said by John Keels :

Unlike the WIRED internet providers who do not generally have valid excuses for not having enough bandwidth I can see where the wireless providers have to watch bandwidth more carefully. EVDO/HSDPA etc are much more bandwidth limited in the sense that they cannot support massive bandwidth for 100's of users at a time. Also, especially in rural areas that have these services it is not unheard of for a tower to be connected through one or TWO T1's which really doesn't provide massive bandwidth for users. I suppose that in cities the tower backhaul is more likely fiber or OC3, ATM, etc that has more bandwidth. Even then the limitations of wireless mean that they cannot always provide endless bandwidth to users.

For wired services I'd argue that its a bunch of B&*&S&*& when comcast and others argue that they don't have enough bandwidth for everyone though. AT&T, Charter, TW, etc same thing.

said by BF69 :

1 GB is still a joke. So is the 5 GB cap everyone has especially for $60 a month. Not to mention $256 per GB overage Verizon charges.

said by tiger72 :

I agree with you both. While wireless providers have a far better argument for bandwidth management techniques, 5GB or less is atrocious. I'm glad to see T-Mobile is responsive to the market - unlike VZW, ATT, and Sprint...

said by schja01 :

Actaually Sprint doesn't cap it's 3G Phones. Only Data Cards and the optional "Phone as a Modem" Plan. My $15/mo Data Plan shows "Unlimited".

said by BF69 :

That's actually useless. The only reason people like my friend that lives a few miles out of town would want to use a mobile company for interent is to use it on a computer. In which case there is a cap. One isn't likely to go over 5 GB surfing the web on a cell phone anyways.

said by BF69 :

1 GB is still a joke. So is the 5 GB cap everyone has especially for $60 a month. Not to mention $256 per GB overage Verizon charges.

said by iansltx :

So basically cell phone companies don't want to get into the fixed residential broadband market.

said by EPS :

Not when it's more profitable to have them on landline, and don't forget that half the major wireless companies are also telephone companies, and Sprint is now dependent on cable companies to fund Clearwire.

said by BF69 :

Well let's see at&t is the phone company here. So who would Verizon offering wireless internet at reasonable rates and higher caps and lower overage fees be cannibalizing thier business? It seems it would be ADDING to it since Verizon doesn't have a landline footprint anywhere near here.