crtc unlimited plans in Effect for the big two ISP's

[Thor.]

If you are stuck with the big 2 ISP's like Bell and Rogers this might be a good option for you, there was a ruling recently that stopped the main ISP's from forcing a download cap, and instead allowed extended packages by law to allow more options like unlimited downloads, this is a big win for the average gamer here in Canada. We now have the option to have no cap at all, no restriction apply.

 

great now i can download all of the games that i have bought like batman and so on lol. Even with a decent cap it was a no go.

 

What do you think of this new freedom we have.

 

if you are with a independent isp some already supply this, but if you're stuck with the big two this is a good thing.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2013/02/21/technology-crtc-wholesale-internet-pricing.html

 

i know Netflix would be happy lol.

Edited February 23, 2013 by Thor.

[Vagrant0]

Just wait till they start charging you through the nose for those unlimited plans.

 

The reason why many countries have bandwidth limits is because the company hasn't built much of a data infrastructure. Out in most of Canada, Australia, or other places where urban centers are mostly isolated, this means that most data through each hub usually only has a few routes before it can be passed onto backbone nodes. Essentially, you have several thousand people trying to suck air through the same straw. The limits are there so that it's less likely for everyone to be sucking air at exactly the same time, or for extended durations. It also ends up earning that company a good deal of money since they can charge enormous fees for overages and don't have to invest anything more in the actual infrastructure.

 

The same practice doesn't work in more dense countries, like the US, UK, Japan, Korea, Germany since you not only have alot more commercial traffic on the network, but also have a much more robust infrastructure. The tradeoff however is wireless internet becomes exceedingly expensive since there isn't much airspace.

[Thor.]

True but what is more expensive, paying double for overage charges or plans that remove the cap all together. We don't have far usage here in Canada, if you wen't over the cap you where dinged big time with overage charges.

Plans do change, but not if they are enforced, they can work with the new packages prices but they can't just do what ever they wan't now. Of course i could be wrong, but the plans are in place, so guess they are enforced, they wouldn't allow it willingly, or would they ???

 

 

Edited February 23, 2013 by Thor.

[RitualBlack]

I noticed and am currently using one of the unlimited packages. I am very glad they started doing this as it is very hard to stay under 100GB/month.

[Thor.]

I agree with you at that, even with a 120gb cap it was nearly impossible, especially steam

I have several games on the ps3 i would love to download, but back when the cap was in place i was scared to. ps+ and so on.

Edited February 23, 2013 by Thor.

[Vagrant0]

True but what is more expensive, paying double for overage charges or plans that remove the cap all together. We don't have far usage here in Canada, if you wen't over the cap you where dinged big time with overage charges.

 

Plans do change, but not if they are enforced, they can work with the new packages prices but they can't just do what ever they wan't now. Of course i could be wrong, but the plans are in place, so guess they are enforced, they wouldn't allow it willingly, or would they ???

 

 

 

 

The point I was making is that they still aren't necessarily encouraged to improve their network, but rather can just go charging you about 70% of what you'd be paying as if you were constantly over your cap, on the premise that most would use the unlimited service for the sake of simplicity, but rarely actually use much more than they would under a restricted plan (once traffic settled after an initial peak period where people go crazy downloading things). Meaning that when all is said and done, they're actually making more money from people, without having to do much more than offer a few service options, and can write off any network slowness to "the government made us do it, we don't have the hardware to handle the traffic at the moment, so you're just going to have to settle for your 10kb/s transfer rates since we're your only option. And have a nice day!".

[Thor.]

No excuse, they could always improve their infrastructure to keep up with demands, they are already making billions of $ from their tv and satellite deals. We Canadians are getting shafted, and not to mention third world rates, which is not good for the average user. We are in the stone ages when it comes to internet. This allows for more competition amongst other ISP's, the thing is we have a huge monopoly Like Rogers and Bell which brings ridiculous prices.

Again big win for the average Canadian.

Edited February 24, 2013 by Thor.

[Vagrant0]

Thor., on 23 Feb 2013 - 17:06, said:

No excuse, they could always improve their infrastructure to keep up with demands, they are already making billions of $ from their tv and satellite deals. We Canadians are getting shafted, and not to mention third world rates, which is not good for the average user. We are in the stone ages when it comes to internet. This allows for more competition amongst other ISP's, the thing is we have a huge monopoly Like Rogers and Bell which brings ridiculous prices.

 

Again big win for the average Canadian.

They could... But we're talking about a business here. Particularly one which has every one of their paying members by the balls. I wouldn't hold your breath until you start seeing other businesses and government agencies complaining because of slow connections.

 

Becoming an ISP, even for a small area, is not something that can reasonably be done by even wealthy individuals. Especially when you don't already have existing infrastructure that you can utilize to develop your network and services.

[Thor.]

We area already suffering lol, its not like its already happening, that's why we need more competition.

 

there is not enough fiber to go around, so we need new companies to fill in the gaps.

Edited February 24, 2013 by Thor.

[Vagrant0]

Forcing companies to do something they should be doing, but weren't, is actually more likely to discourage competition though. Before this ruling a company could have come forward, built their network, and started out right away with an unlimited service and likely taken away most of Bell and Rogers customer base since that new company was offering something which was both in demand, and something which was not currently available in the market. After the ruling, there is no such niche for a new company to exploit to get a good startup since they would have to compete on the very same level with an already established company.

 

What I'm explaining here is that the ruling, from a monopoly standpoint, is in favor of bell and Rogers, and that they are probably laughing all the way to the bank (if however secretly).