Bandwidth Caps on Internet Usage - Time Warner, AT& T and Comcast seem to be leading the way.
Internet download caps - whether they be 5GB, or 20GB or 40GB could suck for you if you do a combination of a lot of the following:
- you're a MMO gamer, playing stuff like guild wars, world of warcraft etc
- you use your xbox, ps3 etc. online
- you stream free video from amazon, hulu, (on demand videos) etc
- you downloads lots of video (shows, anime not licensed yet) etc.
- you use youtube and other streaming sites a lot
- you stream shows from the official network sites
- multiple people in your household use the same internet connection
Way to shoot tech development in the foot guys. Not only does this hamper new internet services but the USA is even less likely to get faster internet, like various countries and regions in the world ALREADY enjoy.
And as video and gaming continues to improve (high def, better virtual reality environments etc.) usage is going nowhere but up. There are already plans for games that could take up to 2GB of bandwidth per HOUR of gameplay. And networks are finally realizing that officially streaming shows leads to increased marketshare that they can measure and track *headdesk repeatedly*
Talk about suckage. The last quote is a doozy btw:
“But some of it, I’m sure, is just that people don’t like change. I’m sure that the first people to buy early cars were angry when they introduced speed limits, too.”
THESE IDIOTS ARE COMPARING SPEEDING TO INTERNET USE? WTF PEOPLE, WTF.
And Time Warner has a basic internet option at about $25 - with the new pricing and caps, people will have to pay $5 more AND get their bandwidths limited.
Plus a bit from a different article:
Charging per gigabyte is more forced migration than natural evolution -- the impetus originates with investors and executives who fear the impact Internet video will have on TV revenues. Imposing such low caps in the age of HD video -- and charging users $1-$5 per gigabyte for bandwidth that costs a carrier pennies -- is a money grab, and it's only made possible by a lack of sustained, viable competition and napping regulators.
While carriers correctly note there are obviously other costs beyond bandwidth that go into providing service -- those costs are more than covered by advertising, alternative revenue and the monthly charges customers are currently paying. Meanwhile, evidence suggests heavy users can be handled without resorting to metered billing by imposing a very high cap (like Comcast's 250GB cap in the States), and by nudging those users -- which carriers freely admit only make up a small fraction of their userbase -- onto a business-class of service.
As with Time Warner Cable yesterday, the argument that carriers don't make enough money under the existing flat-rate system to operate or support infrastructure upgrades is something simply not supported by the healthy profits clearly illustrated in earnings reports. Anybody bothered by the metered billing trend should be demanding hard numbers from any carrier boldly claiming that flat-rate pricing isn't a completely viable business model.