Go Back   Hardware Canucks > NEWS & REVIEWS > Press Releases & Tech News

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old November 15, 2011, 08:03 PM
chrisk's Avatar
Folding Captain
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: GTA, Ontario
Posts: 7,410

My System Specs

Default CRTC Rules in UBB Dispute: Speeds to be Billed, Not Amount Downloaded [Globe]

Well, this was something I did not see coming exactly:
Quote:
On Tuesday, the CRTC released a decision rejecting Bell’s revised proposal that would see a smaller provider charged for the aggregate total of data used by all its customers. The CRTC instead introduced a pricing model that would see smaller providers pay for the total capacity they need, but not the volume of data downloaded.

...
The decision reinforces – in principle, at least – the idea that smaller, independent providers could no longer continue to offer, at least at the same price, the unlimited downloading plans that made them popular with consumers.
“Rates are going up,” said Bill Sandiford, president of Telnet Communications and of the Canadian Network Operators Consortium, an industry group for smaller providers.

...
Given the complexity of new rate charges, many industry experts were still examining the material after the CRTC released its decision late Tuesday afternoon.
Source: CRTC unveils compromise for usage-based billing - The Globe and Mail

I don't like anything that will drive up my internet bill. I don't mind paying for what I use, if the costs are justifiable. I am not entitled to bandwidth. Will have to see how these costs come down to us I guess.
__________________
Fold for team #54196
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old November 15, 2011, 08:38 PM
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 1,230

My System Specs

Default

The deal looks like it will heavily favour throttling if it's bits/second billed charged. As you noted however, it will still mean higher costs passed to customers if providers are allowed to overprice their services unchecked - whether the price tag is placed on total "bandwidth" or the U/D speeds.
__________________
"The computer programmer says they should drive the car around the block and see if the tire fixes itself." [src]
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old November 15, 2011, 09:17 PM
odis172's Avatar
Allstar
F@H
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 682

My System Specs

Default

What what people were saying on the teksavvy section of dslreports, the model is good, but the pricing is way out of wack.
__________________
Laptop: Lenovo T420 - Core i5 2520 - 8GB DDR3
Server: 2 xeon E5530 - Asus Z8N-D6 - 12GB DDR3 - 8x 500GB raid 50 - Perc 6/i - Compucase RA448A00
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old November 16, 2011, 12:43 AM
News Editor
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Cylon Occupied Caprica
Posts: 713

My System Specs

Default

Watch for HWC's analysis on this issue tomorrow night.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter: @thesamreynolds

Follow Hardware Canucks on Twitter:
@hardwarecanucks
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old November 16, 2011, 05:11 AM
chrisk's Avatar
Folding Captain
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: GTA, Ontario
Posts: 7,410

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by odis172 View Post
What what people were saying on the teksavvy section of dslreports, the model is good, but the pricing is way out of wack.
Yep there is a price that the CRTC allows the big ISPs to charge. From what I have read on DSL Reports, the majority of customers will be billed anywhere from $5 to $15 extra per month for their current service (if a company like Teksavvy is to stay profitable).
__________________
Fold for team #54196
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old November 16, 2011, 10:54 AM
Keywork's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Niagara
Posts: 604

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisk View Post
the majority of customers will be billed anywhere from $5 to $15 extra per month for their current service
That, is a slap in the face.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old November 16, 2011, 11:00 AM
AkG's Avatar
AkG AkG is offline
Hardware Canucks Reviewer
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,367
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keywork View Post
That, is a slap in the face.

Not compared to a $300 or more increase, THAT would have been a slap in the face and have killed off all but rogers and bell. This way is not optimal (crtc should have been more strict on price increases) but I doubt anyone will leave over 5 or ten bucks more a month. I know for damn near unlimited AND great TS I'd not care a toss and stick with 'em.

YMMV
__________________
"If you ever start taking things too seriously, just remember that we are talking monkeys on an organic spaceship flying through the universe." -JR

“if your opponent has a conscience, then follow Gandhi. But if you enemy has no conscience, like Hitler, then follow Bonhoeffer.” - Dr. MLK jr
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old November 16, 2011, 11:49 AM
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: London
Posts: 1,419

My System Specs

Default

This is a good way of doing it, very fair. However the price scheme on the 100mbps/1gbps links is awful.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old November 16, 2011, 12:52 PM
Allstar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 646

My System Specs

Default

I think that in light of profit margins for Canada's major ISPs this is completely unwarranted.

Incrementalism is intended to appeal to rational people, to disarm them, and to dissuade from the critical issues and invalid axioms that a price hike is based upon.

Profits are up for Bell, Shaw and Telus. Don't take my word for it, check the web, financial information is well documented and available for the public.

This is big business lobbying for big business. It benefits no one but big business so why is it in anyone's interest (except Ma Bell) to hike the rate for small isps? I could see this being reasonable IFF (if and only if) Bell, Shaw and Telus were taking losses for extended periods of time.

The CRTC is supposed to act in a way that benefits the Canadian people. This hurts local businesses, the epitome of "the Canadian people" with respect to internet service providers.

Another indicator that this is a bad decision is it is in-elegant, and inconsistent with past rulings.

The best weapon people have in their arsenals is the ability to think critically. Ask why. Follow the money.

If you are unhappy with the decision, I urge you to write to the Honourable James Moore, minister of Canadian heritage, as he is the minister "in charge" of the CRTC.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old November 16, 2011, 01:01 PM
slugbug's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal Area
Posts: 540
Default

It just goes to show what a useless entity the CRTC really is.
__________________
Fractal Define XL|NZXT Hale 90 750w
MSI X79A-GD45|Core i7 3820
NZXT Havik 140|4 x 4 Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1600
OCZ SOLID 3 SSD|Seagate 1.0TB
2 X EVGA GTX 460 in SLI
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Downloaded 6.41 lechumbl HardwareCanucks F@H Team 18 November 13, 2011 04:30 PM
What amount should I spend on a MOBO? Yeno CPU's and Motherboards 12 June 23, 2011 07:37 PM
Amount of posts per page geokilla Suggestions & Feedback 7 January 3, 2011 10:36 AM
Downloaded Setup Files Unresponsive in Vista Kommie986 Troubleshooting 8 September 17, 2010 02:58 PM
Amount of thermal paste - help Chris Air Cooling 6 June 17, 2009 06:18 PM