# Warning to the downloaders out there



## taureandragon76 (Apr 21, 2010)

I heard something about caps being put in place for download/upload so I called my provider Shaw and it's true. They have always had the cap but never enforced it and as of Feb 1st they are going to start to. The cap for me is 100GB, anything over you get charged $1/GB. Last month I had 168GB, although I just started getting into downloading torrents that month and went a little crazy But ya just a warning to you all that you gotta start watching how much you download or upload. The upload even includes pictures from your camera to the internet.


----------



## AWW (Apr 22, 2010)

wow are you serious? Thats just a money suck for them.


----------



## Johnnyfishtanks (Apr 21, 2010)

this would suck for me


----------



## dZilla (Dec 30, 2010)

You can check your shaw account online, it won't show how much you've 'downloaded' until you get a 'flag' on your account for being close to your limit.... Just sign up online and its under member services or something it WILL NOT show unless you request it to show on your account online.

Also, main reason why they are doing this as subscriptions like Netflix and the such are competing directly with things like Shaw on Demand...


----------



## effox (Apr 21, 2010)

ahhhhhh SOB!


----------



## beN (Apr 21, 2010)

its a good thing my pooch destroyed my 1tb a couple months back.

ive slowed down on downloading.

although i dl the odd album here & there now.


----------



## Nicklfire (Apr 21, 2010)

I'll believe it when i see it  
They have always had caps in place, and i think in the dawn of interenet they enforced it but... if they start charging people they will just switch service providers...

When someone gets a bill , then tell me i'd be surprised


----------



## Nicklfire (Apr 21, 2010)

So... i guess it's worse then i thought... So i think shaw gives you 2 warnings.. if so.. switch to telus... telus will NOT be doing the same thing.


----------



## Theratboy_101 (Apr 27, 2010)

wow that sucks... but I haven't been over 100gb in a long time!

if your downloading a lot of torrents you should install peerblock. it a free program that blocks known malicious IP's, IP's of those who try and track and report who's downloading. it can also block adware, spyware, popups.. .ext. if you turn the setting on.

I've been using it for like a year and got faster downloads and no more e-mails about copyright infringement


----------



## silvciv888 (May 4, 2010)

u might want to double check your firewall, security, antivirus, etc.

a lady friend of mine didn't do any of that. apparently a hacker or (most likely) a neighbor was able to access her internet and download like crazy. or maybe a hacker hijacked the comp to spam other people.

got several warnings from shaw.


----------



## effox (Apr 21, 2010)

If you leave your wireless network open and unsecured you'll sure be in for a surprise!


----------



## Rastapus (Apr 21, 2010)

effox said:


> If you leave your wireless network open and unsecured you'll sure be in for a surprise!


Overseas it is common to pay for download limits. We have had it good here and I am not surprised to hear this.


----------



## dZilla (Dec 30, 2010)

Rastapus said:


> Overseas it is common to pay for download limits. We have had it good here and I am not surprised to hear this.


They also have far greater download and upload speeds.


----------



## 2wheelsx2 (Apr 21, 2010)

They've enforced it for a long time, but not for the average person. A guy I know has had his capped for several years. He has 2 machines downloading stuff 24/7 though, so he's not your average guy.


----------



## neven (May 15, 2010)

with the improvements to home connections to the net over the last decade, i am suprised the fee based system is being pushed through for residential clients. Reason being is while the throughput has improved, the amount of content not illegal as astronomically increased. You have streaming HD Video over the web, you have software developpers using peer to peer as a primary means of distribution, not to mention them maintaining their software through p2p aswell. Its a backwards step in my opinion, and a punishment for those who play by the rules.

Bandwidth does add up quite easily. A few videos via netflix, music videos via vevo, itunes, and gaming. Plus considering many homes having mulitple PCs networked, doing pretty much the same thing. Thankfully shaw is starting with caps high up there, but i worry that their caps will not keep up with the times, as our bandwidth will keep going up and up as the technologies improve.


----------



## 2wheelsx2 (Apr 21, 2010)

Having come from the telecom industry I can tell you that higher bandwidth doesn't come free. A router with Gigabit cards handling 100,000k subs can cost $250k, and those cards break down. Plus the subscriber management software and maintenance agreements aren't cheap. TANSTAAFL.


----------



## Rastapus (Apr 21, 2010)

dZilla said:


> They also have far greater download and upload speeds.


Most providers overseas charge per speed rate and have a cap, double whammy. No matter what anyone might think you still have it good here.


----------



## Rastapus (Apr 21, 2010)

2wheelsx2 said:


> Having come from the telecom industry I can tell you that higher bandwidth doesn't come free. A router with Gigabit cards handling 100,000k subs can cost $250k, and those cards break down. Plus the subscriber management software and maintenance agreements aren't cheap. TANSTAAFL.


There you go. People are quick to jump on these bigger companies. any change or increase usually has a comparable increase on the companies' side.


----------



## 2wheelsx2 (Apr 21, 2010)

Grant is 100 percent right on the money. The only caveat is that even if we want to pay, we can't get that kind of speed here, unless you're with Novus.


----------



## tony1928 (Apr 22, 2010)

Yeah, I'm pretty sure this is just to protect their turf from the Netflixes of the world that are they are in direct competition with. No doubt that maintaining bandwidth costs alot of money. At the end of the day, it will all come down to what the consumer will pay. I believe there will be an enforced hard cap but eventually that cap limit will increase to the point where it only impacts the hardcore downloaders. I think this move for now is just to throw some cold water on the growth of companies like Netflix before it's too late. In the future, I think owning content that people want will be the money maker rather than charging for delivering content. my 2 cents.


----------



## jay_leask (Apr 22, 2010)

same up here in rupert but i think our over charge is going to be $2/GB.


----------



## Nicklfire (Apr 21, 2010)

I honestly hate telus internet but if it comes down to it i'll switch if i find myself going over my allocated 100g per month



> Shaw High-Speed Lite - 10 GigaByte
> Shaw High-Speed - 60 GigaByte
> Shaw High-Speed (with Xtreme-I) - 100 GigaByte
> Shaw Warp - 175 GigaByte
> ...


----------



## Morainy (Apr 21, 2010)

I don't mind paying more for going over a cap or for services used, but I am unhappy that Shaw has reduced the amount that I can download without reducing my fee. (This month, my cap is lower than last month.) I agree with the poster who wrote that the timing of this strategy is to protect their cable business from Netflix.

We'll probably buy more bandwidth and drop our cable tv package, ending up with a savings. We rarely watch tv anyway. Mostly, we watch DVDs or pay for a show from iTunes.

One ethical issue is neutrality of the net. What is there to protect internet-dependent businesses (like Netflix, iTunes, Google)? Since Shaw provides internet and television cable, it is able to enforce caps that work against its competitors in particular. I look forward to the day when Google provides internet connection.


----------



## slipstream (Apr 25, 2010)

BULL DONKEY DOO DOO

Shaw WAS the best supplier out there, maybe Ill look into switching to Telus (even though I hate them) Or I will have to buy the most expensive internet from Shaw.


----------



## taureandragon76 (Apr 21, 2010)

Here I was gonna go and a 2tb external but don't really see the point of it now. I think that it might just become a common thing to cap and charge for overusage. It's not just the netflix's that are the reason, it's everything from movie companies to music companies etc. In the end though it is being done for the cable company. They make there money from commercials and these days alot of people are just watching tv on the comp avoiding the commercials.


----------



## scherzo (Apr 24, 2010)

+1 on Shaw protecting their market from Netflix. I've often thought about cutting our cable bill and just buying the shows on XBOX and then using Netflix for the kids stuff.

Telus' connections are just too slow for my tastes. We have both at work and we only use the Telus connection as a backup or for special events when we stream to the web.

I don't necessarily buy the "European market" comparison. They pay more for everything, gas, food, hydro, cell phones, etc... They have a much different market than we do and I'm not sure if North America is ready for such high costs of living and changes in lifestyle so quickly.


----------



## 2wheelsx2 (Apr 21, 2010)

scherzo said:


> They get paid more for everything, and work fewer days a year.


Fixed that for you.


----------



## dZilla (Dec 30, 2010)

Rastapus said:


> There you go. People are quick to jump on these bigger companies. any change or increase usually has a comparable increase on the companies' side.


Canadian cable co. Shaw sees Q3 profit rise
By The Associated Press
CedMagazine.com - June 26, 2009
Loading...

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) - Shaw Communications Inc. said profit grew 3 percent in the third quarter as it signed up new cable and telephone subscribers.

Shaw earned 132 million Canadian dollars ($114.5 million), or 31 Canadian cents per share (27 cents), up from 128 million Canadian dollars, or 30 Canadian cents per share, in the same quarter a year ago . Revenue was 861.4 million Canadian dollars ($746.9 million) versus 792.1 million Canadian dollars ($686.8 million).

Excluding one-time items related to taxes for the third quarters of 2009 and 2008, Shaw earned 131 million Canadian dollars ($113.6 million). Free cash flow rose 47 percent to 154 million Canadian dollars ($133.3 million).

Results missed analysts' expectations for a profit of 32 Canadian cents per share on revenue of 862.8 million Canadian dollars, according to a survey by Thomson Reuters.

Shares rose 8 cents to $17.07. They've traded between $13.39 and $23.48 in the past 52 weeks.

The company is on track to reach its guidance for the year, CEO Jim Shaw said.

"Strong subscriber growth and solid operational performance delivered financial results year-to-date that keep us on track to achieve our financial guidance for the year, including generating free cash flow of at least $500 million," he said.

For the nine months ended May 31, the company reported net income of 411 million Canadian dollars ($355.9 million), or 95 Canadian cents per share (82 cents), compared with 539 million Canadian dollars ($466.7 million), or 1.24 Canadian dollars per share ($1.08). Revenue rose 9.5 percent to 2.5 billion Canadian dollars ($2.2 billion).

Looking forward, the Alberta, Ontario-based cable company reiterated earlier guidance offered in October. The company said then that service operating income for cable, before amortization, should increase by 10 percent in 2009, while satellite services should show "modest' growth. Free cash flow is expected to be at least 500 million Canadian dollars.​
I guess in a capitalist society this is what is happening, but I don't see "Shaw struggling to stay afloat" I see Shaw responding to shareholders and that's "WE WANT MORE MONEY"


----------



## CanadianCowbell (Jan 16, 2011)

It's actually thanks to Bell (thanks for the ubb jerks). Shaw is just following Bells example. It is also about dealing with resellers as well as netflix ect. plus add the fact that even with the upgrades over the years things are just not setup to handle to usage that is considered commonplace now. As far as Telus, I would not be surprised if 6 months they change their stance on this issue.

Also when we heard about Bell and the ubb we made the switch to Teksavvy (a reseller out of Ontario) which gave us unlimited. I think it is poor judgement on the part of Shaw/Bell/Telus to have such low bandwidth caps. If they handled it the way Teksavvy does (200gb a month and the option to buy more blocks of bandwidth) I could support this move but in this day and age those limits are just too low when you take into account how gaming is now pretty much online and how the day of the local movie rental place is slowly dying.


----------



## 123mars (Jul 7, 2010)

i haven't been to the cinema or rented a movie in 5 years. i download torrents for free. that is the target audience that shaw is after "abusers". Right now i use telus, and get far better download rates. However, i will switch back to shaw in 6 months to get a cheaper offer. both shaw and telus give preferential treatment to newer customers at the expense of older, more loyal customers. you need to change providers every year or two. you could probably get the download caps removed if you negotiate with them upfront and threaten to switch.

disgusting companies, both of them.


----------

