Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » O Canada! » Canadian » Canadian Broadband » 3web - Sick of "unlimited download" claims yet?
Search Topic:
Uniqs:
3537
Share Topic:
RSS topic:
toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Posting:
2 New Internet options from Sasktel »
« Speedstream 6520 vs. Alcatel Speedtouch home?  
page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 ...9 · 10 · 11
AuthorAll Replies

NeoThe1

join:2005-05-07
Vancouver, BC

 3web - Sick of "unlimited download" claims yet?

I don't think I am in the minority when I say that I am sick and tired of ISPs claiming, for almost a decade, that they will provide "unlimited downloads" while effectively capping, limiting and hassling their users.

Shaw did it to me, now Telus did it to me and now I am taking action against 3web. Setting download limits is their own business, I don't want a say in that; however, I am against the blatant misrepresentation of "unlimited downloads" which is plastered all over their websites, repeated again and again by their phone-support lines and in their advertising.

I e-mailed them and they say "unlimited"; I call customer service and they say "100 GB/month"; I call tech support and they say "50 GB/month but we don't really have a policy because we're piggy-backing on Shaw's infrastructure." Lies, lies and more lies; I am actually willing to pay a reasonable monthly amount (under $100 CDN) for a decent, 7 Mbps, 300 GB/month service, and there are many people out there just like me.

I have sent a letter to their corporate HQ and have filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau in British Columbia. If necessary, i will create an account with 3web just for this purpose and will retaliate with legal action to any threats of throttling or disconnection, unless they clearly and openly state and define their policies and limits in a non-self-contradictory fashion.

If anyone feels the way I do, please contact me with your own experiences with poor customer service, misrepresentation in advertising and discrepancy between promised and delivered service quality. I will use your submissions in negotiating with any possible authority I can get involved in this, until we get accountable, responsible ISPs!
Here is the letter I sent to 3web:
Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing to you because I am highly dissatisfied with the unfair practices of your company’s advertising for the 3webXS: High Speed ‘Platinum’ (Cable) package (»https://highspeed.3web.com/english/HighS···est.html) in Vancouver; your website clearly states that “there is no download limit” on the aforementioned page; your automated telephone line states that you provide “premium unlimited Internet access,” and so does all your other advertising.

First, I contacted a service representative via e-mail who clearly stated that “there is no download/upload limit”; I have then contacted a customer service representative named “Monty” and asked him whether there truly was no download limit; he said that the limit was 100 GB per month. Still, I contacted a technical support representative named “Dan” who stated that the limit was 50 GB per month after explaining to me that that number is absolutely arbitrary and meaningless and contradictory with Monty’s estimate, because, in effect 3webXS has no stated policy on download limits, since you are a third-party provider piggy-backing on Shaw Cablesystems Company’s cable lines and all questions of download and upload speeds and monthly download and upload limits are decided by Shaw Corporation!

There is no statement of any of this information in your PR materials, for the obvious reason that these facts mean that 3web imposes download limits dictated by Shaw Cablesystems but claims not to do so to have better PR. Moreover, by failing to define a download limit, your company has implied that it reserves to change it at any time, or curb any customer at any amount of downloaded data, as it sees fit! None of this information is readily available to the public; moreover, this stance seeks to misinform and cause damage to the end-users truly seeking “unlimited internet access” (at an average 300 GB per month, as permitted by the equipment).

I ask that the 3web company immediately formulate a clearly-stated download limit policy that will be readily available next to the description of internet access packages and in other pertaining materials. Failure to do so would indicate a lack of goodwill on the part of the 3web company towards its customers. I intend to sign up for the aforementioned Internet package and, if and when my download limit will be curbed, I shall do anything in my power to force 3web to revise its policies, including a full report to the Better Business Bureau, the ISP association and similar agencies; I may initiate legal action of an appropriate magnitude against 3web, as the situation may require.

Above all things, I wish to resolve this issue in an amiable manner. Please revise your statements regarding download limits to reflect reality.

Thank you for your time,

[signed]
--
"Life is a love affair with your conscience." -- mgk


mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
Re: 3web - Sick of "unlimited download" claims yet

You get what you pay for.


Sean
The Great Divide

join:2004-01-23
Richmond Hil
reply to NeoThe1
In this case, what should be unlimited internet use as is said by 3Web.

jbcalg
Premium
join:2001-10-08
Calgary, AB
·Shaw

reply to NeoThe1
Re: 3web - Sick of "unlimited download" claims yet?

watch out the windmills don't knock you flying

admirable but doubt you'll get far
- especially with cable or cable reseller
- to guarantee you your 7mb (where's that from lol) and 300 gb, they'd have to make the network capable of providing that to all subscribers, it is a shared access after all


andyb
Premium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico

reply to NeoThe1
said by NeoThe1 See Profile:

I since you are a third-party provider piggy-backing on Shaw Cablesystems Company’s cable lines and all questions of download and upload speeds and monthly download and upload limits are decided by Shaw Corporation!

[signed]
that is false and i dont get where people get that info from.its same in rogers forum.shaw cannot dictate what happens to the line after they have "sold it".once sold it becomes the sole property of 3web and shaw has nothing to do with it except make sure it works.thats what they get paid for


Sean
The Great Divide

join:2004-01-23
Richmond Hil
·Bell Sympatico

reply to NeoThe1
Re: 3web - Sick of "unlimited download" claims yet

Nope, the lines are "rented" out, and as such are still the property of Shaw. Shaw dictates how much "strain" on the nodes a 3Web customer can put on. The "strain" comes from bandwidth use, so, Shaw controls how much bandwidth 3Web users can go through.

This isn't the case with DSL when 3Web sells it, because there's no "load problem" with DSL, as all bandwidth and hardware (except for DSLAMs and fibre/copper) is handled by 3Web.

NeoThe1

join:2005-05-07
Vancouver, BC

reply to NeoThe1
Re: 3web - Sick of "unlimited download" claims yet?

mlerner: I pay for what I am led to believe I am paying for. As an Enlish Major I have learned that words are not randomly-generated communication signals. You want to inform someone, you use a word; you want to deceive someone, you use a word. In this case, I am only fighting for fair advertising that does not misrepresent or imply untruths about the service being offered.

Sean: So 3web is now World Authority Over use of English Language, is it? Ever heard of a little thing called "false advertising"? People have been sued for less. I am not asking for bandwidth, I am asking for truth.

jbcalg: Thanks for the vote of confidence, but people have done more with less. It's time to teach corporations a lesson that without the consumer they are nothing. Capitalism is good, but only when it serves its users, not rephrased and usurped.

andyb: I got this straight from the source: 3web is a slave to Cybersurf Corp., which is a slave to Shaw Cablesystems. It pays to have an intermediate company between a company everyone loves to loathe and the company everyone hails as "the destroyer of Shaw," ironically. The technical part is exactly like Sean said.
--
"Life is a love affair with your conscience." -- mgk


Corvus
Flaming Tards Since 2003
Premium,VIP
join:2003-11-26

reply to Sean
Re: 3web - Sick of "unlimited download" claims yet

said by Sean See Profile:

This isn't the case with DSL when 3Web sells it, because there's no "load problem" with DSL, as all bandwidth and hardware (except for DSLAMs and fibre/copper) is handled by 3Web.
The DSLAM is acting like the node for a HFC network, that's where's the bottleneck.
--
The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then gets elected and proves it.--P. J. O'Rourke


JayMan
Whoot
Premium
join:2002-06-05
Earth
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·ELECTRONICBOX

reply to NeoThe1
Re: 3web - Sick of "unlimited download" claims yet?

Unlimited use = you can use it anytime you want.

Unlimited Bandwidth or No Bandwidth Caps = download as much as you want datawise.

Remember they own the business and can place any restrictions on people they want and they can do it whenever they want.
--
WeatherServer - »www.weatherserver.net


Sean
The Great Divide

join:2004-01-23
Richmond Hil
·Bell Sympatico


edit:
May 8th, @11:22AM

reply to NeoThe1
Re: 3web - Sick of "unlimited download" claims yet

The only bottleneck a DSLAM has is the number of slots... there's no "bandwidth" bottleneck at a DSLAM. Provided there's enough bandwidth on the main network, every user at a DSLAM can download full throttle.

On DOCSIS, even if there is enough bandwidth on the main network, the node won't allow every user to download full throttle, as each node has it's own bandwidth bottleneck (DOCSIS3 is supposed to make that a LOT bigger than it currently is, but we'll see). Since most cable co's oversubsribe on two levels (bandwidth, as well as hardware), it's makes the potential "problem" bigger.

NeoThe1: I'm on your side. My post was in reference to andyb, sorry.


Corvus
Flaming Tards Since 2003
Premium,VIP
join:2003-11-26

said by Sean See Profile:

there's no "bandwidth" bottleneck at a DSLAM. Provided there's enough bandwidth on the main network, every user at a DSLAM can download full throttle.
There is a bottleneck possible on DSL and it's at the DSLAM: Available bandwidth is limited by the capacity of installed fiber links.

It's the same for a HFC node: available bandwidth is limited by the capacity of installed fiber.

These two statements are true when:

1- The DSLAM has the appropriate number of slots for the number customers
2- The HFC node (serving group) has the appropriate number of customers vs capacity

Reasons why we barely see bottlenecks on DSLAM is because there's fewer DSLAMs than HFC nodes (fiber is centralized to only few points in cities, cutting cost of fiber since it's way shorter but more far of customers end) and because most DSL users only get speeds between 2.5 and 3.5 Mbps, reducing the load/stress on DSLAM.
--
The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then gets elected and proves it.--P. J. O'Rourke


Sean
The Great Divide

join:2004-01-23
Richmond Hil
·Bell Sympatico

said by Corvus See Profile:

said by Sean See Profile:

there's no "bandwidth" bottleneck at a DSLAM. Provided there's enough bandwidth on the main network, every user at a DSLAM can download full throttle.
There is a bottleneck possible on DSL and it's at the DSLAM: Available bandwidth is limited by the capacity of installed fiber links.

It's the same for a HFC node: available bandwidth is limited by the capacity of installed fiber.
That's true; but as far as I know, a HFC node has it's own bandwidth bottleneck regardless of the available fibre links, as is set by the DOCSIS standard it's using. Isn't that true?

Obviously both a DSLAM and a HFC node have available bandwidth link bottlenecks (though they aren't really, since often times theres enough bandwidth there), but AFAIK a HFC node has that extra bottleneck put in by the DOCSIS standard, that a DSLAM doesn't have.


Corvus
Flaming Tards Since 2003
Premium,VIP
join:2003-11-26

said by Sean See Profile:

Obviously both a DSLAM and a HFC node have available bandwidth link bottlenecks (though they aren't really, since often times theres enough bandwidth there), but AFAIK a HFC node has that extra bottleneck put in by the DOCSIS standard, that a DSLAM doesn't have.
Yes, DSLAM has this same bottleneck: the max capacity of the cards used PLUS distance limitations...
--
The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then gets elected and proves it.--P. J. O'Rourke


Sean
The Great Divide

join:2004-01-23
Richmond Hil
·Bell Sympatico


edit:
May 8th, @01:42PM

reply to NeoThe1
I agree with the distance (though that's being phased out as we speak, I have a DSLAM 500m from my house), but the max capacity of cards at the DSLAM is a users per DSLAM limitation, not a bandwidth limitaion OR a quality of service hinderance, no?

IMO that's a good thing, it prevents oversubscription at the hardware level.


Corvus
Flaming Tards Since 2003
Premium,VIP
join:2003-11-26

said by Sean See Profile:

I agree with the distance (though that's being phased out as we speak, I have a DSLAM 500m from my house), but the max capacity of cards at the DSLAM is a users per DSLAM limitation, not a bandwidth limitaion OR a quality of service hinderance, no?

IMO that's a good thing, it prevents oversubscription at the hardware level.
There is a physical limitation of bandwidth per card (it's not infinite) but excluding old DBIC systems, it's over what DSL users can get when adding distance limitation.

As for the oversubscribing it's not a so good thing, I remember in the days my roommate was told the closest DSLAM was full (not accepting new customers) so they moved him to another one, adding few KM of copper...
--
The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then gets elected and proves it.--P. J. O'Rourke


Sean
The Great Divide

join:2004-01-23
Richmond Hil
·Bell Sympatico


edit:
May 8th, @02:28PM

reply to NeoThe1
Hmm, I believe Bell's combating that problem with the use of remote DSLAMs. With a DSLAM in every neighbourhood, they'll be hard pressed to run out of slots. But yeah, it is a problem currently.

Yes, there's a limit per card, which is currently at 8000/800 Kbps with the ADSL platform. The thing is though, that limit is per user card, not per DSLAM/node as is with a HFC node. The DSLAM is a lot more "individual" per user than the HFC node is.

Ah, I feel bad for hijacking NeoThe1's thread. Sorry NeoThe1.


Corvus
Flaming Tards Since 2003
Premium,VIP
join:2003-11-26

said by Sean See Profile:

The thing is though, that limit is per user card, not per DSLAM/node as is with a HFC node. The DSLAM is a lot more "individual" per user than the HFC node is.
It's hard to compare two very different technologies but the bottom point is: if both technologies are properly setup, everything will be fine for the customer.
--
The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then gets elected and proves it.--P. J. O'Rourke

NeoThe1

join:2005-05-07
Vancouver, BC

reply to NeoThe1
Re: 3web - Sick of "unlimited download" claims yet?

Sean: DSL is not available from 3web in Western Canada; also, don't worry about "sides" here; I didn't come here to flame people. And don't feel bad about hijacking my thread; I'm learning new things.

Corvus: What exactly is DSLAM and an HFC network? Could you break your explanation down a bit?

JayMan24: I am not fighting against their bandwidth restrictions (although I am opposed to those); I am fighting about unfair and misrepresentative advertising. There should never be a "switch and bait" situation where you are promised one thing and then get suckered into a shoddy deal.
--
"Life is a love affair with your conscience." -- mgk

jamos669

join:2005-04-20
Vancouver, BC

Unlimited use = you can use it anytime you want.

Unlimited Bandwidth or No Bandwidth Caps = download as much as you want datawise.

Hah, last time I checked use of the internet and bandwith were in direct correlation. Granted the amount you use varies by what yoiur doing, but you need bandwidth to use the internet. So unlimited time is a joke.


Happyrat
Google Is Your Best Friend
Premium
join:2002-07-01
Disneyland
·Look Communications

reply to NeoThe1
Re:Sick of "unlimited download" THREADS yet?

Hehehehehe... I love it when the S***house lawyers come out of the woodwork and argue about what "unlimited" bandwidth means

The truth is people, they're selling you a service. Read your TOS and AUP agreements and see exactly what they're offering you. If you have a problem with it, vote with your feet.

Threads like this are so pointless because they keep popping up here and nothing gets accomplished except the venting of a lot of gas.
--
Subtlety is wasted on the dense... »www.fuzzyrat.com
Thread is
Forums » O Canada! » Canadian » Canadian Broadband2 New Internet options from Sasktel »
« Speedstream 6520 vs. Alcatel Speedtouch home?  
page: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 ...9 · 10 · 11


Tuesday, 02-Dec 15:55:01 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 9 years online! © 1999-2008 dslreports.com.republican-creole
page compression OFF
Most commented news this week
· [109] AT&T Metered Billing Trial Hits Second Market
· [82] UDP BitTorrent Will Destroy The Interwebs!
· [60] EFF Challenges Telecom Immunity
· [59] Comcast Tries To Slow Verizon's Philly Entry
· [32] Cablevision Bumps HD Count To 68
· [22] Hawaii Telecom Files For Bankruptcy
· [22] Mega-ISPs, Consumer Advocates Demand Broadband Plan
· [19] Verizon Tops Consumer Reports Wireless Satisfaction Ratings
· [17] FCC To Vote On Free National Wireless Broadband
· [15] Clearwire May Slow WiMax Build
Most people now reading
· [Rant] Bestbuy receipt checker [Rants, Raves, & Praise]
· Is this a good thing for the net? [news,99366]
· Coalition Government Possible? [TekSavvy]
· [WotLK] New Hunter Macros [World of Warcraft]
· Ted Rogers passed away [Rogers]
· Notice, new uTorrent Alpha may be able to evade throttling [TekSavvy]
· Basic 500 Price Increase! [Vonage]
· Upgrade from 768kbps/128kbps to 1Mbps/386kbps? [Verizon Online DSL]
· Routing problem? [OptimumOnline]