dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
66911
share rss forum feed


davegravy

@teksavvy.com
reply to stevey_frac

Re: New speeds Rogers cable - Teksavvy watch out

said by stevey_frac:

As an engineer, I call bullshit.

As an engineer, I call bullshit on your bullshit.

said by stevey_frac:

Markets are analysed, focus groups are called, and product specifications are drafted before engineers and designers build things.

You forgot the part where business people intervene and point out that competition is unnecessary when their company has a monopoly.

said by stevey_frac:

No one is keeping you from your dream. You just want cheap premium service

Nope, just premium service that is sold with markups within the realm of reasonable.

said by stevey_frac:

Honestly, we all know the main use of synchronous packages is torrenting because you can keep your ratio up with your private torrent site. Everyone knows that's what you are really about here.

Honestly - what? I've already given an example of a possible (non-torrent) use for hi-speed upload. There are lots more, you just aren't taking off your blinders.

said by stevey_frac:

Guess what? Video streaming will kill torrents within the decade. 20% of of North America already has Netflix. Once hulu and/or Netflix offers all of your video content on demand and in stunning HD quality, it won't be worth it to deal with the hassle of torrents, and having to download things in advance.

Everyone is going to pay industry-set pricing for their media and be content being told when, where, in what format, on what devices, and how many times they can consume their media, right?
Yeah yeah yeah, that's cute, keep dreaming MIAA/RIAA shill.

Your point is moot, because torrenting is far from the only application for hi-speed upstream.


d4m1r

join:2011-08-25
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to sourtimes

said by sourtimes:

100/100 should be the minimum standard connection. It's sad to see that service referred to here as 'premium service'. You all have the internet available, take a look at European and Asian internet offerings, even offerings in large urban centres in the US as well. Canada is primitive in comparison.

It is settling for less that will get us nowhere. 100mbps/100mbps synchronous is at a minimum where we should be today, and even faster in the future. With the big move to cloud based systems this will become even more apparent as time moves on. It will happen, in many countries it's already there, we're still living in caves and hunting our data down with blunt clubs in Canada though. It's pathetic how regressed and weak our internet infrastructure is here.

I still think 100mbps/50mbps would be more reasonable though.....Obviously we need a lot faster upload speeds, but in terms ratio to download, I think 2:1 would be sufficient for even cloud storage purposes for example. I base this view largely on usage....Think about how you use the internet...2:1 of the times you are downloading vs uploading (if not higher). Anyway, like I said, I'm sure there is a more scientific calculation to the most "efficient" upload speed that should be paired with a 100mbps download speed...
--
www.613websites.com Budget Canadian Web Design and Hosting


TypeS

join:2012-12-17
London, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable

I thought maybe I'd share this:




This is why upload speeds are always a fraction of what the download speed is (to be clear, not why they are as low as 1Mbps, more is possible). Even 2:1 really isn't possible as long as copper coax is the physical medium the internet service is delivered on.

I don't have any statistics on how much it costs to lay fibre but I doubt it' cheap enough for the carriers to start ripping out the ground in every Ontario neighborhood.

Even Verizon in the the U.S. has slowed converting copper lines to fibre to snail's pace.

And before someone mentions Roger's profits, you have to remember a company of Roger's size has many, many departments. Cable internet is probably doesn't bring in the same margins as Digital TV or Wireless, let alone their business and enterprise operations. No company in their right mind is going subsidize the costs of one department with the profits of another. That's just unrealistic.

It'll take time to start getting fibre into a good majority of homes to offer some of the speeds offered in other parts of the world.


Anaron

join:2005-01-28
North York, ON
reply to chrisl83

said by chrisl83:

It's Shaw home package.. $115 a month, which split between two people is what it costs at teksavvy.. so it's not bad at all.

They even have the same speed but with an unlimited package for $195 a month, but that's overkill in price and usage.. 1tb is plenty.

That was suppose to be to section, qreply didn't work YAY.

»www.shaw.ca/internet/broadband-250/

250/15/1TB for $115/month is better than Rogers' 150/10/250GB for $123/month. If the cost is being split between 2 people, then it's $12 more expensive than TekSavvy's Cable 28 plan. It's still a better deal overall considering the speeds (125/7.5 vs. 28/1, assuming you'd pay for the Cable 28 plan by yourself). And it's certainly cheaper than Rogers' 45/4/150GB plan for $75/month.


sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:13
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to TypeS

Well, that picture isn't quite accurate either since the horizontal scale isn't linear.
Moreover, a large proportion of that spectrum marked as downstream is in fact occupied by Television channels. And there are 3 things occupying the upstream spectrum in the 5-42 MHz band ... there's upstream internet, upstream phone, and upstream cable boxes.


stevey_frac

join:2009-12-09
Cambridge, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to epsilon3

I love how i'm a MIAA / RIAA shill for pointing out that Netflix and Hulu are reducing piracy. Excellent.

Pointing out facts now a apparently gives you political motivations.

Anyways, moving on from that ridiculous argument, How long from the CNOC CRTC decision are we looking at until we can get upgraded to 45/4? Will Teksavvy even let us get upgraded, given the capacity concerns?



TypeS

join:2012-12-17
London, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable

said by stevey_frac:

I love how i'm a MIAA / RIAA shill for pointing out that Netflix and Hulu are reducing piracy. Excellent.

Pointing out facts now a apparently gives you political motivations.

Anyways, moving on from that ridiculous argument, How long from the CNOC CRTC decision are we looking at until we can get upgraded to 45/4? Will Teksavvy even let us get upgraded, given the capacity concerns?



There's a thread discussing the CNOC decision here. Apparently it's scheduled for this week?

Also I believe its 35/3 is what 28/1 will get upgraded to.


ProdctionGuy

@teksavvy.com
reply to davegravy

To further Gravy's point, I work in the Film Industry and upload mostly from home back to our office. Increased uploads would GREATLY increase my workflow efficiencies. If anyone would like to investigate the file sizes generated by an ARRI ALEXA camera for 1 minute of footage at 24/fps with a colourspace 4:4:4:4 they would easily deduce that upload speed is where it is at for people to actually utilize the internet for work instead of porn and so on. Feel free to investigate the RAW files generated by the RED EPIC camera at 5K res for 1 minute of footage a 24/fps. Upload speeds need to be increased PERIOD! When I deal with production types such as myself in the U.S they are horrified by the speeds I xfer to them at. A lot of the time I have to XFER footage to an external and drive to the office to upload so I can take advantage of the outrageously priced fiber connection which has upload limits even though it costs 1300/month. Get off the torrent train, there are people here that need to upload to make themselves viable to employers, contractors and so on.

Grow UP STEVEY!


34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON
reply to stevey_frac

said by stevey_frac:

Honestly, we all know the main use of synchronous packages is torrenting because you can keep your ratio up with your private torrent site. Everyone knows that's what you are really about here. Guess what? Video streaming will kill torrents within the decade. 20% of of North America already has Netflix. Once hulu and/or Netflix offers all of your video content on demand and in stunning HD quality, it won't be worth it to deal with the hassle of torrents, and having to download things in advance.

No, that is an idiotic assumption, you are wrong and you are deluded.

stevey_frac

join:2009-12-09
Cambridge, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to ProdctionGuy

So, not only is your workflow here incredibly atypical to that of the average consumer, I can just as easily argue that I need way faster downloads to do something equally work related. I need to download 500 GB VHD's full of code, and builds, but instead I end up taking home physical drives. But when I upload, I only upload tiny changesets. So your argument doesn't really hold any water. Just like that other guy who wants to upload 4 TB files to the cloud, coming up with a few examples of something that requires a lot of upload doesn't mean the average consumer wants or needs that upload. Plus people can trivially come up with special case scenarios where they need way more download. In the end, it's a wash.

But don't worry! Good News! Rogers and Bell both offer consumer fibre packages now! Both feature 100 mbit+ speeds that are syncronous. You just have to convince Rogers or Bell to run fibre to your home!


NBomb

join:2007-01-23
Etobicoke, ON

Why the hell are you even arguing against having as fast a speed as we can get? Who cares what the average user does? Do you think that if you request something reasonable from Lord Rogers that you'll be more likely to get a crumb from him, thank you for the pittance sire? How beaten down is this kind of thinking?

The fact is that xfer and storage CONTINUALLY fall in price every year to the providers. The fact is that these savings are NOT being passed on to us.

Your attitude is defeatist, and just plain wrong, stevey. There's NO REASON why our internet connections should be any slower than anyone else's in the world. NONE.

Demand more, get more.



davegravy

@iasl.com
reply to stevey_frac

You can dismiss each individual's need for hi-speed upstream as a niche requirement (business or otherwise), but that doesn't mean that the collection of niche requirements isn't a significant one. In a world where more and more people are working from home, where more and more individuals are becoming content CREATORS (rather than just consumers) I'd say that growing demand for upstream is expected and reasonable. Whether it is growing FASTER than downstream requirements is of course an important consideration.

And once again, there's the "build it and they will come" argument that I think most market research overlooks. If you make affordable hi-speed upstream available, technologies and uses will emerge from that availability.

E.g. cloud services weren't viable until affordable upstream speeds reached a critical point. Prior to this you could have said there was no demand for cloud services, but that would have been an illusion due to the fact cloud services and the required upstream bandwidth didn't yet exist.



mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
kudos:5
reply to NBomb

said by NBomb:

Your attitude is defeatist, and just plain wrong, stevey. There's NO REASON why our internet connections should be any slower than anyone else's in the world. NONE.

This thread is getting a little out of hand because everyone wants to make assumptions about each others usage and demand perfection.

Let me just make one large and detailed point here though, ISPs are commercial businesses who choose the pipes and what plans to offer based on demand and what the customer will pay. This is the same for every industry.

Should Canada have better options? Maybe. But we keep going back to the big ISPs should all of a sudden cave in and drop their profit margins because we demand it when there are roughly 4-6 million Bell and Rogers customers who pay for it willingly and a Government who for all intents and purposes support the business model with preference given on retail vs wholesale services (might change with a new CRTC but time will tell).

This may sound a little negative but here we have a minority and dedicated group made up mostly of us on this forum who choose flexibility yet aren't doing anything to blow up the market and change it.

The one major thing we can do is actually stop attacking each other, making excuses and assumptions and work together to create something to put these big ISPs out of business. If we all did this, we could actually change the market for good.

How? We've talked about peer to peer wireless networks, community fiber projects, maybe even generating funding for a co-op ISP to build infrastructure. But no one is working together to do it.

Let's think about this before we continue on a pointless discussion of usage and who to blame.

stevey_frac

join:2009-12-09
Cambridge, ON
reply to NBomb

I'm not against fast download or upload speeds. I'm arguing against the ridiculous statement that 100mbit synchronous should be the minimum. Most people don't need such a thing, and have no desire to pay for such a beast.


daeron

join:2012-05-11
Ottawa
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..

said by stevey_frac:

I'm not against fast download or upload speeds. I'm arguing against the ridiculous statement that 100mbit synchronous should be the minimum. Most people don't need such a thing, and have no desire to pay for such a beast.

The cost isn't that huge...look at google doing it in the US for 80 bucks a month with a minimal install fee. It can be done.

Arcturus

join:2008-04-18
London, ON

Nothing matters now speed upgrades for existing TSI customers all denied.

This thread can die too I guess now...


Gami00

join:2010-03-11
Mississauga, ON
reply to daeron

said by daeron:

The cost isn't that huge...look at google doing it in the US for 80 bucks a month with a minimal install fee. It can be done.

lols.. google's example is for a totally different reason then what you're thinking.. the price point they're using is because they can make up the difference in loss of profit/revenue with their AD services/data mining, as well as beta testing their new fully integrated TV/remote/AD/quick buy system that the whole thing is setup for.


TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON
kudos:5
reply to Arcturus

said by Arcturus:

Nothing matters now speed upgrades for existing TSI customers all denied.

This thread can die too I guess now...

Nah, its not as gloomy as it appeared, go and read what TSI Marc posted
--
----|- From the mind located in the shadows of infinity -|----
Nine.Zero.Burp.Nine.Six
Twitter = Twizted Zero
Chat = irc.teksavvy.ca


TypeS

join:2012-12-17
London, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to daeron

Does anyone know exactly how Google is offering its fiber internet services in Kansas city? The situation there regarding ISPs is no different then here, there's only a handful of incumbents that own either the PSTN wiring or the coax cabling that reaches homes. It seems doublful they'd want to use either like TPIAs here are.

Has google actually built it's own fiber network straight from peering ISPs to homes? Thats a HUGE cost, and at their current pricing on plans, if this is what they did, they are eating the costs and losing money on every subscription.