how-to block ads
| |said by 33358088:You've never driven 5 mph at rush hour in stop-and-go traffic? Was the road widened the first time drivers experienced traffic congestion? If not, is it because the DMV was "AIG style greedy"?
I pay for what i get they are supposed ot have capacity
HOW'D you feel about driving to work and being told that form now on YOU have to go 5 miles an hour cause there are too many cars on the road.
What would the response be?
THEY FAIL AND THEY ARE AIG STYLE GREEDY
As speeds increase, caps will likely become the norm. However there's a big difference between generous caps (like the Comcast 250MB/month) perhaps coupled with throttling or very low (5-10MB) caps and overage charges.
Re: the facts please
said by Lazlow:And if the heavy users were to start downloading during what is now off-peak hours... they then become peak hours.
That is just it, caps do not address congestion issues. A user could do all his downloading during off peak hours(download many times the cap) and NEVER contribute to congestion. Conversely a person could do all their downloading during peak hours (never going over cap) and cause a lot of congestion.
As far as costs; both transit costs and hardware costs are defined by Mbps of peak time use. Off peak downloading costs the ISPs absolutely nothing extra.
You're correct that it's more a matter of peak use leading to congestion, but it would be difficult and confusing to have different caps for different times of day. The person downloading 400GB/month is likely doing it both during peak and non-peak hours.
The ideal scenario from a provider perspective would be to have hourly caps, but I doubt that would go over well with consumers.
And just to remind everyone- practically ALL bandwidth on the Internet is shared bandwidth. From your serving node to internodal trunks to the ISP trunks to host capacity- all shared. It's the reason broadband costs $40/month instead of $400/month.