[*] 10Mbit speed - Shaw QoS Fraud?

[LES.NET (1996) INC.]

One problem I see with the whole packet based QoS thing (if its real)...
Is that word will eventually get out that you can buy QoS and people will
use it for file sharing, gaming, and what not.  It would effectively
become useless once a lot of people start using it I would think.

Les

> QOS was never originally available for business but you could always
> request it if desired.
>
> However, I think the reason its not available to business is because
> they already provide signal monitoring for business accounts. If you are
> a business customer and complain of problems "on Thursday last week",
> they can pull up logs and tell you if there was problems with your
> signal.
>
> This sounds exactly like the QOS enhancement they offer for residential.
>
> By they way, the original Shaw tech I spoke with who escalated the
> question on QOS to Calgary was just as amazed as I was that the answer
> was "Its not packet based, but signal monitoring" so I think a lot of
> lower level Shaw people assume its packet based.
>
> He basically said in not so many words that he thought that QOS wasn't
> worth paying for. I got my QOS fees back-dated and refunded on my
> business account.
>
> John
>
> On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 12:06 -0500, LES.NET (1996) INC. wrote:
>> Just spoke with the shaw business people.  QoS is not available for
>> business customers as a directive from Calgary.
>>
>> The tech I spoke with described the QoS service as a packet priority
>> scheme, and said that QoS monitoring signal levels doesnt make any
>> sense.
>>
>> I informed him that Customer service reps have been describing it as
>> such,
>> and he said he would inform the supervisors there about this incorrect
>> information.
>>
>> However, I did not provide any hook to follow up on this.  Mainly
>> because
>> I have business service, so there is no way for me to actively
>> participate
>> in testing this, unless I get a residential modem installed at home,
>> which
>> may be
>>
>> Les.
>> > On 9/7/06, Bill Reid <billreid at shaw.ca> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Sean Walberg wrote:
>> >> > Fraud at worst, misleading at best.
>> >>
>> >> This certainly sounds like marketing spin.
>> >
>> >
>> > I disagree (and I'm sure Seth Godin would have an essay or two to
>> write
>> > about this if I'm wrong).
>> >
>> > http://www.shaw.ca/en-ca/ProductsServices/Internet/ServiceEnhancement.htm
>> >
>> > clearly indicates that problem with third party VoIP providers (and
>> VoIP
>> > in
>> > general) is of bandwidth contention and packet loss, which can be
>> solved
>> > by
>> > purchasing the "Service Enhancement".  If the product does nothing to
>> > solve
>> > these problems, as is suggested earlier in the thread(s), then it's a
>> > clear
>> > case of misrepresentation and not "spin".  It would be no different if
>> > they
>> > claimed the service cured warts.
>> >
>> > Sean
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Sean Walberg <sean at ertw.com>    http://ertw.com/
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Asterisk mailing list
>> > Asterisk at muug.mb.ca
>> > http://www.muug.mb.ca/mailman/listinfo/asterisk
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Asterisk mailing list
> Asterisk at muug.mb.ca
> http://www.muug.mb.ca/mailman/listinfo/asterisk
>


-- 
Leslie Bester
LES.NET (1996) INC.
1-866-944-0009