| reply to AkFubar
Re: Bell appeals CRTC decision said by AkFubar:Why would CAPs be imposed if they are going to a UBB model? Wouldn't that be counter productive to billing for higher usage? Good question. Let me ask another...
Would you ( everyone ) be in favor of UBB if there were no caps and no throttling of any content type? Wouldn't this seem a fair way to deal with traffic volumes? When people pay a fixed amount they tend to use more just because they can.
If the meter was running, they might be more picky about what they download. |
|
|
|
 andybPremium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario
kudos:1 | That would be good if they actually charged the amount it costs instead of the 2 bucks a gig or what ever the rip off rate is these days. |
|
shepd
join:2004-01-17
Kitchener, ON
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·Distributel
| reply to Just_wonder
said by Just_wonder :said by AkFubar:Why would CAPs be imposed if they are going to a UBB model? Wouldn't that be counter productive to billing for higher usage? Good question. Let me ask another... Would you ( everyone ) be in favor of UBB if there were no caps and no throttling of any content type? Wouldn't this seem a fair way to deal with traffic volumes? When people pay a fixed amount they tend to use more just because they can. If the meter was running, they might be more picky about what they download. If the meter doesn't run how ISPs are billed (They are either billed by unlimited usage/max bandwidth (cogent) or by 95th percentile (everyone else)) then that doesn't make sense.
It's like billing everyone the same price for the 407. No, you charge more for people using it during rush hour, and less for people using it off peak.
For most ISPs, your middle-of-the-night bandwidth usage costs them ZERO because it doesn't affect their 95th percentile. But if they were to charge a flat rate per byte, I can all of a sudden exact maximum pain against an ISP by simply making sure I only download during peak hours, because, hey, if I'm paying by the byte, I may as well get the most bang for the buck! |
|
 otty
join:2008-10-24
Revelstoke, BC | Pure UBB vs caps+overages - whats the difference? Caps are just a monthly minimum usage fee...the important thing is the price. |
|
| reply to Edgar_man_boy
From what I understand, they want to charge us for the bandwidth we use between our modem and teksavvy routers. Basically, we pay the copper line etc...
This cost them NOTHING.
Cash cow? anyone? |
|
| reply to Edgar_man_boy
What a joke.
I dont think so.For the last time BELL DOES NOT PAY FOR ANOTHER CUSTOMERS TRAFFIC.
They go through a different router. TekSavvy or Acanac or whoever has their own routers, peers, carriers, etc.
It is up to them how they deal with it.
Bell is simply providing connectivity to their network. Not the internet. Bell is letting you use their internal network.
What a joke they run optical fibre to their RDSLAM's anyways now. Haha bandwidth crunch my ass.
What has gone on lately. ISP's do not own the internet. They are giving you access to it. You are buying access to the internet at a specific speed. They should not be allowed to say how much or to prioritize your traffic!
Bell does not own the internet. They simply provide access to it. You pay what speed you want that access.
Dam if bells that cheap they should have thrown Gordon and his fat friend in the trash a long time ago.
I have no idea how they can act as if they own someone elses traffic. They dont pay for it, its not theirs!!!! |
|
| reply to shepd
said by shepd:If the meter doesn't run how ISPs are billed (They are either billed by unlimited usage/max bandwidth (cogent) or by 95th percentile (everyone else)) then that doesn't make sense. It's like billing everyone the same price for the 407. No, you charge more for people using it during rush hour, and less for people using it off peak. I was thinking along the lines of the rental car model. There is a basic rate for the car ( ISP on-ramp fee ). Some offer unlimited mileage ( bandwidth ), some offer a per-day included mileage ( caps ). You choose which plan appeals to you most. In any case, you still have to pay for the gas ( DSL UBB ). If you want to burn gas driving around in circles because you have unlimited mileage, go ahead. |
|
| reply to Edgar_man_boy
As to your 407 reference that makes no sense.
The 407 was a THEFT from our government.
They confiscated the money from individual citizens to build a highway for Public use.
They socialized the costs and privatized the profits. Thats completely morally wrong.
It's fine to build a toll highway. But with your own capital.
It was wrong they stole the money from us and then sold it to privatize the profit. That was a theft! |
|
otty
join:2008-10-24
Revelstoke, BC | Sounds a lot like how the copper network got built. |
|
 gdogg
join:2006-02-06
39123
1 edit | Remember , just cause they gave it away, doesn't mean we can't take it back.
How quickly they'd give us what we want, by taking un-scheduled holidays |
|
| reply to Edgar_man_boy
ISP's have lost their mind.
Your paying for Access to the internet at X speed.
Where dpi, limits and caps come in is wrong.
Internal bandwidth inside their own network does not cost them.
The CRTC is useless.
This is a sad day. Shortly rogers will follow suit.
If bell had their way they would Ransack the public until they couldn't afford to communicate! |
|
| reply to Edgar_man_boy
personally... I think everyone should boycott every Bell offering.
This includes wholesale. (I hate to say it).
But frig em. In the end wholesale is money in Bell's pocket. |
|
| reply to Edgar_man_boy
1- Forget about CAIP. I don't think that the association has the funds, will and unanimity from its members to be an effectve force against Bell.
2- The only people with enough power to take on Bell Canada is the government. The government is one lead by Geroge W Harper and it is them that we need to convince.
charlie angus, apparently our only ally, doesn't have power. But He might be able to help us make presentations to the Harper regime. |
|
gdogg
join:2006-02-06
39123
2 edits | reply to hate2say it
said by hate2say it :
personally... I think everyone should boycott every Bell offering.
This includes wholesale. (I hate to say it).
But frig em. In the end wholesale is money in Bell's pocket.
I'd have to give up internet
Since my choices would then be rogers and rogers.
Night squirrel
»bcinto.blogspot.com/2009/03/cons···ral.html
You won't be convincing harper of anything. |
|
| said by gdogg:said by hate2say it :
personally... I think everyone should boycott every Bell offering.
This includes wholesale. (I hate to say it).
But frig em. In the end wholesale is money in Bell's pocket.
I'd have to give up internet Since my choices would then be rogers and rogers. Rogers is the lesser of the evils. |
|
gdogg
join:2006-02-06
39123
3 edits | said by hate2say it :
Rogers is the lesser of the evils.
When with rogers, for 14 years, 10 of which we had disconnection issues, they could never fix after 30+ visits.
One time, the tech told me, that he'll have the tech come with there own laptop and if they cannot find the issue, they would put me on a list of no more tech's ever again.
10 mins before the tech was due to arrive, the issues ended (at which point I immediately called them saying don't send the tech)issues were gone for a week, at which point the issues came back.
Rogers has been traffic shaping for much longer then bell and has ruined out internet experience for years at a time.
1 1/2 years ago, a great tech came by and found out the issues are random and were connected to a bad port in the splitter boxes out front in the street and by switching me to a different port , all these disconnection issues ended.
But we still had , very poor , everything thats encrypted gets shaped internet, that was a joke. |
|
| reply to Edgar_man_boy
You guys are all wrong bell is so much worse then rogers.
Rogers only really throttles upstream on torrents in the crowded areas other wise its fine.
They are a rip off yes but they also have a max overcharge fee.
Bell is the evil one! Rogers is more fair then bell thats for sure. Bell is ruthless. |
|
gdogg
join:2006-02-06
39123
2 edits | Yes, but I'm saying.
Teksavvy is better then rogers, so I am not switching.
We just switched to teksavvy from rogers.
Just because, a portion of the teksavvy money goes to bell , doesn't mean I'm going to give up on this great company that represents canadian's want for better internet. |
|
 mlernerPremium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5
·TekSavvy DSL
| said by gdogg:Yes, but I'm saying. Teksavvy is better then rogers, so I am not switching. We just switched to teksavvy from rogers. Just because, a portion of the teksavvy money goes to bell , doesn't mean I'm going to give up on this great company that represents canadian's want for better internet. If the UBB is approved, I might just have to go to Rogers especially since I can actually get near 7 mbps rather than the barely 4 mbps I'm getting right now. |
|
otty
join:2008-10-24
Revelstoke, BC | Me too. In the end Bell may end up losing a lot more than they gain with this. They may screw the wholesalers and get rid of some competition that way, but probably they'll lose more to cable.
...could be that Rogers would see that as an opportunity to put their foot further up their customers' a**es as well though. |
|
