http://openmedia.ca/meter
is it just me or does this seem like a bad bad idea. seems like were going back to the 56k days.......
is it just me or does this seem like a bad bad idea. seems like were going back to the 56k days.......
Usage-based billing for Canadian internet
- Thread starter bioskyline
- Start date
We already have this, as far as I know. Shaw certainly charges extra for more usage. To be honest, I don't really care - what I really want is a connection that doesn't make my games ping spike to 900+ ms all the damn time.
GrimJack;1668364 said:
well if you don't frequently use the internet then i can understand but uh, down here that don't fly too well...i would end up paying close to 500 a month for that crap. Eat my ass useage based internet.
GrimJack;1668364 said:
I was going to start a thread like this, but I figured responses like this would pop up.
25gbs a month is nothing...it doesn't just hurt the pirates, it hurts the legit users more tbh. people who use skype, netflix or hell anything web based.
It's not as easy to track your internet usage as it is cell phone minutes. Web pages can vary widely on how much they have to download.
Overall, it's acrappy setup and sounds like it's the phone companies trying to crack down on VoIP.
Overall, it's acrappy setup and sounds like it's the phone companies trying to crack down on VoIP.
Poodles;1668584 said:
No they are just greedy fucks. I feel for the canadian people, I hope they reverse this bullshit.
---------- Post added at 09:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:33 AM ----------
Sorry Canada
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...t-bitter-dose-of-metered-internet-billing.ars
Poodles;1668604 said:It sounds like one company has a monopoly up there on the network
They do, bell is the one that will be pocketing everything....I'm just waiting for the NBC/Comcast merger to do the same thing to us here in the USA...There is no real competition in the USA for broadband anymore.
SupraMario;1668613 said:
That's actually an inaccurate generalization. In some markets there is little competition. In others there is plenty of competition. The options here in Atlanta are so many I'd have a hard time listing them all. I can get cable, DSL, Wireless, Fiber, etc -- all from different providers.
(In fact this Thursday we're switching from 16mb cable to 24mb fiber at the house for example...)
It all depends on where you live. The US, with 300+ million residents spread over nearly 3.7 million square miles of habitable land cannot be compared to Canada. Canada is actually slightly larger than the US, but it's mostly uninhabited. Canada has a little over 33 million residents, with 90% of them packed into the area within 100 miles of the US border. In population and economic power, Canada is the equivalent of a large US state.
Supracentral;1668627 said:
And most area's there is 2 options or less only 1. So please for the love of dog, don't say we have a ton of options. It's bullshit in every sense of the phrase.
SupraMario;1668630 said:
Here we go again...
Go beyond your anecdotal geographically limited experience an find some hard data to back your statements. (Clue: You know damned well I wouldn't be asking for it if I didn't already have the data that shows the opposite).
But go ahead, do a little digging, find some facts (not opinion fueled by political belief or your own personal issues) and post it up.
I suspect this is just another one of your attempts to justifiy net neutrality and the use of force. We've already been down that road.
Do you still hold the laughable position that internet access is a right?
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/US-Ranks-23rd-In-Broadband-Development-109529 Date: July 23rd 2010
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/CWA-US-Ranks-25th-In-Broadband-Speed-111866 Date: Dec 16th 2010
Go ahead, don't read anything and keep thinking the USA is like Atlanta...You're totally right mike, we have the greatest internet in the world and there is tons and tons of competition for awesome service everywhere.
BTW, when is an FCC study "anecdotal geographically limited experience"?
That's ok though, I'm sure your facts are more correct than the FCC...
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/CWA-US-Ranks-25th-In-Broadband-Speed-111866 Date: Dec 16th 2010
Go ahead, don't read anything and keep thinking the USA is like Atlanta...You're totally right mike, we have the greatest internet in the world and there is tons and tons of competition for awesome service everywhere.
BTW, when is an FCC study "anecdotal geographically limited experience"?
That's ok though, I'm sure your facts are more correct than the FCC...
SupraMario;1668645 said:
Nice strawman. First of all, you of all people should know that the phrase "don't read anything" and me don't go together. More importantly, I didn't say "we have the greatest internet in the world" nor did I say "there is tons and tons of competition for awesome service everywhere". Don't ascribe positions to me and then argue against those made up positions. I'm not falling for your amateurish tactics.
You made a widly inaccurate generalization, I simply illustrated that it's not true.
Since you appear to consider FCC data valid, let's look at the latest FCC data on the subject:
http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2010/db1208/DOC-303405A1.pdf.
Direct your attention to figure 3a which shows that 48% of American homes have access to 3 or more providers that provide at least 3mbsp downstream. An additional 44% have access to at least two, with only 7% having "no competition" available.
Look at figure 3b if you want to count wireless which gives 93% of the population access to competition...
Could it be better? Of course it could. Will it get there? Provided profits are available, certainly.
But your statement that competition "does not exist" is pure, unadulterated bullshit and nothing more than your standard anti-business ranting.
SupraMario;1668650 said:
And we all know how evil you consider someone who does that is...
SupraMario;1668645 said:
Those studies leave a fair bit to be desired.
They talk about what is in use, not what is available.
And the US Telecoms *should* be making more money - they are servicing a larger market, with a significantly higher average income.
And for crying out loud, don't read more into the Canada situation than there actually is. Yes, we have choices when it comes to internet service. Quite a few, actually, unless you live deep in the rural areas. And no, I'm not talking about the little guys that just buy bandwidth from the big boys - we have a bunch of those as well. And yes, we can get really fast speeds - I can buy a residential 100Mbps connection - AND it comes with a 350GB cap. Further traffic costs me all of $1 / GB. Doesn't sound like the end of the world to me.
GrimJack;1668669 said:
But... but... But!! Evil profits! Corporations! We need GOVERNMENT to stop this! So what if we have to have taxes like France to subsidize it to the level it would take to make it happen! It's a RIGHT!
