| But 2GB-3GB != 4GB. There is a difference. Using the example, that makes 50 movies a month that you can watch. Being that Netflix barely has that many movies, that's re-watching the same thing over again.
People keep quoting that 4GB like it's divinely guaranteed or something. And people keep quoting that adding a bandwidth cap is in order to kill the online streaming competition. All this means is that content providers need to be more selective about what they stream and how they stream it. Do you REALLY need a 2Mbps stream of a movie, sucking down 2GB of data? There are codecs that reduce the size considerably, look at the DiVX rips of DVDs clocking in at only 600MB or so. Yeah, it might not be "perfect" but what can you expect from a stream? You would think the content providers would appreciate the added revenue stream, while forcing people who want to get a "good" copy to buy the DVD or Blu-Ray disk.
We got into this metered bandwidth stuff precisely because people were getting stupid with it. I remember when the first hints of Comcast booting people for bandwidth stuff, one guy was complaining because they booted him. Turned out he was slurping down four or five audio streams, 24x7, sucking down almost 500GB a month. And, to add to that, he was not even listening to the stream, he was just recording it and storing it.
South Park had it right, over-logging is going to cause problems. No more mindlessly surfing while watching TV. And limit your pr0n consumption to twice a day, tops. |
·
·
·
·