2 edits |
to AppleGuy
Re: Why Canadian Broadband prices are so high?said by AppleGuy:some Canadians want American companies coming into Canada? Here is Verizon Wireless plans choice (» www.verizonwireless.com/ ··· igurator). Anyone cares to compare it to current Rogers Wireless offering? Also keep in mind, foreign competitors can't behave in Canada as they do in their home countries. Verizon has a monopoly in many US areas, but can't have in Canada most attractive ones. In the US they lobby drafting and enacting legislation favorable for them, and actively block or fight laws favorable primarily to consumers. In Canada it would be much harder for a foreign company to do given local competition. So their price and service structure in Canada has to be quite attractive to penetrate the market and get some share of it. It should improve local competition. Not sure so, Verizon is dreaming about coming here given the terms.  |
|
| |
To get back to broadband for a moment it looks like we are getting a better deal in Canada than in the US. We used to have more restrictive data caps but those seem to be getting less binding, at least at the top end and/or you can buy unlimited for $10/month.
The one exception is Google Fiber - that is the killer service and with the recent net neutrality ruling I would think that google will continue with this pilot project to keep pressure on the industry. |
|
 AppleGuy
Premium Member
join:2013-09-08
Kitchener, ON |
to zamarac
Compared to Rogers, Verizon is $20 per month MORE expensive. |
|
| |
Isn't Verizon a phone company that is more analagous to Bell? Or is this ther FIOS service? Or are we talking Verizon wireless which is a bit of a different company? |
|
AppleGuy
Premium Member
join:2013-09-08
Kitchener, ON |
AppleGuy
Premium Member
2014-Jan-21 12:13 pm
Well, it was off topic, we were talking broadband and how generally it's cheaper in Canada per download/upload speed (by about 40%), this doesn't include if people are capped or not. Anyway, then I mentioned how some people wanted US carriers up here and someone brought up Verizon and their insane pricing, which turns out to be significantly more than Rogers ridiculous pricing. Basically, similar package was $70 with Rogers and $90 with Verizon. |
|
| |
to wayner92
Average upload (» www.netindex.com/upload/) and download (» www.netindex.com/download/) speed indexes by country according to NetIndex. North America seems to be far behind the rest of developed and some not so developed world. |
|
| |
I agree, we're falling behind. Keeping our heads in the sand about what the rest of the world looks like, is a simple solution though. At least it looks like our preferred one. From that site: "The value is the rolling mean throughput in Mbps over the past 30 days where the mean
distance between the client and the server is less than 300 miles." Hmm, 300 miles? That's hardly a suitable measure for the World Wide Web. Fail! However, if one's world is within a 300 mile radius, then that does make sense.  |
|
| |
Arguably Canada may be hurt by the geographic distances and the location of speedtest servers. In places like Belgium and the Netherlands no one is more than 100 miles from the nearest city so that will help their speeds. |
|
| wayner92 |
to Ole Juul
It all depends where you live when I test to Toronto servers I get about 325/21. I get much lower when I test farther away - with Vancouver servers sometimes I get over 200 down, sometimes only 10. Don't forget that some content is duplicated around the world to ensure faster delivery - that is essentially the business of firms like Akamai. quote:
The company operates a network of servers around the world and rents capacity on these servers to customers who want their websites to work faster by distributing content from locations close to the user. Over the years their customers have included Facebook, Bing, Twitter and healthcare.gov. When a user navigates to the URL of an Akamai customer, their browser is redirected to one of Akamai’s copies of this website, almost entirely invisible to the vast majority of its users.
|
|
| |
to Ole Juul
said by Ole Juul:That's hardly a suitable measure for the World Wide Web. That allows to limit tests within borders of most reported countries. |
|
|
| |
I must admit that I don't personally seek out much content that is likely to be carried by Akamai and the like. Perhaps I'm unusual but to me the international capabilities of the web are a very important factor in its value. Information access is where the web shines. I just found a repository of pdf documents at a northern Swedish museum which was valuable to me. Actually, here with my rural wireless, the downloads were fairly fast. I suspect because the real limiting factor is often servers. I spend the larger part of my day seeking out information on the web so access beats speed - though I'd still appreciate a bit of snappiness if I could get it - and a better price would be nice too. |
|
| |
65194623 (banned)
Member
2014-Jan-22 5:38 am
said by Ole Juul:I must admit that I don't personally seek out much content that is likely to be carried by Akamai and the like. Unless you surf to practically nothing then it is almost impossible to not be served some content from the major CDNs such as Akamai, Limelight and Level3. |
|
| 65194623 |
to Ole Juul
said by Ole Juul:Hmm, 300 miles? That's hardly a suitable measure for the World Wide Web. Fail! However, if one's world is within a 300 mile radius, then that does make sense. It's not fail at all. With such a significant amount of content for sites being served from CDNs it means a lot. |
|
| |
to Ole Juul
said by Ole Juul:to me the international capabilities of the web are a very important factor in its value. Its important for many, but purpose of NetIndex tests was to compare speeds delivered by each country providers. They had to isolate the tests from complexities added when traffic crosses borders & merges into international backbones & separates closer to destination, since one country providers can't speed-up slow routes and servers outside their network in another country. |
|
| |
to 65194623
said by 65194623:Unless you surf to practically nothing then it is almost impossible to not be served some content from the major CDNs such as Akamai, Limelight and Level3. Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I thought that the CDNs were a paid-for service. In other words individual servers, universities, and likely government sites as well, would not end up being cached there. Perhaps I'm wrong. The server that I use for my own stuff is probably about 350 miles from here, and across the border. So yes, that's at least ballpark. |
|
| |
65194623 (banned)
Member
2014-Jan-22 5:56 pm
said by Ole Juul:Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I thought that the CDNs were a paid-for service. In other words individual servers, universities, and likely government sites as well, would not end up being cached there. Perhaps I'm wrong. Yes, it is and services which combined power millions of web sites. You really surf the net in such a little isolated bubble world? If so that is extremely weird. |
|
| |
said by 65194623:You really surf the net in such a little isolated bubble world? If so that is extremely weird. Probably "weird", but certainly not isolated. Using Google and the Duck I'm able to find little missing pieces to large puzzles. In my (little) world, research rules. Perhaps I do take advantage of the content delivery services without knowing. It sounds like you would know. I am also active on a number of fora and do a lot of e-mail, but I was not under the impression that those were likely to be cached. Really, the ability to find sites and repositories in far away countries is a very important function of the web to my way of thinking, and I don't think I'm unusual in thinking that. |
|
| |
Getting back to the original thread, there is a newer map with data as of Sep 2011 that shows Canada moving from Orange to Yellow. Given the recent fall in the Canadian dollar we are getting even cheaper - our price has fallen 10% in the last year vs the US given the 10% depreciation in the C$. 
But that doesn't seem correct to me as I find it hard to believe that the average speed in Canada was 45 mbps in 2011. I would be surprised if it was that fast today.
|
|
| |
65194623 (banned)
Member
2014-Jan-23 6:16 pm
said by wayner92:But that doesn't seem correct to me as I find it hard to believe that the average speed in Canada was 45 mbps in 2011. I would be surprised if it was that fast today. I don't buy it that 45 Mbps was the average; more like the upper range for the median speed tier. Besides availability factors such as Bell still not offering 50Mbps service in a lot of areas that have VDSL2 (still) the price will have to come down a good ways before 45 - 50 Mbps will become the average. |
|
| |
to wayner92
said by wayner92:that doesn't seem correct to me as I find it hard to believe that the average speed in Canada was 45 mbps in 2011 I agree it looks a bit fishy. Also their methodology is flown, with showing rates per 1mbps of average connection speed as a critical factor, while not counting the limiting effect of bandwidth caps on actual internet data consumption & overall user experience & internet infrastructure factual state and efficiency. |
|
| |
said by zamarac:I agree it looks a bit fishy. I'll say. Here is a quote from an article on these forums when the CRTC made an announcement less than 3 years ago: Instead of a minimum standard definition of 4 Mbps, Canada's minimum standard definition of broadband is now 5 Mbps. The Canadian plan also sets a target of 2015 to get everybody at least to that speed -- five years sooner than the U.S. plan.
At the same time, the CRTC site itself reported this: With an average of 5.5 Mbps, Canada ranked second only to Japan in an international comparison of Internet download speeds. Their 2013 Communications Monitoring Report (September 2013) sums it up like this: Almost all Canadians have access to basic (i.e., 1.5 Mbps) broadband Internet service. In 2011, the Commission set a download speed target of at least 5 Mbps. It expects all ISPs to offer this speed by 2015. Since that time, availability of 5 Mbps broadband service has increased from 87% to 94%. In general, Canadians living in large population centres have access to broadband speeds in the 50 Mbps to 99 Mbps range, whereas only 12% of Canadians in rural areas can access these speeds. There are charts with details here. |
|
3 edits |
said by Ole Juul:Canadians living in large population centres have access to broadband speeds in the 50 Mbps to 99 Mbps range Having the speed offer available isn't equivalent for majority to actually having such speed access, and again no word about usage caps signifying limits of actual data consumption. One can offer just about any speed, but ask the price majority can't afford, so no need in adequate capacity to backup such offer on a large scale. Current broadband rates are so high compare to actual costs and the subscriber earnings & other "must have" expenses that majority of population can't afford anything above Rogers Express level 35/2 mbps plan, and even that only in dense populated areas. So claiming in the CIRA Report Chart that average (advertised, subscribed to, or measured by tests?) speed in Canada was 45 Mbps in 2011 appears incorrect, its not like that even now, and unlikely in the near future. |
|
| |
said by zamarac:So claiming in the CIRA Report Chart that average (advertised, subscribed to, or measured by tests?) speed in Canada was 45 Mbps in 2011 appears incorrect, its not like that even now, and unlikely in the near future. Bang on. Those CRTC reports are something else - as in "something else". |
|
| |
But they must be off for other countries as well as I don't think the US is 29 Mbps. |
|
| |
65194623 (banned)
Member
2014-Jan-24 9:18 pm
said by wayner92:But they must be off for other countries as well as I don't think the US is 29 Mbps. Well that wouldn't be surprising. |
|
| |
Why wouldn't it? US companies don't seem to offer as fast speeds as Canadian ones do. Check outTime Warner's and Comcast's internet offerings vs Rogers and Shaw. |
|
| |
65194623 (banned)
Member
2014-Jan-24 11:05 pm
said by wayner92:Why wouldn't it? US companies don't seem to offer as fast speeds as Canadian ones do. Check outTime Warner's and Comcast's internet offerings vs Rogers and Shaw. IMO the lower end speed tiers matter more so for the averages in the sense that it drags them down. The US over all is doing much worse for how many people are stuck on lower speed connections such as 1.5 / 3 Mbps DSL or lower speed cable connections well below 10 Mbps. The very high end speeds only go so far to affect the averages because only a relatively small percentage of users have those speed tiers. |
|
| |
zamarac
Member
2014-Jan-28 10:52 pm
Actually they may have published some explanation on the methodology used to estimate speeds, and whether these are average subscriber speeds, or top speeds advertised on the market to which very few subscribe. It's obvious for an average user, the charts are out of reality on the ground. Sounds like a fake success story. |
|
| |
Akamai does a state of the internet report and their results are similar to the OECD report. They show an average peak connection speed for Canada of 34.8Mbps and an average connection speed of 8.8Mbps. » www.akamai.com/stateofth ··· nternet/ |
|
| |
Akamai speed stats for Canada you mentioned (» www.akamai.com/stateofth ··· oi-graph) are a lot different from 45 Mbps depicted in CIRA report. Average connection speed of 8 Mbps is close to reality on entire country scale, while in largest cities its obviously a lot higher, not sure how they calculate it though. While "average pick connection speed" they report needs definition - what do they mean under this term, and how calculate it? |
|
