Is Telus limiting internet streaming?

[kaput]

.

[Cos]

.

[rage2]

http://ispspeedindex.netflix.com/canada

http://www.google.com/get/videoqualityreport/

For streaming video, Shaw > Telus. Unless your unlucky and live in an area that has shitty Shaw performance. Our Apple TV is used on 2 TV's at once day in and day out (my gf and I have completely different TV show preferences), we watch 90% of our TV streamed, and never had a spinny wait.

[schocker]

See if this works maybe compared to your speedtest.net speed
http://thebestofnetflix.com/check-your-netflix-speed/

[A790]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-2j8lDv-eRcE/U5XNXNePkxI/AAAAAAAABi4/jE69VrCWoqA/s1600/canada.jpg

From their latest speed post.

[speedog]

Originally posted by A790
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-2j8lDv-eRcE/U5XNXNePkxI/AAAAAAAABi4/jE69VrCWoqA/s1600/canada.jpg

From their latest speed post.
So what do we really know about the methods used to reached the conclusions stated in the above graphic? How much of the slowdown for certain carriers could strictly be due to something in a customer's own home which could possibly out of the control of the ISP? And TELUS' speed is only 13.5% slower then the Shaw speed - in the end, not that much of a difference.

Now another thing to consider, what responsibility do ISP's have to guaranteeing that a certain type of traffic always get's a certain amount of bandwidth anywhere on that ISP's network? The reason I state this is that Netflix accounts for probably 35% of internet traffic as of recent and to that end, who's responsibility is it to keep the network robust enough to ensure Netflix's streaming traffic gets through without a burp or two. Should TELUS or Shaw or whichever ISP be responsible for making sure their network is robust enough to handle something like Netflix or should they be allowed to perform some traffic shaping - please note that traffic shaping has been around in the telecommunications world form may decades ago, even before the internet. ISP's build their networks to meet an expected average volume - streaming services like Netflix are probably something an ISP may not necessarily build their network to handle 100% during heavy load times - some ISP's may build a bit more robust.

In the end, it's the ISP's capitol dollars going into network builds and not Netflix's - when Netflix decides to distribute some of their capitol dollars towards more robust networks to support their streaming services, then every one of those numbers in the graphic above will probably improve. It's like the city of Calgary, they don't build roads to necessarily handle the afternoon rush at 100koh on Deerfoot and Airdrie is not contributing and of their municipal tax dollars to ensuring that Deerfoot is robust enough either.

[rage2]

Originally posted by speedog
So what do we really know about the methods used to reached the conclusions stated in the above graphic? How much of the slowdown for certain carriers could strictly be due to something in a customer's own home which could possibly out of the control of the ISP? And TELUS' speed is only 13.5% slower then the Shaw speed - in the end, not that much of a difference.
I'll try to answer all the questions piece by piece. The data is gathered from Netflix's end, so this is what they're seeing in terms of average bandwidth to customers from each provider on a global basis.

Slowdowns due to poor networking at customer's homes are inevitable, but this would be consistent across all ISPS, unless Telus customers are less tech savvy than Shaw customers, which I highly doubt.

The 13.5% slower is misleading. There's a cap as to how high that average can go. Netflix's standard content is encoded at 3mbps max, with a small selection of SuperHD content at 6mbps max, and 4K content at 15.6mbps max. This is why the average really doesn't go much further past 3mbps. If I had a fiber pipe directly to Netflix's servers, I won't go much further than 3mbps average because most of their content tops out at 3mbps.

With Telus customers averaging only 2.61, it means there's a choke point somewhere, and that a lot of customers can't even get full quality on the standard Netflix content.


Originally posted by speedog
Now another thing to consider, what responsibility do ISP's have to guaranteeing that a certain type of traffic always get's a certain amount of bandwidth anywhere on that ISP's network? The reason I state this is that Netflix accounts for probably 35% of internet traffic as of recent and to that end, who's responsibility is it to keep the network robust enough to ensure Netflix's streaming traffic gets through without a burp or two. Should TELUS or Shaw or whichever ISP be responsible for making sure their network is robust enough to handle something like Netflix or should they be allowed to perform some traffic shaping - please note that traffic shaping has been around in the telecommunications world form may decades ago, even before the internet. ISP's build their networks to meet an expected average volume - streaming services like Netflix are probably something an ISP may not necessarily build their network to handle 100% during heavy load times - some ISP's may build a bit more robust.
I'm all for net neutrality, and I believe if a network is selling me a 250mbps service, I should be delivered 250mbps of bandwidth not only to the ISP's network, but to the rest of the internet. They should enforce reasonable caps, and should not shape traffic at all. If there's a choke point on their backbones, then they should expand it. That's what my $100/month is paying for.


Originally posted by speedog
In the end, it's the ISP's capitol dollars going into network builds and not Netflix's - when Netflix decides to distribute some of their capitol dollars towards more robust networks to support their streaming services, then every one of those numbers in the graphic above will probably improve. It's like the city of Calgary, they don't build roads to necessarily handle the afternoon rush at 100koh on Deerfoot and Airdrie is not contributing and of their municipal tax dollars to ensuring that Deerfoot is robust enough either.
ISP's are taking my money, they should jack up prices, or align the prices better against usage to pay for the upgrades to handle the actual traffic being used by the customers, period. They shouldn't be the ones that have to pay for end user delivery. That's like asking cable networks to help pay for last mile infrastructure to the homes.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[speedog]

Originally posted by rage2

I'll try to answer all the questions piece by piece. The data is gathered from Netflix's end, so this is what they're seeing in terms of average bandwidth to customers from each provider on a global basis.

Slowdowns due to poor networking at customer's homes are inevitable, but this would be consistent across all ISPS, unless Telus customers are less tech savvy than Shaw customers, which I highly doubt.

The 13.5% slower is misleading. There's a cap as to how high that average can go. Netflix's standard content is encoded at 3mbps max, with a small selection of SuperHD content at 6mbps max, and 4K content at 15.6mbps max. This is why the average really doesn't go much further past 3mbps. If I had a fiber pipe directly to Netflix's servers, I won't go much further than 3mbps average because most of their content tops out at 3mbps.

With Telus customers averaging only 2.61, it means there's a choke point somewhere, and that a lot of customers can't even get full quality on the standard Netflix content.
Too this end, is there anywhere in an ISP's contract/agreement with their customers that they have to guarantee that a certain web based service be available at a certain speed - I suspect there's disclaimers in the fine print with every ISP. In the end, it's the consumer's choice and if they decide to leave TELUS because of slower Netflix streaming speeds, then TELUS can either respond with a better network or they can leave things as is - to me, Netflix isn't a big deal. To many others it is but is it enough for them to jump ship to Shaw in Calgary?

Originally posted by rage2
I'm all for net neutrality, and I believe if a network is selling me a 250mbps service, I should be delivered 250mbps of bandwidth not only to the ISP's network, but to the rest of the internet. They should enforce reasonable caps, and should not shape traffic at all. If there's a choke point on their backbones, then they should expand it. That's what my $100/month is paying for.
Reasonable caps? Now that's a very sticky issue - people would really be all up in arms if ISP's started enforcing their cap limits.. As far as traffic shaping, it's never going to disappear no different then are roads/streets will never be build to accommodate 100kph on Deerfoot at Memorial during rush hour and to that end, there's probably fine print that every ISP has to cover that.

Originally posted by rage2
ISP's are taking my money, they should jack up prices, or align the prices better against usage to pay for the upgrades to handle the actual traffic being used by the customers, period. They shouldn't be the ones that have to pay for end user delivery. That's like asking cable networks to help pay for last mile infrastructure to the homes.
Actually, you're voluntarily giving your money to the ISP's - they're not forcing you to be their customer. As far as last mile infrastructure costs - I'm a bit confused on that one as it's the ISP's capitol dollars that pay for that as well - yes, those monies ultimately come from the customer and many customers would probably be agog at how much an ISP's infrastructure truly costs. That DSL or cable modem in the customer's home/business is mice nuts when it comes to infrastructure costs.

Maybe, a new model has to be worked out whereas a major content provider that uses the internet as their delivery platform (Netflix) has to, in turn, pay to have access to an ISP's customer base - I'm just throwing this out for discussion. In the end, both TELUS and Shaw would rather have their customers utilizing and paying for their entertainment offerings as opposed to internet based services like Netflix from which they probably get no kickback - of course, enforcing reasonable bandwidth caps could provide an additional revenue source to these ISP's. The problem is what is reasonable for me is going to be different from some 79 year old couple like my parents which will once again be different then a university aged kid even though they may very well be on the very same plan speed-wise.

[speedog]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
When I was with Telus I constantly had my internet throttled back

Then I would call in, they would go "Oh, give me a minute to fix that", it would be good for a few weeks and then it would start slowing down a bit... then a bit more... then a bit more... was annoying.
And yet I've never experienced that in over 18 years with them as my ISP. Possibly they were just logging into your DSL modem and rebooting it - that last end piece of technology is probably the most troublesome piece that any ISP provider has in their networks.

[rage2]

Originally posted by speedog
Too this end, is there anywhere in an ISP's contract/agreement with their customers that they have to guarantee that a certain web based service be available at a certain speed - I suspect there's disclaimers in the fine print with every ISP.
You're right, ISPs can't guarantee speeds for services. The problem is that Netflix CAN deliver those speeds, it's just that Telus is either bottlenecked, or throttling. ISPs should be guaranteeing speeds to the internet. If you're paying for 50mbps service, you should be getting 50mbps service. Otherwise, I'd sell a 50mbps service, cap it at 1mbps to the internet and profit.


Originally posted by speedog
Reasonable caps? Now that's a very sticky issue - people would really be all up in arms if ISP's started enforcing their cap limits.. As far as traffic shaping, it's never going to disappear no different then are roads/streets will never be build to accommodate 100kph on Deerfoot at Memorial during rush hour and to that end, there's probably fine print that every ISP has to cover that.
Caps today are reasonable, with the exception of torrenters. A usage based billing is the way to go. You use more than your neighbor, you should pay more. Deerfoot at Memorial can also be fixed if we went usage based. :)


Originally posted by speedog
Maybe, a new model has to be worked out whereas a major content provider that uses the internet as their delivery platform (Netflix) has to, in turn, pay to have access to an ISP's customer base - I'm just throwing this out for discussion.
Maybe ISPs should stop offering 50, 100, 250mbps service if they can't provide it properly.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[speedog]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak
Ok, and why are you taking this personally? lol

This started when they changed me over to Optik. My HD TV started getting black and green square blotches, so I had to keep calling it in.

It wasn't restarted, and they just instantly were able to adjust the speed over the phone every time. They always told me it was an issue on their end.
Nope, not taking personally as I get absolutely no kick-backs from TELUS. Yeah, worked there a long time but really don't care if someone is on TELUS or Shaw.

As far as your issue, sure sounds like a modem problem or possibly something in the local community box - can't even remember what it's called anymore. If you're still on copper, then some weird troubles can lie dormant for years - we recently had our telephone line go out and it was a pair that had shorted out in the pole mounted cable in the alley Neighbor had had all kinds of problems similar to what you're describing, called in multiple troubles over 4-5 years with no fix ever lasting - ultimately proved to be a single wire not punched down properly in the community node/box at the end of the alley, just sitting there in contact most of the time but sometimes moving around creating issues.

[speedog]

Originally posted by rage2

You're right, ISPs can't guarantee speeds for services. The problem is that Netflix CAN deliver those speeds, it's just that Telus is either bottlenecked, or throttling. ISPs should be guaranteeing speeds to the internet. If you're paying for 50mbps service, you should be getting 50mbps service. Otherwise, I'd sell a 50mbps service, cap it at 1mbps to the internet and profit.


Caps today are reasonable, with the exception of torrenters. A usage based billing is the way to go. You use more than your neighbor, you should pay more. Deerfoot at Memorial can also be fixed if we went usage based. :)


Maybe ISPs should stop offering 50, 100, 250mbps service if they can't provide it properly.

And there-in lies the problem - ISP's can't predict bursty traffic so they build for an average plus a bit. Been done that way ever since we've had telephones - the calculations and math involved are quite something and sometimes the provider gets caught with their shorts down. As far as what they offer, they cover themselves quite well in their terms of service/use (TELUS (http://www.telus.ca/content/internet/high-speed/service-terms.jsp) and Shaw (http://www.shaw.ca/terms-of-use/)) - probably every ISP has something similar and that's not about to change any time soon.

So they offer what they wish and anything you get up to that 'agreed to' speed is what you get - complain and maybe get it fixed or move to the another provider who have their own issues.

[rage2]

Originally posted by speedog
And there-in lies the problem - ISP's can't predict bursty traffic so they build for an average plus a bit.
Yea, the problem is they can't handle the average, hence bottleneck or throttling. :rofl:

And if you can't predict bursty traffic and build enough headroom for it, you're doing it wrong. I do that kind of thing for a living haha.

[Mibz]

Originally posted by rage2
And if you can't predict bursty traffic and build enough headroom for it, you're doing it wrong. Have you seen what Telus tries to pay network guys? I'm pretty sure everybody that can do it right is working elsewhere.

[speedog]

I wonder how many people really worry about Netflix speeds? I know my parents and my mother-in-law don't use Netflix, my wife and I don't unless the kids are watching something - we can't be bothered to turn on extra devices to get to Netflix. Probably most people I know that are 45+ don't use Netflix - it's a younger demographic that uses Netflix as best as I can figure. My kids (15-22) use Netflix quite a bit and yeah, I'll admit it can look pretty shitty some evenings (we're with TELUS) but for my wife and I, if it weren't for the kids we wouldn't be bothering with Netflix as there's enough on regular TV to meet our viewing needs.

So for an ISP, they now have to balance the needs of that Netflix watching demographic against all of their customer base and then make a determination of whether or not they wish to make their network robust enough to increase those Netflix speeds. Yeah Rage2, you do that kind of thing for a living, but bigger companies like TELUS and Shaw run to a different beat - have so for years and will continue to do so and as long as they have pretty much exclusively have that final entrance into your home, they will continue to operate as they always have because it's going to be very difficult for someone to come in and build a better end-to-end network and remain price competitive.

[speedog]

Originally posted by Mibz
Have you seen what Telus tries to pay network guys? I'm pretty sure everybody that can do it right is working elsewhere.
Probably isn't significantly more than when I was under TELUS' employ some 7.5 years ago - that company has evolved into a beast that only cares about shareholder profits and nothing more. If things can get done on a shoestring budget, then they will or at least it was that way and getting worse when I left. I know talking to people that still work there on the network side, things have only got worse - I remember multi-million dollar network projects being held up by a missing $10 box of bolts which we couldn't drive down to the local hardware store and purchase on our corporate credit cards. Such a nickel and dime company on the network side but all flashy looking on the marketing and customer retention side.

[A790]

Originally posted by speedog
I wonder how many people really worry about Netflix speeds? I know my parents and my mother-in-law don't use Netflix, my wife and I don't unless the kids are watching something - we can't be bothered to turn on extra devices to get to Netflix. Probably most people I know that are 45+ don't use Netflix - it's a younger demographic that uses Netflix as best as I can figure. My kids (15-22) use Netflix quite a bit and yeah, I'll admit it can look pretty shitty some evenings (we're with TELUS) but for my wife and I, if it weren't for the kids we wouldn't be bothering with Netflix as there's enough on regular TV to meet our viewing needs.

So for an ISP, they now have to balance the needs of that Netflix watching demographic against all of their customer base and then make a determination of whether or not they wish to make their network robust enough to increase those Netflix speeds. Yeah Rage2, you do that kind of thing for a living, but bigger companies like TELUS and Shaw run to a different beat - have so for years and will continue to do so and as long as they have pretty much exclusively have that final entrance into your home, they will continue to operate as they always have because it's going to be very difficult for someone to come in and build a better end-to-end network and remain price competitive.
I care about Netflix speeds, especially since I'm a "cord cutter" and cancelled my TV back in January.

The ISP shouldn't be looking at the "Netflix demographic" separately from its general usage information. If Netflix accounts for 35% of internet traffic I expect that my ISP will ensure that they're setup to handle it. After all, it's what I pay them for.

[speedog]

Originally posted by A790 I care about Netflix speeds, especially since I'm a "cord cutter" and cancelled my TV back in January.

The ISP shouldn't be looking at the "Netflix demographic" separately from its general usage information. If Netflix accounts for 35% of internet traffic I expect that my ISP will ensure that they're setup to handle it. After all, it's what I pay them for.
It may be what you think you're paying them for but their terms of service would beg to differ.

[jacky4566]

Originally posted by rage2


Caps today are reasonable, with the exception of torrenters. A usage based billing is the way to go. You use more than your neighbor, you should pay more. Deerfoot at Memorial can also be fixed if we went usage based. :)


Agree 100%. Usage based billing needs to become more common. This would make people much more aware of the fact that data transfer is not free. Heavy users are a higher burden on the network and need to be contributing fairly.

Heck it may even lower piracy rates if Hill Billy Bob knows he can buy the blu ray for 20$ or pay $10 for the 50gb bluray rip. (not that most people download rips anyway).

My 2 cents.

[firebane]

Originally posted by speedog
I wonder how many people really worry about Netflix speeds?

It really isn't just about Netflix speeds. Its about the overall experience in streaming. If you can stream better with one ISP than another would you not want to go with them?

The fact that Shaw is better than Telus for this speaks volumes.

[firebane]

Originally posted by jacky4566


Agree 100%. Usage based billing needs to become more common. This would make people much more aware of the fact that data transfer is not free. Heavy users are a higher burden on the network and need to be contributing fairly.

Heck it may even lower piracy rates if Hill Billy Bob knows he can buy the blu ray for 20$ or pay $10 for the 50gb bluray rip. (not that most people download rips anyway).

My 2 cents.

I download a ton of movies in blu-ray format and while there maybe a small loss in quality I'd rather download it than buy it and find out the movies sucks... *cough*I Frakenstein*

[speedog]

Originally posted by jacky4566
Agree 100%. Usage based billing needs to become more common. This would make people much more aware of the fact that data transfer is not free. Heavy users are a higher burden on the network and need to be contributing fairly.

Heck it may even lower piracy rates if Hill Billy Bob knows he can buy the blu ray for 20$ or pay $10 for the 50gb bluray rip. (not that most people download rips anyway).

My 2 cents.
Usage based billing - now that would be opening up a can of worms. Let's see, TELUS 25Mbps plan allows for 250GB of monthly data ( I would assume up and down) - is that enough for most? Overages are noted on your bill but not currently charged for - not even sure what their overage fees are.

[rage2]

Originally posted by speedog
I wonder how many people really worry about Netflix speeds? I know my parents and my mother-in-law don't use Netflix, my wife and I don't unless the kids are watching something - we can't be bothered to turn on extra devices to get to Netflix. Probably most people I know that are 45+ don't use Netflix - it's a younger demographic that uses Netflix as best as I can figure. My kids (15-22) use Netflix quite a bit and yeah, I'll admit it can look pretty shitty some evenings (we're with TELUS) but for my wife and I, if it weren't for the kids we wouldn't be bothering with Netflix as there's enough on regular TV to meet our viewing needs.
27% of households uses Netflix, that's that most recent stat I could find.


Detailed within a new study published by The NPD Group, subscription video-on-demand (SVOD) services like Netflix and Hulu Plus have been consistently on the rise for the past two years while subscriptions to premium channels like HBO, Showtime and Starz have seen a steady decline. Specifically, the study indicates that subscription video-on-demand has grown from 23 percent of U.S. households in March 2012 to 27 percent by August 2013.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/netflix-subscriptions-rise-hbo-showtime-decline

So based on your experience, if you want to use Netflix or other VOD services, don't use Telus, because it will look "pretty shitty" some evenings.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[rage2]

Originally posted by speedog
Usage based billing - now that would be opening up a can of worms. Let's see, TELUS 25Mbps plan allows for 250GB of monthly data ( I would assume up and down) - is that enough for most? Overages are noted on your bill but not currently charged for - not even sure what their overage fees are.
Here's my usage, and our household is considered heavy users.

http://i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc475/rage2amg/shawusage_zpsa67c02cb.jpg

We watch most of our shows on demand via iTunes, HBO GO, Netflix, Hulu+, etc. The only shows we watch off satellite are pretty much sports. I also download all of our games instead of buying discs. Plus the home office VPN uses quite a bit of traffic transferring stuff back and forth between work and home. We also have cloud based camera/DVRs in the house that's constantly uploading.

I'm nowhere near my 1TB limit, even on my crazy month with the new XB1 and PS4 games.

[firebane]

Shaw 50 here and I download a ton of movies/tv shows etc.

Most months I'm under and some under less than others but generally I'm right at the limit or slightly over.

[friedn00dles]

Majority is streaming on netflix. Very little downloading lately since megaupload shut down.

http://i995.photobucket.com/albums/af71/friedn00dles/usage.png

[Mibz]

I can't figure out why I went over so badly in March. Especially with most of it being upload. I must've been seeding something super popular. Also, you might notice the last figure is over two months. I was away for a month with computers off so usage would've been negligible.

I wasn't charged for any of my overages (I'm allowed 400GB a month).

http://i.imgur.com/Cid5wjh.png

Oh, I only started using Netflix on May 24th :P

[jacky4566]

Originally posted by speedog

Usage based billing - now that would be opening up a can of worms. Let's see, TELUS 25Mbps plan allows for 250GB of monthly data ( I would assume up and down) - is that enough for most? Overages are noted on your bill but not currently charged for - not even sure what their overage fees are.

Telus must be nicer then because Shaw has charged me twice for overage. they do it in a nice way where you get a speed bump too but its still not fun to pay for a bigger bill than you expected.

[rage2]

Here's what a non pirate's upload looks like. :poosie:

http://i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc475/rage2amg/shawusage2_zpsefb7c92c.jpg

[Mibz]

HACK THE PLANET