Rogers Usage Tracking is a Joke - Page 2 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums
 

Go Back   Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums > Canadian Internet, Phone, TV and Wireless Service Providers > Rogers Communications > Rogers High Speed Internet and Home Phone

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 2011-02-09, 01:39 PM   #16
ScaryBob
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Dandelion City
Posts: 7,133
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JugglingReferee View Post
Is there a device that we can install to check gas and electricity usage?
No and yes, as discussed here

Accurate measurements are a huge issue, especially considering the way that customers are billed for excess usage. After being a Bell subscriber for 40 years, I am convinced that Bell will never get their billing system right. They can't be trusted to bill POTS correctly, so how can they be trusted with something as complex as UBB? My experiences with Rogers are better but I've seen some huge billing mistakes from them as well. Now they want to be trusted when even small errors in complex measurement systems can result in millions of dollars a month in consumer over-billing. I wouldn't be as concerned if the UBB billing rate was something realistic, like $0.02/GB/mo instead of $2.00/GB/mo, especially when the real wholesale cost is close to $0.005/GB.
__________________
At 20 I had a good mind. At 40 I had money. At 60 I've lost my mind and my money. Oh, to be 20 again. --Scary
ScaryBob is offline   Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 2011-02-09, 01:50 PM   #17
Civuck
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 319
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hugh View Post
Previously, I was somewhat blase about this issue but I realize now that we can't trust the Internet Service Providers to get this right on their own.

We need measurement Canada to legislate how Internet usage is measured and to oversee the development of an independent verification mechanism.
Well said - I think the ISPs may have opened a real "can-of-worms" for themselves with this.

If they are so keen on Usage Based Billing, then they are expected to go through the costs associated with making sure it's all done ACCURATELY and verified by an independent party. And my feeling is that won't be a cheap (or quick) undertaking.

I've been floored how often Bell's usage numbers have used in statements by the CRTC or even in news media coverage. Further, it's terrible when those numbers aren't prefaced as being supplied by Bell. And lastly, could we not at least get some comparison numbers from Shaw and Rogers? Even if they are similar numbers, at least you have a benchmark - validity aside that is.
Civuck is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2011-02-09, 04:27 PM   #18
cambo
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Whitby, Ontario
Posts: 369
Default

Check and see if your router can count it's own bandwidth. I use DD-WRT and it counts data both up and down. I add it up and compare with what Rogers has...normally it's very close.
cambo is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2011-02-09, 06:32 PM   #19
JugglingReferee
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 142
Default

I already checked: mine is the Netgear WGR614v7. It won't support DD-WRT or Tomato.
JugglingReferee is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2011-02-09, 08:48 PM   #20
hugh
Member #1
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 47,716
Default

Quote:
Check and see if your router can count it's own bandwidth.
The vast majority of off the shelf routers cannot. The only ones at this point are new ones from Netgear meaning probably 99% of users cannot measure their own internet usage in a reliable fashion.
__________________
As of January 2012, I am no longer the owner of the Digital Home website. My comments and opinions are my own and not those of the current site owners.
I have disabled private messaging so for personal inquiries contact me at the Hugh Thompson website or via twitter.
hugh is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2011-02-10, 11:54 AM   #21
99gecko
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,573
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 57 View Post
This costs money at a time when people don't want to spend more. As stated earlier, I see no need to spend the time and effort since we already have the technology to track this ourselves and report it to regulators, the press and the ISP. Tracking Gas or Electricity would be much more costly per user, although it would be pretty easy to check your water use with a "bucket".
I think that independently verifying internet usage is well beyond the capabilities of the average internet consumer. The average gas or electricity consumer is likely to be more satisfied simply because they have a standardized meter on their property that they can check when their monthly bill arrives.

The whole UBB fiasco is getting deeper and deeper.... And please don't ask me how deep, because as far as I know Measurement Canada does not inspect calibration/certification records for third party Fiasco Depthfinders.
99gecko is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2011-02-10, 12:16 PM   #22
hugh
Member #1
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 47,716
Default

To me the answer lies in building the functionality to record usage into the firmware of modems.

The functionality would be built into the modem's firmware by the manufacturer and could not be altered by the seller (Rogers) or the buyer (homeowner).

The modem is preferable because it is accessible by the Cable company (if its not available then the user isn't using any bandwidth!)

Like a meter reader, Rogers would query the modem every day or every month for usage and the consumer could independently verify through a local webpage. (192.168.xx.xx kind of thing)

This would dramatically lower costs since it would be built into every modem and the ISP's would not have to program Usage meters for their customers.
__________________
As of January 2012, I am no longer the owner of the Digital Home website. My comments and opinions are my own and not those of the current site owners.
I have disabled private messaging so for personal inquiries contact me at the Hugh Thompson website or via twitter.
hugh is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2011-02-10, 01:43 PM   #23
jshel101
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,828
Default

Since the CRTC and Bell wants the internet treat like utilities, then it should be measured like utilities, and accurately. The method that Hugh suggested would work the best. IMO, the ISP's should be responsible for supplying the necessary hardware (Router or Modem) to each of their subscribers, so they can accurately read the usage. They should also charge something a little more reasonable for any overages, like maybe triple the actual bandwidth cost.
jshel101 is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2011-02-10, 02:38 PM   #24
Civuck
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 319
Default

While most people have caught on, there are still those who don't lock down their wireless network.

UBB would encourage more WiFi stealing. Why use my bandwidth when my neighbor's is wide open for all my torrenting, NetFlix, iTunes, Xbox Live, PSN needs.

And I wonder how popular WiFi hotspots like Starbucks would fare with Canadian data priced as reasonably as ink for inkjet printers. Talk about a sudden influx of usage! Suddenly lots of vehicles parked outside Starbucks locations, engines idling away...
Civuck is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2011-02-10, 06:30 PM   #25
99gecko
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,573
Default

I am currently with Rogers, yet oddly enough I have yet to ever check my consumption on line. I have always gone by what my own verification has shown, which is rarely > 10 GB/month. That will change as my kids get older.

Quote:
And I wonder how popular WiFi hotspots like Starbucks would fare with Canadian data priced as reasonably as ink for inkjet printers. Talk about a sudden influx of usage! Suddenly lots of vehicles parked outside Starbucks locations, engines idling away...
Without straying too far off-topic, I suspect the gas consumed sitting idling in the parking lot would cost more than paying Rogers the bandwidth overage charges. I would suspect open hot-spots like Starbucks would lock-out p2p traffic.
99gecko is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2011-02-17, 11:56 PM   #26
Civuck
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 319
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 99gecko View Post
I suspect the gas consumed sitting idling in the parking lot would cost more than paying Rogers the bandwidth overage charges.
It probably would - but then of course we always see lines of idling cars at the pumps when gas is a few cents/litre cheaper at certain locations.

Quote:
I would suspect open hot-spots like Starbucks would lock-out p2p traffic.
Starbucks could be the place to go when it's time to download your monthly Microsoft Windows updates - some of those can be quite large.
Civuck is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2011-02-19, 10:46 PM   #27
viper359
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 461
Default

I am no fan of UBB, or even the overage charges, but that being said, I have never had an issue. Those worrying about spam emails being counted and other minor and small traffic have a point, but a rather moot one. That is small amounts of data, KB's, not megs or gigs. In the bigger picture, its most likely not even a trickle on your monthly usage.

I would rather see Rogers spend the money instead, getting people to secure their networks. Its pathetic to see how many networks are open, unencrypted, and just sitting there. Even the password protected ones are crazy. I have seen some where the password is the network name!!!

If your usage is of such concern, spend the money and buy a better router which has these reporting abilities, or one that can upgrade the software to something better. All big business monitor their own networks usage. While I agree Rogers etc need to be accurate, I don't think the buck sits completely with them.

Too many people have bad computing habits and do not realize the ramifications of such ignorance. People need to lock down their systems, networks, and change their habits. People generally lose their mind if their wallet goes missing. They would never leave their front door to the house unlocked, yet, most don't even employ a free program to encrypt their hard drives. Proper anti virus and malware programs to stop viruses, trojans etc. I am more concerned about my data being stolen from a break in, or my laptop being stolen while working, then Rogers being a little off on my monthly usage.

I think the whole issue is much larger than just a simple UBB.
viper359 is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2011-03-12, 10:52 PM   #28
lforbes
Rookie
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hugh View Post
The vast majority of off the shelf routers cannot. The only ones at this point are new ones from Netgear meaning probably 99% of users cannot measure their own internet usage in a reliable fashion.
In regard to measurment of internet usage, I have been using a freeware Windows program called NetMeter which keeps good stats on download & upload usage on a daily, weekly, monthly and continuing basis. I don't have a Rogers wireless connection yet but am wondering if such a program would be useful for comparison with Roger's usage numbers?
lforbes is offline   Quick reply to this message
Old 2011-03-12, 11:27 PM   #29
metalhawk
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Nepean, ON
Posts: 323
Default

Do keep in mind that if you stream to a PS3, or another console, then Netmeter is useless since it will count whatever you are streaming within your own network (that's why I stopped using it).
metalhawk is online now   Quick reply to this message
Old 2011-03-13, 01:31 AM   #30
MarcP
Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Airdrie, AB
Posts: 4,166
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lforbes View Post
In regard to measurment of internet usage, I have been using a freeware Windows program called NetMeter
That doesn't even measure the overhead of TCP/IP. You're missing a large chunk of what you should be measuring. And that's not even counting the junk packets that your router is filtering, but are still measured as usage by Rogers.
MarcP is offline   Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:28 AM.

Search Digital Home

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.