 manfmmdPremium
join:2003-01-14
Earth, TX
 ·AT&T Southwest
 ·CMA Access
| reply to baineschile
Re: How said by baineschile:I thought it was priority of a company to make money while providing a service that people want not give customers as much as they can possibly afford to, even though the service desired is only desired by the few that caused the cap in the first place... As plenty of people have pointed out, with the increase of services like YouTube, Netflix, etc. ISP's will have to invest more in their infrastructure to keep up. That's part of growing the business and growing your customer base. |
|
 sapoCruising Down Memory LanePremium
join:2002-09-16
Sacramento, CA
kudos:1 | said by manfmmd:said by baineschile:I thought it was priority of a company to make money while providing a service that people want not give customers as much as they can possibly afford to, even though the service desired is only desired by the few that caused the cap in the first place... As plenty of people have pointed out, with the increase of services like YouTube, Netflix, etc. ISP's will have to invest more in their infrastructure to keep up. That's part of growing the business and growing your customer base. The issue is, slowed down growth coupled with consumers wanting more for the same price. This limiting will give them that increase in profit that consumers don't want to pay directly with higher monthly fees. |
|
| said by sapo:The issue is, slowed down growth coupled with consumers wanting more for the same price. This limiting will give them that increase in profit that consumers don't want to pay directly with higher monthly fees. The problem is that this type of plan may end up turning around and biting them in the ass. As folks now have to worry about avoiding overages, people will temper their usage and may eventually switch to the lower speed packages. It may also create the problem where people use up to their limit and stop, taking what they paid for and stopping their usage.
All of this creates a climate where the demand for broadband will be stymied because people will feel they have to ration usage. This will hurt existing services, like VoIP, and will kill new services and business opportunities, like cloud computing (subscription to application services, like Microsoft is considering again) or video conferencing (if it every takes off again).
Strict bandwidth caps and overage charges that are grossly inflated are BAD for the internet as a whole.
--
---
Drilling for more oil is akin to giving a methhead the keys to the meth lab. |
|
sapoCruising Down Memory LanePremium
join:2002-09-16
Sacramento, CA
kudos:1 | Yes, our hopes as consumers will be a push by the high bandwidth applications companies to promote big caps if unlimited is not possible. Depending on the demand of the high bandwidth applications the effect you described of people lowering their tiers may be in fact opposite with people raising their tiers. During all this one needs to contemplate the average users usage which is fairly low(DSLR members tend to not qualify) so this will most likely be a very effective way to curb costs. Restrictions always limit potential growth, there is no doubt about that. But wherever there is a problem innovation generally sprouts. Who knows...
I personally am on your side, I don't have much interest in protecting big corporations but their positions are understandable. I hope these super restrictive caps fail and that this is not a mark for restricted broadband. I like using my internet connection in the way I want to without any big surprises. |
|
