March 1 is a dark day for canadians

Have they actually come out and said this?

The cons thus far have always sided with the corporations over the consumers...

htekemerald

More or less. Both Clement and the PM's office (IIRC) have made statements about reviewing the CRTC's decision (read: overturning or at least modifying it without having to publicly call the CRTC on their bull****), and with an election coming up they can't afford to be on the wrong side of what has become a surprisingly hot-button issue.

Meh, if I were Canadian (Which I'm not) I'd just smarten up and make the most of having 25GB. It's not like it's some pissy little amount. You can work with it just fine as long as you choose to BUY CD'S like everyone should.

Meh, if I were Canadian (Which I'm not) I'd just smarten up and make the most of having 25GB. It's not like it's some pissy little amount. You can work with it just fine as long as you choose to BUY CD'S like everyone should.

DmadFearmonger

In a world of digital distribution (not just for music, but video, games and other software), cloud-based services and streaming video, 25GB is decidedly a pissy amount, especially when you're being grossly overcharged for those 25GB.

Meh, if I were Canadian (Which I'm not) I'd just smarten up and make the most of having 25GB. It's not like it's some pissy little amount. You can work with it just fine as long as you choose to BUY CD'S like everyone should.

DmadFearmonger

Not even enough for a digital download of WoW:Cataclysm

[QUOTE="htekemerald"]

Have they actually come out and said this?

The cons thus far have always sided with the corporations over the consumers...

PBSnipes

More or less. Both Clement and the PM's office (IIRC) have made statements about reviewing the CRTC's decision (read: overturning or at least modifying it without having to publicly call the CRTC on their bull****), and with an election coming up they can't afford to be on the wrong side of what has become a surprisingly hot-button issue.

[QUOTE="DmadFearmonger"]

Meh, if I were Canadian (Which I'm not) I'd just smarten up and make the most of having 25GB. It's not like it's some pissy little amount. You can work with it just fine as long as you choose to BUY CD'S like everyone should.

htekemerald

Not even enough for a digital download of WoW:Cataclysm

[QUOTE="stevoqwerty"]

I did not see this as dark day, we have always been like that. 15 cents per mb if passed cap, consider yourself lucky that they only charge you $2/gb.

htekemerald

Once I got charged over $150 for a $45 5gb plan, that was back in 2007.

[QUOTE="htekemerald"]

[QUOTE="stevoqwerty"]

I did not see this as dark day, we have always been like that. 15 cents per mb if passed cap, consider yourself lucky that they only charge you $2/gb.

stevoqwerty

Once I got charged over $150 for a $45 5gb plan, that was back in 2007.

if you pay for 45 bucks for 5gbs of data on a landline your getting ****ed.

I sure am glad I use a relatively unknown server.

[QUOTE="htekemerald"]

[QUOTE="DmadFearmonger"]

Meh, if I were Canadian (Which I'm not) I'd just smarten up and make the most of having 25GB. It's not like it's some pissy little amount. You can work with it just fine as long as you choose to BUY CD'S like everyone should.

DmadFearmonger

Not even enough for a digital download of WoW:Cataclysm

And people whine and moan that the US is a facist state...

[QUOTE="stevoqwerty"]

[QUOTE="htekemerald"] I seriously doubt you get charged 150 bucks per gig on a land-line conncection.

htekemerald

Once I got charged over $150 for a $45 5gb plan, that was back in 2007.

if you pay for 45 bucks for 5gbs of data on a landline your getting ****ed.

It's Australia, and I had wireless internet, not landline. Now I got landline and 130gb unlimited for $50 AUD.

[QUOTE="Tylendal"][QUOTE="fooZar777"]

Can't imagine the internet with a cap. That's pretty close to my daily usage.

htekemerald

Have they actually come out and said this?

The cons thus far have always sided with the corporations over the consumers...

Don't worry Canada, I have come up with an ingenious solution to this looming problem:

[spoiler] [/spoiler]

Now, what to do with my piles and piles of money...

Ehem.. Rogers already has a cap on the amount one can download and if you go over it you get charged.

So apparently, nothing would change, at least for those under the BIG ISPs, essentially because they have already done this.

[QUOTE="daqua_99"]

No, my point is that people should pay for what they use. We do so for every other commodity (electricity, water, fuel, etc), why not for internet bandwidth? Why should someone who uses 25GB pay the same as someone who uses 250GB of downloads?

PBSnipes

Which would be fine, if the ISPs charged a reasonable price per GB or set resonable bandwidth caps. Instead they charge $1.00-2.00+ per GB for overages on already restrictive bandwidth caps, when in reality the marginal cost of a GB of bandwidth (according to Netflix) is less than $0.01. To use your fuel analogy, that's like charging $AUD131.00-262.00+ per litre for petrol.

Agreed. There should be an incremental cost of something to the tune of 10cents a GB. I mean, even here with our terrible internet, it cost me $10 a month to increase from 12GB to 50GB.

[QUOTE="daqua_99"]

[QUOTE="PBSnipes"]

No, but we can expect reasonable and fair business practices, as opposed to the blatant price-gouging and anti-competitive practices behind these implementations of bandwidth caps and UBB.

htekemerald

We've been having all this in Australia for years. Most of the lines here are owned by one company, Telstra, and there is virtually no stable unlimited system. You want unlimited, you get a crappy connection, as your ISP puts you as lowest priority.

I pay $60 a month for 20mb/s, though I only get ~2mb/s. I have a 50GB download limit.

Australia may well be worse than china when it comes to the Internet, why should I care what your policies are?

Because a political party in Australia proposed a net filter that won't ever pass the Australian Senate? The mere fact that a publicly elected legislature in Australia is even having a debate puts them lightyears ahead of the Great Firewall of China, an autocratic system put in place by an unelected government.

[QUOTE="PBSnipes"]

[QUOTE="daqua_99"]

No, my point is that people should pay for what they use. We do so for every other commodity (electricity, water, fuel, etc), why not for internet bandwidth? Why should someone who uses 25GB pay the same as someone who uses 250GB of downloads?

daqua_99

Which would be fine, if the ISPs charged a reasonable price per GB or set resonable bandwidth caps. Instead they charge $1.00-2.00+ per GB for overages on already restrictive bandwidth caps, when in reality the marginal cost of a GB of bandwidth (according to Netflix) is less than $0.01. To use your fuel analogy, that's like charging $AUD131.00-262.00+ per litre for petrol.

Agreed. There should be an incremental cost of something to the tune of 10cents a GB. I mean, even here with our terrible internet, it cost me $10 a month to increase from 12GB to 50GB.

If you havent heard by now, March 1st Bell and TekSavvy are giving EVERYONE a 25gb cap, soon to follow is Roger in the summer, they say that there is insurance plans, atleast for TekSavvy, and also if you go over your cap you have to pay $2 a GB.

so this means everything gets more expensive and service gets worse

They are pretty much trying to stop Steam, DLC, Youtube, and Netflix

Bell now controls the Price for Internet in canada

Rogers has already dropped the cap when Netflix was released

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/a-metered-internet-is-a-regulatory-failure/article1881250/

Why OH WHY IS CANADA A COUNTRY

gamer-adam1

I didn't even know Canada was a country. I thought it was just something that was made up to scare little kids.

[QUOTE="daqua_99"]

[QUOTE="-Russ93"]

Putting a cap on internet usage is ridiculous... 'nuff said.

-Russ93

Um, so charging for what you use is ridiculous?

Not really, but if people are paying a fee every month, they shouldn't just all of a sudden have a limit to how much they can use if you're still paying the same amount every month.

This guy is right but you know that ain't gunna happen.

Good news everyone.

Minister Tony Clement has claimed he will reverse the decision should the CRTC not backdown.

http://twitter.com/tonyclement_MP

RosieBarton: is it true you will overturn internet decision if CRTC does not back down?

Clement: True. CRTC must go back to drawing board

The internet is safe. Well maybe... I'll congratulate him once this bs has been repealed.

Meh people need to realise that bandwidth is a commodity. Toughen up, you can't expect anything for free.

daqua_99

You pay for the infrastructure with you monthly fee. If the ISP cant deliver teh bandwidth its its fault and not the consumers.

[QUOTE="daqua_99"]

Meh people need to realise that bandwidth is a commodity. Toughen up, you can't expect anything for free.

chris_yz80

You pay for the infrastructure with you monthly fee. If the ISP cant deliver teh bandwidth its its fault and not the consumers.

Firstly, the continent is very remote from the rest of the world, and it's population is extremely spread, despite being only around 22 million. Contrast that with densely populated Asia, Europe and North America, where the majority of content comes from, which are all very densely serviced.

Secondly, the woeful infrastructure in Australia is also reponsible for bandwidth limits; a shocking amount of urban connections are made through digital subscriber line, an aging technology. With the exponentially growing usage and connection, what this means is about half the ADSL exchanges in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane are so congested you simply can't let people download as much as they want as often as they want. Hence no universal unlimited plans. This is also why the government is so keen to get the NBN going, and have the majority of the population use fibre, because at the rate internet adoption is rising, the copper network just isn't going to cut it.

All the ISPs haven't colluded and decided to screw the consumers, it's simply that they cannot deliver unlimited bandwidth like is seen in other countries, because Australia is so far away, so sparsely populated and has such an archaic network.