The internet is dead in canada... 25gb cap for everybody

[ShawnD1]

Opera now has extensions similar to Firefox, and if you wish to use Adblock/Noscript you can use the single extension NoAds.

Ad blocking has been part of Opera long before this. It basically works the same as AdBlock in FF - right click and "block content" or something like that.

Flashblock is a pretty standard addon these days. Now that ads are appearing in flash format, we're looking at single advertisements being damn near 1mb in size. This shit ads up fast.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

Ad blocking has been part of Opera long before this. It basically works the same as AdBlock in FF - right click and "block content" or something like that.

Flashblock is a pretty standard addon these days. Now that ads are appearing in flash format, we're looking at single advertisements being damn near 1mb in size. This shit ads up fast.

I have used Opera since version 5 (2001?), and while I am aware of that, most people aren't.

Opera now also has the option to "Enable plug-ins only on demand", which means that Flash doesn't get loaded unless you click it first (similar to flashblock).

 

[frostedflakes]

I don't really have a problem with charging internet like electricity, but if they are going to do it, it should not be obscene pricing. $2/GB is excessive and 25GB caps are ridiculously low. My electricity doesn't cost $2/kWhr.

Yeah, that's my biggest gripe about most of the tiered plans offered so far. It pretty obviously has more to do with squeezing more money out of heavy users than reducing monthly rate for light users.

For example, let's say you're already paying $50/mo for cable internet with a 250GB cap. So to me, a fair metered service would have a flat rate of say $15/mo, and then a charge of $0.15/GB or something like that. To me this makes sense, because if you download 250GB with the metered service, it costs about the same as the flat rate $50/mo plan. Of course the problem with a fair plan like this is ISPs would never go for it, because then they can't overcharge all the suckers that only use like 2-3GB/mo, suddenly they'd only be making $15/mo off these people instead of $50. Sure they'd be making more on heavy users, but there are a lot more light users than barely use their service than heavy users. That's why most of the tiered/metered plans I've seen so far don't do much to help out light users and just raise rates for heavier users. Which is not surprising I guess, can't blame businesses for trying to make more money. As a businessman you'd be stupid to not attempt to monetize the increased internet usage due to video streaming and stuff like that. But it irks me how they try to sell it to the public as them trying to help out your average customer and make things more fair for them when in reality that couldn't be further from the truth.

 

[CPA]

lol, I guess that puts that myth to rest. We aren't the highest, but we aren't the lowest and only two countries, both much, much smaller than the US have speeds 4-5 times as the US. Otherwise, we are pretty much in line with most other countries.

 

[ChairShot]

Good point ninja!

 

[Murloc]

lol I just checked and I did 700 GB in download in december.
This month is only 350GB though (for now)
I wouldn't be able to survive if I lived in canada. Maybe I should take out downloading from the total to see what it would be like without it though.

About that graph: you can have high speed connections but worse experience due to bandwidth caps. That factor alone is not much of an indicator for the consumer.

 

[AMDZen]

lol, I guess that puts that myth to rest. We aren't the highest, but we aren't the lowest and only two countries, both much, much smaller than the US have speeds 4-5 times as the US. Otherwise, we are pretty much in line with most other countries.

1) Those numbers are clearly outdated

2) What good does these supposed great speeds Canadians get do, if they can't even use it. Might as well have a Ferrari in the middle of Manhattan and never leave the city.

 

[KMFJD]

Yep, I'm absolutely certain.

Back when I ran a server for Team Fortress Classic, it worked out that every client connected to the server required 3KB/s of bandwidth. Since my server was on DSL, I used that as the model for estimating how many clients I could support. When I tried to go beyond that, it lagged as predicted.
Team Fortress 2 is way more extreme than that. If you type "net graph 3" in console, you'll see that a client in Team Fortress 2 requires anywhere between 10-20KB/s.

WoW has roughly the same amount of stuff going on. To ensure that you can't cheat, almost everything is handled by the server. The server tells you where the monsters are, what they are doing, how they responded to what you just did, where other players are, what the other player looks like, etc.

No you are wrong...i don't have the numbers in front of me but it does not use much bandwidth at all, i'll run a test when i get home with 5 clients running and playing, i doubt it goes any faster than 20KB/s


/edit : it's about 5Kb's a client up/down
//running 5 WoW clients, and streaming radio, just under 15KB's

 

[jhu]

My monthly cap is about 210 GB, but that's only because my download rate is 80 KB/s

 

[zerocool84]

my problem is if they want to charge like elecricity whcih is one of the major points always brought up, then charge like electricity.

Everyone gets the same "high" speed. And if user 1 uses next to no bandwidth, then they get charged next to nothing. Flat rate charge per GB.

It is BS, they want to charge the people who use nothing full price, but don't want to give people who use it more that same price.

Spidey doesn't understand this. If they want to charge us like this, I'm fine with that but they don't. They're in it just to screw everyone.

It's just like DRM. Screws all the people who do everything right. No Netflix, Vudu, Hulu, or Youtube any more. In Canada they'll have to worry about every song they buy off iTunes since they have such a low cap.

 

[Phokus]

Netflix and other services should sue on the basis of anti-competitive/monopolistic behavior. Essentially, a big reason for fucking with the customer's total monthly bandwidth is to ensure Netflix and others don't compete with the Cable monopoly's TV/Movie offerings.

We're THIS close to not needing a TV subscription and they know it.

 

[BurnItDwn]

That cap is crazy low.
I would blow through that in no time just streaming netflix or buying a game or two on Steam...

 

[InflatableBuddha]

This kind of shit should fall under some sort of anti-trust laws with internet providers being the cable providers. This is an attempt to push Netflix out of the market and destroy things like Hulu and other online video medias.

:thumbsup:

I completely agree. It's bad enough that we have minimal competition and ridiculously overpriced mobile data plans; now this bullshit. The CRTC is putting us back into the digital stone age.

I'm going to ditch Shaw and probably go to Telus or a smaller ISP (some of them have more reasonable caps of 150-200 GB). I hardly even watch cable tv these days anyhow - really only use my tv to watch movies.

 

[imported_Champ]

I've decided to switch to telus, they have no cap and have gone on the record saying they do not want to implement one. or atleast a UBB style cap

 

[Patranus]

my problem is if they want to charge like elecricity whcih is one of the major points always brought up, then charge like electricity.

Everyone gets the same "high" speed. And if user 1 uses next to no bandwidth, then they get charged next to nothing. Flat rate charge per GB.

It is BS, they want to charge the people who use nothing full price, but don't want to give people who use it more that same price.

That isn't how electricity is billed.

Not only are you billed for when you use electricity (if you have "smart" meters) but you are also billed on how much you use. If you go above some mythical base line, you are charged more for each additional kWh. Not only that but rate schedules vary even between neighbors. And lets not forget different rates for business.

 

[InflatableBuddha]

If they're going to treat internet like a utility, then they need to stop fucking around and treat it like a utility. The way house power works is that I get as much power as I want at any given time. I can run every appliance in the house - all at the same time. If you want to start charging a per GB rate for internet, then you bastards better not put a speed cap on it too since that's not how utilities work. I don't need to turn off the dishwasher before I take a shower and I don't need to turn off my computer before turning on the vacuum cleaner.

Actually this is a good point. We should start treating internet access as a utility and have it properly regulated. From what I've read, electricity in Canada was obscenely expensive before they started regulating the industry.

 

[Ninjahedge]

Not only that, you get things like "brownouts" in areas, especially during the summer, due to excessive usage.

You then get programs instated to get people to reduce their electricity usage to forego the need for more plants ("Energy" brands, etc).

I know where you are coming from, but Electricity is not the best gage to use.

Go back to my bridge ad tunnel fees. You want to DL Vampire Diaries during BW Prime Time, you pay more.

But they have to make things clear and easy to understand exactly what you are getting and why they are charging what they are charging.

BW does not cost that much per G to transmit, but there are few more effective "motivators" for traffic pattern alteration than simple hard cash.

 

[InflatableBuddha]

http://www.canadianisp.ca/

Compare the costs and service for ISPs in your area. I'm shocked to see that I could go with Internet Lightspeed DSL (6mb/1mb; comparable to Shaw High Speed) for only $24/month, with a 200GB cap.

 

[KeithTalent]

http://www.canadianisp.ca/

Compare the costs and service for ISPs in your area. I'm shocked to see that I could go with Internet Lightspeed DSL (6mb/1mb; comparable to Shaw High Speed) for only $24/month, with a 200GB cap.

I'm on Novus Fibre and it shows:

• 20 Mbit/s Download
• 10 Mbit/s Upload
• 110 GB Data Transfer
• $32.50/month Bundled or $37.50/month Standalone

I did not even realize there was a limit as I never get anywhere close to that. I have not had a chance to read all of the articles, but I assume this is just the large providers, correct?

KT

 

[ShawnD1]

Not only that, you get things like "brownouts" in areas, especially during the summer, due to excessive usage.

Maybe in the poorest neighborhoods of Mexico California this is true. In Alberta, Canada the power never goes down unless someone drives their truck into a power box.

Also, this brown-out situation you're talking about is called cable internet. If you want a dedicated line, you get DSL.

edit;
cable is a lot more utility-like than dsl. It's way faster than DSL so you can download a billion things at once, but the caps are lower and you suffer brown out behavior when everyone else is on. The whole point of getting DSL is so you don't get that kind of shortage. Putting a data cap on it when you've already taken a speed hit is total bullshit.

 

[InflatableBuddha]

I'm on Novus Fibre and it shows:

[/LIST]
I did not even realize there was a limit as I never get anywhere close to that. I have not had a chance to read all of the articles, but I assume this is just the large providers, correct?

KT

Cool...yeah Novus looks like a pretty good deal as well, although it looks like it's limited to only certain apartment buildings and condos. Anyways, point being that there are a lot of smaller ISPs here that provide more reasonable limits and for less money. I agree, I wouldn't mind a cap of 100-200GB since that's a lot of data and I probably wouldn't use it all. What annoys me is paying more for less service, especially when there's no justification for it.

From what I've read this only applies to Bell, Rogers and Shaw. Telus is not using UBB at this point (though they may in the future).

 

[Nintendesert]

The 2nd Amendment was designed to fight things like bandwidth caps. Our founding fathers truly were visionaries.

 

[Riceninja]

this is troubling for me, as i regularly hit 500 gb/month. shaw has never complained yet but im guessing my days are numbered

 

[sswingle]

We are at 89gb/8gb this month, almost entirely Netflix.

 

[TheAdvocate]

You've become a real ass lately.

Just lately?