Comments on: Canada sucks when it comes to the digital innovations

By: Jones

Jones — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 02:57:14 +0000

Charging for bandwidth is understandable, but restricting certain types of packages is not. Some people actually want to use other web protocols such as FTP, Telnet, and so on.

By: sieber

sieber — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 04:50:13 +0000

It’s logical to want some packets prioritized over others but I’d rather not have a telco deciding that for me. Telcos have monopoly status, particularly in a geographically big country like Canada. So they’re similar to utility companies. It’s quite acceptable for a government to step in and regulate a monopoly’s activities.

It’s true that charging for bandwidth is a new business model. But having the extra money doesn’t mean they’re going to invest it in bigger or more efficient pipes. Fibre aside, the telcos are now raking in money from the SMS charges. Will we see any of that in terms of improved services (that people can afford)? Not likely.

By: Liam

Liam — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 01:24:45 +0000

In many ways I can understand why the government is hesitant to regulate private networks, I want my VOIP packets to be prioritized ahead of my YouTube videos. In this case I think the boundary is blurred because of the huge power the incumbent telcos have in terms of access to the customer, hence why the public consultation mentioned for next year should be interesting.

In many ways the problem stems from the ‘unlimited’ nature of some ISPs previous plans. Unlimited is a myth, so if sufficient numbers of customers use it as such, then the usage assumptions go right out the window.

Most have made a step in the right direction recently by eliminating or charging more appropriately for their unlimited plans. If they can charge for bandwidth usage, hopefully they’ll better tie the upgrading of their infrastructure to how much they actually sell.