The non conformer's Canadian Weblog

August 19, 2009

Phone companies internet at disadvantage


Telling the truth to all is the best way to deal with any matters now still too.. bad customer services included now.

Internet Cable can be modified cheaper and faster to attain higher speeds over the phone lines

Now “The cable providers have a significant speed advantage over most of Canada’s major phone companies, which provide internet connections over phone lines. Bell and Telus, the two biggest phone companies, are offering speeds with a current maximum of about 15 megabits at a cost of $60 and $53 per month, respectively. In Quebec, Bell has been hemorrhaging phone and internet customers to Videotron, which offers better speeds and prices.

Many of the cable companies are using a network technology known as DOCSIS 3.0, which actually lets them offer speeds higher than 50 megabits.

Canadian internet providers have been criticized for being too slow in rolling out next-generation super-fast internet speeds, and for charging too much for existing services.

A study last week by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development found Canada had the second-highest rates for high-speed internet services ranging between 12 and 32 megabits per second, next to only the Slovak Republic. In Japan, ultra-fast connections of 100 megabits per second are being sold for just over $50 Canadian.

Rogers, Cogeco and Videotron are, however, offering faster speeds than just about every American internet provider.  Rogers Communications is boosting internet speeds in the Toronto area, but will charge a premium for the service. The company announced its new Ultimate High-Speed Internet service with a top download speed of 50 megabits per second, up from 18, and a monthly usage allowance of 175 gigabytes in select parts of the Greater Toronto Area. Customers who currently subscribe to the 18-megabit service will see their speed automatically boosted to 25 megabits at no extra charge, Rogers said.

The new service is considerably faster than the best offered by Rogers’ chief rival Bell Canada, which has a maximum speed of 16 megabits per second, but at $150 a month it is also more expensive than comparable services offered elsewhere in the country.”

” Probably the fastest in Canada? It’s also probably one of the most expensive and slowest compared to other countries. “

“More ISP/Telco lies.  What they are saying is “up to 50MB” and then they’ll throttle your apps to 30k. “


 “a monthly usage allowance of 175 gigabytes” At the speed of 50Mbit/sec you would use up the 175 GB of allowance in just over 9 hours for downloading…” and what do you do the rest of the month?”

” I think it is misleading for the article to talk about these speeds without pointing out that they are all theoretical and that they have nothing to do with the actual speeds that you will get. It doesn’t matter if Rogers has equipment that is capable of a zillion Mbps if they over-subscribe so you only get a trickle during busy periods.”
“The headline should really read “Rogers Offers 50MB Download and Will Finally Deliver the 10 You’ve Been Paying for All Along”  I have never seen my connection at the full amount I’m paying for. I don’t care how fast they *say* it can go, I care how fast it *actually* goes.”
” Why bother upgrading to 50Mbps when u cap, & throttle us we pay for 50mbps u give us 70kbps /sec on our torrents, rogers, bell, aliant & telus u can go …”
“In Stockholm you can get a 100Mbps symmetrical connection (upload and download at 100 at the same time) for about $12 a month.”
” So they throttle their users, steal back bandwidth so they can offer a premium service their customers will never see…. These guys are so badly over-subscribed I’d be amazed if users saw a quarter of that speed.”

The Liberals are just as bad as the Conservatives in not dealing in Canada  with the lying, price gouging communication firms..  The federal, provincial governments, the CRTC, Conservatives, Liberals  unfairly maintaining  archaic, monopolistic telecommunication firms, that are often   bloated, cost ineffective, incompetent, over staffed, un-competitively managed as well is the main reasons consumer costs falsely keep on going up now.

In its first year, 2007-08,  CCTS was still unable able to resolve about 40  per cent, of the complaints according to its own website. What a very high failure rate.  About one-third of the complaints were related to wireless services. 40  per cent, that is about the number of unhappy Customers with Bell’s Internet services too
Subject: Re: CCTS #02010400029439
Thank you for your poor reply, lies, buck passing. But my complaint is still only with one specific firm Bell Canada that I have had a contract for many years and Bell had breached falsely my contract and falsely had disconnected my internet services and I am asking 2500 dollars in damages FROM BELL FOR THEIR INADEQUATE SERVICES HERE  TOO.. NOW  DO FULLY DEAL WITH IT AND THANK YOU. 
Yes it is true that Bell Telephone is still  always seeking news ways by hook or crook as well  to make more money cause it undeniably still loses it’s dissatisfied customers faster than it can gain them.  Bell itself now is always lying for years has always told me it is someone else’s fault for the internet problem and not Bell’s. “Do note that my Bell internet services profile, download speeds  varies, varied from 1 megs, 2 megs, 5 megs, 6 megs, 7 megs, depending on the weather, the day of the week, etc.,  and now all  contrary to Bell’s promises, advertisement of a steady High speed system too, etc., or Bell’s past advertisement that ” Bell delivers reliable Internet access, assuring consumers that they can get on the  Net when they want to and stay there as long as they need”…is also clearly a lie….” Bell’s advertised “Choice of consistent super fast speed” is also a lie for the speed undeniably was slow and varied and too often…  Bell’s advertised “Best price” is also a lie.. and please all do  still deal with Bell’s false capping of my bit torrent too.. on my unlimited download Bell account in Canada.”  Bell for certainty cannot be trusted, it can only be trusted to lie, Bell along with many DSL ISP undeniably lied in their past Internet  ADDS for many years about the advantages of  the internet DSL over Cable too. “The speed advantage of DSL over cable is much higher”, ” DSL-based services results in the ability to guarantee the bandwidth provided by the high-speed DSL connection” ” Cable service providers usually don’t quote absolute performance numbers like the DSL vendors” In real fact Major Canadian DSL vendors like Bell never met their promised speed CONTINUOUSLY or reliably now too anyway and most of the time they were far short of it tooThere was, also is a need for regulatory Government intervention of Bell, ISP providers practices, advertisements too. There has been a lot of evidence, allegations about Bell’s bad  managerial practices,  and it’s motives. It’s mostly been  warranted. Bell  wrongfully sees itself as the sole judge of disputes in their contract obligations too. ..  Sadly AT&T for a start is not the only carrier that doesn’t have presently  adequate  existing bandwidth to support all of their customers, iPhone users  using  an “unlimited” data plan  and that would now include Rogers and Bell? who are clearly already capping their existing customers and others to over come this serious shortcoming,   and in spite of what they do all  promise now they might have in the future I really rightfully do not believe them.  I TOO NOW have been discussing, detailing on the net Bell’s inadequate pretentious, poor services, internet and customer services, specifics included now for many many months.. even in October 2007   
What started as a simple phone call by me in January 2007 to Bell tech help line to determine why my internet services were so slow and sluggish next had  become a major farce, cover-up on the part of Bell Sympatico. I was next lied to for months as to the real reasons Bell they rather had offered me their poor internet services to me and  to many others in my city for years now too.. and then Bell had even  lied to me some more, had also breached their contractual obligations to me many times too, had allowed me even to be slandered, abused on the Bell customer forums now too.. and why? so  that clearly greedy Bell can continue stay in business to make more money.. and so who really cares now about the customer’s good welfare in reality? now? What not Bell itself, not the CRTC, not the federal government, not our Prime Minister Stephen Harper, not  the the federal Minister of Consumer Affairs, Jim Prentice..  not  any provincial consumer affairs Minister, but only the citizens, the news media, and the NDP party care about the citizens  good welfare really it seems. Not acceptable for sure too!
Imagine that Bell has been in Business for many years and is still guilty now clearly of misleading advertisements, fraudulent and unacceptable business practices, not living up to their contractual obligations, as I now have PERSONALLY WITNESSED, EXPERIENCED  and undeniably detailed to even Bell and many others many times too now . I Paid for a high speed unlimited download service but that is not what I got next. I got low internet speed at a high price. With Bell you have to check your actual delivered speeds , “internet download and upload speed test” cause Bell seems to change it to suit themselves..  ( Acanac Inc.  , and do  see their speed test ). BELL EXECUTIVES HAVE BEEN  TOO CHEAP, AND STINGY TO SPEND THE NECESSARY MONEY TO DO THE MUCH NEEDY UPDATES TO BELL’S INTERNET WHICH DO LACK FULL CAPACITIES TO SERVICE ALL THE PRESENT CUSTOMERS, NEVER MIND ALL THE FUTURE ONES, SO THEY HAVE TO THROTTLE THEIR SERVICES
 More and more, Bell, Sympatico Internet users are finding Web browsing a lot less fun these days for  it took a little time to load the pages, there is continual internet connectivity problems for their Bell ISP provider is totally unreliable, dishonest, inadequate too.  
Bell has always had it’s spin doctors spin, lying..  Now this Mis-advertisement of the actual speeds attained  also reflects the common  problem we tend to  have also in Canada with the false, misleading advertising, trade practices by Bell, Rogers, Videotron in regard to the speeds of their iPhone and DSL, ADSL, cable internet services. These Communication, ISP firms amongst others are known to inflate, advertise substantially higher speeds than the consumer will actual get next get on the average, and the  next related internet congestion cause web connectivity problems, and also reductions of the downloads speeds too..
Bell firstly has also not been transparency about it’s internet capping as well now..  Major Canadian DSL service providers commonly employ bandwidth / speed caps for residential customers. Bandwidth caps place an artificial limit on the maximum speed a customer can achieve by monitoring their indCOMPENSATION as soon as possible.ividual traffic flow and throttling network packets .Providers concerned about the capacity limits of their network  implement a cap so that they can accommodate more customers, and make more money and undeniably  do not do this for the sole benefit of the consumer but mainly their own. But I have said much of this before for many months now too already even that Bell will lie, divert the truth and basically try to say that the customers are all still stupid, and the customer’s own computer’(s) are at fault,, they are lacking sufficient processing power or memory, cache and they  cannot keep pace with a high-speed Internet connection. Or the spyware, viruses on the computer when that rarely is the case now too for the slow internet speed,s but rather it is mainly due to Bell’s own faulty, and poorly maintained and poorly serviced equipment…  Bell is one of he biggest liar that I have personally dealt with too..  I had written 300 letters to Bell trying to get simple, straightforward satisfaction, appropriate payment,  answers from them and of course they dishonestly refused to provide any answers.. all they Sasha Rollins,  did eventually is double bill me and next cut of my internet for complaining too much to them.. real perverse people. Nevertheless I posted a full log for about 2 years on the net, too all of the major news editors, major politicians now too  for all to read, and Bell undeniably now did not try to deny it too, as to how crooked they were and how poorly they had actually responded to their false breach of my internet contract too. I now do realize that I have been told many times now by Bell on the phone, on the net that my internet account matter now has been escalated to the Highest level at Bell, specially Bell executive care services, and that as usual I  have been lied too. Bell should pay for internet throttling, Breach of contract too. Telus says Bell should pay for internet throttling dispute: Telus Corp. is supporting consumer groups and small service providers in seeking legal costs from Bell Canada Inc. in a dispute over the throttling of internet speeds. Telus had said it agrees with the Public Interest Advocacy Centre and the Canadian Association of Internet Providers, who say that because Bell started the whole argument over throttling, the company should be liable for all the costs whether it wins or loses the dispute.
 Bell Sympatico now even  wanted an extra payment of 75 dollars if I do not return ASAP their high speed modem as soon as possible, conveniently forgetting that they themselves had wrongfully had breached my ISP contract, and also that they had falsely refused to refund me for an  overcharge of an  extra 55 dollars, to me for this  high speed modem that I had never even requested from Bell Sympatico in the first place, and they too easily seem to forget that  fact they Bell Sympatico had falsely also now tried 4 times to withdraw, steal my  money from my bank account even during the time I as supposed to have  free 6 months high speed unlimited internet as well. An agreement they too had falsely breached now too. Now Bell Sympatico’s executive care  Sasha Rollins had  complained to me in writing 3 times back that in the last 18 months I have written 280 letters of rightful complaints to Bell about their inadequate, pretentious, services, even their false breach of their contract obligations. Me I am even next still even rightfully complaining to Bell Sympatico now that I had even firstly to to write any of these 280 letters of complaints to Bell Sympatico, and I as a direct result do even rightfully still do demand full payment of 2500 dollars from Bell Sympatico NOW  for all my wasted time in even having now to do so now as well, plus further payment for the many years I had paid for a high speed internet services but never got one from Bell Sympatico as well. And I rightfully still expect this rightful  2500 dollars payment to me now from Bell Sympatico ASAP AS WELL , and  so also  NEXT  I too will demand an extra 250 dollars in payment  if they do not pay me my 2500 dollars<>;

 Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 1:12 PMSent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 9:04 AM  Subject: CCTS #02010400029439

Dear sir,

Thank you for contacting the Commissioner for Complaints for Telecommunications Services (CCTS). The CCTS is an independent agency with a mandate to receive, facilitate the resolution of, and, if necessary, resolve eligible consumer and small business complaints relating to certain retail telecommunications services.

The scope of CCTS’ mandate is set out on our website:

Unfortunately, this matter is not an Eligible Complaint within the meaning of our Procedural Code and is therefore not within the scope or mandate of the CCTS. The CCTS handles complaints on a specific case by case basis.  Your complaint pertains to the market of the internet service by all the service providers in Canada. This matter is not within the definition of an “Eligible Complaint” with regards the CCTS’ Procedural Code section 1.1(j).
Therefore, the CCTS cannot process your complaint.  The Procedural Code can be found at:

You may wish to contact the CRTC at 1-877-249-2782 or the Telecommunications Service Provider (TSP) of your choice as they may be able to assist you with this matter.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding your complaint, or anything contained in this correspondence, please do not hesitate to contact us.

CCTS P.O. Box 81088 Ottawa, ON K1P 1B1


Sincerely, CCTS Assessment Team


do see also

August 15, 2009

CRTC is clearly in Bell’s bad pocket again



 Online Petition Stirs Commentary with Calls for End of CRTC mediacaster A petition calling for the dissolution of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, (CRTC) says the regulator has become a burden on the Canadian public, and should be replaced with a new regulator

Dissolve the CRTC !

Toronto Star – Neoseeker – – Dslreports

Dear Minister of Industry,

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) was created for the purpose of ensuring broadcasting and telecommunications systems serve the Canadian public and ensure that Canadians have a wide variety of options to create and view works of media or communicate across the country and the entire world.

We, the undersigned, believe that the CRTC has become a burden on the Canadian public and are failing to perform their duties in the interest of the Canadian public and that of a fair and unbiased telecom policy.

Scrap the CRTC, petition urges  An online petition to dissolve the CRTC  . The petition, at   and on   Facebook and Twitter,  was started Saturday by Mike Lerner, a 23-year-old Ottawa software company employee, who was frustrated by a decision to allow Bell Canada to institute usage-based billing on its wholesale internet customers. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission last week provisionally approved Bell’s request to require independent companies such as TekSavvy and Acanac, which rent parts of its network to supply their own services, to charge customers by how much they download.Independent providers typically offer customers hundreds of gigabytes of usage where Bell’s most popular service allows only 50 gigabytes a month. Smaller providers now say they have just under three months to migrate their customers on to similar usage models. Once those plans are implemented, they say, their services will be indistinguishable from Bell’s.  The CRTC, the petition says, is failing in its mandate to protect competition and look out for the interest of Canadian consumers and has for the past three years shown “undue preference in the interest of commercial entities and their preference for traditional business models over competing models that would create competition.” “We, the undersigned, believe that the CRTC has become a burden on the Canadian public and are failing to perform their duties in the interest of the Canadian public and that of a fair and unbiased telecom policy,” it says.Lerner told CBC News the government needs to replace the current regulator with a body that is staffed by people who are in touch with the new technology and competition models being introduced by the internet.”You need some people who have experience with telecom but you also need some people who understand the new types of competition. They just don’t have any experience in that field,” he says.


This is all really unacceptable. Monopolistic, big bad Bell is allowed to violate basic  contract laws as well again.

 “Want to know why this happens?  Wander around the building in Gatineau where the CRTC offices are. Nothing but hundreds of middle aged women who have never used bittorrent, never downloaded a software update, and never used an open source application.  People completely out of touch how technology is used today!   What DO they care about? Their Big Pension Countdown!”
If the CRTC isn’t going to do their job, then we at least need to examine Bell’s anti-competitive practices under consumer protection laws. They all need to be brought down a few notches. I’m convinced the CRTC is hindering the advance of technology and broadcasting in this country.”
The CRTC’s time has come! Enough pandering to big business interests. I urge all Canadians to support this initiative. The consequences of not supporting this and net neutrality will diminish the online experience for all Canadians for years to come. ” 

Rogers, Bell, Videotron, Shaw, Telus  all only care about one thing.. maximum profits.. motivated by maximum greed.. finding an excuse to charge the customer for more.. and that they have done with their regulating, capping… and no one cares about what the consumer thinks, the CRTC or the federal Conservatives as well included. This consumer price gouging perversity has got to stop. I asked the Liberals and Iggy to rightfully speak out against this, and I am  still waiting to hear from them? Why are they not talking about this as well?

Sadly to many of us are like sheep, we do what we are told, because we are fearful of negative consequences, sheep are often afraid of their own shadows as well.. but unfortunately we do not have the luxury of being abused, whether it is verbally, physically, mentally, or what ever.. cause the abusers tend not to stop their abuses upon us unless they themselves do feel some real , personal negative consequences in reality. I too have found when being abused that screaming rape in a loud voice in public, full public exposure and calling the police, demanding the appropriate rightfully prosecution works the best.. sadly the too often lazy, pretentious, inadequate police, watchdogs  themselves can be a real part of the problem and not the solution, so I next expose the bad cops and all the bad watchdogs, politicians  readily as well.

see also

“Bell to charge small ISPs by usage

Last Updated: Thursday, August 13, 2009 | 11:45 AM ET  By Peter Nowak, CBC News

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission has approved a request by Bell Canada to implement usage-based billing for its wholesale internet customers.

The decision, made on an interim basis, could result in lower download limits for customers of smaller companies such as Teksavvy and Acanac that rent portions of Bell’s network to provide their own internet services.

Smaller ISPs, which typically allow customers to download hundreds of gigabytes a month, may be forced to lower their limits to Bell levels. Bell’s most popular plan allows customers to download 50 gigabytes a month.

The CRTC on Wednesday also approved a request from Bell that will allow the company to charge small ISPs 75 cents for every gigabyte over 300 that their customers use.

Smaller ISPs had fought the requests and said if granted, their services would become indistinguishable from Bell’s. The CRTC last year also allowed Bell to extend its traffic management practices, where certain uses of the internet such as peer-to-peer file-sharing are slowed or “throttled,” to smaller ISPs.

Independent companies are therefore required to throttle their own customers as well.

Although the CRTC ruled in favour of Bell during the throttling dispute, it also launched an inquiry into the larger issue of net neutrality, or how much control internet providers should have over the connections they provide to customers. The regulator is expected to make a ruling on net neutrality by the end of the year.

Consumer concern

Internet experts said that with usage-based billing, the CRTC has once again ruled in favour of Bell at the expense of consumers.

“It raises significant competition concerns since it suggests that independent ISPs will further lose their ability to differentiate their services,” University of Ottawa internet law professor Michael Geist said.

“It also calls into question Bell’s claims during the traffic management hearing that they can’t differentiate between providers since the implementation of [usage-based billing] would mean much more detailed info about end users.”

Mirko Bibic, head of regulatory affairs for Bell, said the company’s network-management technology is capable of differentiating between wholesale customers for accounting and usage-based billing purposes but not for traffic shaping, a fact that was made clear in its filings during the CRTC hearing.

“Our statements to the CRTC were and have always been accurate,” he said.

Bell stopped offering unlimited downloading to its own retail customers a few years ago. Throttling and usage-based billing are key parts of its strategy to fight congestion on its network. Critics, however, have said that Bell has so far failed to prove its network is congested.

Rocky Gaudrault, head of Teksavvy, was angry with the CRTC’s decision and said it will limit his company’s ability to offer new services such as television over the internet and could see an increase to customers’ bills of $10 to $20.

“Today’s decision has to send a clear picture to those the CRTC have to answer to,” he said.

“Someone needs to step in and audit how these lawmakers come to their conclusions as predatory tactics, which last I checked were not allowed in Canada, are being allowed to march through the regulatory gates without any resistance, all while laughing in the face of both Joe competitor and Joe public.”

The CRTC has given small ISPs 90 days to prepare for the implementation of Bell’s usage-based billing.”

” Today the CRTC just proved they are corrupt. Only a person of an IQ of less then 80 could not tell this is bad for consumers, Indy ISP’s and small home run businesses.  One of the board members of the CRTC is a former bell and rogers employee, I wonder how much he is taking under the table in cash or stocks.”

“Unbelievable! The CRTC should be dismantled immediately and/or there should be an inquiry into it’s board members. The CRTC does not represent or protect the best interests of Canadians or any company other than the already established monopoly.”

“The CRTC screws Canadians.. AGAIN. This agency is rapidly wearing out its welcome. When Bell is wholesaling access to its system it has NO BUSINESS even knowing anything about the usage of individual customers of another company! It need only know the total usage by Teksavvy (or whoever else) and bill accordingly. Even the wording used by the CBC in this article is slanted. By expressing the issue this way “Smaller ISPs, which typically allow customers to download hundreds of gigabytes a month, may be forced to lower their limits to Bell levels. Bell’s most popular plan allows customers to download 50 gigabytes a month.” CBC is taking sides in a much more complex issue than this paragraph describes. Net neutrality NOW. “

” “Someone needs to step in and audit how these lawmakers come to their conclusions as predatory tactics, which last I checked were not allowed in Canada, are being allowed to march through the regulatory gates without any resistance, all while laughing in the face of both Joe competitor and Joe public.” Brilliantly put. Our internet privileges are slowly being stripped away from us for more and more profit, and the CRTC hasn’t done a thing about it.  Crooks.”

” I find it incredibly ludicrous that the CRTC is made up of ex-Bell cronies! How in the heck is THAT fair and unbiased? Whatever Rocky has been cooking up to deal with the throttling fiasco, he had better shift into high gear and really start researching his options on a fail-safe plan to rid the TekSavvy name from Bell’s medusian gaze forever. Or its out of business for his family for GOOD.  Bell doesnt want you using Usenet, P2P, Torrents, FTP, VOIP or YouTube HD without forking over 50% of your paycheck. Who else in this world has those kind of markups? Answer: The Mafia.  Time to change tactics with Bell. Writing angry letters is not going to cut it anymore.”

“The members CRTC should be investigated. These bunch of crooks are really the public enemies.” ” Canadian Regulators Send Another ( Pornographic) Love Letter To Bell”

I have just renewed a one year unlimited download contract with Accanac/Bell.. I rightfully oppose to Bell. CRTC putting any caps on my downloads. My tracking number is: 0010400029439


CBC had said “ Bell stopped offering unlimited downloading to its own retail customers a few years ago. Throttling and usage-based billing are key parts of its strategy to fight congestion on its network. Critics, however, have said that Bell has so far failed to prove its network is congested. ” SPECIFICALLY AS OF AN 1,2008 THAT IS NOT REALLY A FEW YEARS AGO BUT ABOUT 1.7 YEARS AGO..  and the move was clearly made to allow Bell to offer rental of  it’s own movies, to provide internet phone for iphones, and to encourage people to get Bell TV  as well


Bell is always seeking news ways by hook or crook as well  to make more money cause it undeniably still loses it’s dissatisfied customers faster than it can gain them


PS   Australia biggest ISP admits to lying Wednesday, August 12, 2009 | 11:15 AM ET Last week saw an interesting revelation from Telstra, Australia’s biggest phone and internet provider. New CEO David Thodey admitted to a court that Telstra had lied to block rival internet service providers from accessing its network. Under previous CEO Sol Trujillo, an American, Telstra had told other ISPs that several of its downtown telephone exchanges were full so they couldn’t install their own equipment and thereby provide customers with their own services. There was, in fact, plenty of space but Telstra was playing dirty tricks to cut its competitors off at the knees.

” These things ARE happening, perhaps not to the extent of demolishing bathrooms, but the lying about full areas definitely occurs. In fact, some small ISPs have had such problems with this that they advise potential new customers to sign up with Bell for a month (no contract) and then migrate over to the wholesaler. This is because when wholesalers put in the line request, they are often told that the customer can not receive DSL or that the customer will receive a much lower speed profile.

In regards to the Competition Bureau, our Bureau consciously ignores all anti-competitive behaviour from Bell. When Bell started throttling its retail customers, they lost a large number of subscribers to DSL wholesalers. Bell then unilaterally and magically decided that their network was congested because of wholesaler traffic and started throttling their wholesalers. This was an unbelievably anti-competitive move. However, how did the Competition Bureau respond? They referred all complaints to the CRTC, claiming that all telecommunications issues were the responsibility of the CRTC. Fast forward a few months. An association of small Canadian internet providers, the CAIP, files a tariff application with the CRTC asking for access to Bell’s new upgraded network. The CRTC agrees and gives Bell notice to submit their expected costs from this move. What does Bell do? Bell ignores the CRTC order and instead submits a proposal to impose Usage-Based-Billing on all wholesalers, with absolutely ridiculous overage fees of nearly $1 per GB, with no maximum penalty. The CRTC recently granted this proposal on an “interim” basis. This, despite the overwhelming submission of comments against the proposal. The CRTC even acknowledges that the proposal discriminates against wholesalers, but claims that it is not “unjust discrimination”? Huh? It is worthy to note that Bell Retail is NOT included in this proposal, and Bell only just today added a new $5 for 40GB insurance plan to its offered internet services. Smells like anti-competitive behaviour to me.” 

see also

July 6, 2008

Bell, BCE, Sympatico. iPhone

Filed under: News and politics — thenonconformer @ 7:14 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Bell bites back with poor-man’s iPhone Globe and Mail – 3 Jul 2008 BCE Inc.’s lengthy struggle to privatize may have left management distracted and Bell Canada’s brand reliant on a couple of aging beavers, but the phone company is still managing to strike back at its more nimble rivals.
Bell to offer smartphone with unlimited data plan
Can You Avoid The iPhone Data Plans From Rogers? Yes, But It Will
E Canada Now – – The Gate – Canada NewsWire (press release)

Ever wonder besides viruses that as time goes by you notice that   your computer net is slower, and slower, well it is no secret Bell, Rogers, and others cannot handle the continually increasing demands caused by computers and iphones now too. So their systems break down too often, have too many failures often, are over used, in over capacity mode.. and these carriers seem to  have been to cheap to rectify the problem, update, modernize their communication equipment..


I had already written months ago  even here that Bell was capping the Sympatico downloads EVEN cause it was making way for their iphone business and Bell will definitely abuse it’s phone customers the next same way it has undeniably now too  abused many of it’s ISP customers. Sad and unaccepatable.
Message from youth: Don’t charge us for incoming texts –  SUN MEDIA A decision by telecom giants Bell and Telus to charge customers for receiving text messages as well as sending them isn’t sitting well with youth who use the service more than any other group.
Bell/Telus Text Messaging Cash Grab Makes No Economic Sense
Text-fee plan flayed Winnipeg Sun
Prepaid Reviews – – –
all 109 news articles »


consumer groups and opposition politicians are alarmed, since cellphone users have no control over who messages them. The groups see the new charges as a cash-grab, and want the federal government to regulate how telecommunications firms set fees. 


 see also


July 5, 2008

Too Many major ISP suppliers are unacceptably guilty of

Filed under: News and politics — thenonconformer @ 5:50 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Too Many major ISP suppliers are unacceptably guilty of initial and subsequent false misleading advertising practices, and an immoral  “Bait and switch” business   practice as well.
Here is the undeniable reality.. Many bad ISP corporations beforehand do not disclose the amount of capping that they do to their customers., or after wards, or lie as to much they supposedly cap. For example I have a Bell Sympatico connection or I can use a second party proxy connection, and next I get twice the download speeds with the proxy over the Bell’s capped services even  during the non peak hours as well, such as all day Saturday.. not just  evenings  4.0 pm to 2. am when Bell admits it caps their lines. Now that is a fact any potential bell customer should know now too.
“AP  Sun Jun 15, 9:45 AM ET  At one time, the word “unlimited” meant unlimited.
Sprint’s mobile broadband service is the latest to abandon the term and the principle in favor of a monthly cap designed to keep their heaviest users from overwhelming their network.
But Sprint isn’t alone: its two 3G competitors also cap usage, and two wireline broadband operators are testing explicit caps as well. In the earliest days of broadband, service was either heavily capped, with ridiculously low limits–I recall DSL plans that had 1 GB monthly downstream limits for business-grade offerings–or totally uncapped. 
 Now, the idea of capped service with metered rates, stern warnings, or cancellations above a monthly limit are fully in fashion. For the last few years, companies like Comcast and Verizon’s wired broadband division have warned users about excessive downloads, degraded their service, or canceled their accounts, often with little recourse, and sometimes denying it all the while. Enough states’ attorneys general and FCC staff and commissioners have been involved that what was implicit has become explicit, but with the related effect that caps have become much lower than what they were in the ad hoc days before these changes. Driving all this is not scarcity, because there’s plenty of headroom out there on the Internet, but two interrelated issues: service providers always dramatically oversell their service, and some users are actually abusers. ( But really how can one be an absuer when he pays for and uses what was advertised now?
 On the first issue, if an ISP has 500 people connected to a central office DSLAM (a DSL aggregator) with a total downstream bandwidth of 2 Gbps, there’s no universe in which a phone company makes available 2 Gbps to that location. Rather, they allot a fraction of that, which works when traffic is bursty, not continuous. Many people downloading or streaming a lot impact everyone in the same grouping. (I’ve seen this at home when I complained about my 3 Mbps DSL dropping to 500 Kbps at night. A Qwest technician explained I was lumped with heavy users, and with about 20 minutes of waiting on the phone, regrouped my line to another, less used pod of users, and my service has been fine since. The nice part is that was a logical change; no one had to walk over to a cage and move my wires around.)
The second issue has provoked a lot of debate. But without explicitly labeling the limits on a service, a subscriber can’t technically abuse it. If you know when you sign up for Comcast that they limit your use to 10 GB and provide tools to monitor as well as an understanding of what that bandwidth would allow you to “consume” each month, it’s a very different matter than “all you can eat. “
Verizon had long promised unlimited Broadband Access for their 3G EVDO mobile broadband service. But it was well documented that unlimited had fairly strict limits. After an investigation by the New York attorney general’s office, Verizon agreed to change its disclosures, pay some costs to the state, and refund money to some subscribers. The company now fully discloses its 5 GB per month limit for combined upstream and downstream data. Verizon charges you 49 cents per MB ($490 per GB) when you cross that limit, and the company says that they use email, SMS, and a live data usage display in their connection manager to keep you apprised. Note that a single high-definition movie download might consume nearly 5 GB.AT&T, likewise, has a 5 GB cap each month on LaptopConnect, its 3G cell data offering, with unspecified behavior when you top that amount–additional charges may apply, but clarity would be helpful. They note in their PDF-only terms and conditions: “The parties agree that AT&T has the right to impose additional charges if you use more than 5 B in a month. Prior to the imposition of any additional charges, AT&T shall provide you with notice and you shall have the right to terminate your service.”Sprint has joined this club with first the leaked news and then official confirmation that starting July 13, 2008, its 3G service would also have a 5 GB cap. A spokesperson told me that off-network roaming–ostensibly with Verizon or Alltel, the only other major providers of 3G in the US using the EVDO flavor–is capped at 300 MB per month. Now these are all 3G providers, who have limited spectrum over which they have to make sure all contending users in each cell get approximately the same kind of experience. They can’t afford one user sucking down all bandwidth. However, we’re seeing the same kinds of limits start to be tested for cable-based broadband.

Comcast is testing delaying traffic–slowing down packet transmission to throttle the bandwidth rate–in two Eastern cities they cover for the heaviest users of their service. This is an effective cap, rather than a cutoff. (Comcast has been delaying BitTorrent P2P traffic for all its users prior to this; this change affects all traffic, not just BitTorrent, and is being announced, instead of sub rosa.) In a town in Texas, Time Warner Cable is experimenting with offering different speed packages each of which is coupled with a monthly limit on usage. The lowest-priced package offers a ridiculous 768 Kbps downstream and 1 GB per month for $30 per month; the highest-priced is 15 Mbps downstream with a more reasonable 40 GB per month limit. Charges are $1 per GB above that. With cable companies traditionally and telephone companies newly offering television programming, premium channels, and on-demand video, the caps are another tool to prevent competition from over-the-Internet sources of things to watch. In a situation in which a few carriers control all the pieces, it’s unclear whether rate caps can stick. If both telcos and cable companies decide to impose such limits and restructure their networks, who do you turn to? People with broadband are unlikely to cancel it. In a monopoly or duopoly market, you can’t switch brands. There has to be a happy middle–a role that the FCC may help to negotiate. A 40 GB cap switched to 400 GB might serve precisely the right purpose without penalizing average users who have no other market choice. With Time Warner Cable charging a buck a gigabyte above their monthly limits in their test market, but with Amazon’s S3 service delivering it retail for as little as a tenth that, it’s not hard to see that carriers are looking to caps to solve network problems and make a little scratch on the side.”
Beware always of men and women, bullies, tormentors, control freaks,  persons, civil and public servants,  politicians, pastors, leaders, elders, Corporations, governments who falsely do, will try to enslave you, oppress you, exploit you even while they claim they are proclaiming the truth, democracy, trying to help you, etc.,
Is 51:23 ..your tormentors {and} oppressors, those who said to you, Bow down, that we may ride {or} tread over you; and you have made your back like the ground and like the street for them to pass over.

Create a free website or blog at