[Scape]

http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/01/05/a-dystopian-future-for-canadas-internet/

Quote:

On Tuesday, independent Canadian ISP Teksavvy announced its new service plans, effectively dropping the other shoe in the long-running usage-based internet billing debate. While on the surface there are some things to like, at the core the new plans–and regulatory system they’re based on–paint a disturbing picture of the future of Canada’s Internet.

The CRTC set things in motion in November with its government-ordered revisit of the issue and came up with something called capacity-based billing, a sort of diet UBB. In essence, instead of large network owners charging indie ISPs for every byte their customers download, the new system requires the smaller companies to buy chunks of capacity based on how much they think they’re going to need on a monthly basis.

As Jesse Brown noted on this site earlier this week, while some commentators praised the decision, others–including Teksavvy–said the regulator screwed things up again. While the system itself was okay, the fees that a few big network owners are allowed to charge through it were way too high, the company said, which will inevitably result in price increases for customers.

All eyes have since been on Teksavvy, one of the largest and most vocal of the UBB opponents, to see what it would do. In the end, the company’s new plans and the accompanying explanation are something of a mixed bag. On the one hand, most existing plans are going up by $3 to $4, which fits the predictions by some observers that the CRTC’s ruling would push up rates by 10 to 15 per cent. The issue, as Teksavvy puts it, is that while its fixed costs actually went down somewhat thanks to the decision, the variable ones can potentially go up significantly. The company’s pricing notice reads:

If left to stand, these prices will ensure that residential Internet service prices will increase dramatically as consumer usage at peak times increases… in the face of the recent decision, we have to modestly adjust our rates.

On this front, if Teksavvy is to be believed and the rate increases are essentially going to further compensate network providers, the impact of capacity-based is the same as the intended effect of usage-based billing: Prices for consumers are going up.

On the plus side, Teksavvy is now officially offering higher speeds–up to 24 megabits per second–with usage limits that are generally much more generous than those of the incumbents at significantly lower prices. As many people pointed out on Twitter, even with the price increases, the company’s plans are still way better than what can be found elsewhere.

But there are plenty of downsides as well. For one, Teksavvy has introduced the concept of non-peak usage–meaning that customers can download all they want in the wee hours of the night without it counting against their caps. Some observers call this “innovative,” but it may well be the first step down a slippery slope. It heralds a future where internet usage is further compartmentalized–if it starts with file-sharing overnight, how long till someone makes it more expensive to watch online video in the evening, or call on Skype during the afternoon? Not only can this approach become confusing, it can also become expensive and limiting.

The only countries I know of that have adopted such non-peak usage concepts are Australia and New Zealand, both of which are in the process of building multi-billion-dollar next-generation fibre networks because their telco monopolies have failed to provide decent infrastructure on their own. The two countries, along with Iceland and Canada, are also the only ones where unlimited usage plans are uncommon if not completely absent. As I’ve pointed out before, one those countries (cough, Canada, cough) is unlike all the others. As far as anyone can tell, in fact, Canada is not an isolated island that must buy capacity on cables that run under the ocean.

Is the idea of compartmentalized internet service–where Canadians can only watch Netflix or other online video in the early hours of the morning for fear of exceeding their caps– an absurdist notion? It is indeed. It portends a dystopian scenario, which may or may not come true, but would be just as absurd as imposing a capacity-based billing scheme in response to congestion problems that large network owners have yet to prove exist.

It’s also thoroughly absurd to suggest that limiting how Canadians use the Internet–rather than expanding their use of it–is in any way “innovative.”

[commanderkai]

I already lowered my Teksavvy plan. Welcome to Canada. Who wants to start dragging fibre optic cable from Detroit over to Windsor?

[jeff744]

Huzzah Sasktel, apparently they are already installing Fibre Optic cables in the major cities.

[martin14]

jeff744 wrote:

Huzzah Sasktel, apparently they are already installing Fibre Optic cables in the major cities.

They're only doing that now ?

Holy shit, Slovakia has had that for 5 years already.

And Italy.

[Tricks]

Un fucking believable.

[saturn_656]

I'm getting sick of the incumbent telecom outfits always trying to find a new way to suck the customer dry with bandwidth caps, arbitrary rate increases (sometimes with no warning), subpar speed, etc.

At this point, I'm all for the CRTC opening the gates and let the "hordes" in, the incumbents would either be bought out or run into the ground.

[andyt]

I just had to download a fairly large file. It started off at 1800 kpbs and then kept getting throttled down to around 200. I have optik by Telus - I doubt if it was heavy usage doing this, but Teluse throttling my download.

So I asked what people do for movies, and many said they stream them. Yet above people say Netflix is a problem with streaming speed and if you're a heavy user you might overshoot your usage limit. (I have no idea what mine is, I'm not a heavy downloader) So that doesn't sound like a good option for the good old video store to me. I was just thinking of checking out Netflix, but if there's a problem with throttling download speed or having to pay lots of overage fees, that $8 bucks doesn't sound like such a bargain anymore.

[Guy_Fawkes]

andyt wrote:

I just had to download a fairly large file. It started off at 1800 kpbs and then kept getting throttled down to around 200. I have optik by Telus - I doubt if it was heavy usage doing this, but Teluse throttling my download.

So I asked what people do for movies, and many said they stream them. Yet above people say Netflix is a problem with streaming speed and if you're a heavy user you might overshoot your usage limit. (I have no idea what mine is, I'm not a heavy downloader) So that doesn't sound like a good option for the good old video store to me. I was just thinking of checking out Netflix, but if there's a problem with throttling download speed or having to pay lots of overage fees, that $8 bucks doesn't sound like such a bargain anymore.

I watch all my netflix on low quality so that I can keep my usage down. The picture is still pretty good, but no where close to HD.

[andyt]

One reason I broke down and bought a dvd is for the bluray quality - sure makes a diff. I think the world's gone mad. They come out with perfectly good tech like bluray and high def TV, and then don't support in proper fashion. Meanwhile the early adopters are going for 3D TV, and it probably turns out there's very little content available for it.

[Guy_Fawkes]

There is for now, but that is because of the high cost of 3D right now, in a year it will start to come out. The same happened with blu ray. I think blu ray is properly supported, but Im the kind of person like likes to own my movies.

[jeff744]

martin14 wrote:

jeff744 wrote:

Huzzah Sasktel, apparently they are already installing Fibre Optic cables in the major cities.

They're only doing that now ?

Holy shit, Slovakia has had that for 5 years already.

And Italy.

There are 1 million people in all of Saskatchewan, 200,000 live in the largest city. I think they have had a good reason to take their time on it.