|
The Gunslinger posted:Yeah, they seem quite willing to shirk their responsibilities and essentially provide a shield for corporations that don't want to compete. The competition thing especially drives me nuts, we have something like 3 different levels of oversight for that and none of them are doing a loving thing. I'm really fed up with this poo poo but I'm not sure what more to do, I've written my MP, I donated a bunch of money to OpenMedia and CNOC. I'd love to hear suggestions Raise billions of dollars to build a competing infrastructure 
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 21:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 24, 2024 12:46 |
|
|
This must contravene the Competition Act somehow, right? If it's a worthwhile law in the least... maybe some complaints to the Competition Bureau would be useful... although whatever this is saying might make things complicated when it comes to authority there.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 22:13
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Does Konrad von Whatever not speak english or what is happening here? Why is this translated? He speaks french in response to francophones.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 22:58
|
|
|
I just got back from getting some stitches... glad I didn't miss Bell. Who is talking now?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2011 22:01
|
|
|
This is amazing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2011 23:01
|
|
|
"Some people say that internet congestion is a myth." "Well the CRTC says that it isn't, based on our numbers! SO THERE!"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2011 23:15
|
|
|
Did anybody else get an email from Tony Clement?Tony Clement posted:Thank you for your email regarding Internet traffic management practices http://openmedia.ca/blog/net-neutrality-clement-confirms-he-still-out-step-rest-canada
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2011 00:59
|
|
|
I just got an email from the NDP outlining their internet platform:The NDP posted:I have heard from thousands of Canadians who tell me that internet They already had my vote, but this just puts me even more in their favour... those all seem to be policies that would actually start to get to the root of the problem. Edit: Just gave them an advanced polling vote, using my TekSavvy internet bill as proof of residence! 
thexerox123 fucked around with this message at 20:57 on Apr 22, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2011 19:06
|
|
|
Lone Rogue posted:As for "Conservative majority will govern differently than Conservative minority", I *know* they will govern differently. If they didn't, the Conservative baby boomers who put them in office will vote Liberal in four years as punishment. That's quite obvious. I have a feeling the Conservatives aren't too worried about the Liberal party at the moment.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2011 14:05
|
|
|
teethgrinder posted:
Someone else pointed this out in the election thread at the time, but of course they won't make huge changes that people can easily speak out against... however, they will make smaller, still detrimental changes... for instance, they won't make abortions illegal, but they will probably instead just remove funding for planned parenthood. http://www.thesudburystar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3125672
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2011 15:29
|
|
|
Lone Rogue posted:http://teksavvy.com/en/res-internet.asp Do you know if/when you'll be getting faster/better Cable packages?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2011 13:41
|
|
|
I've been trying to listen to the CRTC stream for the past few days on my mac, but every time I try, it tells me I have to relaunch firefox in 32-bit mode, and then firefox crashes horribly until I stop trying to open it... does anyone have any suggestions for how I could listen to it? I can't figure out how to get it to stream in VLC, either.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2011 16:19
|
|
|
Vaginal Engineer posted:Go to VLC click open network and paste mms://STREAMER.crtc.gc.ca/stream1-english in. Worked like a charm. Thank you!! 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2011 16:35
|
|
|
When is the CRTC actually going to be ruling on it?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2011 18:01
|
|
|
KvF's comments right now are really frustrating. Getting hung up on whether it's a "market failure" and saying that the structure seems competitive. Ugh. It's so anti-competitive, I thought that had been made clear over the course of the hearings! 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2011 15:16
|
|
|
This guy sounds like he might be about to come out with some heavy-hitting stuff against Bell!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2011 16:38
|
|
|
Yeah, Teksavvy is the best internet I've ever had, hands down. Whereas my time with Bell and Rogers were nothing but headaches, excessive prices, and lovely service (also throttling). I seriously had to call Bell 6 or 7 times to get my billing sorted out when I cancelled with them. Each time, they found a way to mess it up in a completely new way, assuring me that this time, it was dealt with, but not giving me any written confirmation of that (despite promising to email it to me). I was so glad to go from their crummy service that dropped several times a day and came nowhere near advertised speeds, to getting faster download speeds than I'd ever had before with TekSavvy. thexerox123 fucked around with this message at 20:01 on Jul 28, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2011 18:08
|
|
|
I may have just convinced my parents to switch from their lovely Bell internet... it's been dropping constantly, and I just showed them that they are regularly getting 3 mbps and change on speedtest.net, while paying in a price range that should get them 16-25 mbps. Bell is the worst.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2011 20:25
|
|
|
Oh god, it's even worse today. That's abysmal. Bell's charging them $60 a month, and they're getting this. thexerox123 fucked around with this message at 14:08 on Jul 31, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2011 14:05
|
|
|
After dealing with Bell customer support for over 2 hours (during which, time lost all meaning), they were able to finally tell me that the reason my parents are getting such slow speeds is because the plan they're paying for is up to 5 Mbps, unlimited. For $63.95 a month. So it took me over two hours to find out that their internet is slow just because... Bell is ripping them off because they want to cap their customers. Thanks, Bell! I explained to them that TekSavvy cable internet is 3 times as fast for the same cost, so hopefully that's one less customer for Bell.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2011 19:13
|
|
|
Vergeh posted:Is there somewhere where can I get updates on these meetings? I'd like to keep up with what's going on but I don't really have the patience to sit through an entire audio session. https://twitter.com/#!/OpenMedia_ca Open Media has been following them and they were tweeting select things during the sessions. http://www.michaelgeist.ca/
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2011 14:45
|
|
|
I'm so very glad to be back at my apartment using my TekSavvy internet.  It's ~6 times faster than the Bell internet I've been on all week. Also, I just realised that I'm getting a speed that is faster than advertised... their site still says up to 15 Mbps... has the recent change with Rogers' plans finally taken effect, or is Speedboost in effect or something? thexerox123 fucked around with this message at 21:47 on Aug 6, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2011 21:42
|
|
|
Is it normal to get dramatically slower speeds on speedtest.net when torrenting, or is that a sign that I'm being throttled?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2011 14:57
|
|
|
Thanks for all of the replies! Yeah, I figured it was just slowing down due to the torrent, but I was surprised at how much it was slowing down, so I figured I'd ask. I do get pretty consistently fast torrent speeds, though, so the more I think about it, I doubt I am being throttled at all. I think I probably do want to get a faster router at some point... I bought a D-Link DIR-615 kind of on the fly, because we hadn't realized that we were only getting a modem from TekSavvy, and not a combo device... but we just got a third roommate, and we use XBox Live/Netflix pretty regularly (and have already been having connection issues with them with just 2 people), so I'm thinking it might be better for the three of us to split the cost of a better router. What do I want to be looking for in a router to make sure it can handle the load that three college students would put on it? thexerox123 fucked around with this message at 13:12 on Aug 9, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2011 13:01
|
|
|
Interesting news: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2011/09/01/youtube-movies-in-canada-_n_945428.html Sounds like good news to me, if only to have a big force like Google potentially in the ring against the ISPs.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2011 01:19
|
|
|
Pr0phecy posted:I too, like all of you, want to poo poo in the mouth of any Bell higher up, but I'm curious to know, how many of you actually sent letters to your MP's and representatives complaining and explaining why throttling and more importantly, bandwidth capping, is a ridiculous affair. I sent several, at least, to my MP and the head of each party. And also sent a bunch through the automated things that openmedia had been doing a few months ago.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2011 01:37
|
|
|
Am I wrong, or doesn't Rogers have to give the wholesalers like TekSavvy access to the same speeds that they offer? Why is Rogers trying to sell me on 32 Mbps service when I can only get up to 15 with the TekSavvy cable that I have?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2011 19:15
|
|
|
EoRaptor posted:The CRTC needs to decide on pricing for a tier, based on submissions from the provider and the resaler. They've done this for basic tiers, and have until December 31st 2011 for all other tiers. But their highest tier isn't available at all to TekSavvy users yet... so, they don't have to give us access to it until the CRTC decides on pricing sometime before December 31st?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2011 21:02
|
|
|
8ender posted:I was recently upgraded as well. From 15mbps to 24mbps download. The upload is still the horrible 1mbps. Rogers is slowly rolling out speed upgrades to all the Teksavvy customers. I'm getting pretty good speeds at the moment!  Much faster than the 15 mbps that we're paying for... I'm sure my speeds wouldn't be as good right now if both of my roommates were awake, though. Haha.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2011 13:03
|
|
|
Scaramouche posted:I know the CRTC also handles CanCon and the like, but surely that's a pretty small fraction of their activity when compared to internet and mobile regulation? According to Wikipedia, the Minister of Heritage oversees the CRTC: "The CRTC reports to the Parliament of Canada through the Minister of Canadian Heritage, which is responsible for the Broadcasting Act, and has an informal relationship with Industry Canada, which is responsible for the Telecommunications Act." And the Department of Heritage is apparently responsible for "policies and programs regarding the arts, culture, media, communications networks", etc.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2011 01:04
|
|
|
I'm sure this was mentioned earlier in the thread, but does anybody know when the CRTC is going to actually make their decision on UBB?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2011 21:25
|
|
|
univbee posted:Jesus Christ Teksavvy, they completely screwed the pooch on my order despite my calling a few times to make sure everything was OK (it said 5 meg in one place and 25 meg on another), and now when I call today to verify that a tech is coming all of a sudden the speed is wrong (should have been 25, was put through as 5) and they have to cancel the whole appointment, meaning another week without internet and me having to organize another day off work. If they weren't the only ISP with greater than a 100 gig cap in Montreal I'd have dropped them so fast over that bullshit, especially since I called earlier to make sure everything was straight. Are you getting DSL, or Cable? Because it probably wasn't a TekSavvy technician who hosed things up for you, since they usually have to send out a technician from whichever company runs the lines that you need to use.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2011 13:57
|
|
|
Lone Rogue posted:For those who like to read, the CRTC decision: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2011/2011-703.htm 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?  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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Pr0phecy posted:I am convinced that there is absolutely nothing I can say to make them over-turn that decision. I already hear the "you have paid money a specific service and now you must pay an additional fee for additional use" pre-written line in my head. There seems to be a lot of anecdotal evidence for Bell routinely "accidentally" adding unwarranted charges or penalties to peoples' bills and then just reaping the benefits of people not having the patience/wherewithal/evidence to get them overturned. It's so scummy, a friend of mine just had that happen to her this past month... now they're switching to TekSavvy, though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2012 19:53
|
|
|
Mister Macys posted:So if I want the speed of Rogers, but better upload I'd say yes. It costs a bit more on start-up, and as many people in this thread have said first hand, you can't always rely on their customer service/they have no technicians of their own and the big telecoms strangely don't seem to put wholesale customers at the top of their courtesy list. But, I've had TekSavvy for several years now, and it's by far the best internet I've ever had. Going back home to my parents' Bell internet is like going back to dial-up in comparison. :\
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2012 13:04
|
|
and usage caps, TekSavvy is the way to go? (Ontario)
|
Lone Rogue posted:(the pricing changes was due to the CRTC hearing that the fool running OpenMedia.ca claimed was a win for Canadians) Do you have more details on this? I was under the impression that it was quite a bit better than UBB, but still not going nearly far enough (although considering this is the CRTC that we're talking about, a decision that just isn't completely pandering to the telecoms seems like a win). I was following OpenMedia.ca at the time of the hearings, so I'm prepared to be disillusioned.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2012 22:06
|
|
|
Apparently Rogers is trying to claim that not allowing them to make false/untested claims about the performance of their products is infringing their right to free expression  quote:In the first of its kind in Canada, Rogers will ask the Ontario Superior Court to strike down a key provision in the federal law requiring companies to have “adequate and proper” tests of a product’s performance before making performance claims in advertisements. Rogers says this testing requirement violates its right to freedom of expression enshrined in Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I can't get over how blatantly reprehensible this is. And here I was, thinking Bell was the worst.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2012 18:15
|
|
|
Unrelated, but I was just looking for an avenue to complain to Rogers about it, and apparently they have a dedicated Doctor of Naturopathic Medicine? What on Earth? Why? I guess they really DON'T have a problem with untested claims, lol Edit: And she happens to have the last name Rogers.... I would hope she's just inherited a spot on the board, and isn't actually in charge of any naturopathy for the company. ...not that either option sounds good. thexerox123 fucked around with this message at 18:37 on Aug 7, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2012 18:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 24, 2024 12:46 |
|
|
triplexpac posted:I like the that they're going to fight to be able to make misleading or false claims, or at least be able to defend them in court. I see they have their priorities straight. This article includes Rogers' PR spin on it: quote:Rogers responded by saying its case is actually much more narrow. “We’re committed to truth in advertising and support legislation that prevents false claims and protects consumers, including the Competition Act. We’re not challenging that fundamental principle. We’re raising two specific, narrow concerns with the act as it now stands,” spokeswoman Patricia Trott told Postmedia. But then... quote:The Competition Bureau levied the $10-million fine in November, 2010, after finding Rogers’ Chatr wireless brand had engaged in “misleading advertising” with its claims that Chatr users experience "fewer dropped calls than new wireless carriers" and have "no worries about dropped calls". Uh-huh. Just narrow enough to be able to continue to make claims that are complete bullshit like they've been proven to be doing and not pay any restitution to customers. Sounds like Rogers has a real commitment to truth in advertising.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2012 23:29
|
|