afransen
Senior Member
Well, Rogers is in breech of contract, so you have a case. Call their customer service and ask to speak to a manager.
|
|
|
Good Toronto ISP (Internet Provider)?
- Thread starter kev1n1m
- Start date
MetroMan
Senior Member
It'll be a difficult case to prove since most the details and agreements were discussed over the phone, but perhaps somebody higher up will give me what I need.
To update with regards to 3rd parties, I've looked at Teksavvy in particular and concluded that I wouldn't get any better service than Bell since it is their phone lines that they would be using.
Bell advertises up to 7mbps in the package I'm subscribed to currently. Because of the distance to the distribution station, I get 5mbps max, but most often 3mbps.
I think the only solution would be to get a dedicated line but I can't justify $500 per month for internet
Rogers and Bell both have upgrades in the tube so I can only hope that they reach me soon.
Anyway, I'm eager for the morning so that I can get on the phone and tell Rogers how pissed off this customer is (I'm on Rogers for my iPhone).
To update with regards to 3rd parties, I've looked at Teksavvy in particular and concluded that I wouldn't get any better service than Bell since it is their phone lines that they would be using.
Bell advertises up to 7mbps in the package I'm subscribed to currently. Because of the distance to the distribution station, I get 5mbps max, but most often 3mbps.
I think the only solution would be to get a dedicated line but I can't justify $500 per month for internet
Rogers and Bell both have upgrades in the tube so I can only hope that they reach me soon.
Anyway, I'm eager for the morning so that I can get on the phone and tell Rogers how pissed off this customer is (I'm on Rogers for my iPhone).
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
This is so typical of Rogers. Keep calling back and working it, and good luck. I can't tell you the nightmares I have been through with them, it's by far the most inefficient company I've ever dealt with and I hear the same from so many friends and co-workers.
While I'm on it, avoid their "Home Phone" like the plague.
While I'm on it, avoid their "Home Phone" like the plague.
MetroMan
Senior Member
Yeah, I don't need a phone at home. I need one phone and it's always on me.
When I tried to start over the process of getting business internet, the only way they'd give me the rates the first guy offered me was if I subscribed to a business phone.
They just couldn't understand the concept that I run my business from my iPhone and MacBook Pro. It's based out of my apartment but I'm never there. I meet clients at the ROM, AGO (I have memberships at both for that purpose), and the occasional Starbucks.
Why the hell do I need to be tethered to a wall?
Not so long ago, Canada was leading the US in broadband spread by a large margin. Today, my US friends tell me about their 15Mbps connections, WiMax, Highspeed 3G for laptops...
We're falling so behind. When's the competition coming from Yak and the others that won bids for radio spectrum last year?
When I tried to start over the process of getting business internet, the only way they'd give me the rates the first guy offered me was if I subscribed to a business phone.
They just couldn't understand the concept that I run my business from my iPhone and MacBook Pro. It's based out of my apartment but I'm never there. I meet clients at the ROM, AGO (I have memberships at both for that purpose), and the occasional Starbucks.
Why the hell do I need to be tethered to a wall?
Not so long ago, Canada was leading the US in broadband spread by a large margin. Today, my US friends tell me about their 15Mbps connections, WiMax, Highspeed 3G for laptops...
We're falling so behind. When's the competition coming from Yak and the others that won bids for radio spectrum last year?
khris
Senior Member
Without something in paper from the company, they will always say you have no proof that such a deal was offered.
But if the problem is with you, they'll swear up and down they agreed to a verbal contract over the phone with you, and make you pay whatever you owe them.
It's really quite shady the way these companies work, which is why you should always try to get everything in writing on paper. If you're agreeing to something over the phone, don't fully agree and accept to start a service unless they mail you the terms of the offer on paper first.
But if the problem is with you, they'll swear up and down they agreed to a verbal contract over the phone with you, and make you pay whatever you owe them.
It's really quite shady the way these companies work, which is why you should always try to get everything in writing on paper. If you're agreeing to something over the phone, don't fully agree and accept to start a service unless they mail you the terms of the offer on paper first.
000
Senior UT Member
A lot of major US cable markets are being upgraded to DOCSIS3.0 now.
Here's an example 50/5 Cox.net tier with 'PowerBoost' (a temporary speed burst for the first few seconds of a file):
Hopefully we'll see this from Rogers next year.
There was a time cable internet was a relatively new technology (1996), and Shaw Wave serviced parts of the city with the same 10/1Mbps connections we pay for today. A buddy of mine in Scarborough was lucky enough to have that available. Shaw sold their network to Rogers/@Home, imposed their policies, and things have been pretty stagnant since then.
Here's an example 50/5 Cox.net tier with 'PowerBoost' (a temporary speed burst for the first few seconds of a file):
Hopefully we'll see this from Rogers next year.
There was a time cable internet was a relatively new technology (1996), and Shaw Wave serviced parts of the city with the same 10/1Mbps connections we pay for today. A buddy of mine in Scarborough was lucky enough to have that available. Shaw sold their network to Rogers/@Home, imposed their policies, and things have been pretty stagnant since then.
MetroMan
Senior Member
Wow.. I would kill for that ^
I have a client who I do a project for 3 times a week. It takes less than 5 minutes of manual work, then 1 hour of rendering and compression of the file and then another 1 hour to upload. I'm wasting 2 hours of my life, 3 times a week tapping my fingers while this thing is done. It shouldn't take more than 30 minutes from start to finish.
I got a new MacBook Pro with 2 GPU's and a dual core processor so performance has improved. The real improvement will come with Apple's new OS Snow Leopard which will take the application I use and fully make use of the 2 GPUs and both CPU cores. Right now, the app only uses one of the GPU's and one core. It doesn't know any better. Preliminary tests on the BETA of SnowLeopard have shown dramatic improvements.
... but alas: I'll still be waiting an hour + to upload the damn file.
I have a client who I do a project for 3 times a week. It takes less than 5 minutes of manual work, then 1 hour of rendering and compression of the file and then another 1 hour to upload. I'm wasting 2 hours of my life, 3 times a week tapping my fingers while this thing is done. It shouldn't take more than 30 minutes from start to finish.
I got a new MacBook Pro with 2 GPU's and a dual core processor so performance has improved. The real improvement will come with Apple's new OS Snow Leopard which will take the application I use and fully make use of the 2 GPUs and both CPU cores. Right now, the app only uses one of the GPU's and one core. It doesn't know any better. Preliminary tests on the BETA of SnowLeopard have shown dramatic improvements.
... but alas: I'll still be waiting an hour + to upload the damn file.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
Internet Surveillance?
Liberal shift may assure Net neutrality
Jun 22, 2009 04:30 AM
Michael Geist
Last Thursday began as an ordinary, rainy spring day in Ottawa. Canadian politicians, having just avoided an unwanted election, were only two days away from an extended summer break.
Yet by the end of the day, a trio of events unfolded that could help shape the Internet in Canada for years to come.
The first took place mid-morning, with the introduction of new lawful access legislation.
The bills would dramatically change the Internet in Canada, requiring Internet service providers to install new surveillance capabilities, force them to disclose subscriber information such as name, address and email address without a court order, as well as grant police broad new powers to obtain Internet transmission data.
The introduction of the legislation by Justice Minister Rob Nicholson and Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan – accompanied by more than a dozen law enforcement representatives –generated an immediate wave of criticism.
Internet service providers expressed concern about the cost of the program, while privacy groups lamented the government's about-face on the issue of court oversight since Stockwell Day, the previous public safety minister, had pledged not to introduce mandated disclosure of subscriber information without it.
Given the experience with misuse of surveillance powers in other countries, the bill will likely continue to attract attention as Canadians ask whether the government has struck the right balance between providing law enforcement with the necessary investigative powers, ensuring robust oversight, and preserving online privacy.
Hours later, the scene shifted to question period, where Liberal Industry critic Marc Garneau surprised Internet watchers by emphasizing the importance of an open Internet and declaring that the Liberal party now firmly supports net neutrality. The party has adopted a position opposing the management of Internet traffic that infringes privacy and targets specific websites, users and legitimate business applications.
The move represents an unexpected shift in policy direction just weeks before the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission is scheduled to conduct hearings on network management practices. For months, the NDP has stood virtually alone among the major Canadian political parties in its support for web neutrality.
With the Liberals onside, the door is open for a bipartisan effort this fall to enshrine net neutrality principles into law.
Immediately after Question Period, the standing committee on industry held its final hearing before the break on the Electronic Commerce Protection Act, Canada's new anti-spam bill. Some business groups have sought to water down the legislative proposal, implausibly arguing that Canadian privacy law is sufficient to address persistent spamming activities and that the ECPA's tough penalties could dissuade talented business leaders from taking on corporate directorship positions for fear of potential liability.
Representatives from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and the Competition Bureau and CRTC chairman Konrad von Finckenstein firmly put those fears to rest. Assistant Privacy Commissioner Elizabeth Denham rejected the view that current privacy laws are up to the task of countering Canadian spam and welcomed the clarity of the anti-spam bill.
Von Finckenstein was similarly supportive of the ECPA, expressing optimism about its potential to address long-standing spam concerns.
These issues – lawful access, net neutrality and the ECPA – will be back on the parliamentary agenda in the fall. But on a single day all three moved to the fore with big implications for the Internet in Canada.
Source
Liberal shift may assure Net neutrality
Jun 22, 2009 04:30 AM
Michael Geist
Last Thursday began as an ordinary, rainy spring day in Ottawa. Canadian politicians, having just avoided an unwanted election, were only two days away from an extended summer break.
Yet by the end of the day, a trio of events unfolded that could help shape the Internet in Canada for years to come.
The first took place mid-morning, with the introduction of new lawful access legislation.
The bills would dramatically change the Internet in Canada, requiring Internet service providers to install new surveillance capabilities, force them to disclose subscriber information such as name, address and email address without a court order, as well as grant police broad new powers to obtain Internet transmission data.
The introduction of the legislation by Justice Minister Rob Nicholson and Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan – accompanied by more than a dozen law enforcement representatives –generated an immediate wave of criticism.
Internet service providers expressed concern about the cost of the program, while privacy groups lamented the government's about-face on the issue of court oversight since Stockwell Day, the previous public safety minister, had pledged not to introduce mandated disclosure of subscriber information without it.
Given the experience with misuse of surveillance powers in other countries, the bill will likely continue to attract attention as Canadians ask whether the government has struck the right balance between providing law enforcement with the necessary investigative powers, ensuring robust oversight, and preserving online privacy.
Hours later, the scene shifted to question period, where Liberal Industry critic Marc Garneau surprised Internet watchers by emphasizing the importance of an open Internet and declaring that the Liberal party now firmly supports net neutrality. The party has adopted a position opposing the management of Internet traffic that infringes privacy and targets specific websites, users and legitimate business applications.
The move represents an unexpected shift in policy direction just weeks before the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission is scheduled to conduct hearings on network management practices. For months, the NDP has stood virtually alone among the major Canadian political parties in its support for web neutrality.
With the Liberals onside, the door is open for a bipartisan effort this fall to enshrine net neutrality principles into law.
Immediately after Question Period, the standing committee on industry held its final hearing before the break on the Electronic Commerce Protection Act, Canada's new anti-spam bill. Some business groups have sought to water down the legislative proposal, implausibly arguing that Canadian privacy law is sufficient to address persistent spamming activities and that the ECPA's tough penalties could dissuade talented business leaders from taking on corporate directorship positions for fear of potential liability.
Representatives from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and the Competition Bureau and CRTC chairman Konrad von Finckenstein firmly put those fears to rest. Assistant Privacy Commissioner Elizabeth Denham rejected the view that current privacy laws are up to the task of countering Canadian spam and welcomed the clarity of the anti-spam bill.
Von Finckenstein was similarly supportive of the ECPA, expressing optimism about its potential to address long-standing spam concerns.
These issues – lawful access, net neutrality and the ECPA – will be back on the parliamentary agenda in the fall. But on a single day all three moved to the fore with big implications for the Internet in Canada.
Source
khris
Senior Member
I finally made the switch to Teksavvy from Bell. My service starts July 30 due to Bell requiring 30 days notice.
Bell recently decided to double their modem lease fee from $2.00 to $3.95. A huge ripoff. This shouldn't even be allowed in my opinion. That modem is years old and has been paid off more than once. Not to mention I was paying $50 a month for their high speed unlimited package. That package is not currently available.
Teksavvy is $40 a month for unlimited high speed on the same lines with the same speed, and no modem lease. You can use your own modem, or buy one from them.
When I called Bell to cancel, all they offered was 5 months of the same service I was getting for $33 a month. Crappy offer!
Bell recently decided to double their modem lease fee from $2.00 to $3.95. A huge ripoff. This shouldn't even be allowed in my opinion. That modem is years old and has been paid off more than once. Not to mention I was paying $50 a month for their high speed unlimited package. That package is not currently available.
Teksavvy is $40 a month for unlimited high speed on the same lines with the same speed, and no modem lease. You can use your own modem, or buy one from them.
When I called Bell to cancel, all they offered was 5 months of the same service I was getting for $33 a month. Crappy offer!
lordmandeep
Banned
I have ACN and got speeds around 500kbs from regular downloading for like 25 bucks a month.
Of course you can only get those insane speeds through either special download sites or through a Local Area Network.
Of course you can only get those insane speeds through either special download sites or through a Local Area Network.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
Are you sure that you will get the same speed with Teksavy? When I talked to them last year they couldn't guarantee the same speed I was getting with Sympatico. If I recall, something else had to be installed for DSL through Teksavy, maybe it was a dry loop or something?
I have a great deal with Sympatico. I negotiated $42.95/month (no charge for the new 3WIRE wireless modem and I don't need their security package so I get a $10 reverse credit on my statement each month) for the "Performance" package which is 7 Mbps & 60GB per month. About two weeks ago I called to add an extra 30GB of data per month ($10) and the CSR suggested that I just upgrade to the "MAX 10" package for $10/month and I'll get 100GB of data a month. I said as long as my modem is still free and I don't pay for the security package, I'll do it. She put me on hold, confirmed my free modem/security package, I reviewed everything we discussed, got a confirmation number and five days later my new service was activated. I now pay $52.95 plus tax.
I was getting 6'ish Mbps d/l, now I'm getting around 8500-8800 Mbps d/l consistently, day or night. The only downside is Sympatico throttles BT's, but after midnight it's not a problem.
If your prepared to take your business elsewhere both Rogers and Bell will do deals with you to keep your business which combined, can save a lot of money each month.
This may sound like I'm supporting Sympatico, I'm really not. But I will confess to being a happy customer with their service (except throttling) and with the price that I pay.
My speeds tests on "Performance", and now "MAX 10" -
Click on the thumbnail to enlarge, then click again on the image for full size.
I have a great deal with Sympatico. I negotiated $42.95/month (no charge for the new 3WIRE wireless modem and I don't need their security package so I get a $10 reverse credit on my statement each month) for the "Performance" package which is 7 Mbps & 60GB per month. About two weeks ago I called to add an extra 30GB of data per month ($10) and the CSR suggested that I just upgrade to the "MAX 10" package for $10/month and I'll get 100GB of data a month. I said as long as my modem is still free and I don't pay for the security package, I'll do it. She put me on hold, confirmed my free modem/security package, I reviewed everything we discussed, got a confirmation number and five days later my new service was activated. I now pay $52.95 plus tax.
I was getting 6'ish Mbps d/l, now I'm getting around 8500-8800 Mbps d/l consistently, day or night. The only downside is Sympatico throttles BT's, but after midnight it's not a problem.
If your prepared to take your business elsewhere both Rogers and Bell will do deals with you to keep your business which combined, can save a lot of money each month.
This may sound like I'm supporting Sympatico, I'm really not. But I will confess to being a happy customer with their service (except throttling) and with the price that I pay.
My speeds tests on "Performance", and now "MAX 10" -
Click on the thumbnail to enlarge, then click again on the image for full size.
doady
Senior Member
Rogers throttles P2P like crazy, down to 10kbps upload speed! All day, all night, everyday! I hope this support for net neutrality will lead to an end to throttling.
smuncky
Senior Member
i also called in a week ago to cancel my internet service with bell. however, the rep on the line could not give me a comparable deal. she offered me $45/month while i'll be paying $33/month all in with teksavvy. and considering i only do 200gb a month, there was no point for me to chose bell anymore.
jenny_zhang
Active Member
Just venting my recent experience: I have a grandfathered Bell account with unlimited bandwidth. Recently my old modem broke down and Bell said they could send me a new home networking modem instead. Somehow I wasn't thinking straight, agreed, then found out my account type had changed and I lost my grandfathered account. So I argued with them for days but they said it was impossible to change back. I was basically screwed out of my unlimited account.
Here's my recommendation to anyone screwed over by Bell - send an email to Kevin Crull or Andre Oulimar (firstname.lastname@bell.ca). These guys are higher up on the Bell chain and are seemingly more sympathetic to the average user. I emailed and got a response quickly saying that he would give me back my old plan (and let me keep the modem). So now I get to keep my old unlimited account.
Of course, I probably shoudl have just taken the opportunity to switch to TekSaavy altogether, but I'm just lazy and have been with Bell since forever.
Here's my recommendation to anyone screwed over by Bell - send an email to Kevin Crull or Andre Oulimar (firstname.lastname@bell.ca). These guys are higher up on the Bell chain and are seemingly more sympathetic to the average user. I emailed and got a response quickly saying that he would give me back my old plan (and let me keep the modem). So now I get to keep my old unlimited account.
Of course, I probably shoudl have just taken the opportunity to switch to TekSaavy altogether, but I'm just lazy and have been with Bell since forever.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
That is exactly what happened to me about a year and a half ago. I fought my way to a supervisor which eventually (and it wasn't easy) got me the free modem deal and a reduction to my monthly Internet plan.
What actual download speed do you get with TekSaavy?
Last edited: