 
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
 ·T-Mobile US
| Marie Carrier of Cogeco: another utter lying PoS corp exec Is there ANYTHING these lowlifes would NOT say for money?
quote:
"This is not something we’re doing to make money; it’s to better manage our service."
translation: I am getting paid to LIE INTO YOUR FACE so I will DENY even the most OBVIOUS things but I am NOT TOO SHARP to tell you the truth, hence this utterly pathetic and idiotic statement.
--
[BQUOTE=[user=bicker]]Waaaa waaaa waaaa. You just want what you want and don't care to factor in what is right or true. Your perspectives are un-American, and deserve far more ridicule than I'm prepared to pile on them.
[/BQUOTE] | |
|
Bladerunner37
join:2002-10-21
Nepean, ON | This is Canada Welcome to Canada, the land of the most expesive cell phone rates, why not raise the broadband rates up there to.
Cmon fellow Canadians, lets pay more, we wont complain about it. | |
|
theninjasqua
join:2007-09-26
Oakville, ON
| Missed the Point I think this article missed the whole point. Arguably this is good for Cogeco's customers. Right now they are all under hard bit caps, once you hit your monthly cap you are stuck for the month, no internet. At least now they have the option to go over if they so choose, they just have to pay extra for it. I see no issue with that.
--
-theninjasquad | |
|
 | tenchsan
join:2004-05-04
H0H0H0
1 edit | Re: Missed the Point said by theninjasqua  :I think this article missed the whole point. Arguably this is good for Cogeco's customers. Right now they are all under hard bit caps, once you hit your monthly cap you are stuck for the month, no internet. At least now they have the option to go over if they so choose, they just have to pay extra for it. I see no issue with that. You are totally off the point.
The greater picture is this : Canadian Broadband is being leveled down on a national scale.
Have you ever wondered what is the cost of bandwidth?
Do you know what kind of service you get in the states for the same price?
Do you know if the numbers provided by Bell to the CRTC (see previous posts in thread) are real (anyone remembers when Bell had to be forced to divulge their data when they throttled the whole network (even wholesale ISPs) without warning and denying the fact)?
Do you know if there's any cartel going on right now?
Do you know that downloading music is LEGAL in Canada because we pay a levee on blank media? »cpcc.ca/english/index.htm
Do you know how much bandwidth you use on youtube?
Remove your pink sunglasses and take the red pill. | |
|
IHM
Premium,VIP
join:2001-12-18
Hamilton, ON
| the truth Face it folks, it's not about money. It's about discouraging the type of behaviour that is really damaging to a cable network (i.e. P2P). Such a small percentage of customers exceed the caps, it's not really worth even discussing. I understand folks on DSLreports.com don't identify, but if you're doing more than 60GB a month, you are not normal. In any shape or form, you are doing way more than is "normal".
--
2 Large Bunnies...1 Dead Penguin | |
|
| 
Anon123
@videotron.ca
| Re: the truth It's all about money.
Why does Cogeco exist? Why does any company exist? To make profit. Period. Customer satisfaction, deploying technology, making bandwidth available for everyone all take a back seat to the idea of the president making more money if an opportunity presents itself. This is THE very definition of business and/or American Capitalism.
Once these business men figure out that hard disk space is rapidly outgrowing transmission speeds, the caps will have to go up exponentially every few year or they will have to meter you in a different way, such as #of hours logged in. It's the same thing with automobiles. If water powered cars came out, they would stop taxing the gas, but start taxing the distance you drive by every kilometer you cover. They need to make money one way or another.
The technology and ISPs CAN support more bandwidth to user, they just chose not to because it's far more profitable to meter something than just having someone pay a flat rate. It's a business model, so they will model their infrastructure accordingly. Maximum possible profit, nothing else matters.
So whats next? Metering TV viewing based on time? Metering how much oxygen we use? Metering how much methane is release by our flatulents and then getting blamed for global warming?
It's all about cash guys...it's in the corporation's interest. What's in OUR interest is a DISTANT second.
End the Fed and stop bowing down to corporations. | |
|
| | 
Phreaky
join:2002-03-02
Round Rock, TX
| Re: the truth And since none of us work for corporations, yes, down with those suckahs...
more unemployed peeps means more of us can sit on boards posting that putting more people out of work is a good thing. Eventually we can hope there will be enough bread in the breadline, and really won't worry about whether or not we have enough nearly free bandwidth. | |
|
| |
Chuck Carlson
@teksavvy.com | Or more to the point Cogeco is embarrassing the whole country of Canada in front of the rest of the world. | |
|
| 
mattei
Moderated, now muzzled
join:2001-03-19
Canada
| Face it Cogeco employee, you're a shill.
• Were you unaware that Cogeco "rate shapes" P2P applications at the application layer? There goes most of your PR argument.
• Not normal? Why does Cogeco offer packages with higher limits (even a "network destroying" unlimited tier)?
The merit of your marketing is not worth discussing. | |
|
| |
Phreaky
join:2002-03-02
Round Rock, TX
| Re: the truth And in 2-5 years when the "unlimited" bandwidth that apparently you all don't think that the cable companies pay for from backbone providers becomes a MUCH more scarce resource and the costs go up exponentially, what do you think is going to happen?
I don't think you'll be so forgiving of the 10% using 90% of the available bandwidth I'd guess. | |
|
| | |
Anon123
@videotron.ca
| Re: the truth quote:
providers becomes a MUCH more scarce resource and the costs go up exponentially, what do you think is going to happen?
It's funny because the reverse is actually happening. Switches, wan/lan equipment and generally all networking technology are actually becoming more robust as time passes by, yet bandwidth is becoming more and more expensive. This seems to suggest that the technology is not at fault but rather how an ISP handles the bandwidth-to-customer ratio which seems to be tightening every year because there are simply more and more people surfing the net, as it becomes more readily available to everyone.
Every piece of electronic computer equipment will eventually become more robust and cost fractions of what it once did due to mass production (hello 8 port 100mbs switch for $12.99). High end wan equipment is no different, it's just a different scale. The tactic is scarcity. It's actually in their interest to keep bandwidth low and overload their network.
Again, this has nothing to do with the technology that allows 10 or 20mbs to be delivered to EVERY user, it has to do with the business model. | |
|
Chuck Carlson
@teksavvy.com | 'Not About Making Money' Since when is 250 gigabytes a month a very high cap? The rest of the world would laugh that there even is a cap not to mention the antique-ish speeds prevalent in Canada. | |
|
|
|
|
