Canadians React With Anger to New Internet Usage Caps

[himemiya1650]

I've normally been cool with the CRTC and it's regulations for the sake of protecting Canadian interests. However keeping prices artificially high for the sake of bigger companies and their interest is pretty bad. It's the first time I've ever writing a letter of concern to my MP D:.

 

[Custard_Angel]

Capped internet is a bad thing?

Welcome to Australia ************.

 

[googleboy]

This is a terribly, terrible thing. As an American I can see this in our future. If there is anything we can do to help you, our friendly northern neighbors, please let us know!!!!

Just a note, if you can, you should send letters AND go see your MP's in person. I have found locally that seeing my representative can make a lot of difference.

Anywho, Solidarity brothers

 

[Weaver]

If there would ever be one thing preventing me from wanting to live in Canada, It would be this.

This.

It seemed like a cool place to live...until now.

If I lived there, I'd shit a brick then throw that brick through a window at Bell.

Hey Bell,

Spoiler: WARNING: Offensive

[HEADING=1]GO.FUCK.YOURSELF[/HEADING]

Haha I actually knew a guy who threw a brick through the window of a Bell office several, several years ago.

 

[Jaeger_CDN]

It has nothing to do with electing our political leaders but more to do with an outdated Telecom watchdog (The CRTC) which is made up of old telecom executives who are usually blindly oblivious to modern technology and current thinking.

These are the same brainwaves that recently decided the "Money For Nothing" song by Dire Straits released 26 years ago is descriminatory and required all radio stations to pull it from their playlists.

 

[Jumwa]

I don't like to use hyperbole, but outraged is the only word I can think of at the moment to describe my reaction.

 

[ALPHATT]

hah, if you tried to sell capped internet in continental europe and many parts of the US, they'd laugh in your face.

 

[HellspawnCandy]

Ugh, this is rather disturbing to hear. My friend from Australia keeps complaining about something similar to this(those of you in Australia I apologize if I got my facts wrong) I'm just waiting for this to happen in America. I don't know how it hasn't happened but it's not a matter of if anymore, it's definitely gonna be when. Which I don't understand, if people pay insane prices(someone mentioned $100 a month, that's fucking insane!) they deserve unlimited internetz. Corporations are getting insanely overpowered and now are just sucking up what used to be a free luxury.(seriously 96% for Bell?)

 

[Formica Archonis]

Yet again, the CRTC shows why putting a bunch of greedy old men in charge of a burgeoning young industry is the surest way to kill it. Canada's been steadily sliding down the quality list for Internet in terms of speed and cost. We used to be one of the better ones but we stagnated completely. Or, more specifically, our ISPs stagnated.

I know he was linked in the original post but it bears repeating and bigger letters.
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/
This guy gets it.

 

[floppylobster]

We pay $40US for 40Gig per month. If we go over that, it's goes to dial-up bitches. Although between 2 and 6am I get free internet - at speeds of up to 20Kbps! (if I'm lucky).

 

[squid5580]

I'm a Canadian customer of Bell Canada...and seriously people, it's been this way for a long time - I'm not sure when usage caps were first implemented but about 7 months ago, I was charged extra for internet usage and was told it was because I went over my monthly limit. Since then I've paid an extra few bucks a month to get an extra 60 GB of usage.

If you haven't come across this before, it's probably because you haven't had to worry about it.

There are a lot of smaller ISPs that offer unlimited bandwidth for fairly cheap, though the speeds are typically lower than capped service from the bigger ISPs. What this decision essentially does is tell the smaller ISPs they can't do that anymore and have to offer capped service with overage charges once a rather low bandwidth cap is exceeded. This kinda ruins the competitive market because it means there's less incentive to go with a smaller ISP since they're now stuck offering essentially the same service as the larger ISPs. I could probably go on, but a lot has already been said elsewhere and I'd encourage you to look for it yourself if you're so inclined.

I dunno for me it has always been a choice. Either I go with the companies that have caps (Rogers and Bell) that yeah I have to pay like 15 bucks more to have my cap doubled. Or I go with the company that has unlimited but the internet is so fucking slow I couldn't use much more than the basic limit.

I personally enjoy not having to wait an hour to download a freakin small arcade game on my 360. Or being able to play online with the proper framerate.

It's a matter of preference, honestly. I would rather have unlimited bandwidth and be able to download as much data as I could possibly want, and maybe have to wait a little while longer to get it because of lower download speeds. With the amount of data I've downloaded in a month on numerous occasions, I'd have paid through my nose with low bandwidth caps and excessive overage charges.

I dunno I think that if you use alot that you should be expected to pay a bit more. Sure $2.50 a gb for overages up to 60 bucks is extreme without a doubt (that is my Bell plan). But a simple phone call and I had my bandwidth doubled for $15 bucks. To me it seems like Hydro. I mean you use it you pay for it. You don't use it and you don't. To me it seems like they are just saying use it a bit more responsibly. Make sure you want that movie or music before you download it. Don't leave JTV up when you go for a coffee.

And believe me with the company I had with the unlimited there was no way I could download everything I wanted within a month. It was about as fast as old school dial up. When I complained about the speed and the technician came by he told me my download speed was about 1.5-2mb. I was waiting minutes for an average patch on a 360 game. Not the few seconds it takes it normally.

Out of curiosity how does it work in the States? Do all of your companies have unlimited?

That's why unlimited plans, and plans with high download caps are more expensive. We already did pay more for unlimited. And no not all of our companies have unlimited. Here in Quebec, the big Telecoms don't. Only the small independent providers do.

Really here in Ontario (well the place I live in Ont. since I can't get like Shaw in my area) the unlimited BW and phone package was a few bucks cheaper than the basic package of Bell or Rogers. You know before I opted for more bandwidth.

 

[Wolfram23]

I'm glad Escapist has this article to help raise awareness. Luckily it appears that the outcry is being heard in parliament. I've signed the petition already and have posted several links on FB to get friends to join the effort.

Here's hoping.

I don't think I've been screwed yet, they say it's Ontario and Quebec so far. But really we have pretty shitty internet speeds as is. My gf is a student so we got a "free" upgrade to their highest speed cable (through Shaw) which is rated for, I think, 3MB/s. Of course I've never ever ever seen more than 1.5MB/s. Interesting hey?

 

[HellsingerAngel]

What the hell are you doing exactly that uses 1TB a month? Honestly. I have a 2TB HDD and I cant imagine filling it any time soon, even if I spend every waking minute watching anime.

Some people actually use the internet more than you. Playing games takes up a lot now and with digital distribution becoming more popular for PC games instead of disks, it gets harder and harder to justify low caps. It's very easy to go over 20GBs with just two games off Steam.

Is it really so much to ask that people take the tiniest iota of personal accountability and think for a minute that maybe it might be appropriate to not live in such a narcassistic, self-important 'me-centric' universe where you are entitled to everything you always wanted and so much more, and the hell with other people?

No, it isn't. Is it too much to ask large companies to get reasonable cap sizes with reasonable pricing structure according to current usage by standards today and not have pitiful increments on packages? Most people that use above a 10 Meg connection use a lot more than 75GB per month. The pricing structure is also fairly rediculous:

Performance/Fiber 6 (6 megs up, 1 meg down, 25GB a month) = $31.95 one year, $36.95 after
Fiber 12 (12 megs up, 1 meg down, 50GB a month) = $36.95 one year, $41.90 after
Fiber 16 (16 megs up, 1 meg down, 75GB a month) = $46.95 one year, $51.95 after
Fiber 25 (25 megs up, 1 meg down, 75GB a month) = $52.95 one year, $57.95 after

For the record, those prices are listed with bundling discount (need more than one service with Bell), a one year contract attached and without modem rental fee (non-negotiable).

Now, the speed to bandwidth ratio is just absurd. Anyone getting a 12 meg connection speed is definately getting it for higher end usage, which 50GB/month doesn't cover. Even 75GB is a joke at those speeds. It just boggles my mind how Bell has absolutely no reasoning for their higher tier services while their lower tiers are absolutely spot on. Comapred to bundling services in the U.S., these prices are absolute jokes. I understand that most main stream companies in other countries are fairly tight, but my girlfriend even thinks these are rediculous and her family is getting a much better deal with SKY(net). I just think it's time Canada needs to put its foot down and demand better structure with company plans and their pricing there of.

Oh, and for those of you who don't like that we have a burgeoning population on which to use the fibre backbone installed 20 years ago, feel free to make your own, then complain to yourself. Until then, free market states that they can charge whatever they want to, because, lets face it, you are still going to play Blizzard, er, Shaw anyways.

You do realise that we're a country of only 34 million, a measily 1/9th of the population of the United States, and are getting almost double the price simply because "infastructure costs a lot!" How does that make sense!? If a country that has to service nine times our population can easily afford to do this, why can't Bell Canada!? Is there a break point where revenue meets and exceeds cost of maintenance and rate of expansion? Could they give us numbers as to where this is? Could they give them to the CRTC? Because they sure as hell haven't given any solid facts to anyone as of yet, but still insist of their point being valid!

 

[darthricardo]

Urgh, I'm Canadian, and I'm just glad they haven't hit Telus or Shaw just quite yet. It's only a matter of time, but I'm hoping this bulls**t will be shut down before it hits British Columbia.

I'm a Teksavvy user. I'm absolutely thrilled that my roommate and I's 200GB cap is now reduced by 70%. This is the best thing to ever happen to me. I love Bell and everything they stand for.

I see what you did there...

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Can we have one country left?

Australia has the Firewall, Canada has the Watchdogs, UK has the CyberWar, US has the Game bannings...where else do we have?

last time I checked, the world consisted of more than 4 countries.

Where we can have broadband, human rights and gaming in peace? Of the 195, that number is dropping very rapidly.

 

[number2301]

Spoiler: Rocket Dog Quote

I struggle to sympathise with this. In the UK some plans have a 1 or 2 Gb monthly limit. 20Gb is condidered unlimited by some companies. I've found that heavy browsing uses about 2Gb a month, so that still leaves 18Gb from a UK limit. I don't really see the problem!?

What the fuck?
Heavy Youtube browsing can use up to 2GB a day. Not to mention this also includes uploads.

If you consider 2GB a month heavy browsing I really want to see how much you browse.

Spoiler: vxicepickxv quote

I struggle to sympathise with this. In the UK some plans have a 1 or 2 Gb monthly limit. 20Gb is condidered unlimited by some companies. I've found that heavy browsing uses about 2Gb a month, so that still leaves 18Gb from a UK limit. I don't really see the problem!?

What the fuck?
Heavy Youtube browsing can use up to 2GB a day. Not to mention this also includes uploads.

If you consider 2GB a month heavy browsing I really want to see how much you browse.

I hit more than 2GB a DAY for a month straight with Steam alone. That's not counting GOG, Youtube, The Escapist, Netflix, PS3 patches and game updates, and Twitter.

Come to think of it, I haven't hit my invisible Comcast cap yet. They also haven't responded to my FOIA request yet either.

Spoiler: Karilas Quote

You're serious!?

I struggle to sympathise with this. In the UK some plans have a 1 or 2 Gb monthly limit. 20Gb is condidered unlimited by some companies. I've found that heavy browsing uses about 2Gb a month, so that still leaves 18Gb from a UK limit. I don't really see the problem!?

What's your definition of heavy browsing?

I've got an odd capping system, I'm limited to 20 gig a month at peak time [4pm til midnight], but uncapped the rest of the time. Given that an evening of iPlayer or 4OD can easily eat up 2 or 3 gig, same goes for Youtube and all the escapist videos and the like. This means at the times when most people would want to watch some TV they are most limited to do so. This fair sucks balls for me because I don't have a TV aerial.

Spoiler: p3t3r Quote

I struggle to sympathise with this. In the UK some plans have a 1 or 2 Gb monthly limit. 20Gb is condidered unlimited by some companies. I've found that heavy browsing uses about 2Gb a month, so that still leaves 18Gb from a UK limit. I don't really see the problem!?

then you download a game from steam and watch some movies on netflix. if you are into digital distributional you can go over it in a hurry

i used to have a cap of 2gb then i downloader maple story and we went way over and i got in trouble. then mw2 online happened so now we have 20gb cap.

Apologies for the quote storm but I wanted to respond to these guys but needed to cut my post down.

When I say heavy browsing I mean ~4 hours a day for me, plus three other people in the house who use the net a lot less than me. Although I don't use Iplayer, Youtube, 4OD, or any similar services much. Mainly because I have a 32" TV in front of a comfy sofa and I don't find much of interest on Youtube. Under those circumstances I regularly exceeded my 2Gb download limit, although not massively so.

As for streaming films or downloading games, ever consider a bit of restraint? Bandwidth is limited, especially in the UK with our ageing phone systems and so its only fair that people who use unusually large amounts of bandwidth pay more. I can only imagine this is exacerbater in a country as vast as Canada or the US. Certainly in this country, streaming films and downloading games is considerably higher usage than the vast majority of people who only use Facebook/Ebay/Email.

Before I moved to an unlimited package, I used to only download one game or DLC a month so I kept under the 10Gb limit, fairly simple. And XBox game updates are rarely even 100Mb.

 

[zombiesinc]

I've signed the petitions and am writing to my MP.

I lived in Australia and had to pay-per-gig which was incredibly frustrating. If you accidentally went over your monthly limit, your internet practically went backwards. No, just no.

"Stephen Harper
We're very concerned about CRTC's decision on usage-based billing and its impact on consumers. I've asked for a review of the decision."

It's something at least. 250,000 and counting, it can only go up, right?

 

[Funkysandwich]

Performance/Fiber 6 (6 megs up, 1 meg down, 25GB a month) = $31.95 one year, $36.95 after
Fiber 12 (12 megs up, 1 meg down, 50GB a month) = $36.95 one year, $41.90 after
Fiber 16 (16 megs up, 1 meg down, 75GB a month) = $46.95 one year, $51.95 after
Fiber 25 (25 megs up, 1 meg down, 75GB a month) = $52.95 one year, $57.95 after

I live in Australia. My 25GB per month @ 1.5 meg is around $50, and that's not a bad deal over here. Keep in mind that $1 Autralian is around 96 US cents at the moment.

 

[HellsingerAngel]

As for streaming films or downloading games, ever consider a bit of restraint? Bandwidth is limited, especially in the UK with our ageing phone systems and so its only fair that people who use unusually large amounts of bandwidth pay more. I can only imagine this is exacerbater in a country as vast as Canada or the US. Certainly in this country, streaming films and downloading games is considerably higher usage than the vast majority of people who only use Facebook/Ebay/Email.

That bold part is what's worng with your argument.

Estimated Pop. of Canada 2010: 34,238,000
Estimated Pop. of UK 2010: 62,348,447

That's nearly double our population and you're still getting better deals in both price point and bandwidth. Again, let me give you a window into something I just pulled up:

SKY Broadband Unlimited - perfect for downloading music & movies.

* Up to 20Mb download speeds
* Unlimited monthly usage
* Free evening and
weekend UK calls#
* Sky wireless router (worth £50)
* 24/7 technical support
* Free 12 month trial of McAfee Internet Security Suite
* Recommended for Sky Anytime+ TV on demand, in line with your Sky TV subscription

£7.50 with SKY TV, £10 without.

Even without TV, it's SIXTEEN F-ING DOLLARS TO GET UNLIMITED BROADBAND WITH A POSSIBLE 20MEG DOWNLOAD!!!

...I rest my case.

EDITS:

I live in Australia. My 25GB per month @ 1.5 meg is around $50, and that's not a bad deal over here. Keep in mind that $1 Autralian is around 96 US cents at the moment.

Yup, I realise that Australia is getting the pinch too. Does it make it acceptable? Hell no. Look at the deal above to see why.