| [General] Why are data caps seen as okay? Dear At&t,
I have finally gotten home internet, as I have been struggling to pay back due credit card bills and trying to pay for "food" since I moved out on my own. I was so happy to hear it would only be around 30 dollars a month, but your salesman didn't mention to me that I would have a data cap limit. WHY IS THIS SEEN AS OKAY? Why should you limit my download when I pay for your service? I feel as though there is a gigantic ocean of data, but you are telling customers that only one small portion of water exists. It is a lie, and travesty that a corporation is purposely withholding technological advancement to make higher profits. I understand you need money, but you have monopolized cell phones and internet. You have used your salesman to get people to sign out of necessity. I have no choice and I am locked in, but I am hoping other people read this forum and start to think. We are being tricked into thinking that bandwidth is like a natural resource that has a limited source. The truth is you can just make more wires, connect more computers, and invest in infrastructure. OPEC does the same thing. I just wanted to put this opinion out there that regulating my usage is disgusting. |
|
| It wont help.
I've come to the conclusion ATT feeds off of customer grief. |
|
| reply to LogicMan
Wow, Your name may be LogicMan but you have none, or, are young and are not hip to how business works.
If you want to access the "gigantic ocean of data" how are you going to get to it w/o a provider? I guess you could be your own provider and develop your own infrastructure, get all the permits required and jump thru all the regulatory hoops. How much do you think that would cost? Probably a lot more than $30/month.
"The truth is you can just make more wires, connect more computers, and invest in infrastructure"
Yea, but then it wouldn't be $30/month anymore would it?
My suggestion is a couple courses in Economics, or, use your 2GB data cap wisely and read about it online. BTW, for normal usage 2GB is plenty.
--
TT
|
|
Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| 30 dollars can buy unlimited fiber in some parts of the world. ( certain areas of South Korea, Japan, China, and various countries in Eastern Europe, and soon to be Mexico, Vietnam, Brazil, Colombia, and Ecuador.
But your point is well taken, broadband prices are hyper inflated in the US and Canada. |
|
| "30 dollars can buy unlimited fiber in some parts of the world.
Go there then because that's not here. |
|
|
|
1 edit | We would like it to be here.
You seem offended. |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Fighterpilot
said by Fighterpilot:My suggestion is a couple courses in Economics,
You balk at citing other countries yet cite Economics, a certainly global subject.
Ignorance at its finest. |
|
| "Are we not allowed to strive for better? You seem offended."
Of course, strive for better. Just don't expect it for free as the OP thought they were entitled to unlimited downloads for $30/month using SOMEONE ELSE'S INFRASTRUCTURE. They're blaming the company who put in the infrastructure and made the investments for not providing unlimited service to all. Idiotic. |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| 30 dollars = free ?
We're not off to a very good start. I'm out.
The unlimited model works fine in other countries and did here as well only a few years ago.
Yet we pay much more today and get less capacity. Something sure smells foul with that. |
|
| Unlimited is not $30.
The OP can get a true business Internet line and not be capped. You're not going to get that for $30/month |
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| Your right when I lived in Joam South Korea I paid $ 18 US dollars equivalent ( depending on the exchange rate at that moment )
unlimited 20+ mbit/s cable. Areas with 1000/1000 fiber offer 100/100 for 35 USD equivalent. There are no usage caps in SK.
Nobody mentioned business lines. |
|
| "unlimited 20+ mbit/s cable"
Tell the OP then. They're looking for it. My response was to someone who thought they should get more for their $30/month using someone else's stuff.
I'm not in Korea and I don't think the OP is either. So.....
--
TT
|
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by Fighterpilot: My response was to someone who thought they should get more for their $30/month using someone else's stuff.
So he must own his own ISP in order to wan't unlimited internet? (something standard on my Time Warner cable line right now, typical use for me hovers around 400 GB's down and 100 up.)
That is probably the most extreme position I've seen on the issue of usage caps thus far.
Bravo.
BTW, my Bellsouth DSL line was un metered for its entire 6 year existence until ATT bought them.
So your position that ATT didn't build it for unlimited is bunk on its face as they didn't build this part of their network at all. |
|
| "Something that was pretty standard before 2006 - 2007."
You mean before every TV, smartphone, car, BluRay player, etc, etc, started sucking down bandwidth? |
|
| Nope, I mean before ATT bought my Bellsouth DSL line.
Bellsouth didn't even monitor usage on my DSL line for 6 years, now ATT caps at 150 GB.
Since backhaul from DSLAMs is not only cheaper and faster care to explain? |
|
| "typical use for me hovers around 400 GB's down and 100 up."
Like our current President insisting on income 'fairness' ATT and others have implemented the same policy. 400GB. WOW, you and I aren't even in the same conversation considering I don't even come near to my limit. ATT and others would say YOU are the reason for caps due to your usage. |
|
| Again, I pose this question.
During all of my 6 years with Bellsouth DSL I was un metered.
Now back haul bandwidth (behind the DSLAM ) prices and equipment has plummeted, yet ATT charges more and caps at 150 GB.
Please explain. |
|
| Why did AT&T implement this data plan?
AT&T has experienced a dramatic increase in the amount of data that is sent and received over its wireline broadband networks. This dramatic increase is driven primarily by a small fraction of our customers. In fact, the top 2% of customers use about 20% of the total capacity on our network. A single high-traffic user can utilize the same amount of data capacity as 19 typical households. Lopsided usage patterns can cause congestion at certain points in the network, which can slow Internet speeds and interfere with other customers' access to and use of the network.
--
TT
|
|
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
2 edits | You didn't answer!
I didn't think you would.
A canned PR response doesn't count, it doesn't address the issue anyway as DSL congestion comes from back haul access from the point of the DSLAM onward in the CO.
Can you please provide a technical explanation?
To reiterate, ATT today no doubt has access to cheaper back haul and faster, cheaper equipment. |
|
| Easy answer. ATT and others are businesses who have invested heavily in infrastructure. Purpose of a business is to MAKE MONEY for themselves or their shareholders. Sorry, that's just the simplest answer I can provide. Lot of people think businesses should exist just to provide things to customers w/o thinking of the profit aspect or the capital that's been invested. After this thinking they usually run to the govt saying it's not 'fair' that this business is charging for a service some consider should be unlimited and 'free' so to speak.
I cannot continue as we just don't see eye to eye on this, and, 4am comes very early for me.
I doubt the OP has gained anything from this conversation but it's possible.
--
TT
|
|
