NormanWilson
join:2006-05-04
Toronto, ON
| Is it really all about traffic volume and caps?
There seem to be a lot of people posting here to whom the only reason to sign up with Teksavvy is to get unlimited traffic volume, or to find ways to subvert Bell's traffic-shaping.
I have no beef with those to whom those are important issues, and I agree that network neutrality in general and the problem of Bell's inherent conflict-of-interest (in being both a supplier to other vendors and a retailer in their own right) are worrisome.
But I personally don't use peer-to-peer file sharing, have no interest at all in the entertainment-media content that people think drives PTP (and tend to fetch large OS distributions by other means than direct-to-home file transfers), and don't buy into the various emotional arguments about whether it's politically correct to do business with Bell. So none of that has anything to do with my choice of a home ISP.
The reasons I moved some years ago from Sympatico to Teksavvy, and the reasons I don't expect to leave Teksavvy soon, are:
1. I'm an operating-systems programmer by profession and avocation, and for various reasons sensible and not want to run my own standalone computing world and supply my own standalone network services. Hence I want a fixed IP address and the ability to have unfiltered connectivity so I can run my own SMTP and other servers, make calls direct to other SMTP servers, and so on. (And I'm willing and able to assume the responsibilities that go with that.)
2. I'm not an utter cheapskate, but I'd rather pay less if I can (and when I changed providers Sympatico charged appreciably more than Teksavvy to provide a service package that didn't meet my needs).
3. I like the corporate face Teksavvy display; in particular that Rocky has, for many years, been an active member of the network community, contributing to this forum and many others, not merely to promote his own services but to discuss both technical and business matters.
4. I haven't often had to contact Teksavvy about service problems, but when I have, I've always received a response in a reasonable time (whether that means a prompt reply by e-mail or a only a short wait, if any, on hold). Once I reach a Teksavvy representative, it has always been someone who knows what I'm talking about, is willing to hear technical details where I know more than he or she does, and is willing to explain without condescension when it's the other way around. It isn't always possible to get my problem solved quickly, but at least I get a sense that someone wants to help and that the company are doing their best.
5. For the most part the service just works. I've had a couple of outages, probably caused by problems in Bell's infrastructure, but no matter who's fault it was the problems have been fixed within a day (or, once, two days for a problem that wasn't a complete outage). I'd rather it was faster, of course, but I don't think that's a bad response time for a residential service with no specific service guarantee.
The point I'm aiming at is that none of these reasons is affected by Bell's recent behaviour (technical or corporate). So although I disagree with the recent CRTC decision, it doesn't discourage me either from staying on as a Teksavvy customer or from recommending Teksavvy to others.
I'm beginning to wonder if I'm alone in this feeling. Is there anyone else here to whom unthrottled PTP, unlimited traffic, and political solidarity are not the only things that matter?
Norman Wilson |
|
shepd
join:2004-01-17
Kitchener, ON
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
| No, you're not the only one here. I download plenty (depends on the month), but my two reasons for using TSi are that they are unlimited and that they allow servers. Well, that and they don't port block!
The unlimited is important to me, not necessarily because I use 200 GB+ every month (in fact, my usage shows I don't come close most of the time!) but because it means I pay one rate and I'm done with it. I'm just not interested in dealing with checking my usage all the time--that drives me crazy enough with my cell phone!
Most ISPs specifically ban servers. I don't want an ISP, where, once I've shown them that I can keep my machines safe, still gives me the boot anyways "because it's against the ToS". And it's always so arbitrary! Anyone ever get the boot for using FTP? Nope! X? Nope!
I also appreciate that the owner of the company is actually willing to deal with his customers. Even with other medium size ISPs you don't get that kind of treatment. It's great!
The price didn't factor into it so much for me. As long as it isn't ridiculous, like Rogers top offering for well over $100 a month (for unlimited).
The thing is, TSi has provided an option for those who aren't happy about the throttling: They offer MLPPP. So, no matter if you're a customer who needs bandwidth, or if you're a customer that likes the service, or you're a customer that likes the ToS, you get it all. 
I have to admit, here and there I have been tempted by other ISPs cheap offers, but I always remember to ask the following:
- "Do you throttle?"
- "Do you allow servers?"
- "Do you block any ports at all?"
- "Do you have true unlimited, or do you breathe down your customers necks once they hit a magic, usually hidden, threshold?"
99% of the time, the answer either is "I have no clue" or "Yes". So, it doesn't take long to realize the deal isn't all it's cracked up to be. Not enough bandwidth to be useful as a quick-download link, too many restrictions to use my server on it. |
|
metavore
Slightly Vole
Premium
join:2002-10-10
Edmonton, AB
·TekSavvy Solutions..
1 edit | reply to NormanWilson
said by NormanWilson  :Is there anyone else here to whom unthrottled PTP, unlimited traffic, and political solidarity are not the only things that matter? I recently moved from GTA to Edmonton and decided to get TSI out here as well. It's not really the price or higher download limit than Telus; in the end, it's because their reps have never lied to me nor have there been any surprise billings. Only THT and IGS were similar in that respect.
I have never used Bell for internet, by the way, just for phone. They were rude and lied to me as a phone customer. I prefer to limit my dealing with companies like that, hence I will also not use Telus for internet (because, you see, they lied to me before I even got a phone line, about hidden fees etc).
So it's about the not-lying.  |
|
GNca George
GorillaNET
Premium
join:2008-07-12
Minden, ON
| reply to NormanWilson
Yes.
It isn't a question of money, its question of integrity.
Tek and all their staff are simply decent people to deal with. I never come close to the caps, but even while working through Bell's infrastructure probems, calling up Teks's service have just such pleasant people to deal with.
What a change from the competition. BTW, I have recent dealings with Rogers and have to say they were pretty darn good too, surprisingly so. Nice professional people to deal with.
Bell OTHO, I'm absolutely, categorically certain that the CSR and activation reps employed there are decent human beings, but the corporate requirements that frame their jobs stink.
George
--
Powered by Candlelight Wireless Broadband and Teksavvy MultiLink DSL! |
|
LittleStone
join:2003-10-31
Ottawa, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to NormanWilson
NormanWilson, I agree with you 100%, though I also use P2P time to time so it's always a pleasant to have a neutral ISP.
There's always a concern whether TSI's business model is sustainable. Bell's recent behaviour show that they want to choke off competition. Without enough customers it's difficult for TSI to keep it's excellent quality/price ratio. For the average consumers, the doubt is enough to stop someone choosing TSI.
Those who have chosen TSI, like you and me, are among the small group of informed who found the services of the big players lacking. P2P is popular but unwelcome on Rogers/Bell, so there are quite a numbers of P2P users here. TSI became the asylum of P2P users. |
|
no doubts
@videotron.ca
| said by LittleStone :There's always a concern whether TSI's business model is sustainable. Bell's recent behaviour show that they want to choke off competition. Without enough customers it's difficult for TSI to keep it's excellent quality/price ratio. For the average consumers, the doubt is enough to stop someone choosing TSI. Doubt on what Bell will/can do next (if i read you right) shouldn't be a concern with anyone considering a move to TekSavvy. AT ALL.
Teksavvy has no contract.
Teksavvy does not have Early termination fee's forced upon you.
So even if someone has doubts about moving to teksavvy, there is really no issue. If things don't work out, just change ISP's again. Nothing lost at all in trying. You are not bound by any contract or huge termination fee's.
At most you can wake up next to a horse head...  |
|
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON |  reply to NormanWilson
Gang..... From everyone at TekSavvy.... Thanks!
PS - I'll be sure to send this to all the staff!
Rocky |
|
LittleStone
join:2003-10-31
Ottawa, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to no doubts
said by no doubts :
So even if someone has doubts about moving to teksavvy, there is really no issue. If things don't work out, just change ISP's again. Nothing lost at all in trying. You are not bound by any contract or huge termination fee's. If we are completely rational, you are right. But it's human nature to overestimate the cost of change. It took me half year to get my wife to switch after I convinced a friend to sign up with TSI, not that I didn't know the advantages. It just took time and effort to switch. It might be nothing to you, but there's always something more important than internet, at least in my wife's mind. Imagine if she had to do it once again in a few months, I would rather wake up with a horse head. ;-p |
|
vitesse
join:2002-12-17
Saint-Jean-Sur-Richelieu, QC
·Bell Sympatico
·TekSavvy Solutions..
 ·Videotron
·Look Communications
| reply to NormanWilson
I agree with you. I use my connection for web server / ftp server (for my work) I use web server and "radio" server for my hobby I need static IP for the servers. This is one of the main reason I choose dsl over cable. I choose Teksavvy because like the vision Teksavvy, Rocky and most of his staff have of the internet.
P.S. This is one of the best post I read on this forum |
|
DSL_Ricer
Premium
join:2007-07-22
| said by vitesse :I need static IP for the servers. Might I ask why? Does a service like Dyndns not solve that? |
|
Spike
join:2008-05-16
Toronto, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
1 edit | reply to NormanWilson
The affordable static IP that unlike Bell/Rogers thinks is for business accounts only and not for regular users (lots of $$$$$$$$), custom reverse DNS, and no nonsense of port blocking (along with no lame server restrictive ToS) is some of the major reasons why I joined TSI.
Oh, and how often do you get to talk to staff of your ISP and meet them in person?
One word, kickass. |
|
Spike
join:2008-05-16
Toronto, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
1 edit | reply to DSL_Ricer
said by DSL_Ricer :said by vitesse :I need static IP for the servers. Might I ask why? Does a service like Dyndns not solve that? Using a dynamic IP for a mail server or http server would be a nightmare. I've been there. A lot of these services also take almost an hour to update, lets not forget how the majority of nameservers cache a result for hours at a time. |
|
vitesse
join:2002-12-17
Saint-Jean-Sur-Richelieu, QC
·Bell Sympatico
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Videotron
·Look Communications
| reply to DSL_Ricer
said by DSL_Ricer :Might I ask why? Does a service like Dyndns not solve that? If Dyndns use no delay and I can point www.mydomain.com with this kind of service to my house, It could do the job.
--
Connection: Teksavvy 12000/1600 2 line in mlppp - premium
www.Globaltuners.com Remotely controled Radio scanner
|
|
Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
·Colbanet
| Their free service doesn't let you use a TLD, but their "Custom DNS" service does. It costs $27.50 USD per year, and so is cheaper than paying for a static IP (which is normally $48 CAD/year)
There may be cheaper solutions out there, as DynDNS isn't the only fish in the sea. |
|
kewlkeed
Grouch
Premium
join:2005-02-05
Knowlton, QC
| reply to NormanWilson
Not to drive the post off topic but there are things that a simple static address can do that any DynDNS provider can't. Not to mention when running email and other things it's a royal pain in the ass waiting for updates, also can cause you to be flagged as a spammer rather quickly if you go through some IP changes and host changes etc.
Back to the original topic, myself I am a user who does demand a lot of bandwidth, and oddly enough not mostly for P2P, I do a lot of streaming, run my own servers, etc (I have a much larger network than most home users). So the unlimited is a big factor for me... However it certainly isn't the only one.
As for Tek, how many other ISPs out there are active in forums like this? Not to mention the CEO of those ISPs and most of their staff? Ain't gonna find that anywhere! I could go on and on describing the differences such as hold times, (Or lack thereof hehehe) to their CSAs actually knowing their stuff, etc etc etc.
I love the company all around, and I certainly don't want to do business with anyone else. Both for a technical standpoint, and for the fact that Tek treats their customers with respect and are of the utmost helpful.
Thanks again R0CKY and the TSI gang!
--
Justin - DSLR resident grouch and Mr Negativity
Have a nice day! |
|
Sukunai
join:2008-05-07
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to NormanWilson
I am a power user lite in that I use a lot of bandwidth to an ordinary bloke's calculation, but not really all that much to some extent monthly.
Speed is nice, but I can't willingly see operating under 60 gigs a month. I want more even if it actually isn't always much more.
But no, I didn't pick Teksavvy for their speed or their bandwidth until I had already determined that Bell had to go.
Teksavvy was merely the solution to a problem.
And the problem was actually Bell Canada's disgusting service quality that drove me away.
When a friend told me about Teksavvy, and that he was immediately dumping Bell I took notice, as my friend is generally a very picky person and usually roots out the best deal.
I was more than happy to select Teksavvy, as they are everything Bell isn't including their better service assistance beyond just being a source for a service.
It is NOT just about the speed and the bandwidth. When there's money involved, my money involved, I expect more than just a product/service, I expect to be treated like I am valuable to them.
Anyone thinking Bell considers them important, is a fool. |
|
milnoc
join:2001-03-05
H3B
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to NormanWilson
I've chosen TekSavvy because it's an ethical company that doesn't outsource its support staff, and doesn't use questionable business tactics to retain its customers or extract more money from them. With them, you get exactly what you paid for with no deceit whatsoever.
As for the question about the usefulness of fixed IPs for home use, it allows me to connect to my home network via OpenVPN without the need for a DynDNS subscription which, unfortunately, is still a bit unpredictable. Losing your home connection when you're halfway around the world is extremely annoying. A fixed IP eliminates this problem. |
|
DabberDan
join:2004-11-15
Gatineau, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
1 edit | reply to Guspaz
said by Guspaz :Their free service doesn't let you use a TLD, but their "Custom DNS" service does. It costs $27.50 USD per year, and so is cheaper than paying for a static IP (which is normally $48 CAD/year) There may be cheaper solutions out there, as DynDNS isn't the only fish in the sea. I'm using a .ca domain and I have Tomato update the TLD's IP. It's free since I only use 1 of 5 domains that come with an account.
»zoneedit.com/
Edit:
I'm on TSI for the following reasons:
- 200 GB of bandwidth
- no port blocking - I host a personal website and connect remotely to my network
- customer service
- competitive price |
|
Bellundo
@teksavvy.com | reply to shepd
Most ISPs specifically ban servers should read: Most Canadian ISPs specifically ban servers. The rest of the world doesn't have the problem Canada has. |
|
shepd
join:2004-01-17
Kitchener, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by Bellundo :
Most ISPs specifically ban servers should read: Most Canadian ISPs specifically ban servers. The rest of the world doesn't have the problem Canada has. You might be right (beats me, I can't read any other languages very well... yet). But I know in the US servers are generally also banned from the major ISP's residential accounts. I'm too lazy to check the other major english-speaking speaking countries. I bet in the EU its completely different. Of course, in the EU, you don't get shut down just for running a torrent tracker... |
|
