You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Computer Tech, Gaming & ElectronicsTHIS SPACE OPEN FOR ADVERTISEMENT. YOU SHOULD BE ADVERTISING HERE! Silicon Valley.
Tips & tricks, tech support, home theatre, online gaming, reviews, latest news...
I've consistantly gone over 300gb/month for the past 6months with Shaw, my cap says i have 100gb,.. I have yet to be charged for any over usage or warned??
Its not in effect yet.
Advertisement
__________________ Posted from NE 1-J W Inglis Building
I've consistantly gone over 300gb/month for the past 6months with Shaw, my cap says i have 100gb,.. I have yet to be charged for any over usage or warned??
You should really READ this thread. Already been mentioned that it doesn't start till February and you get 2 warnings before they start charging.
man years ago i got my service cutoff from shaw for only using 85 gigs (with 60g plan) ... why the hell was i so special, and you guys not?!
I've been disconnected in the past many many years ago back in the Rogers days. With shaw I did get a couple warnings but no disconnection. After I upgraded to extreme haven't had so much as a peep for years.
Libby Davies? Of course she will agree with you. She thinks people are "entitled" to shit for free without paying for your fair share. I wonder if the NDP campaigned for fast, cheap unlimited Internet how many of you would actually vote for them? The amount of money people pay for Internet/cable is such a small percentage of your total cost of living that it's laughable people whine about it while throwing huge money away on other things. Posted via RS Mobile
I don't think ppl have a problem paying their fair share or even UBB under the right conditions. The real problem is:
1) They're an oligopoly.
2) They have an incentive to crowd out competing products like VoD in favor of their own (which is usually lower quality and more expensive).
3) Cloud services (like dropbox, etc) become collateral damage. This is where a lot cool new shit is gonna be coming from.. server farms.
Libby Davies? Of course she will agree with you. She thinks people are "entitled" to shit for free without paying for your fair share. I wonder if the NDP campaigned for fast, cheap unlimited Internet how many of you would actually vote for them? The amount of money people pay for Internet/cable is such a small percentage of your total cost of living that it's laughable people whine about it while throwing huge money away on other things. Posted via RS Mobile
Get your head out of your ass.
Canada pays more than most countries in the world for mobile service and its getting to be the same for internet services aswell. Where do we draw the line as citizens? Personally i dont like monopolies doing money grabs, at the moment UBB is exactly that. I rely on the internet to do my job and i dont want to prices to skyrocket for no good reason.
And your damn rights, if any party sticks up for ME as a citizen and i would vote for them. No i didnt vote for Libby Davies but she represents my riding so yes im still going to voice my concern to her! Alot more than other people do... which is alot of bitching on the internet and getting nothing else done in the real world
Netflix CEO Reed Hastings said it is "inappropriate" for Internet service providers to require his company to pay all the costs of delivering streaming video to a subscriber's home, and tomorrow he plans to do something about it.
In a letter from Hastings to Netflix shareholders published today, he said it is only fair for ISPs to accept some of the financial burden since it is the ISPs' customers who have requested Netflix's content. Hastings made it clear that he hasn't received enough cooperation from ISPs.
In response, Netflix plans to publish statistics about which ISPs are best at delivering "the best, most-consistent high speed Internet for streaming Netflix."
If you're an executive at Charter Communications, you've got nothing to worry about. The only early tidbit Hastings revealed about tomorrow's post is that Charter was the top-performing ISP. But for bandwidth providers further down on the list, the disclosure could prove embarrassing. How much do you want to bet that some of the poorer-performing ISPs are the ones giving Netflix the hardest time about streaming costs?
Hastings wrote: "We think the cost sharing between Internet video suppliers and ISPs should be that we have to haul the bits to the various regional front-doors that the ISPs operate, and that they then carry the bits the last mile to the consumer who has requested them, with each side paying its own costs."
In the letter, Hastings said he hoped to get some "voluntary agreement" on the issue. Following that, he lowered the boom and disclosed the plans to publish the performance list. Netflix's message was that either ISPs pay their fair share, or they're in for a fight.
A move like this is out of character for Netflix. Typically, the company isn't a street brawler.
It's rare for executives to go public with a disagreement, and they've been in plenty of them over the years; with film studios, Blockbuster, various partners. Taking this spat public is a sign that Netflix hasn't managed to budge some of the bigger ISPs on the issue and that the company may now be more willing to flex its muscles.
Netflix is riding a wave of consumer interest. Hastings said today that for the quarter ending December 31, the company added 3 million new subscribers while rocketing past earnings expectations.
In a public relations battle, Netflix is going to be tough to beat. This is the company that did away with the dreaded late fees for video rentals and was first to offer a compelling Web-streaming service, one that enables viewers to watch thousands of titles for only $7.99 a month.
Much of the public consider that a better deal than traditional rental stores offer. When compared to pay TV services, a growing number of people argue Netflix wins there too, providing more bang for the buck.
So, we'll see if Netflix can get its way on this issue. We'll post Netflix's ISP list as soon as it goes up.
Canada pays more than most countries in the world for mobile service and its getting to be the same for internet services aswell. Where do we draw the line as citizens? Personally i dont like monopolies doing money grabs, at the moment UBB is exactly that. I rely on the internet to do my job and i dont want to prices to skyrocket for no good reason.
And your damn rights, if any party sticks up for ME as a citizen and i would vote for them. No i didnt vote for Libby Davies but she represents my riding so yes im still going to voice my concern to her! Alot more than other people do... which is alot of bitching on the internet and getting nothing else done in the real world
Boo hoo. So we pay more than many other countries for Internet access. We also pay way less for other services as well. Why aren't you all off bitching about oil/gas prices? The amount your expenses have increased in recent years if you drive a vehicle makes these internet charges seem like chump change. It's all a matter of perspective - I don't see Interent as costing me enough money to feel the need to do something about it.
You still with hostway or have you moved on? What exactly does this do to make things more difficult/expensive for your job? I wonder, are you going to vote NDP because they will save you personally $50 per month on Internet fees, or Conservative because they will save your company (employer) $10,000 per month in taxes? Which political party will actually benefit you more overall, not just in one specific area? I never ask people their affiliations, but I wonder who you voted for in the past and what specific reasons you had (like most people, myself included, it would probably be the party that benefits you financially the most).
The United Nations proposed that Internet access should be a basic human right. I agree 100%. The Internet is pretty much becoming a necessity for anyone looking for work, trying to get an education, do research or even communicate with others. But The United Nations didn't say watching HD entertainment over the Internet was a basic human right. You wanna use it for entertainment, you gotta pay, IMO.
And Netlix is so-so, IMO. Tried it for 2 months and there wasn't much I wanted to watch I hadn't already seen. The concept is great, though, and I found the execution of their service to be first rate. I kept it for my kids, but I won't use it much.
What I wish Netflix would do is offer various premium services and packages. I would gladly pay $29.99 or $39.99 a month for all the latest TV shows and movies. No more having to set the PVR to record a show I wanted to watch - just stream it when I feel like watching. This is obviously the way TV will be done in the near future. Then I'd drop Shaw for TV, upgrade my data plan and switch to Netflix (or maybe some future competitor) for all my viewing needs.
FiveDime already mentioned the reasons as to why Netflix is only soso. We also don't get a lot of the services that's available in the states.
Quote:
What I wish Netflix would do is offer various premium services and packages. I would gladly pay $29.99 or $39.99 a month for all the latest TV shows and movies. No more having to set the PVR to record a show I wanted to watch - just stream it when I feel like watching. This is obviously the way TV will be done in the near future. Then I'd drop Shaw for TV, upgrade my data plan and switch to Netflix (or maybe some future competitor) for all my viewing needs.
This is exactly why Shaw is enforcing these caps now.
This is exactly why Shaw is enforcing these caps now.
Shaw, Bell, Rogers, et al. are enforcing caps now because they're allowed to now, since the CRTC changed the regulations. They would have enforced them a decade ago if they could have. Everyone jumping ship for Telus and locking into long-term contracts is in for a shock when Telus follows suit - you better read that fine print because I guarantee you it will include a clause that allows them to change and enforce caps with little or no notice.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Sure they're allowed to now. It's cause they pushed for it to get passed by the CRTC. Imagine if Netflix decided to stay out of Canada, do you think we'd be in this situation?
They are business and all they care about in the first place is money. Screw over everyone and make money while they're at it.
Just take a look at how the mobile market has changed because the CRTC allowed other companies to play. When could you even get close to unlimited everything for $40 without Wind/Mobilicity? That would've costed an arm and a leg without them.
It may seem like Telus is the option to go to now, but like what's been said in this thread is that they can't find a way to put a meter on the bandwidth. I think it's cause the TV data is being sent on the same line and it'll be hard to differentiate between TV and the internet.
This is kind of a bad analogy but think about them putting a cap on your TV? How would you feel about that? I know not everyone watches TV but that's the only thing I can think of right now. Like a new channel comes out that plays new releases of movies regularly, shaw doesn't like this so they put a cap on how much TV a month you could watch and them charging you extra for each 30minute interval of TV you watch.
So was looking at my bandwidth usage through Shaw last night, and I was at 13.3gb after 4 days into my billing period. Today, within 24 hours, my usage was up to 14.8gb... and I haven't been online for the past 20 hours. Is it likely someone is piggybacking on my wireless connection? My router is using WPA-PSK with an 18-digit key.
It may seem like Telus is the option to go to now, but like what's been said in this thread is that they can't find a way to put a meter on the bandwidth. I think it's cause the TV data is being sent on the same line and it'll be hard to differentiate between TV and the internet.
I don't believe that for a second. It would be ridiculously easy for them to differentiate, the easiest way would probably be to read the data logs from the TV box(es) to see how much data they're using, and subtract that from the total. There are a half-dozen other ways to do it as well - look up SNMP, for example.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
So was looking at my bandwidth usage through Shaw last night, and I was at 13.3gb after 4 days into my billing period. Today, within 24 hours, my usage was up to 14.8gb... and I haven't been online for the past 20 hours. Is it likely someone is piggybacking on my wireless connection? My router is using WPA-PSK with an 18-digit key.
login to your router's wireless login.
check which mac addresses are connected to your wireless.
Check your router's logs, too... I've seen my router filter brute-force attacks trying to find and login to an FTP server or even to the router admin page, and that can generate a lot of traffic.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
I don't believe that for a second. It would be ridiculously easy for them to differentiate, the easiest way would probably be to read the data logs from the TV box(es) to see how much data they're using, and subtract that from the total. There are a half-dozen other ways to do it as well - look up SNMP, for example.
They can't do that yet.
__________________ Until the lions have their own historians, the history of the hunt will always glorify the hunter.
Yea you're right Soundy. Sooner or later they'll implement it but I guess for now Telus is riding this shaw is going to screw us over train until people switching over die down and then BAM they pull the switch too.
Unless you know our petitions, emails, letters, and calls actually do something and maybe things will change.
They'd be one shitty company if they didn't know how much data their TV servers were sending out. How else are they gonna manage capacity? They probably just don't wanna bother tracking data usage for each and every household unless you're a problem.
You keep on believing that. SNMP would tell them everything they need to know, and it's a technology nearly as old as the Internet itself - we were learning about it in a training course 20 years ago. Shaw's cable modems support it... their HD cable boxes support it... Telus's DSL modems support it... I guarantee you Telus's Optik boxes support it.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Yea you're right Soundy. Sooner or later they'll implement it but I guess for now Telus is riding this shaw is going to screw us over train until people switching over die down and then BAM they pull the switch too.
Unless you know our petitions, emails, letters, and calls actually do something and maybe things will change.
The thing that gets me is everyone rushing over from Shaw to Telus... and signing into a contract. Three months down the road, if or WHEN Telus goes the same route, all those people will be screwed even worse because they'll now be stuck with Telus' pricing for two years or more.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
login to your router's wireless login.
check which mac addresses are connected to your wireless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundy
Check your router's logs, too... I've seen my router filter brute-force attacks trying to find and login to an FTP server or even to the router admin page, and that can generate a lot of traffic.
Thanks guys, I'll look into once I figure out the router's menus.
So far I looked at the "Dynamic DHCP Client list", and my two computers are listed. There's a third client without a host name in the list, which I've tested to be my phone. Is this sufficient to figure out whether there's another user accessing the router? I just cleared the log and made note of my computer's MAC addresses, so I can monitor that in the next little while too.
Last edited by Spectre_Cdn; 01-27-2011 at 10:29 PM.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
