Canada bandwidth limits

Page 1 of 1 (19 items)
This post has 18 Replies | 0 Followers

Posts 291
Bob Schlessman | Forum Activity | Posted: Mon, Jan 31 2011 6:13 AM

This may be old news to our forum friends north of the border but I just read that the CRTC has put a 25 GB per month limit on all internet customers. I would think it might put a crimp in your access to resources, even more so for those who are beta users/testers. How does this affect you?

It may be just a matter of time before we have the same issue in the U.S. considering the number of providers who alreay have similar limits in place.

 

Posts 4625
RIP
Milford Charles Murray | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 8:15 AM

Peace to you, Bob.           As a Canadian (Ontario), I think this is a matter of pricing, not a limit. 

*smile*

CRTC is trying, I think, to give the smaller ISP's a more equal playing field.

Philippians 4:  4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........

Posts 4625
RIP
Milford Charles Murray | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 8:17 AM

It actually doesn't affect me personally in the slightest!   *smile*

Philippians 4:  4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 9:11 AM

Milford Charles Murray:

Peace to you, Bob.           As a Canadian (Ontario), I think this is a matter of pricing, not a limit. 

*smile*

CRTC is trying, I think, to give the smaller ISP's a more equal playing field.

In the United States bandwidth is regulated by the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) While there is presently not a monthly cap on data transfer imposed by law, there are limits on the data transfer speeds for different lines.

The financial costs for internet access are set by "Local Franchise Authorities" (local government and non-government  bodies approved by the FCC.)

When cable TV first began in the USA it was unregulated and there were many small companies vying for the same market. In the interest of fostering growth of the new industry the FCC granted a measure of protectionism allowing territorial rights for legal monopolies.

It is possible the US government could cap residential data transfer volume but there would be a public outcry they don't want to deal with. It is more likely the  LFAs would impose taxes on data volume. Most local governments in the USA are cash-starved. Sad

Two interesting reads on the subject:

 http://mikeb.inta.gatech.edu/papers/democratic.best.wade.pdf

 http://deftmag.com/blogs/who-regulates-the-internet-gatekeepers/

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 291
Bob Schlessman | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 10:33 AM

Milford Charles Murray:

Peace to you, Bob.           As a Canadian (Ontario), I think this is a matter of pricing, not a limit. 

CRTC is trying, I think, to give the smaller ISP's a more equal playing field.

Makes sense Milford, but the article seems to indicate just the opposite and the CRTC are caving to pressure from the large providers. Here's a link to the article:

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/%5Bprimary-term%5D/canada%E2%80%99s_telecommunication_regulator_outlaws_unlimited_bandwidth

Blessings,

Bob

Posts 291
Bob Schlessman | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 10:37 AM

So back to my original question: How much will this impact our fellow forum members who download huge amounts of data each month for Logos 4? e.g. the beta testers north of the border.

Bob

Posts 19333
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 11:16 AM

Bob Schlessman:

So back to my original question: How much will this impact our fellow forum members who download huge amounts of data each month for Logos 4? e.g. the beta testers north of the border.

 

I don't think it's going to affect me much. Downloading new beta versions is minor; it's the resources I buy and the massive resource updates that come occasionally, but even those are tiny (1 GB) compared to the limits. My entire Logos Library takes up about 20 GB. I generally only download a few GB a month of Logos data. The typical ISP limits are around 25 GB per month, and I'm on a plan that allows me 75 GB per month for $32. I can't tell what my typical monthly usage is because they don't even appear to be metering my usage yet. It always shows that I've used 0 GB of my allotted 75 GB. I'm not going to complain to them about that! Smile 

The people who would run over the limits and have to pay additional charges are those who download lots of HD movies every month. So it might affect Netflix which has recently entered the Canadian market.

Here's a petition Canadians can sign if you're upset about the ruling and think it might affect you and choke competition: http://openmedia.ca/meter

Here's an article offering a different perspective on this ruling: http://www.vancouversun.com/Opinion+Usage+based+billing+time+come/4180711/story.html

Posts 103
Mark O'Hearn | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 12:20 PM

Bandwidth limit?  No, there is no money in that scenario.  At least how it is being discussed in this thread.  As a customer of Rogers, Canada's largest Internet provider I believe, they want to charge people who use more of the Internet.  Due to our family's usage requirements, that has meant paying for their highest residential service to avoid exceeding my plan's bandwidth limit.  We started enjoying Netflix; havent't had cable for over a year.

Meanwhile there are other providers that do not cap their customers.  Of course this means the bigger players like Bell and Rogers potentially lose their customers to them.  It is wonderful that we Canadians continue to enjoy the market manipulation of the CRTC.  How this serves the Canadian public is lost on me.  They have a history of questionable decisions in any event.  Was considering switching to a fibre optic Internet provider that does not cap their customers.  If this is passed there will be less incentive.  Pity.

Posts 291
Bob Schlessman | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 12:46 PM

Rosie Perera:

The people who would run over the limits and have to pay additional charges are those who download lots of HD movies every month. So it might affect Netflix which has recently entered the Canadian market.

That'skind of what I thought, Rosie. Though if we ever see the same type of caps across the board here in the U.S. then the impact on Netflix and other streaming media providers could be significant.

Regards,

Bob

Posts 4625
RIP
Milford Charles Murray | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 12:59 PM

Bob Schlessman:

Milford Charles Murray:

Peace to you, Bob.           As a Canadian (Ontario), I think this is a matter of pricing, not a limit. 

CRTC is trying, I think, to give the smaller ISP's a more equal playing field.

 

Makes sense Milford, but the article seems to indicate just the opposite and the CRTC are caving to pressure from the large providers. Here's a link to the article:

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/%5Bprimary-term%5D/canada%E2%80%99s_telecommunication_regulator_outlaws_unlimited_bandwidth

Blessings,

Bob

Bob, thanks for that link!           I find this very upsetting!  I have an idea that there's going to be a massive groundswell of angry Canadians who will be very vociferous re. this issue.

              It is possible that we will have a federal election in the next few months, and perhaps the Conservative Minority Goverment will backoff!   At least I hope so!  It would be good for our country if this became a political issue!!!   *smile*

Thanks for your original post re. this matter, Bob!   Appreciated!   Peace and Joy in the Lord!              *smile*

Philippians 4:  4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........

Posts 4625
RIP
Milford Charles Murray | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 1:07 PM

Rosie Perera:

Bob Schlessman:

So back to my original question: How much will this impact our fellow forum members who download huge amounts of data each month for Logos 4? e.g. the beta testers north of the border.

 

I don't think it's going to affect me much. Downloading new beta versions is minor; it's the resources I buy and the massive resource updates that come occasionally, but even those are tiny (1 GB) compared to the limits. My entire Logos Library takes up about 20 GB. I generally only download a few GB a month of Logos data. The typical ISP limits are around 25 GB per month, and I'm on a plan that allows me 75 GB per month for $32. I can't tell what my typical monthly usage is because they don't even appear to be metering my usage yet. It always shows that I've used 0 GB of my allotted 75 GB. I'm not going to complain to them about that! Smile 

The people who would run over the limits and have to pay additional charges are those who download lots of HD movies every month. So it might affect Netflix which has recently entered the Canadian market.

Here's a petition Canadians can sign if you're upset about the ruling and think it might affect you and choke competition: http://openmedia.ca/meter

Here's an article offering a different perspective on this ruling: http://www.vancouversun.com/Opinion+Usage+based+billing+time+come/4180711/story.html

Rosie, I'm so glad to see that Vancouver Sun article.             It is well-written.  Thanks for giving us the links.

             *smile*              I was starting to get a bit unpleasantly excited, but think I'll calm down quite quickly!               *smile*

Things are "in perspective" again!                Peace to you, Rosie!   And Joy in the Lord!

Philippians 4:  4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........

Posts 19333
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 1:11 PM

So Bob, Milford, and Mark, what do you guys think about that editorial in the Vancouver Sun that I linked to above? In particular, his point that the bigger players paid for all the fiber optic cable to be laid, and took on the risks associated with that, so why should smaller new entries into the playing field get a free ride to use those cables and offer unlimited internet bandwidth to their customers? I could sort of see his point, even though I'd love to have cheap unlimited bandwith. But the truth is that it did cost somebody something, and there's no free lunch in life.

Right now I'm paying Telus $32/mo for a plan that caps my usage at 75 GB, and I've never come anywhere close to going over that (I suspect it's because they're not actually metering my usage yet -- it always shows me 0 GB of actual usage in my usage history). I suppose if I did start going over that on a regular basis I could jump up to the 250 GB plan for $50/mo. That doesn't seem like a big deal. They're giving me something valuable to me and not (IMHO) overcharging me for it. I have my landline phone service through them too, so they actually give me a bit of a discount because of the bundle package. I know we all love to hate the big companies that push the little guys out of business, but they can't help it if economies of scale make it tough for new competitors to enter the market. Telus certainly has received my share of wrath for how cruddy the DSL modems they've provided me with have been (two of them have died on me and had to be replaced), and how long their hold waits are at peak hours. But in general they've given me pretty decent service over the years.

Posts 4625
RIP
Milford Charles Murray | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 1:14 PM

Thanks again, Rosie!       My plan is quite similar!

Philippians 4:  4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........

Posts 1666
SteveF | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 3:12 PM

Dear fellow Canadian Internet users:

In my area of Southern Ontario the other "shoe" has now dropped.

A local (re-seller?) states their "case" in the following article, stressing the (usually unmentioned) reason behind Bell/Roger's demand for higher prices. "Tek Savvy" claims it is to keep people watching TV/CAble and to keep them away from the competitors like NetFlix. They also try to "refute" arguments related to that "last kilometre" of actual cable/fibre needed to deliver into our homes. My "last mile" was installed by Bell 12 years ago!

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/01/canada-gets-first-bitter-dose-of-metered-internet-billing.ars

htt://www.tektok.ca/2011/01/teksavvy-customers-throttled-by-crtc-ruling/

 

 

Regards, SteveF

Posts 103
Mark O'Hearn | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 3:52 PM

Rosie I can only speak about my region.  Here in Saint John, New Brunswick (Maritimes) it was the little guy (NBTel now Aliant Telecom), with the help of provincial government sponsorship, that laid the fibre optic network some years ago.  I understand this was one of the first installations in North America.  Today the company is installing, at their expense, fibre right to the home.  They have no bandwidth limits.  SteveF understands exactly what is going on I believe.  Netflix and further media streaming companies from the USA are a real threat and probably the future.  Rogers online service simply cannot compete.  With CRTC unaccountable to the Canadian public, at least directly, our long tradition of having to pay more for technology/telecommunications will surely continue.

Anyway been pleased with Rogers overall.  Enjoying Netflix for the last few months.  Given how little our family used watched cable TV it just got too expensive, what with all their package schemes and added fees.  Even with the upgrade to our Internet service it is still cheaper and better than cable. 

When one examines the profits that these giants make in a year, especially from cell phones, it is really puzzling why our CRTC feels the need to protect them from Netflix.  Rosie I am sure they can make a case about infrastructure costs elsewhere in Canada, in hindsight perhap there should have been a government controlled national monopoly on our Internet infrastructure. At least  then we would have had some representation.

Anyway there are more important things to think about.Smile

Posts 291
Bob Schlessman | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Jan 31 2011 4:25 PM

Rosie Perera:

So Bob, Milford, and Mark, what do you guys think about that editorial in the Vancouver Sun that I linked to above? In particular, his point that the bigger players paid for all the fiber optic cable to be laid, and took on the risks associated with that, so why should smaller new entries into the playing field get a free ride to use those cables and offer unlimited internet bandwidth to their customers? I could sort of see his point, even though I'd love to have cheap unlimited bandwith. But the truth is that it did cost somebody something, and there's no free lunch in life.

I am pretty much in agreement with you Rosie. I remember back in the early days of personal computing (before the internet) when the only service available was dial-up. The BBS's all charged membership fees based upon your connect speed (e.g 14.4 Kbps, 28 Kbps or 56 Kbps. A lot of them also charged based upon the amount of data you downloaded. But I digress. I think it is only fair that those who download hundreds of GB per month should pay higher rates than the customers who download less than 25 GB. The editorial used the analogy of sending a package across the country. The heavier the package the more expensive to ship it.

I am not sure what it is like to be a customer of the big providers. I have lived in rural USA for so long all I have ever had available is the small ISP. The service is reliable and the speed is more than adequate. I have no trouble completing any OS or software updates in a reasonable amount of time, even Logos 4. I haven't ever done an audit to see how much I download in a month but I am fairly certain it is less than 20 GB.

Blessings,

Bob

 

Posts 1374
nicky crane | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Feb 1 2011 3:50 AM

complaining about 25GB a month ceiling??  I pay $10 for 2 GB, and buy 2 packets, and sometimes run out....Stick out tongue

Posts 4625
RIP
Milford Charles Murray | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Feb 3 2011 1:06 PM

Great News in Canada!

*smile*

Peace to Logos Brothers and Sisters!           And           Joy in the Lord!

CRTC will rescind ‘unlimited use’ Internet decision - or Ottawa will overturn it

CTV article here:            http://www.ctv.ca/generic/generated/static/business/article1892522.html

Philippians 4:  4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, Rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand..........

Posts 19333
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Feb 3 2011 1:18 PM

Milford Charles Murray:

CRTC will rescind ‘unlimited use’ Internet decision - or Ottawa will overturn it

CTV article here:            http://www.ctv.ca/generic/generated/static/business/article1892522.html

That is great news! It won't affect me either way, since I'm with one of the big providers. But I'm glad to see healthy competition stay alive in Canada. And I'm glad to see Canada demonstrating that it does listen to the voice of its discontented people who want freedom of choice, unlike a certain other country that is very much in the news right now...

Page 1 of 1 (19 items) | RSS