Quote:
Originally Posted by InCoGnEtO
not defending....educating. HUGE difference. I don't like the changes either, but I think people should know ALL of the information before making a decision.
the argument is that with 1% of the users using 25% of the bandwidth, its not fair for the other users on the same node to have their service saturated. And yes, saturation is a real problem, especially in large centers like Vancouver and Calgary. If you don't believe me, call any TSR and ask how many calls they get a day on 'slow speeds'. Shaw is splitting nodes on average of 1 every 3 days in Vancouver to relieve saturation issues.
Should people who earn more than $1M a year be taxed more than people who earn $40K a year? It's a relevant debate.....
Also, as content continues to be data heavy, limits will change to reflect them (ie/ they will go up). It's not meant to stop people from using the internet, its meant to stop abusers from abusing it.
|
This is misinformation not education... HUGE difference
Yes it might be the case that it is only 1% of the users, but we have yet to see proof of that, except off the cuff remarks by Shaw employees. Caps in developed, highly industralized nations like Japan and South Korea and nowhere near the pitiful levels Shaw has established. Even Comcast, who is the model for Shaw has 250GB limits for their 15 mbps service.
This is about Shaw making sure the they have their hand in the pie of online content providers, people are going switch away from old tech like delivered TV, it is happening every day and Shaw is scared. Because Shaw didn't invest in infrastructure spending now there is congestion? Shaw has had a problem with congestion for many years, speeds drop in the evening and weekends for virtually every customer.
I am no fan of Telus, but I am glad that Telus is making a big play - Shaw will be caught with its pants down.
I am sorry for the aggressive tone of this post, but I hate condescending posts like these