Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   

   Michael "TheZorch" Haney, Mar 7th, 2006 @ 9:51am

   
   

   VoIP Legislation

   This is exactly why we need legislation protecting VoIP servies from this sort of thing happening. Call it anti-competitive activity, which is exactly what it is and should never be allowed.
   

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   

   Panaqqa, Mar 7th, 2006 @ 10:52am

   
   

   Typical...

   In Canada, Rogers (a large ISP) is using traffic blocking on BitTorrent. Only end to end encryption gets around it. I think we're in for a bad time of it up here when this type of thing really takes hold.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   

   John Simpson, Mar 7th, 2006 @ 11:05am

   
   

   Re: Typical...

   Yeah? Well you're teh ghey.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   

   Deacon, Mar 7th, 2006 @ 11:36am

   
   

   Correction

   "Shaw, of course, doesn't charge users of its own VoIP service the fee"
   
   This isn't really correct. Shaw's VOIP plan costs $55 a month. I have Primus with unlimited long distance in North America, and it costs $30. Vonage is slightly more expensive than Primus, but still less than Shaw. A no frills plan with either of them can cost less than $20.
   
   So, while Shaw doesn't offer the "VOIP upgrade" for their own service, it's pretty obviously factored into the price. It's not like they're undercutting the competition.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   

   BG, Mar 7th, 2006 @ 11:52am

   
   

   Shaw vs. VoIP

   I have Shaw cable and broadband, and also Skype; I haven't seen any addtional charges from Shaw, though perhaps it's only for monthly-fee VoIP like Vonage?

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   

   DaMan, Mar 7th, 2006 @ 11:57am

   
   

   Re: Shaw vs. VoIP

   I have Vonage and Shaw and I have not seen any charges .....yet, that could be because Shaw's VoIP isn't available in my area untill November.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   

   Leonard Smith, Mar 7th, 2006 @ 12:11pm

   
   

   Garbage

   Damn Canadians !!!!

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   

   Bulent Akman, Mar 7th, 2006 @ 1:34pm

   
   

   Re: Garbage

   Thank you for demonstrating your intelligence and tolerance. Yes, in fact I do have a sense of humour. Do you?

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

9.  

   

   Brent, Mar 7th, 2006 @ 2:20pm

   
   

   Re: Shaw vs. VoIP

   It's actually an optional fee you can choose to pay if yuo want to make sure your VoIP traffic gets QoS.
   
   It's BS though, since QoS doesn't solve anything. It only assures your packets get QoS ON Shaw's network...once it leaves their network, it's anybodies game.

    

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

10.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Mar 7th, 2006 @ 6:32pm

    
    

    Re: Garbage

    Wow, didn't come across as you having a sense of humor. Guess I missed it. But then again, I am so stupid I can't figure out how to get an account on this leftest pinko blog! lol Sense of humor anyone?

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

11.  

    

    Anwar, Mar 8th, 2006 @ 2:46am

    
    

    Re: Garbage

    ^^^^^ wanker

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

12.  

    

    George, Mar 8th, 2006 @ 1:09pm

    
    

    Re: Shaw vs. VoIP

    Good point. But is this also implying that VoIP is deteriorated on Shaws networks? If so, by accident or on purpose?

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

13.  

    

    Someone, Mar 10th, 2006 @ 5:32pm

    
    

    Test

    Blah

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

14.  

    

    Stevey, Mar 27th, 2006 @ 2:48pm

    
    

    Re: Shaw vs VoIP

    Shaw is a brazen company with its pricing. They charge an extra $10. per month over and above the high speed internet rate!! That, I was told, is because you "might' get a second or 3rd computer sometime in the future! VoIP would be a second $10. charge. 20 bucks for nothing.
    
    If you go for a job with them, you have to agree to not tell anyone else working there how much you make.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

15.  

    

    Anonymous Coward, Apr 7th, 2006 @ 4:15pm

    
    

    Rogers is totally packet shaping to throttle VoIP traffic in a completely illegal and competitive stance, and I have a lot of material to prove it. If it keeps up our business is going to deliver a report/complaint to the CRTC.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

16.  

    

    Joey, Aug 2nd, 2006 @ 1:31pm

    
    

    Is Rogers really?

    What do you mean "if it keeps up"??? Do you think they will change several hundred manhours in setting their network up the way it is now? I've complained a tonne to Shaw about their tax, and I didn't like it, so I stopped paying them when they didn't listen. Are you still paying Rogers every month?
    
    If you have so much proof that you think they will actually do something, then do it instead of just making empty threats. Things won't fix themselves like you're hoping they will.

     

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment