dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
36
zamarac
join:2008-11-29
Canada

zamarac to 34764170

Member

to 34764170

Re: Why is Rogers Ultimate Fibre "only" 350Mbps

What would be a reasonable for consumers usage cap to complement 250/20? How such "reasonable" cap is determined by Rogers depending on a plan speed?
wayner92
join:2006-01-17
Toronto, ON

wayner92

Member

What is a reasonable cap? By my calculation you can run Extreme Plus, Extreme and Express full out for about 7.1-7.6 hours before you hit your cap.

With Old Ultimate you only had 3.7 hours. With New Ultimate you have about 7.9 hours.
34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

34764170 (banned) to zamarac

Member

to zamarac
said by zamarac:

What would be a reasonable for consumers usage cap to complement 250/20? How such "reasonable" cap is determined by Rogers depending on a plan speed?

at least 15TB. I consider 20% of the connections potential over the month as reasonable.
zamarac
join:2008-11-29
Canada

1 edit

zamarac to wayner92

Member

to wayner92
said by wayner92:

you can run Extreme Plus, Extreme and Express full out for about 7.1-7.6 hours before you hit your cap.

Don't you think, it translates to "speed really doesn't matter" on Rogers capped plans? Why would one be willing to pay for "theoretically" increased speed, when it doesn't translate into a different consumption experience? Internet is now just another utility, pay must be proportional to consumption, meaning new level of HD & 4K experience. For daily browsing the speed is long sufficient. Then what these speed & rate hikes are for?

Sorry to say, but the impression is the customers are considered incredibly stupid. Given the fact they buy into these speed plans - are they?
wayner92
join:2006-01-17
Toronto, ON

wayner92

Member

Are you saying that it isn't worth getting faster speeds because you don't get more data? Extreme plus is 45/4 150GB and Ultimate is 250/20 1TB. You don't think that isn't a different consumption experience?

Sure I think the caps are stupid but I think the higher data caps are more important than the faster speeds in the higher end Rogers plans. My average consumption is 300GB/month. The old Ultimate cap of 250GB was a problem, the new cap of 1TB isn't.

I can't believe I am defending Rogers.
cepnot4me
join:2013-10-29
L0C 1K0

cepnot4me

Member

The data caps are the result of Rogers realizing 2% of the users used 98% of the bandwidth. The caps are set to force customers to pick and choose the movies they download. (Let's face it, pirating movies was the catalyst for the caps.) as I was one of those, I must say it made sense. I downloading everything, watched half of it. Deleted the rest a few months later.

However, now a days. With legit providers like Netflix, AppleTV, and even all the broadcasters putting their shows online for free VIA their website.
The purpose behind caps has changed, and should also reform in Rogers.

Which I believe is why Rogers and Bell are back to offering unlimited.

If only they'd do so with cellular plans.

The industry pushes forward with faster speeds, however the industry should be pushing Caps into retirement. They are only stifling the growth of legal media services and their own growth into Internet content. (Rogers anyplace tv.)
65194623 (banned)
join:2014-01-14

65194623 (banned)

Member

said by cepnot4me:

The data caps are the result of Rogers realizing 2% of the users used 98% of the bandwidth.

Some people keep saying this and yet it doesn't even make sense. 2% of the user base cannot use 98% of the bandwidth. Even if these 2% all had 350 Mbps connections they still couldn't use up all of the bandwidth. The bandwidth on tap far far exceeds what 2% could consume.
said by cepnot4me:

The caps are set to force customers to pick and choose the movies they download. (Let's face it, pirating movies was the catalyst for the caps.) as I was one of those, I must say it made sense. I downloading everything, watched half of it. Deleted the rest a few months later.

The caps are to discourage people actually using their connections and thus OTT video services and such and for the Canadian providers in Ontario in created an additional revenue stream. The comment in the brackets is nonsense. It didn't make sense but then again you don't know what you're talking about.
said by cepnot4me:

However, now a days. With legit providers like Netflix, AppleTV, and even all the broadcasters putting their shows online for free VIA their website.
The purpose behind caps has changed, and should also reform in Rogers.

Actually the purpose hasn't changed at all. That won't happen. Keep dreaming.
said by cepnot4me:

Which I believe is why Rogers and Bell are back to offering unlimited.

No, they're back to offering unlimited because they're losing customers to independent ISPs in fairly large numbers. It's called competition. Without the independent ISPs they wouldn't be offering unlimited options, but even then they do so with strings and gotchas.
said by cepnot4me:

If only they'd do so with cellular plans.

From their perspective it doesn't make sense to do so. They want more money. Wireless networks are their massive cash cow.
said by cepnot4me:

They are only stifling the growth of legal media services.

That's what they want.