Shaw Internet - Magical New Speeds and Lots-o-bandwidth, fickle geeks appeased

[nik-]

Originally Posted by MJM

So I guess what this boils down to is the cheap #######s that steal a pirated version of a movie and watch it through their television instead of going to a movie theatre like the other law-abiding citizens , are now going to have pay for the priviledge to steal copyrighted material. Doesn't seem like a such a bad thing to me.....

From what I'm reading and seeing, anyone who just surfs the interest, plays some online games, and doesn't torrent all day long will not have an issue with this cap. The only real negative is potentially netflix.

The problem is the service is going backwards as society moves technologically forward.

[MJM]

Originally Posted by nik-

The problem is the service is going backwards as society moves technologically forward.

The service is going backwards due to the blatant abuse of technology by society. Most people won't even know these charges exists, and will never be hit with them because most people don't sit their illegally downloading 6-7 movies in HD everyday.

[Old Yeller]

Hey don't paint us all with that broad a brush... I'm usually good on 2 HD movies a day.

[photon]

I can't download HD movies, it'd kill my ratio.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by MJM

The service is going backwards due to the blatant abuse of technology by society. Most people won't even know these charges exists, and will never be hit with them because most people don't sit their illegally downloading 6-7 movies in HD everyday.

A couple of years ago that would be true, but more legal content is available online now, and that is obviously growing. Netflix is the big one, but Apple also offers movies and TV episodes for download or streaming. It is quite conceivable that, if someone is using their internet connection as their primary source of entertainment, they would have no trouble hitting their 60 GB cap (which is what most people have).

The caps aren't to stop torrenters from using up all of the bandwidth, it is to prevent people from getting to like internet-delivered entertainment so much that it starts (or continues to) make a dent in the traditional cable and broadcasting businesses. I guess that's what happens when the broadcaster, the cable company, and the ISP are all the same company (as is the case with Bell, Rogers, and Shaw).

[The Yen Man]

Doesn't sites like Global and CTV offer full episodes to stream over the internet after it's been broadcast? I've never used it before, but I swear I've heard them advertise it. As more and more networks do that, data usage is just going to increase. And with content on PSN, Xbox Live, and Itunes getting bigger and bigger, that's also just going to increase. It kind of sucks that people have to start rationing the amount of downloads they do, but I guess that's the way Shaw wants it.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

Doesn't sites like Global and CTV offer full episodes to stream over the internet after it's been broadcast? I've never used it before, but I swear I've heard them advertise it. As more and more networks do that, data usage is just going to increase. And with content on PSN, Xbox Live, and Itunes getting bigger and bigger, that's also just going to increase. It kind of sucks that people have to start rationing the amount of downloads they do, but I guess that's the way Shaw wants it.

They do. I think that the big shift will happen when these networks combine it all in a nice user interface that you can control from your TV, game console, and other TV-connected devices. Hulu has made that leap in the US, but the content owners in Canada aren't as quick to adapt.

[ZedMan]

Originally Posted by photon

I can't download HD movies, it'd kill my ratio.

usenet is the way to go for HD content (or anything else as long as its recent) IMO. All of the content, no ratio BS. Plus I find it's a lot easier to keep track of usage than torrents.

[The Goon]

Originally Posted by MJM

So I guess what this boils down to is the cheap #######s that steal a pirated version of a movie and watch it through their television instead of going to a movie theatre like the other law-abiding citizens , are now going to have pay for the priviledge to steal copyrighted material. Doesn't seem like a such a bad thing to me.....

From what I'm reading and seeing, anyone who just surfs the interest, plays some online games, and doesn't torrent all day long will not have an issue with this cap. The only real negative is potentially netflix. I have friends who do nothing but download pirated games, movies, music, and other copyrighted material all day long. It has always kind of pissed me off..... so i'm not that worked up about this.

My wife tends to rent a lot of movies from iTunes to watch on our iPad in various locations around the house (we have a young baby, so relying on the TV & VOD doesn't work). I can see this affecting us depending on what the actual limits are.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by photon

I can't download HD movies, it'd kill my ratio.

In Iceland you get no charges for download in country, only from outside Iceland. So within Iceland I am downloading tons of stuff, all HD, my poor HD space I need another 1 terrabyte.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by photon

I can't download HD movies, it'd kill my ratio.

In Iceland you get no charges for download in country, only from outside Iceland. So within Iceland I am downloading tons of stuff, all HD, my poor HD space I need another 1 terrabyte.

[Spinoff90]

Originally Posted by MJM

So I guess what this boils down to is the cheap #######s that steal a pirated version of a movie and watch it through their television instead of going to a movie theatre like the other law-abiding citizens , are now going to have pay for the priviledge to steal copyrighted material. Doesn't seem like a such a bad thing to me.....

From what I'm reading and seeing, anyone who just surfs the interest, plays some online games, and doesn't torrent all day long will not have an issue with this cap. The only real negative is potentially netflix. I have friends who do nothing but download pirated games, movies, music, and other copyrighted material all day long. It has always kind of pissed me off..... so i'm not that worked up about this.

There are a lot of legal things that eat up bandwidth. For me the big problem is going to be Steam. I have purchased more than 300 games on Steam and with game file sizes getting bigger and bigger with some like Star Wars The Force Unleashed at 25GB even it won't take much to go over the limit and have them rack up a huge profit they don't deserve to make. Internet in North America is a pathetic joke and providers are going to keep using whatever bull#### excuse they can to screw the customers and make more money. Same thing with cell phones. We are pathetically behind other parts of the world and getting screwed over big time.

[Bobblehead]

Netflix released a "report card" of ISP throughput.

http://techblog.netflix.com/2011/01/...-networks.html

It is interesting to note that the Canadian ISPs would all be in the top half if compared to the US. Also, note the comparative lack of competition in Canada.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Spinoff90

There are a lot of legal things that eat up bandwidth. For me the big problem is going to be Steam. I have purchased more than 300 games on Steam and with game file sizes getting bigger and bigger with some like Star Wars The Force Unleashed at 25GB even it won't take much to go over the limit and have them rack up a huge profit they don't deserve to make. Internet in North America is a pathetic joke and providers are going to keep using whatever bull#### excuse they can to screw the customers and make more money. Same thing with cell phones. We are pathetically behind other parts of the world and getting screwed over big time.

There are many legal things that consume large amounts of bandwidth. Netflix and Steam are 2 of the primary ones that come to mind. I would be willing to wager a large amount of money, that for the majority of the people in this thread (or elsewhere for that matter) who have an issue with these caps, those 2 services are not the things consuming the most bandwidth.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Thor

In Iceland you get no charges for download in country, only from outside Iceland. So within Iceland I am downloading tons of stuff, all HD, my poor HD space I need another 1 terrabyte.

Australia has similar notions I believe. What would be cool is if ISPs partnered with big CDNs to locally mirror content so it's cheaper/free to download. Like if Shaw had their own Steam CDN node, then downloads from Steam wouldn't impact overall usage.

[Graysdir]

Originally Posted by InCoGnEtO

Fact is that less than 1% of shaw high speed and extreme users go over their limit
btw, if you can't tell, I am kinda in the know

That is completely false. Shaw has stated that under their OLD caps, only 1-2% went over their allotment. Since quietly lowering the caps, they have stated that 10% of their users will be over the cap. You can find the quote from Shaw online, and they were quite clear about the 10% figure on multiple occasions. They seem to think that is "low". Btw, even the Shaw rep I spoke to on the phone quoted a similar number. (She said 12% will now go over their cap)

I guess you're not so "in the know" as you stated you were:

Edit #1: I just used Shaw's online chat, and asked their rep how many people go over the new caps, and she said "approximately 10 to 12 per cent" (exact quote)
Edit #2: I found the email I received from a Shaw rep last week: "Less than 10% of our customers are currently using data above our current package allowances and only 2% were over the old limits. We embrace these customers; they are not “abusers”, they are high value users."

Here is a good post on how to get involved:
http://www.digitalhome.ca/2011/01/us...at-can-you-do/

[Graysdir]

Originally Posted by MJM

The service is going backwards due to the blatant abuse of technology by society. Most people won't even know these charges exists, and will never be hit with them because most people don't sit their illegally downloading 6-7 movies in HD everyday.

Under Shaw's supposed "High Speed" plan, you could download 3 Netflix movies per week, plus some light surfing, and you'd be at your cap. Don't forget, Windows updates, virus updates, game updates, and the fact that even when you aren't home, your modem communicates with Shaw, and that 24/7 usage also gets added to your bill.

Btw, this has nothing to do with downloading illegal movies. It has to do with web-based video (Netflix, hulu, etc) and the fact that Cable is losing subscribers by the thousands. During Shaw's most recent investor meeting, they said they lost 6500 cable subscribers this year. Now with UBB, people will be forced to re-sub to Cable. Shaw wins! We lose.

[photon]

3 Netflix movies per week in HD would be 27GB, not even half of the 60GB.

And if you go over, each movie would cost as little as 45 cents if you buy the bandwidth in buckets ahead of time, which if you are a heavy user makes sense to do.

[theonlywhiteout]

yeah if all you did was watch netflix. and you didnt have any family members or roomates surfing and watching youtube, downloading music/video legally, backing up data to the cloud, etc etc.

this is a cash grab and price gouging made legal by the crtc which would be fine except the duopoly that exists between cable and telco has also been regulated into existence.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by photon

3 Netflix movies per week in HD would be 27GB, not even half of the 60GB.

And if you go over, each movie would cost as little as 45 cents if you buy the bandwidth in buckets ahead of time, which if you are a heavy user makes sense to do.

True.

But is there a problem with a 150GB minimum bandwidth limit? That would cover the vast majority of the population. Plans with higher limits can also be available and priced accordingly.

I agree with paying for what you use, but its 2011. There is no reason to lower the bandwidth cap outside of this being nothing other than a cash grab.

Netflix confirmed that it only costs pennies to deliver 1GB of bandwidth to any wired user. And that will only get cheaper as the backbone is built out with faster and faster speeds.

Again, I agree with paying for the bandwidth you use, but Shaw is not helping themselves with lowering the caps, and making it that magically people who once upon a time used 50GB per month, now use 200GB per month according to their meter.