You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Canadian ISPs = suck
- Thread starter Jokergrin
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Lion Heart
Banned
Deadly said:How much are you paying for this? Because the 10mbit connection with Videotron has a 100 GB DL/UP limit...
its like 40ish for 6 months than goes to 50 after that.
Blackface said:I have four people in my house using the Internet. We go over the cap every month. We have a 95gb cap with 10mb down 1mb up.
It's complete bullshit that there is a cap. The cap should be 250gb. It's costing the ISP's nothing extra regardless of the bandwidth used.
CRTC is a joke.
Yeah, same here, we have 5 people, 2 desktops, 3 laptops, 1 internet TV box, 1 PS3, 1 PSP, 1 DS, 1 Wifi cellphone, all things that access the internet with the bolded accessing it daily, it's essentially a miracle to have a month where we don't go over the pathetic 95GB combine up/down cap.
_leech_ said:This sounds very, very nice. My bandwidth would be cut in half compared to what I get now, though. Hmm, this is an option.
Been with them for 2 years now. Yes bandwidth is slower, but if you're getting 30k/s on torrents and have a 20 or 30GB limit now.. then it's totally worth it. Getting 400 k/s on torrents on a 5mb line is way better than 30k/s on a 8mb line.
I hadn't had any problems or downtime with them.
arts&crafts
Member
Blackface said:I have four people in my house using the Internet. We go over the cap every month. We have a 95gb cap with 10mb down 1mb up.
It's complete bullshit that there is a cap. The cap should be 250gb. It's costing the ISP's nothing extra regardless of the bandwidth used.
CRTC is a joke.
Exactly the same here. Next month I figure since I am going to go over anyways I should just download like a terabyte of stuff just to spite them, and then I will have a shit load of movies and tv shows to watch. Really a win win.
PflargBlarg
Member
firehawk12 said:Up speed is always more important in games for ping than down speed, so those numbers are the ones you would look for.
Up 'speed' has nothing to do with ping generally. Mostly because calling it speed is a misnomer. A 3 mbps upload does not send the data any faster than a 1 mbps upload, it just sends more at a time. This is why people talk about 'fat pipes' in regards to internet. All data transfer is limited to the speed of light (technically it travels significantly slower than that because of the medium it is going through i.e. wires). In most multiplayer games the amount of data being sent back and forth is insignificant compared to how much bandwidth an average hi-speed broadband connection gives you.
In closing, the only thing that is going to give you a better ping is being closer to the server that is hosting the game. (It should be pointed out that if you're the one hosting the game it is fairly important to have high upload bandwidth since you could potentially be sending data to 30 other people, instead of just 1).
aphoushole
Neo Member
I use Sasktel.
CrushDance
Banned
:lolaphoushole said:I use Sasktel.
I'm on Bell on their unlimited service from about 2004 or so when I got banned from Rogers for using "Too much" bandwidth but never being given a set number. With all of the steam shit that I download, shows, movies, and porn, oh god can't forget about the porn, I do nearly 200+GB a month with combined upload.
Only shitty thing is I'm stuck in Bell's 5Mbit connection and can't change shit or that'll breach the terms of my contract and I'd have to be put into a bracket with a bandwidth limit. Luckily I live less than 100m from the nearest Bell internet node and my speed is about 7.5mbit and sometimes even faster.
If there is an alternative I'd love to hear it, but Bells Cap and Rogers outrageous prices are keeping me from changing anything at all.
Only shitty thing is I'm stuck in Bell's 5Mbit connection and can't change shit or that'll breach the terms of my contract and I'd have to be put into a bracket with a bandwidth limit. Luckily I live less than 100m from the nearest Bell internet node and my speed is about 7.5mbit and sometimes even faster.
If there is an alternative I'd love to hear it, but Bells Cap and Rogers outrageous prices are keeping me from changing anything at all.
Canwest speaking out against the CRTC a bit, or at least telling them to grow a pair:
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/727435--crtc-blamed-for-empowering-cable-firms?bn=1
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/727435--crtc-blamed-for-empowering-cable-firms?bn=1
GATINEAU, Que. Cable companies have gained so much power they have become a threat to Canadian broadcasting, and the national telecommunications regulator is mostly to blame, says Canada's second-largest private broadcaster.
Canwest Global Corp. president Leonard Asper blamed the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission for setting ground rules that have impoverished broadcasters and put cable firms in the penthouse.
"Broadcasting is a regulated business. Once you decide to regulate, it should be fair regulation," he chided the CRTC during hearings on the future of broadcasting Wednesday.
"Yet over the past 40 years, regulatory policies and decisions have favoured one sector to the detriment of another, resulting in a massive wealth transfer."
Cable firms like Rogers (TSX: RCI.B) and Shaw (TSX: SJR.B) have most of the power in the industry today, he said.
Canwest, which has been granted bankruptcy protection for its TV operation, is the last of the major broadcasters to appear before the CRTC asking that the regulator set conditions that would compel cable and satellite operators to pay for TV signals.
The trouble is, making such a decision would leave it open for the carriers to charge customers as much as $10 a month to cover the extra costs, which they have said they would do.
To which, said Canwest regulatory affairs executive Charlotte Bell, the CRTC should show some spine.
"You have to pull your weight to keep this under control," said told chairman Konrad von Finckenstein.
As he has on each day of the hearings to date, von Finckenstein again stressed that he is interested in a solution that won't involve a rate increase for subscribers to cable and satellite services.
The CRTC chairman has at times alternated from pleas to frustration in asking broadcasters and distributors to get together and take the hot potato out of his hands.
One of the worries for the CRTC is that the Conservative government has put the regulator on notice it will not tolerate charging consumers more.
Earlier, Quebecor (TSX: QBR.B) president Pierre Karl Peladeau, who runs both Quebec's dominant broadcasting and cable service, noted the CRTC's concerns.
"You seem to be worried about the public reaction of (fee hikes). Well you are right to be," he warned.
"The government is absolutely right ... (to) care about the customers," he added, stressing there is enough money in the system to support all the stakeholders.
Given the two apparently mutually-exclusive propositions, CRTC commissioners have been paying close attention to any idea that promises what chairman von Finckenstein has called a "win-win-win" outcome a win for broadcasters, a win for carriers and a win for consumers.
Peladeau, whose Quebecor firm has a foot in both camps as both the province's dominant broadcaster and cable operator, said the solution is not to increase what consumers pay, but to divvy it up differently.
The party that needs to give, he said, is specialty channels that have risen from virtually nothing in the 1980s to capturing almost half the television viewership today.
Many of the specialty channels are owned by the big conventional broadcasters such as Canwest Global Communications and CTVglobemedia as well as other broadcasters such as Corus and Astral Media.
Quebecor also holds sole or partial ownership in specialty channels including Le Canal Nouvelles TVA, mentv, Mystery, Mystere, Argent and Prise 2 through its TVA Group French-language TV network
Peladeau is asking the CRTC to give stakeholders three years to rebalance the system, in essence allow both specialty channels that currently get a fee-for-carriage and conventional stations that don't to duke it out.
And to make sure there is real negotiation, he said, the regulator should remove the "must-carry" label on all signals except for the English and French-language CBC, which would be excluded from the bargaining.
That way, Canadians get to pay for only the stations they want to watch and the market determines the value of specialty and conventional signals.
Peladeau said the CBC should be excluded from fee-for-carriage since it already receives $1.1 billion in government funds, adding it was "scandalous" that the public broadcaster is also asking to be paid for its signal.
Like all the broadcasters, Peladeau said the system began losing its balance with the advent of specialty channels, which fragmented viewership and ad revenues. He noted that while conventional television revenues keep dropping, the CRTC imposes on them the onerous costs of producing domestic programming.
In earlier submissions, broadcasters have said they are barely surviving, noting two recent local station closures in Brandon, Man, and Red Deer, Alta., and two that went on the market at fire sale prices in Hamilton, Ont., and Victoria.
"The situation truly is a cause for concern," Peladeau said.
"Conventional television is the cornerstone of our broadcasting system and plays a vital role in Canada's democratic, cultural, social and economic life."
The CRTC also was more than receptive Tuesday to a proposal by CBC executives that the regulator dictate cable firms offer viewers an inexpensive "skinny basic`` package that would include mostly the Canadian channels. That wouldn't prevent the distributors from raising fees on their expanded packages, but the existence of a low-cost option would dissuade gouging, the CBC said.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.