site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Uniqs:
217
Share Topic
Post a:
Post a:
AuthorAll Replies


Me3423423

@hbs.edu

Canada is big

You keep forgetting that CapEx for Canada per person is WAAAAYYY higher than in other countries.

Given the large land mass and dispersed population, Bell's investment is much less efficient than in the US (where the same geography has 10x the population). As a result, Bell should be allowed to keep more revenue if they're going to wire the country end-to-end.

Why don't the small ISPs start laying cable instead of bottom-feeding and complaining?

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..

because that would make sense and nobody wants that. they want the big evil Bell and Roger's Family to do that. Besides companies like Teksavvy would have to spend money and we can't have that because they're too busy working on their own Dish TV services.



DrugSkill

join:2005-11-14
Saint-Jean-Sur-Richelieu, QC

2 edits

reply to Me3423423

said by Me3423423 :

You keep forgetting that CapEx for Canada per person is WAAAAYYY higher than in other countries.

Given the large land mass and dispersed population, Bell's investment is much less efficient than in the US (where the same geography has 10x the population). As a result, Bell should be allowed to keep more revenue if they're going to wire the country end-to-end.

Why don't the small ISPs start laying cable instead of bottom-feeding and complaining?
You are right if you take rural regions into account, but urban zones are not that dispersed. By saying US has 10x the population for the same geography, you also take allot of un-occupied territory into account. Those zones don't need and don't have any wiring at all. In the end, that doesn't really make sense.

Back 4-10 years ago, the ISPs were actually offering a better service and there were less users. No cap, no throttling, just a little less speed. Does that cost more in wiring for more users in urban centers that already had broadband anyway? I don't think so. Does it cost more in server equipment? Surely. But that didn't stop them from investing even more in electronic equipment and technology that actually undermine the quality of the service for their customers.

Technology is probably the reason why they didn't put restrictive measures at the start. I remember Videotron not being able to monitor traffic usage for some types of modem back then. The same goes for throttling.

The Speed competition between the ISPs probably helped to create that. 'We have more speed, we are the fastest.' But written in very small characters on the bottom of the screen it says, 'Your restricted to only 20gig a month, but probably don't give a fuck since your only an average user that only wants his webpages to load as fast as possible.' More speed, less usability. I'm just speculating, but that's pretty much what it looks like.

Back some years ago, you had the choice to have the fastest capped shit, that offers special features, like being able to watch secret webcams in reality shows like Star Academy and Loft Story(let me laugh) with Videotron, or have less speedy, uncapped service, without special features from Bell. The choice was clear, Bell all the way. That was the good old days, now it sucks everywhere you look.

Friday, 01-Jun 07:09:31 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics