dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2
share rss forum feed


LazMan
Premium
join:2003-03-26
canada

1 edit
reply to elitefx

Re: How does TSI offer unlimited?

said by elitefx:

said by resa1983:

In well-managed networks, congestion isn't an issue.

Rogers isn't well-managed.

In times of crisis all we'll have is the Internet to conduct matters of national security and survival.

Rogers cannot be allowed to be the root cause of the demise of Canada's ability to conduct business and transmit data in a timely and effectual online world.

I'm in the business, and I think Roger's doesn't actually do too badly.

Managing a network with 1.9 million end users is challenging... What exactly do you feel they are doing that is "inept" and leading to the "demise of Canada's ability to conduct business"?


elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:1

1 edit

said by LazMan:

Managing a network with 1.9 million end users is challenging... What exactly do you feel they are doing that is "inept" and leading to the "demise of Canada's ability to conduct business"?

Better put: Common sense dictates having one company control the flow of information in a country as large as Canada, or any country really, is bad for competition, pricing, bandwidth costs and technological upgrade expenditures etc.

Bell and Rogers are for all intents and purposes one entity under 2 business , though legally separate, divisions. Their unified strategic attempt in purchasing MLSE was all the final proof anyone needed. It was a very public statement that together they stand.
Both control a separate arm of the internet service/bandwidth pricing structure in Canada. It is obvious price fixing is alive and well today. Rogers/Bell will back each other to the hilt. It is in their best business interest to do so.

How the Competition Bureau has allowed things to degrade this far and allow the Rogers/Bell conglomerate to monopolize Canada's data transmission services should be the subject of a full parliamentary investigation.


LazMan
Premium
join:2003-03-26
canada

Wow - me thinks your tinfoil hat's on a little tight today...

The MLSE deal was to control content; and more an "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" sort of deal, then collusion, in my opinion...

Plus, you didn't actually answer my question, of what are they doing that's inept or leading to the demise of Canada's ability to conduct business. Which were your initial statements, BTW...



elitefx

join:2011-02-14
London, ON
kudos:1

said by LazMan:

Wow - me thinks your tinfoil hat's on a little tight today...

Insults will get you nowhere Bud. As they say " the proof is in the pudding".

We'll see who's right as time goes on................

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

said by elitefx:

said by LazMan:

Wow - me thinks your tinfoil hat's on a little tight today...

Insults will get you nowhere Bud.

Can't help it if it is true.


DarkStar33

join:2008-03-27
Toronto, ON
reply to LazMan

said by LazMan:

Managing a network with 1.9 million end users is challenging... What exactly do you feel they are doing that is "inept" and leading to the "demise of Canada's ability to conduct business"?

Regardless of the size of your network the investment should be along the same lines. Larger networks are often more efficient per user if you do them correctly.

If you are doing it right 0.9M, 1.9M and 10.9M really is not that big of a change if you invest correctly.

Chances are Rogers technical team is 1/3 of the size it should be and network development 5-10 years behind.
--
TekSavvy Extreme Cable Pro (Toronto, ON)
»www.speedtest.net/result/1343900371.png


TypeS

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

Actually, that is probably not true. It's more likely they drag their feet in upgrading network hardware to add capacity when it's needed in order to maximize profits.

Most NA carriers will upgrade hardware on their networks as late as they can while still continuing to advertise their services at speeds that are oversubscribed.


34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

said by TypeS:

Actually, that is probably not true. It's more likely they drag their feet in upgrading network hardware to add capacity when it's needed in order to maximize profits.

Most NA carriers will upgrade hardware on their networks as late as they can while still continuing to advertise their services at speeds that are oversubscribed.

To me that is pretty obvious.

yyzlhr

join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON
kudos:2
reply to DarkStar33

said by DarkStar33:

Chances are Rogers technical team is 1/3 of the size it should be and network development 5-10 years behind.

In North American standards, the Rogers HFC network is much more advanced than most MSOs on this side of the hemisphere.

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

said by yyzlhr:

In North American standards, the Rogers HFC network is much more advanced than most MSOs on this side of the hemisphere.

Rogers/Shaw and Videotron are doing a pretty good job at downstream speeds but Rogers and more so Shaw are quite weak for upstream speeds. Comcast is the only US MSO that over all is doing a better job. One area they're ahead of everyone else is the push to move customers to their IPTV based infrastructure and according to them their time line is to migrate within the next 3 years. I think that is pretty darn optimistic but we'll see.

resa1983
Premium
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON
kudos:10
reply to LazMan

said by LazMan:

said by elitefx:

said by resa1983:

In well-managed networks, congestion isn't an issue.

Rogers isn't well-managed.

In times of crisis all we'll have is the Internet to conduct matters of national security and survival.

Rogers cannot be allowed to be the root cause of the demise of Canada's ability to conduct business and transmit data in a timely and effectual online world.

I'm in the business, and I think Roger's doesn't actually do too badly.

Managing a network with 1.9 million end users is challenging... What exactly do you feel they are doing that is "inept" and leading to the "demise of Canada's ability to conduct business"?

I so missed this post before. How about this:

Stating that they monitor their network, and begin upgrades before they're needed, so they're completed before congestion becomes a problem. Complete BS.

An entire POI was only being served by 3gbps - they denied upgrades to TPIA because they didn't have enough capacity for themselves, let alone TPIA due to lack of upgrades. Kitchener/Waterloo POI sometime back in 2011

Having a local node fail over & over - just doing patch jobs on the bloody thing. Refusing to do any significant work on it. I was stuck on that node until I moved. Massive congestion on this local node due to way too many houses, multiple apartment buildings, and multiple sets of row townhomes being on it - and this was before Rogers increased their speeds causing network-wide congestion.

While we're on that. Network-wide congestion from them increasing speeds to all (Retail & TPIA), then scrambling afterwards to do node splits.

Failure to abide by ITMP policy (for years on end), and getting caught red-handed multiple times.

Lack of network upgrades and relying on throttling to manage their network (ie against ITMP policy).

Leading of course to Rogers being forced to do more node splits to be able to remove throttling, to get the CRTC Enforcements Division off their ass.

Hell, and that's only the last 2 years. :\
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

34764170

join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

said by resa1983:

While we're on that. Network-wide congestion from them increasing speeds to all (Retail & TPIA), then scrambling afterwards to do node splits.

They keep doing that over and over again. They roll out upgrades to alleviate congestion then roll out higher speed tiers and it's back to congestion as nodes are overloaded.