Drex_CS
join:2005-05-11
canada | reply to Bandito
Re: Cable always has upload problems
how many years have people in the states been waiting for fiber/adsl2+ ??
I realize thier upgrades are not the best out in Vancover there, but atleast they're WORKING on it. |
|
Thingamajig
Premium
join:2004-11-03
B.C.
| reply to Wills
said by Wills  :said by TKJunkMail : The cost to fix this solution for Shaw was 2 to 3 million dollars. Are you expecting me to believe, that the largest cable provider in Canada, doesn't have 2 or 3 million just laying around? The ones putting the larger demands on the systems ARE paying for it. They are paying a higher price for those higher speeds they'll never see. Only 3 million to fix these problems, yet Shaw chose to cap their users. That is greed, plain and simple. 2 to 3 million to repair?!? See where they are putting their money you've so generously given them...
»www.shaw.ca/en-ca/AboutShaw/Medi···eleases/
August 25 2005 - Purchase of 1,000,000 class B shares
January 20 2005 - Purchase of 200,000 class B shares
- Purchase of 43,500 class A shares
November 5 2004 - Purchase of 750,000 class B shares
All the shares purchased were in the $22-25 range in this time period. Thats 1993500 shares purchased using the $22 figure thats $43,857,000 to buy back their own stock in the past 12 months. Meanwhile the Greater Vancouver area has still not undergone any significant upgrades to alleviate congestion and throttling. The bold emphasis above rings true! |
|
Bandito
join:2003-01-23 | reply to Drex_CS
We've been waiting for a year now, and crowded nodes are still an issue. |
|
Drex_CS
join:2005-05-11
canada
| reply to Wills
said by Wills :Are you expecting me to believe, that the largest cable provider in Canada, doesn't have 2 or 3 million just laying around? If your paying for the higher speeds, then you ARE using them. and the 2 or 3 million wasn't for thier whole network, that was for the specific area. If you wanted unlimited bandwidth, you'd be asking shaw to revamp every node in the country. (which would mean a lot more money)
By the way, incase some of you didn't know, shaw is already fixing this, Calgary and most of Edmonton have already had heavy upgrades done. The reason they haven't allowed higher usage is because of vancouver/lower mainland where the nodes *are* over crowded and one person doing a lot of trafic will slow up the rest. Give it a year or two and hopefully it'll all be done. |
|
Drex_CS
join:2005-05-11
canada
| reply to Primis1
said by Primis1 : Aside from your childish resorting to accusation of piracy because you're apparently bereft of any other argument...I find myself using upload more and more. Well you picked out 2 things in there that I'm not arguing. I only said the pirate thing because, be honest, how are going over 70 GB a month just downloading/uploading pic's from your friends? Doubtful...
One thing your missing (and it's a big thing) is that YOU are not the average user.
The Xtreme internet IS for media heavy users, as well as gamers, but it's pretty hard to be over the cap just doing that. When you start breaking 50GB that means your getting a lot of pod casts, downloading through p2p/torrent, etc.
I think the goal of Xtreme is not to download and upload music/movies/etc.. it's goal is to be able to watch stuff on websites and gaming. (Shaw's goal isn't to help you with p2p/torrent/etc) |
|
Wills
join:2001-01-03
Port Charlotte, FL
| reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :But will you be willing to pay what it costs to do the upgrades? And do you think these upgrades should be born by all users or by those putting the larger demands on the system? The cost to fix this solution for Shaw was 2 to 3 million dollars.
Are you expecting me to believe, that the largest cable provider in Canada, doesn't have 2 or 3 million just laying around?
The ones putting the larger demands on the systems ARE paying for it. They are paying a higher price for those higher speeds they'll never see.
Only 3 million to fix these problems, yet Shaw chose to cap their users. That is greed, plain and simple.
--
I have a shaved head, a goatee, and tatoos. Don't you realize the rules don't apply to me. |
|
Primis1
join:2005-06-13
Coldwater, MI
| reply to Drex_CS
quote:
First, your missing a big point here, Shaw *does* meet the demands of most users. just because you choose to download and pirate 100's of GB's a month of info doesn't mean my grandma does as well. You need to learn how to put your feet in other people's shoes.
No, I don't. Aside from your childish resorting to accusation of piracy because you're apparently bereft of any other argument, you also didn't actually read a single thing I've said yet obviously, since you're harping on download. The DOWNload is irrelevant. We want more UPload. I don't use much in the way of download anymore, I find myself using upload more and more.
And the original argument was that "The cableco's infrastructure can't handle increased upload".
And the statement that "Are you willing to pay more?" for something I should already have by now in the year 2005 is completely asinine and stupid.
Thus why I said "If they can't hack it and keep up... that's their problem not mine". My demands as a consumer don't have to in any way take into consideration any 5-year or 10-year plan they may or may not have. |
|
zod5000
join:2003-10-21
Edmonton, AB | reply to Drex_CS
yah they'll kick off if suspensions don't work on you. |
|
Drex_CS
join:2005-05-11
canada
1 edit | reply to zod5000
said by zod5000 :the argument is flawed, because when shaw states their statistics in those warning emails that say you're in the top 10 percent. They fail to point out how many people they already punted off their networks (or left due to the warnings). shaw controls their own bloody statistics through indimidation and threats. Never heard of someone being punted off the system. usually it's a standard phone call/emial saying to slow it down a bit.. if you do, then they forget about you, if you dont, they turn off your modem for a predetermined amount of time (which they tell you before hand).
Ofcourse they dont count people that leave... you want them to count everyone who is not using thier internet? why dont you ask them to put thier caps up by making an assumption on the fact that they "could" have all of north america as customers... just sounds stupid now doesn't it?
What threats are you getting from shaw? I know i got a letter that said they are offering me a free trial of thier Cable because I have the internet.. O and there was this scary one about how they're offering a inexpensive phone service now.. ya that one was scary! |
|
zod5000
join:2003-10-21
Edmonton, AB
 ·TELUS
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to Drex_CS
the argument is flawed, because when shaw states their statistics in those warning emails that say you're in the top 10 percent. They fail to point out how many people they already punted off their networks (or left due to the warnings).
why don't you guys see how that artifically lowers the bandwidth usage numbers their always flashing. Mix that with the caps, and of course its not hard to get in the top 10 percent. To get an accurate number, they'd have to let the floodgates open for a few months, let the people comeback, redo the states, and see what kind of average they get, and then still see if you're in the top 10 percent.
shaw controls their own bloody statistics through indimidation and threats. |
|
zod5000
join:2003-10-21
Edmonton, AB
·TELUS
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| reply to TKJunkMail
shaw makes more then enough to pay for the upgrades a year, they are just squeezing the existing system to increase profits.
They are like any other freemarket company, its about making as much money as possible, its not about the customers.
from their point of view, you can see why, there isn't really any competion in western Canada. You've got telus, and then you've got all the companies that resell either shaw or telus.
Telus is fairly slower, and has been dicking around with idea of caps lately.
shaw can just keep screwing people over, because they're aren't really any places for their customers to go. For ever high bandwidth user they dump of their system then can bring on about 300 people like my grandparents. Then is skews their statisitics (because they boot off all the high bandwidth users), then they can tell high users their in top 5 or 10 percent, went that number is screwy, because there can't be alot of heavy users, because they chased 'em all away.. lol
Shaw is so damned crooked it drives me nuts (I've been lingering on telus, because as of yet, they haven't punted me off or threatened me with suspension.. also no p2p throttling). Telus is slower, but in the long run (unless they do begin to enforce caps), having a slower speed, but a more accessible connection wins out for me. |
|
Drex_CS
join:2005-05-11
canada
| reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode : quote:
just because you choose to download and pirate 100's of GB's a month of info doesn't mean my grandma does as well.
Grandma would be offered a "Lite" plan if cable operators weren't afraid standard customers would downgrade and they'd lose revenue. She is on the Lite plan, shaw does offer that (128kbps). I dont mean to say that shaw is right in capping at 50 (I said earlier that a raise would be good) but saying that Shaw is going to go out of buisness because of the 5 to 8% of people that hit 100 GB a month is silly. And 80+% of shaw's internet basis are made up of people that wont go over that cap unless they really try to. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| reply to Drex_CS
quote:
just because you choose to download and pirate 100's of GB's a month of info doesn't mean my grandma does as well.
Again though, that's why Grandma is on the standard plan and he's clearly going to go for the Extreme tier (and pay more for it).
Grandma would be offered a "Lite" plan if cable operators weren't afraid standard customers would downgrade and they'd lose revenue. Instead, she's using 10% of a $50 connection and paying much more than she's getting. So it works both ways.
Cable companies hold some responsibility for their marketing choices, you know.... |
|
anonpronman
@69.183.x.x
| reply to TKJunkMail
IF they have the download capacity they also have the upload capacity.. They "ISP" simply don't want to spend the extra $$$ on the upload..
Larger Demand? Proper provisioning on the isp's part is what i say.. everyone should be treated equal.. NO MATTER WHAT.. |
|
Drex_CS
join:2005-05-11
canada
| reply to Primis1
said by Primis1 :And if they can't hack it, then their business model is flawed and... that's not my fault or responsibility....It's called capitalism. It's darwinistic in nature. If you can't provide what's necessary or can't cut it.. too bad. Those are the breaks. It's life. First, your missing a big point here, Shaw *does* meet the demands of most users. just because you choose to download and pirate 100's of GB's a month of info doesn't mean my grandma does as well. You need to learn how to put your feet in other people's shoes. For every 1 or 2 of you (and me) who download a lot, there are 100 people who use 10 Gb a month if they go crazy on it.
Shaw's the 2nd largest CableCo in the country I believe.. looks like they're havin a rough time eh?  |
|
Primis1
join:2005-06-13
Coldwater, MI
| reply to TKJunkMail
quote:
But will you be willing to pay what it costs to do the upgrades?
Excuse me? It's the cableco's obligation to pay for the upgrades, or else. The "or else" being "you'll lose your userbase". The burden is not on me, the user. They already HAVE our money, what are they using it for?
It is not the user's responsibility to durectly pay for natural progression to meet increasing demands. That's the company's responsibility. And if they can't hack it, then their business model is flawed and... that's not my fault or responsibility.
It's called capitalism. It's darwinistic in nature. If you can't provide what's necessary or can't cut it.. too bad. Those are the breaks. It's life.
It's not the Special Olympics. It's not welfare. It's not "Help out a multi-billion dollar-earning brotha'" Day. It's reality. You (meaning the cablecos) have income. USE IT, and use it wisely. If you're not... then I guess it sucks to be you. |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| reply to TKJunkMail
Well in this case users are already paying more for the tier, so they are contributing more capital than the average user.
The tier is also clearly being marketed toward that hungrier user-base. Don't want them gobbling up that bandwidth, or can't supply it? Tone down the speed rhetoric slightly.
Raise the caps to 100GB monthly and eliminate app-specific throttling and they'd have no complaints. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
3 edits | reply to Primis1
But will you be willing to pay what it costs to do the upgrades? And do you think these upgrades should be born by all users or by those putting the larger demands on the system?
--
My Web Page
Join Red Room Forum |
|
