Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular
Google slams Bell Canada: open Internet is "extraordinary"
arstechnica.com — Google weighs in on Bell Canada's P2P throttling system, blasting the company's approach and the sad state of the ISP market. Not surprisingly, other incumbent ISPs don't think Bell's solution is too bad, and one even cops to some P2P throttling of its own.
MakiMaki- 1238 diggs
- digg it
- Ozeki, on 07/08/2008, -2/+62The goddamn telecom market in Canada is so ***** evil...
Funny thing is that most of the time when other company (from other countries) try to penetrate the Canadian market in other marketplaces, it is seen as a bad thing (and most of the time it is) but its almost what the consumers need in the telecom market to make it a decent ***** place now...- winmywii, on 07/09/2008, -1/+5U.S. companies aren't much better.
- BinaryFragger, on 07/09/2008, -0/+14We desperately need more competition.
I just checked out the Rogers website, and their 'Extreme' Internet is now $54.95. Bell Sympatico is not much cheaper at $49.95/month (including modem rental).
Costs are rising, speeds are getting slower (sure, they advertise incredibly fast download speeds, but good luck actually achieving those speeds). Internet technology is moving at a backwards pace in Canada.- zomglolcats, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3Pretty much the same scenario in the US.
- RiverBelow, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Actually here in Canada I switched over to Yaknet, from Cogeco. Cogeco is absolutely ***** ridiculous, and my only other choice was Bell, and ***** that. So I heard about Yak which is sadly, DSL, but they don't throttle BitTorrent and bandwidth limits are non-existent. Not non-existent like Comcast, with a 200 or 300 GB cap. I've done 1.5 Terabytes and have not yet been bothered at all by them. I was also getting good speeds and the way they handle things is a lot better, for example, on Cogeco I could get just over 1 megabyte a second, on say, iTunes podcast downloads. Thats great, but my Xbox Live would lag like crazy. Now Its down to around 350 KB/s with iTunes podcasts but I can also have bittorrent going pretty fast and play on Live virtually fine. It definitely has its pros and cons, and there's people I've talked to who have switched who have terrible speeds around 100 KB/s on wireless N which makes no sense to me because mine is solid. I'm not sure if they're completely trustworthy yet but I definitely like them more than Cogeco.
- hakkola, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2In western Canada, most people use Shaw for their internet, and it is pretty damn good, hi speed is 5mbps, for $32/month if you have cable t.v, $41 if you don't, 6 months at $29.95 and a month free, free modem, free install. Extreme is only $10 more.month, and you get the same deal as hi speed, same 6 months at $29.95, and twice the speed, then nitro which is 25mbps but expensive as *****.
I can't complaing about internet prices, but cell phone plans do suck balls.
- HiddenCanuck, on 07/09/2008, -0/+8Only thing worse than the telecoms companies is the mobile phone networks. Both of them.
Anyone who has lived in any other country knows how we are getting screwed 17 ways till Sunday in ways that competition has removed from other areas.
- caupolixan, on 07/08/2008, -1/+57It sucks big time when your only choice is either Rogers or Bell as your ISP.
- mrelusive, on 07/09/2008, -1/+4Or Shaw, though their service doesn't seem as bad (their customer service is another story).
- nickert0n, on 07/09/2008, -0/+5I have Shaw Extreme-I in Alberta and I easily pull 5 Mb/s D/L
amd 2 M/b/s U/L on a speed test.
If I get a good set of seeders my torrents usually go at about 1 MB/s which is sickly fast however ONLY if I encrypt my traffic because shaw has been bandwidth throtiling with QoS for years now.
So being that said, dont cry about your ISP, Encrypt your traffic.
And before anyone pipes up that they will de-prioritize encrypted traffic aswell, know that this is a bogus claim and it is very against the law. There is no valid reson to do so therefore they cant.
Many different sockets via the internet are encrypted and even if the ISP's did do that they would lose business huge.
So rest easy, encrypt your packets.
/nerd tutorial - pogobouncepogo, on 07/09/2008, -1/+0See thats the problem though. There is no competition for the ISP's to lose their business too. Are you going to go without internet to stick it to the man? I am sure as hell not going to drop my internet access just so I can say "HEY MAN you suck!" Because what will they hear? Oops we just lost 0.000001% of our profit...then they will throw their heads back and laugh.
*nerd rant* - kevro, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3rogers throttles encrypted traffic as well.
- Abominable, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Shaw is okay. Just like nickert0n said, just encrypt your traffic and you'll be fine. Shaw's prices I think are okay, and their customer support is pretty good too. I'd say their service is reliable and decent.
Yeah shaw throttles bit torrent, but we just have to deal with it/encrypt traffic.
- nickert0n, on 07/09/2008, -0/+5I have Shaw Extreme-I in Alberta and I easily pull 5 Mb/s D/L
- whoreable, on 07/09/2008, -1/+10I for one, welcome our Google ISP overlords.
- longzero, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0There's also Videotron for cable access. Although, their prices are horrible.
- oxymoron69, on 07/09/2008, -0/+6The choice between Bell and Cogeco isn't much better.
I had cogeco cable internet once, it was 10mbit/s and I blew through my cap in less than a week.
They terminated my account because what they call unlimited is actually 60GB.
My new ISP Teksavvy.com actually gives you either 200GB or real unlimited for $10 more.- Redge, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1It's sad Teksavvy isn't available in my area because I would go with them in a hearthbeat!
- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1I signed up with teksavvy a couple of months ago and I am fairly content with their service.
P2P' get throttled like no tomorrow. But teksavvy does not have any control over it...as they are left to the whims of Bell (being a third party ISP).
Sucks...sucks even more that the CRTC would not force an injunction on Bell to remove all throttling for third party ISP's before it can actually PROVE that their traffic is being affected by P2P.
And meanwhile Bell just launched it's own Video over the internet service. LOL....this has monopoly/anti-competitive moves written all over it.
Wake up CRTC!
- b0rna, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Only good things to say about Shaw, they provide service all over canada...i regularly receive excess of 3MBytes per second from their boost service...yes that's a full 24Mbits, and well seeded torrents run in the 1MBytes range. Customer service has always been great too.
Just my 2 cents.
- mrelusive, on 07/09/2008, -1/+4Or Shaw, though their service doesn't seem as bad (their customer service is another story).
- pianomahnn, on 07/09/2008, -3/+105Google ... will you please use your many billions to start your own ISP?
- Renian, on 07/09/2008, -2/+4Thank you for echoing essentially the same comment that I made on a similar article. :)
They absolutely need to do this. With the resources they have, they could quickly set into place their own fiber-optic network and satellite network.- DanBoodro, on 07/09/2008, -2/+4I'd sign a lifetime contract with Google if they were an ISP. Google knows what internet users want, thus making it easier for them to satisfy us and I'm sure they would have extremely competitive prices. If any deal for net neutrality or anything were to go down like that, Google would definitely have our backs.
- arrrapirate, on 07/09/2008, -1/+18i wouldn't sign a lifetime contract with anybody, are you nuts?
- dajuggernaut, on 07/09/2008, -2/+14Sadly I cant sign a lifetime contract with google... I already have one with the devil...
- 1of42, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2Uhhh... why do you all assume that Google would have your interests at heart as an ISP? Google's actions here have been entirely consistent with its position as a company whose bottom line is very tied to net neutrality and open access. It's not doing this ***** to look out for you guys out of philanthropic principles.
Think about it. ISPs pay for bandwidth and infrastructure. Obviously it's in their best overall interest (or so they think) to throttle large downloaders that place more load on their system.
Google's business is based off of free and quick access to information. Obviously it's in their best interest to not want any throttling.
Google's a better company than most, but it's still looking out - long term - for its bottom line. That's all. - americamatrix, on 07/09/2008, -0/+5@ dajuggernaut
"Sadly I cant sign a lifetime contract with google... I already have one with the devil... "
...I didn't know the devil worked for Comcast - Renian, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1@1of42
If Google's losses are greater or equal to the costs of building up the ISP and charging a certain amount for it, they will do it, because of what you said. Just because they are looking out for their bottom line does not mean that it cannot help the consumer. - n4tune8, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2I'd even be ready to receive ad-word (not popups, not banners) ads from the sites I visit while using the "google network" if that can decrease the price of the subscription.
- freebird09, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0@ americamatrix
"...I didn't know the devil worked for comcast"
Isn't it kind of obvious?
- Nosferotu, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4Here here - I have this fond dream in my heart that someday, Google will set up free wireless internet all across the US. Really, who would be surprised if they were already working on this?
- harmil, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2Had they been able to pick up the wireless spectrum they were bidding on, I think they would have, but if it came down to a real bidding war, they knew the telcos would pony up more cash than even Google could.
Now the question is: how does Google get the last mile? Wireless isn't going to happen. I've been wondering if the future might be in powerline-based transmissions, but there are still many glitches to work out in that. - chubbstar, on 07/10/2008, -0/+1mmmmmmm... fiber optics....
- Renian, on 07/09/2008, -2/+4Thank you for echoing essentially the same comment that I made on a similar article. :)
- ericjohnson0, on 07/09/2008, -1/+10As so much of our lives is moving or has moved online, this little 'throttling' crap greatly reduces the choices people have. We need to stay on top of the elected officials to make sure the Net stays 'open' and Neutral.
Here is one nasty little device which is specifically designed to 'gag' traffic.
http://thesaloon.net/blog/_archives/2008/6/27/3765 ...- getsaf, on 07/09/2008, -0/+5There are many valid reasons to use a device like that.. Of course it's not designed to run on an ISP to filter all of it's clients, but for a college dorm, it would be very useful.. It's not going to "cap" P2P traffic, it simply assigns priority to more important traffic like HTTP or VOIP etc.. It's simple QOS.
It's another thing when an ISP decides to cap traffic because when you sign up for service it's generally a package with an assigned speed 5mb/s max, but if they are capping your P2P traffic at 1mb/s then you are not getting what you paid for.
- getsaf, on 07/09/2008, -0/+5There are many valid reasons to use a device like that.. Of course it's not designed to run on an ISP to filter all of it's clients, but for a college dorm, it would be very useful.. It's not going to "cap" P2P traffic, it simply assigns priority to more important traffic like HTTP or VOIP etc.. It's simple QOS.
- killdashnine, on 07/09/2008, -2/+7I'm with pianomahnn ... Google should build their own ISP, or even better a replacement to the entire Internet.
- mbauer14, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Does anyone have an idea if Time Warner (Roadrunner) does this? Because the only time our connection seems to slow to a crawl is when things are being streamed over p2p. A full reboot (resetting the modem and router) is required. Is this just due to the network being unable to handle the increase in data transfer, or is Time Warner at fault?
- ericjohnson0, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Depends... how many people are uploading FROM you when you're on your P2P network?
- mbauer14, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1it usually entails watching video from sopcast. so i really have no figures on other people connected to the same stream.
- jonshipman, on 07/09/2008, -1/+1You need a new router. Switched to a Linksys WRT54GL from a G and got over 10x faster on my torrents and I can still use the internet.
- mbauer14, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1actually, we just switched to a new router, the regular linksys wrt54. usually, just resetting the router does not help, and the actual modem needs to be unplugged/plugged in.
- ericjohnson0, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Depends... how many people are uploading FROM you when you're on your P2P network?
- Akraz, on 07/09/2008, -1/+10"Rogers even admits to doing a bit of P2P throttling itself"
LOL A BIT? LOL
LOL..
LOL................................- dark_helmet, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1They really don't throttle that much, i can easily pull the full 7Mb of my connnection, and upload at the full 512Kb. Their low caps are another issue
- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4we are talking P2P here
I highly doubt you get a 7MB download connection for your torrents. More like 2.5 Kbps? - savethejets, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Rogers admits to throttling upload speeds. However they "supposedly" don't throttle the download speeds.
- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4we are talking P2P here
- lololol1, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3I got my first warning notice from them last week...
- daridave, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3PIRATE !!1!1 /ISP-imitation
- dark_helmet, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1They really don't throttle that much, i can easily pull the full 7Mb of my connnection, and upload at the full 512Kb. Their low caps are another issue
- ButlerMonkey, on 07/09/2008, -1/+11Will any Canadians be surprised by this? Forget about Bell's Internet service, but as a company they leave a lot to be desired.
I wonder if this negative news about Bell distract from Rogers recent negative press, you know, the other ***** monopolistic media and communications service provider in Canada? Actually it just means half the news stations in Canada will be talking about how crappy Rogers is in regards to the iPhone while the other half can talk about how Bell cheating it's customers as an ISP.- Definition, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1I'm Canadian, but I use an ISP that uses Bell's network. Which sucks greatly. But, either way I don't have a choice, since Bell, really is a monopoly. I guess I don't like to think of Bell as one, but really Rogers is for one, not in my area, but I've heard terrible things about them. Then there is Videotron, but again, they cap on bandwidth, and I have a hunch that they throttle. I guess for the normal consumer, they wouldn't mind much, therefore unsurprised, but still, this isn't right. Now you say that Bell cheats their customers. Of course they do. I work as a part-time network infrastructure technician and I see a lot of ***** from Bell. I work with phone systems, and A LOT of the time, Bell fails to comply. For example, I might have a customer that is missing a line, or one that hasn't received a feature to their phones. But, what I really hate about Bell is that they simply don't care if they don't supply you with the paid features or lines and such. They don't. If you need some support, they'll simply throw you at someone in Bangalore.
You can never find an honest company these days.
- Definition, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1I'm Canadian, but I use an ISP that uses Bell's network. Which sucks greatly. But, either way I don't have a choice, since Bell, really is a monopoly. I guess I don't like to think of Bell as one, but really Rogers is for one, not in my area, but I've heard terrible things about them. Then there is Videotron, but again, they cap on bandwidth, and I have a hunch that they throttle. I guess for the normal consumer, they wouldn't mind much, therefore unsurprised, but still, this isn't right. Now you say that Bell cheats their customers. Of course they do. I work as a part-time network infrastructure technician and I see a lot of ***** from Bell. I work with phone systems, and A LOT of the time, Bell fails to comply. For example, I might have a customer that is missing a line, or one that hasn't received a feature to their phones. But, what I really hate about Bell is that they simply don't care if they don't supply you with the paid features or lines and such. They don't. If you need some support, they'll simply throw you at someone in Bangalore.
- xamboozi, on 07/09/2008, -1/+2obviously current isp's really could care less about the people. why doesnt an isp lay down some fiber and offer unlimited everything and make it a huge point in they're advertising? they would blow away comcast, bell and everyone else and make a lot of money. they make competition WAY to easy, yet everyone competing seems to be inbred. i swear, the more i read the news the more i believe the movie idiocracy is becoming a reality.
- sodade, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Because ISPs don't make money when people actually use the bandwidth they pay for.
- jakethelake, on 07/09/2008, -7/+3dupe of yesterday.
- pinoylife, on 07/09/2008, -1/+10Credits to google in supporting net neutrality and against isp monopoly.
Temp. solution to Evil -Bell's throttling:
"Set your bittorrent port to TCP/1723, and put any DHT or tracking on UDP/500, UDP/50, UDP/51."
-www.dslreports.com/shownews/How-To-Defeat-Bell-Canadas-Throttling-95919- htan, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1is this a setting that is to be changed in the bt client? or router-side?
i'm using utorrent right now and i'm not sure how to specify a tcp port- pinoylife, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1For more info check their guide:
www.dslreports.com/shownews/How-To-Defeat-Bell-Canadas-Throttling-95919
What I also did is I did a port forwarding in my router for UDP/500, UDP/50, UDP/51
- pinoylife, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1For more info check their guide:
- htan, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1is this a setting that is to be changed in the bt client? or router-side?
- DRJTower, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2Google ... you are my hero!
- nickert0n, on 07/09/2008, -6/+2I have Shaw Extreme-I in Alberta and I easily pull 5 Mb/s D/L
amd 2 M/b/s U/L on a speed test.
If I get a good set of seeders my torrents usually go at about 1 MB/s which is sickly fast however ONLY if I encrypt my traffic because shaw has been bandwidth throtiling with QoS for years now.
So being that said, dont cry about your ISP, Encrypt your traffic.
And before anyone pipes up that they will de-prioritize encrypted traffic aswell, know that this is a bogus claim and it is very against the law. There is no valid reson to do so therefore they cant.
Many different sockets via the internet are encrypted and even if the ISP's did do that they would lose business huge.
So rest easy, encrypt your packets.
/nerd tutorial- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -1/+4DPI affects encrypted traffic as well.
- pogobouncepogo, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Since you copy and pasted your reply out here I am just going to do the same thing....
See thats the problem though. There is no competition for the ISP's to lose their business too. Are you going to go without internet to stick it to the man? I am sure as hell not going to drop my internet access just so I can say "HEY MAN you suck!" Because what will they hear? Oops we just lost 0.000001% of our profit...then they will throw their heads back and laugh.
*nerd rant* - pinoylife, on 07/09/2008, -1/+5Obviously Bell knows that we can encrypt our p2p traffic and thus program their throttling to bypass it.
buried for tutorial-fail.- nickert0n, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Its illegal....
- freebird09, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0...heard you the first time...
- nickert0n, on 07/09/2008, -0/+7Dugg for Google standing up against *****.
Madd Respekt - grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -1/+6Bell forces throttling upon it's third party ISP's. If this is not an anti-competitive move by a monopoly, then I do not know what is.
Sending a note to your elected representative does very little in Canada nowadays. There are only one or two exceptions to that though, Thank God for people like Charlie Angus (rocker turned MP) and Michael Geist who have openly rallied in favor of net-neutrality and have led and have brought the issue up in the Parliament. Not to forget the smaller ISP setup here in Canada, who have stood up and resisted these monopolistic move(s) by Bell.
If you look at the big picture, then this really is just another anti-competitive move by Bell to keep the masses away from how they access their data and entertainment. Bell not only offers Internet service in Canada, but also their Satellite Channels (Bell express vu). Even if say 50,000 folks in one local decide to get rid of their Bell Express Vu setup and decide to go with downloading and watching the content they want. A very small percentage of market loss will result into substantial loss for Bell. Rogers (Rogers Cable) and Bell are in bed when it comes to a throttling setup, as wide-spread use of P2P will seriously hurt their market share in the long run. It might not be 2, 5 or 8 years. But it will happen. P2P is revolutionary. All Bell and Rogers can really do is extend the timeframe, whereby the real damage will occur to their profits.
All we really need is an ISP that let's you use your allocated bandwidth. However you wish to use it. If you exceed the 200G limit. You simply purchase more bandwidth for that month.
Resist these monopolies. They curb innovation and threaten our future as a continent. - LemonHerb, on 07/09/2008, -0/+6Google should just block traffic from the ISPs that do this, maybe some of the other major sites on the net could do the same. Once everyone leaves those ISPs they will start treating the customer like they matter and value their busines more.
- freebird09, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0While a valid point, this would most certainly not be in Google's best interest. By blocking off whole ISPs, they can greatly hurt the traffic to its sites and thus decrease ad revenue by a good amount. Can you imagine if a large portion of Canada couldn't use Google or Youtube etc.?
- Corman420, on 07/09/2008, -0/+7Every wireless provider, ISP, and satellite/cable provider should be slammed in Canada.
We pay $75+ amonth for each of these services...
And system access fees? WTF?- n4tune8, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3I find Videotron (cable provider) to be reasonably good. Yes, they have download/upload limits, but if you go over, there is a maximum of 30$ you'll pay for that month, usually bringing you to the same price as the "next speed level" (which usually have a higher U/D limit too). It's like saying "look, if you'd pay the 30$ up front, you'd get more AND get it faster".
- Emachine, on 07/09/2008, -1/+8Google should threaten to block access to it's search engine and services for bell canada customers. Throttling would disappear very quickly.
- seb9898, on 07/09/2008, -0/+5Do not give them (Bell) ideas, they are dumb enough to say:
"Well, we don't need Google! We're already partner with Microsoft and we have our Sympatico MSN Search! People won't notice!"
- seb9898, on 07/09/2008, -0/+5Do not give them (Bell) ideas, they are dumb enough to say:
- hamobu, on 07/09/2008, -1/+4To companies, customers are nothing but an asset to be managed.
- DarkStar3333, on 07/09/2008, -1/+20There is no need to lay more fiber, Canada has an incredible ammount of fiber allready in the ground waiting to be lit.
The real problem is that Rogers or Bell really have no incentive to upgrade there networks or install additional hardware. They have reached a happy medium of having allmost identical services and costs, the only real different is the logo on your monthly bill and "savings" you can achieve by bundling in TV, Phone, Cell into a package.
The thing most americans wont know is that Bell was owned by the Government at one point. It was public (taxes) money that was invested to install a large portion of Canada's residential infastructure years ago. When Bell was spun off as a private company they inherited the network and upto now they were doing fine managing.
Its economically unfeasable for an ISP to make the investment to build enough DSLAMs to allow them to bypass this throttling manuever.
Internet in Canada = Lowest Common Denominator - grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4Seems like someone at Bell is un-digging all the anti-Bell comments
LOL wot a bunch of losers - JasonCox, on 07/09/2008, -0/+8Dear Google,
Can we use some that dark fiber you've been buying in bulk?
Signed,
Residents of North America - pond70, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3BELL F- YOU
- sonza, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0While we're at it. ROGERS F- YOU!
- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3Article went from 50 diggs to 450 within an hour
I wonder if Bell actually cares about how much bad press they get for their anti-competitive (throttling) moves.- giveupsin, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0No more so than Google's anti-competitive and uncaring attitude. I look at all these companies as demons.
- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0Google is anti-competitive?
Proof please?
- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0Google is anti-competitive?
- kevro, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1why would they care, they can just throttle those pages.
- chubbstar, on 07/10/2008, -0/+1bell just says "so what? go to rogers! oops! you found out they throttle too and now youre too lazy to change ISPs? guess youre stuck with us."
- giveupsin, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0No more so than Google's anti-competitive and uncaring attitude. I look at all these companies as demons.
- Nosferotu, on 07/09/2008, -1/+3Google is the angel of the internet. They are the company which stands as the avatar of internet culture, and what the future SHOULD be.
- SLockhart, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Awww, your so cute.
- Nosferotu, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1C'mon, you know it's true. What company is making steps nearly as large or positive as Google in the growth of seemingly all important forms of technology these days? And really, what real complaint can anyone muster against them?
I love Google.
- Nosferotu, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1C'mon, you know it's true. What company is making steps nearly as large or positive as Google in the growth of seemingly all important forms of technology these days? And really, what real complaint can anyone muster against them?
- SLockhart, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Awww, your so cute.
- corbanbrook, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2FTA: 'Large incumbents Rogers and Telus have no problems with Bell's approach (Rogers even admits to doing a bit of P2P throttling itself)'
What confuses me is how Bell is the company that is always talked about in regards to throttling P2P when it was rogers in fact that started throttling first. In fact, months in advance of bell and has by far a stricter throttle in place. I switched from rogers to bell after finally being fed up with the throttle, and Bell was fine for about 6 months before they finally adopted sandvine technologies.- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0Like someone said.
Media doesn't want to collude things too much (we guess). Rogers get blasted for bloated iphone package (rates) and Bell gets lamented for throttling P2P like no tomorrow.
Media seems to be drawing the lines, so people direct their discontent appropriately? - Spamorama, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0So true. Always wondered why Rogers gets a free pass on their throttling but Bell gets its ass reamed by everybody.
And gregmonkey...Bell's been blasted for a while now for throttling. Well before this recent Rogers/iPhone controversy.
- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0Like someone said.
- mr0nine2five, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2I'd love to see another option for global internet connection. DYI open source hardware and software wireless stations. of course i know nothing of the systems involved in such a massive undertaking...
- combatgoose, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2Great article.
I personally have great disdain for Bell after it was discovered there was physical damage to the actual line going to my house and they said they would not fix it. Compile that on top of the fact that I am over the maximum 5km distance from the 'source' and that they are unwilling to change us to the same line that the people next door use, and you get some extremely bad internet, all the while paying the same price everyone else does, while getting a max download rate of 120kbps, on a good day.- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0Again ..
this post is more related to P2P, throttling, anti competitive moves and monopolies.
If you are getting slower downloads..then this is not the venue.
I'd be lucky if I got anywhere close to 120kbps for my torrentz!- combatgoose, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0Too many digg users seem to have this superiority complex where if you say something that doesn't relate 100% or isn't full proof, and scientifically proven, you'll get ripped on or flamed.
I realize what the article was about, I was just sharing a 'side note' as to another reason why I dislike Bell.
I have taken Cisco CCNA courses and I'm willing to bet I have as good an idea, if not better understanding of the subject matter.
Thanks for your concern though :) - grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0again
it is unrelated
This is not a "general Bell bashing post." - combatgoose, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0And your comments have nothing to do with the topic either.
Honestly, you're a hypocritical idiot. - chubbstar, on 07/10/2008, -0/+1ZING!
- combatgoose, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0Too many digg users seem to have this superiority complex where if you say something that doesn't relate 100% or isn't full proof, and scientifically proven, you'll get ripped on or flamed.
- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0Again ..
- traceymark35, on 07/09/2008, -1/+1Does port forwarding to use random ports everytime you start p2p, if you use dsl router help in sorting out throttling problem?
See http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/0,1000000097,2097 ...- justice7, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2No, it does not. Using port numbers to identify types of traffic is an oldschool approach, and with the ability to change ports easily; it isn't the most reliable. What the ISP's actually do, is read your packet header information. If it contains bittorrent header information (for example), they will throttle it. They now know what port you're using and which IP is getting the traffic and can begin choking your connection.
The only REAL way around this, is full blown encryption; but that has overhead associated with it. At this rate, though.. the overhead will still be faster than the throttled connection.
That will only work as long as only a small portion of users are doing it. Once everyone catches on, they'll find new ways of throttling the connection. It might just be an arbitrary throttling to heavy usage -- and there is no getting around that.
- justice7, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2No, it does not. Using port numbers to identify types of traffic is an oldschool approach, and with the ability to change ports easily; it isn't the most reliable. What the ISP's actually do, is read your packet header information. If it contains bittorrent header information (for example), they will throttle it. They now know what port you're using and which IP is getting the traffic and can begin choking your connection.
- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4In other news:
While North American monopolies offer a stripped (dumbed) down version of broadband connection to their customers for x3 the price.
Asian ISP's are now offering "fiber" connection to a majority of the populace for less than a quarter of broadband price in North America. - savethejets, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4Not to mention Bell announced yesterday that soon they will start charging mobile phone customers 15 cents per incoming text message. They claim their networks are getting hammered by the increase in texting.
So Basically soon ( I'm sure Rogers will follow suit ) Canadians will start getting charged for something they ultimately have no control over. This is utterly ridiculous.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNew ...- justice7, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2I saw this as well, I can't stand cellular phones in Canada. I have one from work which i don't pay for. I like to keep it that way; if it wasnt mandatory for me to have it -- i wouldnt at all. I hate the damn things.
- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2P2P throttling + SMS charges = Signs of a company getting desperate
I'd be dumping my (Bell) stocks if I was an investor - ycobrico, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1you know what guys.. if u have Google starts ISP.. what happen to all of your online privacy.. i still think Google still track on almost your every single move online.. so if Google really gonna start isp.. can u imagine.. all of your online behavior and history will be seen and recorded by who!
- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1...there is no such thing as privacy and our live(s) are going to get even more transparent as we advance
The NSA knows more about you than your own parents
Like Steve Jobs once said "You are already naked."
- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1...there is no such thing as privacy and our live(s) are going to get even more transparent as we advance
- daridave, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3I hate Bell, I hate Videotron, I hate Rogers. Darn it, what am I going to do ?! Change country ?! I wish some one with more power would wake the f* up and do something.
- n4tune8, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Please explain what you hate about Videotron? I understand about the other two...
- beerock, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2Wow, American companies have to step up for us because our government is scared of corporations.
Bell is one the most poorly managed companies in all of North America, and absolutely rips it's customer's assholes open.
They have already been charging an illegal system access fee on cell phones for a decade, and starting next month, they will begin to charge for incoming txt messages.
Why? Because some execs douche-bag son just got his MBA and realized they'll make more money with this illegal scam, that the Canadian government doesn't have the stones to deal with.
***** Bell.- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Sans the profanity
You have summarized the whole ordeal quite well =)
- grepmonkey451, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Sans the profanity
- macwac, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2The reason why Google backs (us) diggers and end-users, is simple.. money. They don't want ISPs to throttle internet when they are the content/service provider, such as youtube. It will inevitably damage the service and download speed of youtube videos, stopping people from using it if it gets too bad - meaning decrease in revenue from decrease in ad exposures. Especially as they want to go into higher definition videos and potentially a hoard of other internet sites they will be launching - requiring the end user to have high internet download speeds. Google driving innovation. Bell on the other hand wants to make your internet into a telecom payment system where they charge you per byte... that way they get filthy rich (not as if they aren't already).. that's how they see their growth rather than becoming the content provider, impeding innovation. One has to bow to the other..
- Ktse, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0Sounds like the modem is getting overloaded with connections. I used to have that happen a lot whenever I used a torrent service just due to the sheer number of peers connecting and uploading files on some of the torrents.
Make sure that the router is handling all the traffic and not the modem. Some modems are setup to handle connections and routing and thus having the router itself only act as a bridge. - layzice, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1You know a month or two with no customers would put them in their place faster than than any bad pr they will get from this digg article. Cancel your cable/phone services and wait them out. With no money they lose.
Unfortunately, many people are to heavily reliant on these services for news/entertainment/work/porn to do so.. and they know it .
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by