dslreports logo
spacer
1
spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer

view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2010-01-06 18:09:45: There's two major reasons ISP executives want to shift from flat-rate to a pricing model where customers face low caps, and high per-gigabyte overages. ..

prev · 1 · 2

duder 1

@rr.com

no money

i have no money for it so i will give it up like i say what do you need food or internet f@#k um all
Zeroumus4

join:2009-02-24

no crappy access here

Crappy internet access in Canada must be an eastern canada thing

in BC and Alberta, your basic 30-40 per month service gets you about about 15-25 megabits down and 1 up and you would have to move about 500gigs of data before the internet police would come after ya. 100megabit access is starting to become reasonable for early adopters.

all this crappy Canadian service seems to be coming from the big players out east who do not even compete or are non existent over here
SuperWISP

join:2007-04-17
Laramie, WY

1 edit

Karl is unqualfied to comment

Karl has never operated an ISP, worked for one, or balanced the books for one. What qualifies him to pontificate on the economics of running an Internet service provider? Nothing at all. On the other hand, he does have an incentive to bash ISPs, because it gives the false impression that he is a "consumer advocate" (even though harming ISPs in fact harms the public by making Internet access harder to obtain and more expensive). In my opinion, DSL Reports should hire an expert to report on such matters and relegate Mr. Bode to a blog where he can rant as much as he desires.
otakuon

join:2005-04-06
Loma Linda, CA

1 edit

Re: Karl is unqualfied to comment

Re: Karl is unqualfied to comment

HUH? I take it from your name that you run a local WISP out in Wyoming. Now, with Wyoming being the most sparsely populated state in the US (I spent my summers in high school there), I could image that starting up an ISP is not cheap or easy. But we are talking about nationwide data providers here with millions of users each who are running well established networks where the initial build-out investment has long since been repaid (and in may cases was subsidised by the government). For those of us who are users on such networks, we are infuriated as time after time these ISPs insist on foisting ever increasing costs on us while giving us little to no return for our forced "investment". I understand that in order for a public corporation to continue to succeed it must increase its profits year over year (or face shareholder revolt), but when the these prices rise at a rate that is faster than the rate of inflation by a large margin (as they are) while the cost of providing the service from the ISPs perspective continues to decrease, something is going to have to give. Eventually, they will price them-selves right out of existence because most users will no longer be able to afford it. And I think Karl Bode has just as much say in this matter as anyone else since he has been coving the consumer broadband industry since there has been a consumer broadband industry. He knows the ins and outs of the games that these ISPs play. For instance, when the phone companies went before the FCC saying that by allowing them to provide TV services they could compete with cable and thus lower the price for all Americans...what has happened, the exact opposite. Most of us still live in an area with a single reliable provide and those of us that do have more than one only have two and they just end up price matching themselves anyway. The most frustrating part is that as we move ever more and more deeper in the information age, the very people who are supposed to carry us forward (and who promised us that they would lead the way) are now trying to implement schemes that will kill innovation and grind progress to a halt. As we are moving towrads a more connected world, the very people we depend on to keep us connected are creating roadblocks to the world that they initilally sold us.
leopoldb0

join:2008-12-01
Toronto, ON

A different model for internet access

I'd love to see a network in Canada that truly motivated local ISP's.

1. A national backbone created and supported by the federal government.
2. Provincial urban nodes supported created and supported by provincial governments.
Local ISP's given even access nationally to serve local customers. Bell, Rogers, Cogeco, etc. would be given the same right of access as local ISP's. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

In other words make internet access consistent for the majority of Canadians (except for "back to the landers" who get what they choose).
There are those who would fear "the state" being their conduit but the state would get access via the existing providers anyway...
leopoldb0

join:2008-12-01
Toronto, ON

And a different model for holding ISP's feet to the fire...

I'm not a developer but I'm envisioning a different way for us to hold the ISP's accountable.

A mashup of google maps and performance testing by DSL-reports.

It operates like this:
I go to DSL-reports and register with my postal code (accurate to within a few houses of mine). Then I run a performance test.

When I see that my performance doesn't come close to what I pay for on a monthly basis, I have good evidence to press my ISP with - ie, ALL of the subscribers in my area get the same crappy performance rather than just one lonely guy.

Anecdotally, I live in one of the larger communities of apartment buildings in Toronto (High Park). I pay for 5 meg service but Bell testing only shows 2.5 meg and has for almost 4 years. Bell told me that the LC is way over on Runnymede road. Why wouldn't they put a mini-LC in this neighbourhood so we'd get decent performance.
Considering all the AP's that I see in my area, I'm considering starting a petition in this area to force Bell to fix this properly.

Leopold B (AP name Oakmount7).