hahahahahaha. Not a chance in major markets. They've barely paid off the investment in the FTTN gear at the moment, and haven't even leveraged it to profit properly. Amortization schedules in the telco/cable world are measured in decades, and only just starting to be reduced down (wonder why prices are going up? - that's a fundamental reason). In 10 years you'll start seeing momentum building, 20 for general deployment. Specifically for BC... https://fibre.telus.com/kelowna https://fibre.telus.com/armstrong https://fibre.telus.com/portcoquitlam These are all cities with existing dsl deployments. I think you're really underestimating the rate of fiber into communities.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
Yeah. Atlantic Canada has FTTH in almost all the major cities and sorrounding areas now -- Halifax, St. John's, Fredericton, Moncton, Charlottetown, and growing. I don't think it's impossible. It's just that Rogers and Bell kinda seem to be okay with not really competing for customers. For what it's worth, in the areas that Aliant has deployed FTTH (FibreOP) in Atlantic Canada they have completely destroyed Rogers' market share.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 00:22
|
|
|
Nitr0 posted:Specifically for BC... Is there a way to see an exhaustive list of cities in BC that are close to getting or have fiber deployed? Telus or otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 08:28
|
|
|
Fuckin' PoCo 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 09:15
|
|
|
Nitr0 posted:Specifically for BC... Small communities will always be first. They get the most subsidies, have the smallest workforce to be trained, easiest to manage PR, and in general have the most cooperative municipal governments. (Note, I'm Toronto based) Much of the dealings I've had with Bell recently basically comes down to "We've spent a fuckton on the major cities, and we need to make money again since our shareholders are demanding it". (shareholders = pension funds, etc) Telcos are taking a beating on all sides/businesses arms, and already people are seeing the effects of that (take Shaw's 50+% effective price increase, cell phone costs rising). They're in the mode of making sure they make money from the items they've got now, and only do the absolute minimum required/demanded for expenditures unless they make a good profit. In BC, Telus got handed buckets of money through programs like Network BC (agreement) and got exclusive rights to do the work and even gets to own the infrastructure outright at the end of the agreement. Because of that, there will never be competition in the areas (most important part = regional interlinking), but at least it's possible to order up to burstable 100mb (half-duplex only!) (cir of upto 50mb) circuits during the agreement (until ~2020). Major cities will be the last to get upgrades, and I'll stand by my saying of 10 years of talking, 20 to widespread implementation of FTTH in them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
I wouldn't necessarily call kelowna or poco small. Kelowna is the largest city outside of the lower mainland in bc, poco 10th, armstrong is the only small town.
Nitr0 fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Jan 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 22:17
|
|
|
priznat posted:Fuckin' PoCo Well PoCo only has it because the city paid for it itself and deployed it itself without telus doing anything for it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
slush posted:Yeah. Atlantic Canada has FTTH in almost all the major cities and sorrounding areas now -- Halifax, St. John's, Fredericton, Moncton, Charlottetown, and growing. I don't think it's impossible. It's just that Rogers and Bell kinda seem to be okay with not really competing for customers. Yep, Bell Aliant ran FTTH to my parents' 110 year old house in Charlottetown. My new house a few km away obviously also has FTTH, and Aliant has been a great ISP so far. No bandwidth caps, support is all local people, and they doubled my speeds for free* last month. * then announced a $3 increase to all plans a few weeks later
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 03:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 20:24 |
|
|
So if I want to choose where I live based on the availability of fiber, where can I find a list of those cities and neighborhoods?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 04:00
|
|