View or search for all towns »

 

Telus vs Shaw internet

Hi Rosslanders!

I am about to move from lower to upper Rossland, and I was curious if anyone had opinions over Telus or Shaw Internet.  Currently with Telus, but have been finding it to be less than desirable.  Constantly drops signal and takes forever to reboot.  Looking for any advise as to what you have found works best in this wonderful town!  

Thanks!

TekSavvy - as good or better than either, and almost half the price.

Telus is ADSL which has more speed limitations in Rossland than Shaw cable internet (DOCSIS). ADSL speed depends, among other things, on the distance from the switch (located downtown). Shaw can provide higher speed if you pay for it.

TekSavvy is a good alternative for ADSL. Lightspeed.ca is a good alternative for Shaw cable. Both providers must use their respective counterparts for the last mile (TekSavvy uses Telus, Lightspeed uses Shaw). I have used each of these providers (Telus, then Teksavvy, then Shaw, then Lightspeed). I am currently with Lightspeed (over 2 years) and have been satisfied with their service. It has been as reliable as the Shaw cable it relies on at half the price and with no data caps. I wrote a document with advice on switching to LIghtspeed. If you are interested I would be happy to send it to you.

Reliability is a toss-up based on my experience. When I was with Teksavvy I did have problems with the speed deteriorating over time.  It was a problem with Telus and how they were allocating bandwitch at the switch. They corrected it when I complained to Teksavvy however I believe it took more time than if I had been a direct Telus customer. I was never able to get more than 5 mbps down from ADSL but I regularly get 80 mbps down on LIghtspeed cable. I found that the local tech's for both Telus and Shaw are outstanding, the problem is getting one scheduled to come out and it is a little more difficult if you have Teksavvy or Lightspeed because you are one step removed. Fortunately I have only had to do this once with Teksavvy and never directly with Lightspeed except for the initial install.

Note that you require a Telus home phone number to use TekSavvy ADSL without a dry loop charge. The dry loop charge is significant and will bring the TekSavvy rates almost to the same level as Telus.

I'd say stay away from Telus. We (in upper Rossland) have had numerous problems with Telus. The bandwidth issue mentioned above seems to be much of the problem and when you call to complain they manage to fix it but the fix is short lived. Unfortunately both my wife and I have business intersts tied to our telus email addresses and do not want to risk issues by changing. As soon as those interests are gone telus will be gone. I've become so frustrated with having to call them every few months that I've given up and just tollerate the slow internet and poor cel coverage.

I also live in upper Rossland and our Telus internet would never work or it was super slow. We just switched to Shaw in May and it's working great so far! :)

I have recently switched to Telus cell based internet and find that it and the support are good.

I was with Telus land line based previously.

Telus internet is very poor. Just about to switch to lightspeed, which uses Shaw's infrastructure but is half the price. We'll keep you posted.

@rossville when I go to TekSavvy website they only offer cable-based internet for Rossland addresses. Maybe they switched from ADSL offer.

Teksavvy still offers DSL over Telus in Rossland. I checked and they now appear to offer cable as well so thanks for that information. I don't know anyone who is using it. Similarly Lightspeed is offering DSL. In all cases these companies are using Telus (DSL) or Shaw (Cable) to access your house. Some of the downtown core businesses have access to fibre through the CBT but I don't believe it has been extended to any private homes. Telus has not extended their fibre network to Rossland and appear to have no plans to do so. Telus needs fibre to compete with Shaw for TV customers.

Teksavvy and Lightspeed offer similar services however Teksavvy is more expensive for cable. I am paying $40 per month for 75 down and 7.5 up on Lightspeed. According to their website it would be about $55 for 60/6 from Teksavvy. Both companies feature no data caps. 

The CRTC mandates that Teksavvy/Lightspeed/others must be allowed access to the telephone/cable infrastructure in Canada. The owners of this infrastructure (Bell, Rogers, Shaw, Telus, Cogneco etc) do not like this and have been fighting it by trying to raise the cost to use it. The CRTC has been rejecting some Tariffs with higher fees so the battle is still ongoing.

Teksavvy is headquartered in Ontario/Quebec. In my opinion they are the leader in advocating for the independant providers. Lightspeed is headquartered in Burnaby BC. 

My opinion only, but as a long time customer of Telus I've come to the conclusion that service is getting bad and things are turning to crap, and I'll be changing companies soon. That is all. Carry on. :)

We've been happy on Lightspeed cable internet.  

So far my Teksavvy service over cable works fine. Speeds are as promised in the package. 

I was getting consistently poor (15 and 0.5) performance from my Telus connection in upper Rossland. I complained, and  they sent out a technician, who explained and addressed a hardware connection issue. I'm now gettting consistently adequate performance (28.9 and 2.8 this morning). Competition between Shaw and Telus isn't bringing down costs (still amongst the highest in the World), and unfortunately condemns us to a future of mediocre connection speeds. Shaw's infrastructure has inherent technical limitations, and without a monopoly Telus can't practically be subsidized to invest in connecting the fibre from the trunk line into homes,  as I understand is the case in Revelstoke and Fernie. As it is, there's no easy answer. 

So with Telus previously I was getting similar speed to Stewart.  With Shaw I'm 300 down and 20 up. With the 300 package. Can't even compare the two for speed of service.  I haven't even gone to the fibre yet.  

 

 

@Jacek - would you please run a tracert and post the results? I will show the results of my tracert below so you can see that Lightspeed is using Cipherykey. I am curious about how Teksavvy has implemented their cable service. Note that I have hidden part of my ip address for security...

tracert 8.8.8.8

Tracing route to dns.google [8.8.8.8] over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1    <1 ms    <1 ms    <1 ms  192.168.0.1

  2     8 ms     9 ms     8 ms  24.67.xxx.xxx

  3    28 ms    30 ms    30 ms  rd3cs-be118-1.ok.shawcable.net [64.59.170.41]

  4    23 ms    26 ms    27 ms  rd3ht-be10.ok.shawcable.net [66.163.72.194]

  5    29 ms    29 ms    29 ms  209.205.110.197.a30-6b.cipherkey.net [209.205.110.197]

  6    33 ms    33 ms    34 ms  209.205.90.122.a26.cipherkey.net [209.205.90.122]

  7    33 ms    33 ms    32 ms  pr02-ae12.sea09.net.google.com [206.81.80.69]

  8    33 ms    33 ms    33 ms  108.170.245.113

  9    35 ms    33 ms    34 ms  209.85.242.39

 10    33 ms    33 ms    35 ms  dns.google [8.8.8.8]

Trace complete.

 

 

 

 

i vote for Lightspeed.. half the price...

Will do tomorrow, not at home tonight. I used to work couple floors above Cipherkey Exchange in the Electra building. Our dev servers were located in their datacentre in the basement of the building, I remember our shock when we changed offices and suddenly we were not able to work same way and had to move some servers to the office :-)

At that time they were hosting Shaw. 

 

@rossville

traceroute to 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets

 1  192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1)  2.762 ms  3.154 ms  2.351 ms

 2  24.xxx.xxx.xxx (24.xxx.xxx.xxx)  13.171 ms  11.519 ms  12.093 ms

 3  rd3ht-be118-1.ok.shawcable.net (64.59.170.45)  41.741 ms  45.695 ms  43.802 ms

 4  xe-2-0-0-607-agg01-van2.teksavvy.com (209.161.255.137)  36.505 ms  45.207 ms  71.847 ms

 5  pr01-et-0-3-0-0.sea09.net.google.com (206.81.80.17)  41.374 ms  38.844 ms  39.966 ms

 6  108.170.245.97 (108.170.245.97)  51.247 ms  54.210 ms

    108.170.245.113 (108.170.245.113)  40.931 ms

 7  209.85.254.249 (209.85.254.249)  60.937 ms

    209.85.254.171 (209.85.254.171)  132.466 ms

    209.85.254.249 (209.85.254.249)  58.196 ms

 8  dns.google (8.8.8.8)  51.878 ms  51.682 ms  48.861 ms

TekSavvy
TekSavvy
TekSavvy
TekSavvy