Thanks for the detailed post Gustin... This topic hit home for me this
week as I had to arrange a new Internet connection.
Some of the packages listed in the snippet you posted are not accessible
any longer. (i.e. I have the SOHO Extreme package at the moment, but
according to their website, that is not available now).
One of the things I learned while researching my new connection is that
the proposed meetering only applies to residential packages at this
time. If it turns out to be a cash cow, you *know* it will be applied
to the business packages as well.
I also have mixed thoughts on the meetering discussion. On one hand, I
say/think that you should be willing to pay for what you use. If you
consistently exceed your pacakge limits, change your package. But, the
limits do seem a little low, knowing that bandwidth needs are only going
to increase.
On the otherhand, there is some argument that by applying the meetered
approach Bell/Shaw/Rogers/whowever the ISP is, are effectively locking
out new competitors. If I were to use Telus as a back-end to creating
my own ISP, and then Telus applies meetering to *me*, how could I
compete in any way with the other ISPs? I'd be at Telus' mercy - if
they choose not to offer a package with the available bandwidth at a
price point I can earn a profit at, then I'm going out of business real
quick. And Telus would be more than happy to take my customers.
I've seen LOTS of discussion on how the meetering is because of NetFlix.
I have yet to see anything definitive on that. I do beleive that
NetFlix is using this as a marketing tool though, regardless.
If anything, I believe the meetering discussion has come about because
we Internet peeps are just using more bandwidth than ever - streaming
audio/video, games, and just sheer volumes of data. (how many distro DVD
ISOs do we grab a month??) Somewhere, someone has to build the
infrastructure to support that demand. Someone has to pay for that,
which of course works out to the customers - us. But I don't agree we
should pay any service fees that cover those full costs EVERY single month.
Shawn
On 11-01-27 11:41 PM, Gustin Johnson wrote:
I am split about this. On one hand I have for a while been thinking
that the Internet should be metered, like water or electricity. It
should also be as smart (ie. nothing but a dumb pipe). If I want to
take a 2 hour shower, then I can do so as long as I am willing to pay
for it.
The big problem is that the price needs to be reasonable, which $2/gig
is not. I have zero faith in the market to set reasonable price.
I am not sure when Shaw will be charging, but they have posted their
current "guidelines" in the acceptable use policy (aka the AUP). You
can find this at:
http://www.shaw.ca/en-ca/AboutShaw/TermsofUse/AcceptableUsePolicyInternet.htm
Of interest:
You must ensure that your activity while using the Services does not
improperly restrict, inhibit or degrade any other customer’s use of
the Services, nor represent (in the sole judgment of Shaw) an
unusually large burden on the network itself, such as, but not limited
to, peer to peer file sharing programs, serving streaming video or
audio, mail, http, ftp, irc, dhcp servers, and multi-user interactive
forums. The guidelines for Bandwidth Usage/month for each service
package are the following: Shaw High-Speed Lite — 15 GigaByte; Shaw
High-Speed — 60 GigaByte; Shaw High-Speed Extreme — 100 GigaByte; Shaw
High-Speed Warp — 175 GigaByte; Shaw High-Speed Nitro — 350 GigaByte;
Point of Sale Connect — 10 GigaByte; Hih-Speed — 70 GigaByte;
High-Speed (with Extreme) — 110 GigaByte; SOHO — 90 GigaByte; SOHO
(with Extreme) — 130; Business — 175 GigaByte; Business (with Extreme)
— 225 GigaByte (all bandwidth is based on combined download and
upload).
While the limits are not terrible, they are not great either. I would
be happier with this scheme if I could bank the bandwidth I don't use,
but that is less likely than the moon disappearing.
If Shaw was not competing with Netflix or YouTube I would be less
worried, but this seems like their response to the success of the
Internet based services that we have asked for repeatedly for years.
Instead of competing they are putting up pay walls.
Ultimately what I would like to see is that ISPs are barred from the
content business. They should be in the business of selling Internet
access and nothing else.
Now that I have pulled the pin on the grenade, let the flame war begin
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Dafydd Crosby<[email protected]> wrote:
I've been in and out of the loop on the matter of metered Internet billing.
Does anyone know when Shaw's planning on starting this on residential lines?
More info:
http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/2011/01/canada-wages-youtube-war-against-metered-internet-billing.ars
-Dafydd
_______________________________________________
clug-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca
Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php)
**Please remove these lines when replying
_______________________________________________
clug-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca
Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php)
**Please remove these lines when replying
_______________________________________________
clug-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca
Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php)
**Please remove these lines when replying
