babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
LTJ:
I'd like to see a more discussion on this post here... I know the response that comes from the Telco's as to why this is, but I'd like to here the counter arguements.
First I think comparing Canada's wireless pentration by land percentage is kinda silly... I'm just guessing, but Russia is probably last (Cell coverage in Siberia can't be good). Canadian geography is always a telco challenge. Wireless penetration by user access (not by land mass) would be a more accurate measure... Otherwise you're promoting telco's going though the arctic and putting up cell phone towers in 2 mile intervals to get our wireless pentration number up to something as respectable as countries without vast arctic regions are ^^ Polar Bears can use the 411 directory on their iBears to locate iceflows instead of swimming for days on end :D
This Geography, along with the CRTC, is what the Telco's blame the higher prices on. My information might be a bit old, but to my understanding, the CRTC regulates that Telco's cannot charge additional money for services by location. IE, the price someone pays living in a rural home is regulated to be the same as what I would pay living in a city center. Really, once the network is built you can put as many customers on it as you want (to some degree), so a network serving a high density region can put on many more customers than one in a rural location while costing around the same amount (cabling distnaces could push the rural one to higher costs). CRTC says the prices must be the same... Therefore your high density area's are (to some degree) subsidizing the cost of the low density regions.
Now for the study above... Your average American lives in high pop density area's where they can get the service for cheap (particularily in Georgia apparently). Your 'unaverage' american living in a rural area (assuming theres rural to be found in the mass of urban sprawls) would be paying quite a bit more for their services. This is different from Canada where we pay the average cost spread across all users (atleast theorectically).
This is me paraphraising what I've heard from the Telco's... Is anyone more familiar with the CRTC regulation that dictates this?
So I am trying to follow the logic here and CRTC, okay. Obvious some do not understand what is taking place.
That all fine and dandy, cost spread, but that's not the point. Maintaining the system? That's not the point either. Infrastructure "already exists" and if you want to pay, that is your choice.
We know by "public institutions use" there is no fee to be had? You piggy back now, and like the "loan of book" have access to information( what constitues library by legal definition under non profit). Shall you be discrimminate upon then when infromation is contained in a frequency medium that is public??
This is a "medium access point" in terms of "new internet spectrum use." We've already defined it in terms of "public or not."
So why not. The costs are ridiculous. Limited to a "portion of society" while others are being discrimminated upon?
Best,
Not sure if I fully understand what you are responding to Admin... My comment was directed to the higher prices we pay in Canada compared to other nations and the reason thats given by the telco's... You're talking about White Space, which is a diff topic.
The infrastructure doesn't exist yet... The internet isn't magical. It's a series of routers and the connections between them. All of them physically exist somewhere, were manufactured by one company and bought/installed/maintained by another company. This new technology will require new hardware to be added to this network (which is why so many hardware manufacturers are jumping onbaord). FYI, these new components have a horrid failure rate when first manufactured... The cost related to maintaining them (repair and replacement) can be huge. Who would take on the cost if it's completely public?
What would be public use is the actual airways. Whomever bought that piece of equipment can freely use this public resource to transmit information. The owners of whatever equipment thats picking up your signal and putting it onto the internet will still charge access fee's (otherwise, they wouldn't be investing in these routers or be in business).
Now there might be the occasion where a public resource has bought that equipment like a library or school, and they could put you onto the internet for no charge to you (though the gov't is likely paying someone for that access which they are giving to you for free).
I think most of the cost for future white space networks will be with cost of personal comm devices themselves. Infrastructure and maintenance costs for whitespace networks should be less than for cable or DSL much less for strictly satellite-microwave backhaul systems. White space networks could allow for two or three times the communication distances capable with WiFi. Equipment-hardware costs should continue to drop as silicon chip and comm technologies improve. Whitespace looks good for rural service where dialup to no service whatsoever not looking too good.
Don't be so childish, Noise. Yes, Bell and Telus are on one network and Rogers is on another. But Bell and Telus are moving to the same protocol and, nevertheless, you can't take your Telus phone to Bell or vice-versa. Or, you can try it. Just try swapping that SIM card and give it a shot.
I am a buyer of technology, Noise. I know what is available and what I can and can't do. And if I could move my hardware from Telus to Bell or vive-versa, I would. But Bell, for one example, will offer me a credit to offset the cost of new hardware should I switch because -- BECAUSE! -- the phones are vendor locked. If I was in the states I could buy unlocked phones and use them with the vendor of my choice (and there are far more than just three).
Stop being an apologist for the greed and poor service of the telcos. If anyone is looking foolish it is you.
Entrapment is a perfect word for the tactics of the internet and phone service providers ; sorry to hear of your difficulties ThePB.
I understand the feeling... powerless, and as if being robbed. I am having a similar experience with Telus - they "sold" me a package deal but did not tell me there was a one-year contract attached to it. When I wanted to cancel my internet [due to my old operating system not working with Internet Explorer anymore - another story of corporate entrapment] then Telus told me there would be a $120 cancellation fee. I was going to hve to pay for internet service that I could not use!!
Noah - These entrapment examples seem to be from the contract that the telco company duped you into signing (by not disclosing the length of the contract term). To me, that seems more like a consumer protection issue instead... Which would go around the CRTC, no? If it remains within CRTC jurisdiction, ya we're screwed.
Fidel - I agree with what you have, but I think your missing one thing with your analysis. You're completely right that the cabling would be more expensive than using the white space would be, but cabling never was that major of a cost... It's the equipment on either side that gets expensive. For an example, an Anda 2200 is a telco side peice of equipment that is used frequently for small business setups. It's a 10/100BaseTX, which is the small end for these connections. Several of these would feed into larger connections handled by more expenive equipment and those would flow into even larger connections. I've been in the Calgary main POP, the number of racks and shelves housing all this equipment is amazing. Maintainence would include everything from troubleshoot/repair/replace of this equipment as well as the building itself (air conditioning and humidity for these buildings needs to be striclty controlled).
That's the cost I'm concerned about in nationalizing the current infrastructure, which really has little to do with the frontend access into it (cell frequencies vs white space)... I've supported nationalizing it soon after the Net Neutrality//'throttling' issue from Bell, if you want an example of the CRTC in the telco's pockets, give that issue a read. Some of the mandates from the CRTC on maintaining competition are pretty screwy too (Bell operates a good chunk of a network for Rogers by CRTC regulation to 'maintain competition' after a smaller company was bought out. Gotta wonder what type of compeition it is when they're running each others networks, at this level it's entirely integrated). Bell and Telus have a joint venture working on the network for the 2010 olympic games and I'm seeing a $900 million initial price tag attached to it, just as an example of the investment thats gone into the network we do have. As a public resource, someone would have to continue these investments and maintainence.
FM - Ha, Good job with the name calling... I'm a telco apologist in the same way you're a pro-nuke neo-con. I make my living working on the network you're consuming from. I've transferred a blackberry and phone from telus to bell when I first left telus, and more recently took a m300 phone from Bell to Virgin. It's dependant on product type of course, Telus has a few phones other networks just don't support in the regions they operate as a CLEC for example. What model numbers are you working with?
Well Folks, Cell Companies just aren't regulated the way good old land line used to be. It's hard to determine where & when the CRTC would get involved here, but always, always bring it to the atenttion of your Better Business Bureau. Email them the details after any failed attempt to correct it with your phone company provider & CC your carrier. They'll sudenly pay attention.
Oh and really consider those lengthy contracts with a new provider, regardless of how crappy the service is, or where on the planet the call centre is, you're stuck with it,
Just tripped over this: Rogers, Bell, Telus: The most profitable cellphones around
The only money I give to those fuckers is my landline, which I have with Rogers. My landlord has decided to provide internet and satellite TV for everyone in the house as part of our rent (he's with Bell, which I hate with the intensity of a thousand suns), and I absolutely refuse to own a cell phone because they're such rip-off artists.
When cell phone rates come down to the rates of landlines, maybe I'll buy in (and get rid of my landline). But for me, that means that all incoming calls must be free, text messaging must be optional and able to be turned off (and when turned on, must be a low flat rate per month instead of per-message), and all local calls, incoming and outgoing, must be free.
Until then, I'll be fucked if I'm going to have a cell phone ever again.
I use Loblaws' cell phone service. Granted, you still have to pay for incoming calls the same as outgoing (at $0.20 a minute) and per-text message ($0.15 per), but the cost averages out to $12-$13 a month.
Rodgers, Rodgers where did you go wrong, as there are few that have not been lured into Rodgers to find themselves entrapped in a sea of debt as they gouge their customers like no other. Who are the majority of there customers? The young of course as teenagers spend their time on their cells chatting with each other despite being right there. Teens? But whats Rodgers excuse, Big Fat Creepy Corporation taking advantage of the unsuspecting and the young? You bet as there are few that don't find themselves deep in debt and they haven't even got outside the home yet. So what givens with these Greedy Corporations everyone is supposed to be so ingratitude to for bilking them of their cash. Rodgers is special when it comes to low down and dirty pricing they are Tops no doubt about it. Way to go Rodgers way to go Conservatives obviously your kinda company as birds of a feather flock together. Which might explain the new Harper/Campbell Combo where they appear to be trying to goose the public with their Golden Egg. Which is confusing to me because it was Campbell's advise that helped Dion lose the election as he was stuck on Greenshift and people weren't buying into it despite Campbell's reassurance it was a real Winner!.
Cash store finds a customer in the poor and disabled as over the counter fees along with interest work out to 46% of the cost of the loan. You can see the poor outside their doors on Welfare Wednesday half way down the block while Feds and Prov Governments ensures the loans by promising these peoples GST and PST. Let me not ask what I can do for my country or its people but what can I do for the Rich and the Famous and the Powerful, you know the needy because by the time these guys get finished with the publics resources there isn't going to be anything left for the public. Rodgers all over again get your money for nothing and your kicks for free. A license to steal. Have they made this Rodger guy a hero rate? Thats next as Canada honors Rodgers, the man for his what his commitment to Canada's youth and their futures? For a better word for Teens are cash in the bank as youth run out and buy the latest Ipod and Apple another Rodgers I would hope not.
And no disrespect to Mr. Rodgers of course Mr. Dress Up whose steady voice and steady hand kept the kids amused for the hour as he will be dearly missed by many a child and mom for his hours of Entertainment and Patience over the years.
That's a good reason to have a publicly owned network since our inefficient public health system is way more efficient than any of the private options while providing equal access to most Canadians based on need.
When I say most I am thinking of First Nations communities but I don't see the profiteers wading into those communities to set up there either.
(Today is world TB day. It is a disease of poverty and a preventable one at that. Aboriginal Canadians are 29 times more likely to get the disease than other Canadians. Makes it hard to think about a cell phone network today I guess but the public-private debate is fiarly universally applicable.
All communication technology should be nationalised and absolutely free (in the sense of not paying out of pocket). This is not ideology but plain common sense.
Any large industial nation needs easy, reliable, and accessible communication to function properly, but as things stand it's like charging a tax every time you want to connect with someone, as if that were a bad thing. It actively discourages the interaction that society and the economy requires to operate. Only an idiot could think this was a good idea.
The same argument applies to transportation. Imagine a country where all movement and interaction was fast, reliable, and didn't cost you a cent. Business would flourish. Community would re-invigorate. These are the wheels that make society move, but they are loaded with friction and gummed with obstacles for no other reason than to make a bunch of greedy capitalists rich. Want to call your clients? Gotta pay us first. Wanna get to work? that'll cost ya. Wanna see how your sick grandma is doing? Pony up some dough. These fuckers are actively working against us, impeding every activity that creates a healthy, functioning nation. They are no less than the enemies of civilisation.
I couldn't agree more that all telecom services should be nationalized. Bell, Telus and Rogers are all disgusting ologopolist scumbags.
But I reserve my most vociferous hatred for Rogers due to some particularly nasty dealings I had with their billing department. I cut my Rogers cable TV service off and I will never use it again as long as I live.
For me to use them, the CEO of Rogers would have to come to my door directly, get down on his hands and knees and beg my forgiveness...and even then they'd have to pay me to take their stupid service.
Up the thread, Maysie compared them to drug dealers. I would say that drug dealers are much more ethical than Rogers.
A great article in the Torontoist: Text Bomb
The comments section below it is well worth reading, too.
It won't stop until people stop paying them for it, LTJ. People scream, cry, tear their clothes, whine, freak out, and then they go like lemmings and hand their money over to the fuckers.
It is my opinion that the vast majority of us only THINK we need cell phones. After having a cell phone for two years, I thought I was going to have a horrible time living without one. But I've survived the past five years just fine, and I will continue to survive. I will not ever have a cell phone again until the cell phone companies actually pretend to WANT my business by offering me fair terms, like no contracts, reasonable charges, free incoming calls from anywhere, no "roaming charges" and no bullshit "system access fees" and horseshit like that.
And I like cell phones - they're handy and I've occasionally missed not having one. But I just won't pay it. I fucking refuse.
The funny thing is, we were so fed up with Bell, we just went entirely Rogers.
There's a guy in London who rented a protable sign (London being the portable sign capital of the world, which adds so much beauty to the Forest City--- when the billboards don't cover up the trees... but that's another subject) to decry the poor customer service of Bell Canada.
I expect that in the comming year or two, we will be equally frustrated with Rogers.
In the meantime, I heard Kafka blew his brains out with a revolver after dealing with Bell Customer Service.
I did exactly the same thing - got so pissed with Bell that I went entirely with Rogers. But Rogers sucks too. I've gone back to Bell for my home phone (after swearing up and down that I wouldn't a few years back) simply because they called me and asked me to come back, offered me a half-decent monthly rate and DIDN'T MAKE ME SIGN A CONTRACT to get that rate for the first year. So I can cancel any time.
There is nothing that will win my business like no contract and a fair monthly rate. If the biggies offer it, I'm happy to go with them. But I'm not loyal - I will be as promiscuous as I need to be with telcos in order to get the best rates.
I wish I could live without a home phone, but I can't. I've known people who have exclusively used skype as their home phone. But then you still have to get internet access from someone. My landlord includes my television and internet, so I don't have to worry about that, at least.
And I like cell phones - they're handy and I've occasionally missed not having one. But I just won't pay it. I fucking refuse.
I don't have a cell phone, either. Although, I borrowed Rebecca's earlier this week when I was out on a kind of mission I won't get into here. I had the cell phone so I could call her when I found out something. When I did have information, I realized I didn't know how to use the damn thing. Apparently, you can't just push the "Talk" button and dial. You have to hold the "back" button, then do three arabesques, then hit talk while till holding the back button......
Anwyay. She ended up calling me. Thankfully, when you are called, you only have to push "talk" to answer. I relayed the information, then she asked me to pick up a few things while I happened to be out.
An event that, strangely, doesn't sell me on the idea of having a cell phone on me all the time.
Last friday Rebecca and I were out for a walk around Spettigue's pond here in London. It's primordial down around the pond, real magic.
Untill one of your daughters calls on the cell phone with a "since you're out, can you pick up......"
Technology is grand.
Cell phones suck. I have over two years left on my contract. The cancellation fee is $20 a month and my "cheap" plan is $30 a month. According to the math in my head that means if having a cell phone is worth $10 a month I should keep it. It's actually not worth $10 a month to me but I just can't stomach forking over $540. And I've already broken two contracts with the same company! What a moron. What would happen if I didn't pay the cancellation charge?
You're not kidding. I recently received a Roger's bill that was more than double my usual outrageous billing. So I called them to say WTF?
They proceeded to tell me that what I thought was a plan for $10 a month unlimited long distance in Canada had somehow been reduced to 20 minutes somewhere along the way. But that now I could opt for a new 1000 minute plan for just $5 per month. Checking with a manager. he switched me over, and credited me over $140 in excess charges. Plus I'm saving $5 a month from now on.
How many people just pay these pirates??
Rogers has a whole department dedicated to retention of disgruntled customers. If you phone with a beef and say you are switching they try to make you happy. It really works the first time you try that.
I didn't have to threaten them, actually.
Sweet!
Only with Rogers you say. Not any more. Pity.
Bell will sell iPhones next month
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/10/06/bell-iphone.html
Using Bell Canada's services? Does all your information go right to the USA and the NSA?
http://www.2wire.com/?p=422