how-to block ads
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
 ·Colbanet
·TekSavvy Solutions..
edit:
October 6th, @01:10AM
| No more usage checker?
Looks like the previous thread was locked; this is unfortunate, since the last post was Rocky announcing his intention to remove the usage checker. This is something that requires discussion, regardless and separately from the previous discussion on privacy.
This is *NOT* a perk. This is a requirement for an ISP that offers capped service. If users have no reliable method of tracking their usage during the month, the ISP should not be enforcing caps.
It's OK for an ISP to not have a usage checker if they only offer unlimited service. But as soon as the ISP uses caps, many users have no way of accurately tracking their usage, especially not when most user-side tools that WOULD help them track it use 1024-base rather than 1000-base.
I'm serious here; I consider any decision to suspend the usage checker is analogous to the decision to give all users unlimited service.
EDIT: If TekSavvy wants to temporarily suspend the 200GB cap until such time as the portal is ready 3-6 months from now, I have no problem with that. I only object to having no usage checker while caps are enforced.
EDIT 2: I want to note that I was out most of the day today, get back, check DSLR, and all of a sudden Rocky is suspending the usage checker, making me go "Wait... WHAT?" | |
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
| reply to Guspaz
Re: No more usage checker?
This is no different than long-distance when it comes to metering... It's the responsibility of the user to make sure they stay within their usage limits, not ours to handhold anyone, so yes, this is a perk. One that we may have to reconsider as a result of resent actions by a select few.
Rocky | |
Ares45
Hands off my bytes, Bell
Premium
join:2007-11-14
Toronto, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
edit:
October 6th, @01:18AM
| While I appreciate your position Rocky, expecting the user to monitor their bandwidth usage is absurd.
I use the Tomato firmware which monitors bandwidth used, and it is always different than the TekSavvy count.
If this policy comes into play, where we cannot use tools such as CapSavvy or the OS X widget, I will probably leave TekSavvy in search of an ISP that does alert you to bandwidth use.
Edit: Guspaz's idea would work as well, with a suspension of the 200GB cap. I simply won't pay overages when I can't be told what I'm going to be charged.
Edit 2: Rocky, you can't compare long distance phone charges to bandwidth usage, unless a phone plan includes a set number of minutes. Given that all long distance calls are billable, the user is aware that they will be billed for any LD calls. There is no margin of unbillable use with LD calls. | |
LiQuiD
BSD geek
Premium
join:2002-08-08
Anjou, QC
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to Guspaz
Yes but the (clearly NDP voting) proctologist has achieved victory over The Big Bad Corporation. He took The Corporation to their knees and made them change something.
Now, no one will be able to surmise from his download bandwidth that he's downloaded tons of pr0n from the internet. However, his continued use of free porn sites that collect tons of information on him via cookies will continue unabated, but while these sites will know what type of pr0n gets his rocks off, how many times he goes to google, what email addresses he has, what his PC's name and/or username is, and potentially stuff like what bank he deals with, what site he gets his news from, and whether his dream car is a ferrari or lamborghini, among many other things I cannot think of at this time..........
At least the world won't know how much he downloaded last month.
Whew.
--
Windows is the virus. Linux is the vaccine, FreeBSD is the CURE | |
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
| reply to Ares45
said by Ares45  :While I appreciate your position Rocky, expecting the user to monitor their bandwidth usage is absurd. I use the Tomato firmware which monitors bandwidth used, and it is always different than the TekSavvy count. If this policy comes into play, where we cannot use tools such as CapSavvy or the OS X widget, I will probably leave TekSavvy in search of an ISP that does alert you to bandwidth use. ok... then tell me how a thread gets around 10 pages long for something that is so absurd as a total GB usage for a month? If we really wanted to take anything away, do you not think we'd cut capsavvy and such at the legs before it got off the ground? Gabe was even writing stuff to complement what was already done!
When people look at the N'th degree they don't consider the collateral damage to anything. They simply look out for number 1.... time for a little dose of reality for a second... We're here for everyone, through and through, but we expect a little respect in return and entertaining trolls like this isn't a way to do it!
We're working our butts off, more than you all will ever know, and the last thin we need is "Fried Green Tomatoe" style BS like this and even less giving it air.
I'm extremely disappointed right now as we go way out of our way to help, no matter who the person is, period.
Fanboys have been shunned, that's fine, but trolls need to as well... Here's a statement you all can consider. I read every single TekSavvy thread currently and I read most of the other Canadian ones as well.... I do this as I believe in the group that resides here. I see this group as a healthy segment of our future in technology and treat them as such. What just happened tonight is a statement made that the relationship has to be a mutual and fair one!
It's not to say we're taking anything away, but we'll now have to consider the new air that's been given to this extreme thought!
Rocky
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc.
Authorized TSI employee ( »TekSavvy FAQ »Official support in the forum )
| |
Ares45
Hands off my bytes, Bell
Premium
join:2007-11-14
Toronto, ON
edit:
October 6th, @01:41AM
| --- | |
Taylortbb
Premium
join:2007-02-18
Waterloo, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
edit:
October 6th, @01:42AM
| reply to R0CKY
Rocky, I understand your position, basically someone has been stirring up shit about nothing. But the reality of business is that there will always be customers that you simply cannot make happy, don't let that affect the offerings for your other customers.
Bandwidth checking is simply one of those things that people need to do, even with cell phones you can phone in and ask what your current usage is. TekSavvy needs something in the meantime until that customer portal is up and running. If the solution is you have to phone in to get your usage then do that, but do something. I personally don't think that's a great solution, the best solution is probably to only allow checking your usage from your account. It could be done on a simple IP address system. Maybe you make the usage monitor opt-in, and make people understand that it's not private. But the point is that there's a way to make it work in the meantime.
TekSavvy is known for the best service, and eliminating a feature every other ISP has is hardly the way to do that.
--
Taylor Byrnes
www.taylorbyrnes.org | |
LiQuiD
BSD geek
Premium
join:2002-08-08
Anjou, QC
·TekSavvy Solutions..
edit:
October 6th, @01:57AM
| reply to Ares45
said by Ares45 :Like I said, I appreciate the situation you've been put in by the confused ramblings of a small group. There's a case to be made for lack of privacy, but it's not a glaring oversight, nor is it a critical flaw. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD... there is NO case for lack of privacy. Everyone get off the goddamn privacy protection bus. It kills me, having worked in fraud (prevention guys, not creation  ), and in porn, how people latch on to this idea of privacy without having one iota of an idea of what it really is. I described in the post above how much MORE info we're divulging by submitting cookies. You know what though, the porn sites are not even close to being the worst with that browsing info. At the risk of being slapped with any threats of legal action, I won't go further, but trust me, there are sites many put into their "trusted sites" category on IE that farm tons of info off of you. Another bit of info you may not like to hear... most of the people who are most anal about privacy are the ones targeted by many phishing, and other scams. That blindness they have is exacerbated by the social engineering of these brilliant, but crooked, individuals. And so they fall... hard. Guys, trust me, I know.
How much you downloaded, EVEN IF your email is your full name is not your greatest concern.
It's unfortunate this has happened, but it's the whiplash effect of Teksavvy's impressive growth and immense success. They've reached out to the (insert your choice of: Stupid, uninformed, misinformed, uneducated, incapacitated) general public
--
Windows is the virus. Linux is the vaccine, FreeBSD is the CURE
Edit: IB4TL!! | |
Bhruic
join:2002-11-27
Toronto, ON
edit:
October 6th, @02:22AM
| reply to R0CKY
said by R0CKY :I'm extremely disappointed right now I must say that I am as well. Although about a different issue. It's... I'll use the word "disheartening" to see a company react in such a fashion to the disgruntled rumblings of a few select individuals. The closest analogy would be the traditional "well fine, if you're going to be like that, I'm going to take my ball and go home".
If you're going to cap people, then you have an ethical obligation to provide some method of checking usage. Yes, the post about privacy got a lot of responses, but in the net scheme of things, there were relatively few people who seemed to consider it a valid issue. "Fixing" the issue by causing problems for everyone else shouldn't be the preferred solution, and certainly not in the fashion that we've seen here.
I suspect that the whole situation is simply a case of a knee-jerk emotional response. I further suspect that it'll be one that sleep and a clear head will fix, because it in no way reflects my opinion of Teksavvy todate, which has been nearly universally positive. Hopefully I can go back to thinking that way soon. | |
LiQuiD
BSD geek
Premium
join:2002-08-08
Anjou, QC
·TekSavvy Solutions..
edit:
October 6th, @02:47AM
| said by Bhruic :I suspect that the whole situation is simply a case of a knee-jerk emotional response. I further suspect that it'll be one that sleep and a clear head will fix, because it in no way reflects my opinion of Teksavvy todate, which has been nearly universally positive. Hopefully I can go back to thinking that way soon. Interesting tidbit I snipped from your post. Firstly, it certainly is easy for any of us to come here and be critical after the fact. It's also very easy for us to have our cooler heads prevail given the lack of any vested interest on our part. Is it the appropriate, correct response? Only time will judge that, certainly you or I are in no position to do so. For the record, I am neither agreeing, or disagreeing with the actions taken. The only thing we can likely all agree on is that as is the case with all doctors, not all proctologists are good ones. I am convinced that "Doctor" is a proctologist, if he is a doctor (I suppose if this becomes considered a defamatory remark against "Doctor", it would insinuate that Proctologists are bad people/doctors). I think that "doctor" exhibits key traits that would have him excel in that field. A certain "first hand knowledge" one can say.
Have you ever owned your own business? It stings 100x more when negative comments are made criticizing your hard work, the blood, sweat and tears put into your endeavor. Everyone has a breaking point. Personally, I was impressed with the patience Teksavvy showed overall, as a business entity, in the face of increasing numbers of comments, that shall we say, suggest less people are willing to go to bat for them. I would next ask, whether or not you did own your own business, if you actually never had a "knee jerk emotional response," to quote your description of it. From what I can see though, in that same statement where you labelled Teksavvy's actions as such, you committed one of your own. I find it disheartening that you're willing to change your view on the company overnight over this occurrence... similar to feeding the trolls, this kind of "knee-jerk reaction" only strengthens the motives behind Rocky's actions. Do not misinterpret this as a criticism of your reaction to Rocky's decision. Just as you are entitled to not be in agreement with Rocky's reaction to recent events, while I respect your opinion, and cannot say that it is wrong to come to such a conclusion, I am simply in disagreement, and thought I'd do so while highlighting an interesting spin on it.
I for one believe that it is morally unethical for me to hold someone to higher standards than that to which I hold myself accountable. I cannot say I would never have such a reaction if it was my own Pride and Joy. Mostly because I've been guilty of this once before (or a hundred or so, but whatever).
--
Windows is the virus. Linux is the vaccine, FreeBSD is the CURE | |
jibby
join:2008-03-31
edit:
October 6th, @02:55AM
| reply to Guspaz
couldn't Teksavvy just password protect the bandwidth checker page? | |
LiQuiD
BSD geek
Premium
join:2002-08-08
Anjou, QC
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by jibby :couldn't Teksavvy just password protect the bandwidth checker page? They could
The issue here is a little bigger than that now though. It's about the manner in which they were dragged through the mud over this.
--
Windows is the virus. Linux is the vaccine, FreeBSD is the CURE | |
decx
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Vancouver, BC
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to Guspaz
Re: No more usage checker?
Simply disappointing how the actions of a few paranoid individuals would go about wreaking it for everyone. The frequently updated TSI bandwidth checker is one of the main reasons why a capped service is available to many users here.
However, I do have to agree with Guspaz about the usage checker being a requirement. Even with major post paid service providers like Bell or Rogers provide facilities for customers to check their usage on services like wireless and long distance minutes and dial up hours for their current billing period. In addition the user can also call customer service to ask how much usage they have accumulated so far.
Personally, I would find it rather difficult make use of a 200GB service without a bandwidth checker, it would just involve too much checking. It would not only be unfortunate if the bandwidth checker was taken offline, but for many of us "power users" who signed up for premium service because the cap was increased from 100GB to 200GB, it could become quite a pain to make use of what we paid for without running into overages. | |
latchkey
join:2007-12-28 | reply to Guspaz
Why can't one just 'opt out'? Afterwards their info will not be collected or viewable through the bandwidth checker?
That doesn't seem like it would be that difficult does it? | |
Bhruic
join:2002-11-27
Toronto, ON
| reply to LiQuiD
said by LiQuiD :Have you ever owned your own business? Yes I have, and yes, I agree that negative comments have a way of being personalized more than when you are working for "the man". And that's why it's even more important to not type "in the heat of the moment". When you're on a forum like this, representing your company, you don't really have the luxury of having a bad day. I know that sucks, and it's an impossible requirement to live up to, but it's just reality.
From what I can see though, in that same statement where you labelled Teksavvy's actions as such, you committed one of your own. I find it disheartening that you're willing to change your view on the company overnight over this occurrence... I was going to respond by saying that I wasn't doing that, but on reflection, I'd have to say I am. However, I think that I'm perfectly justified in taking that position. Teksavvy, in my mind, has made a name for themselves by proving that they are focused on customer satisfaction. They've proven their willingness to stand up to Bell on the throttling issue, and they've shown a willingness to engage in frank, open discussions on these forums. This is very laudable behaviour, for which I commend them.
However, the behaviour exhibited here is the complete opposite. Again, it's not the usage checker itself that's at issue (although I consider that a mandatory feature to have), it's the way it's been handled. And that's badly.
I for one believe that it is morally unethical for me to hold someone to higher standards than that to which I hold myself accountable. I'm not holding them to higher standards than I do for myself... I don't have a problem with heated first-responses, as I said, I've done those myself. But then when I've had a chance to cool down, I've stepped up and admitted as much. | |
decx
Premium
join:2002-06-07
Vancouver, BC
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to latchkey
said by latchkey :Why can't one just 'opt out'? Afterwards their info will not be collected or viewable through the bandwidth checker? That doesn't seem like it would be that difficult does it? If it comes to disabling the checker while waiting for the portal, I could definitely see the opt-out being a perfectly acceptable stop-gap measure.
It would mean Teksavvy would have to modify the the DB their checker use as well as the checker, but my guess is it isn't anything really major. | |
Mashiki
Balking The Enemy's Plans
join:2002-02-04
Woodstock, ON
 ·mybrighthouse
 ·Rogers Hi-Speed
| reply to Bhruic
said by Bhruic :I must say that I am as well. Although about a different issue. It's... I'll use the word "disheartening" to see a company react in such a fashion to the disgruntled rumblings of a few select individuals. The closest analogy would be the traditional "well fine, if you're going to be like that, I'm going to take my ball and go home". .... I suspect that the whole situation is simply a case of a knee-jerk emotional response. I further suspect that it'll be one that sleep and a clear head will fix, because it in no way reflects my opinion of Teksavvy todate, which has been nearly universally positive. Hopefully I can go back to thinking that way soon. The sad thing is many companies, especially those working their way against mega-corps are stuck in a tough spot. The zealous overkill approach, is the only one that they can take due to the way media will, can and does approach news, especially news that will effect the company and their position. While I'm not saying that Rocky had done this per-say because of this, I believe that there is a possibility that they're going beyond because of any possible ammunition that could be used against them by Bell, et. el., with regards to the CRTC and the current throttling/privacy issue there. Sadly ethical overbearing and over-reaching as it is, companies can and do dig at the smallest issues that exist. So any moral high-standing, or grand standing that may be perceived is also an excellent thing to attack.
Using a printed statement while not the best as seen by many, is really the only way they can do this within a reasonable time frame and still give you a measurement on how much you're using. Back when I was with NNT(North Norwich Telecom), they used to give me how many hours of dial-up I used on my bill out of my total. There was no fancy way to check.
--
The Art of War
"Excessive law is no law." - Cicero | |
Ikarasu
join:2004-01-09
Port Coquitlam, BC
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·TELUS
edit:
October 6th, @05:30AM
| Wow.
I too have to say, this is a change for the worst. There is no unlimited option out west... and I have 3-4 computers in my house, and a modem/router which wont monitor total use. I'd have to route every computer through a PC and use it as a gateway to know how much we're using, which is something I'd rather not do. Bandwidth meters in my place arent accurate either, because I usually get some stuff while my family gets other stuff, and we just stream it via network to eachother.
I don't have any leeway for usage... I'm always just under, or close to my GB (and would be more if I wasn't realizing I'm close to my limit). Taking it away pretty much means the end of Teksavvy for me... I hate to do it, but I'd rather go with Yakk for peace of mind.
IMO, if you have caps...you need a way to display usage stats. It's not a "perk" but a necessity for your customers...
At the very least, let people opt in to view their stats. Don't screw over thousands of people because 1-2 complain...
[Edit] I also don't see this as the same as long distance usage, or cell phone usage. Long distance usage my family knows they'll be charged xx per minute... and I don't share my cell phone with limited minutes with my family. It's hard, if not impossible to track usage of the Internet between 3 users...I can't even keep track myself with the way I have things networked right now. | |
-
|
