dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
21
share rss forum feed
« A very familiar story.
This is a sub-selection from No


Ben
Premium
join:2007-06-17
Glen Carbon, IL
reply to pnh102

Re: No

said by pnh102:

Low caps make LTE a totally useless technology.

     I'm going to play devil's advocate here.  It's possible the cellular sites may not have enough backhaul capacity to support users using much more than 10GB/mo.  While the cost of actually transmitting a GB is ridiculously low, the CapEx is significant, and increasing the backhaul capacity isn't inexpensive.  No company will do it for free.  They also likely decided the amount of time to "make back" the money spent on CapEx, combined with the lower profit margins of a more reasonable price, wasn't "good enough."

     Wireless connectivity isn't like POTS, a technology that has seen few changes (relatively speaking) over the years.  So the time frame for making the money back on the investment has to be shorter.  3G equipment was likely very expensive, but it wasn't in use 10 years ago.  Now they are moving to 4G/LTE.  So, accepting a lower profit margin and a return on investment that takes 10+ years is simply not acceptable.

     Also, if satellite was an alternative (if you can call it that), these LTE offerings actually don't look that bad.

     However, I will agree the low caps do make it difficult to justify purchasing the service if you have cable, or even DSL at home.

     Like you, I also wish the service was either cheaper or offered more for the same money, but sometimes you have to take a step back and look at reality.

     As with any new product or service, it also makes sense for a company to charge so they glean the most profit from customers who either want the fastest of the fast, latest and greatest thing, or the desperate customer who will jump ship to a service that is only slightly better.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

I'll concede that there might be some technical limitations, but here is where I differ:

1. If it was entirely technical considerations preventing more use than X GB a month, then throttling, not overages, would be the more logical way to address that.

2. At the end of the day the user doesn't care what is on the other end of his Internet connection. It could be a hamster on a wheel, fiber optic cable, copper or anything, just as long as it is fast and it works.

As long as all LTE offerings continue to be "graced" with low caps and high overages, regardless of the reason or motivation, then there's no way they can replace wired broadband connections, or, in my own extremist interpretation of things, be useful for anything at all.

I mean, look at this nonsense... one user burned through his cap in 2 hours. »online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142···hirdNews
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.



Ben
Premium
join:2007-06-17
Glen Carbon, IL

said by pnh102:

I'll concede that there might be some technical limitations, but here is where I differ:

1. If it was entirely technical considerations preventing more use than X GB a month, then throttling, not overages, would be the more logical way to address that.

     Fair enough.  I've often thought caps weren't a good thing, at least from the consumer point of view.  If gasoline were rationed in such a way that everyone could only drive X number of miles per month, there would still be rush hour.  Though of course companies will try to make money.  However, the occasional story of John Doe racking up thousands of dollars in overages, even if due to his negligence or not fully understanding his data plan, is not good PR for any affected company.

     Perhaps one thing Verizon could have done to make the offering a little better, would be to say, only apply traffic that takes place between say, 8AM to Midnight against the cap, if they keep the cap at all.  The Midnight to 8AM window would then be great for large downloads such as Windows Service packs, Steam games, and so on.

     Awhile back when I upgraded my primary hard drive, I must have downloaded 100+ GB that weekend because of reinstalling many Steam games.  If I were in a rural area with poor Internet connectivity, I'm not sure what I would have done.  I'm guessing such folks probably don't use Steam, instead purchasing DVDs, and saving patches so they don't have to download them again later.


asdfdfdfdfdf

@myvzw.com
reply to pnh102

"in my own extremist interpretation of things, be useful for anything at all."

I agree with everything you say except the above. Certainly this is nothing that those with any wireline options should be considering and I agree that we are not anywhere near being able to treat wireless as a viable alternative to wireline infrastructure. I think the drying up of wireline investment and the attempt to sell these services as alternatives is saddling this country with second rate communications.

As far as the above sentence, though, people who are starving take the best crumbs they can get. I don't like it, this isn't very good and it has much more limited usefulness than what you are used to but it is better than every option that most of the rural have nots face. They need to consider carefully as a $30 for 2GB or $50 for 5GB mobile plan might be better for them. For those who find 5GB too limiting spending $10 more for double is the best they will get in a market that is charging $10/GB overages. This undercuts the millenicom plans that are offered on the verizon network. If people have sprint coverage, sprint or millenicom sprint network options might be a better choice.

There are rural wisps out there trying to do a good job but they can be very variable. Some are quality offerings, some are even more limited, slower and less reliable with higher up front costs. Certainly people should look into rural wisps available in their area but they need to consider carefully as it isn't always a sure bet as to which way to go. I wish the small wisps all the best and want to see them thrive but I couldn't, in good conscience, suggest that everyone should automatically go with a local wisp as it isn't necessarily the best option for all consumers. If consumers make the choice to sacrifice some performance and cost to avoid doing business with ATT or verizon though, more power to them.


jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA
reply to Ben

This is why we need a government option who will do it without regard to ROI. This needs to be done in the rural areas.


MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Mediacom

said by jjeffeory:

This is why we need a government option who will do it without regard to ROI. This needs to be done in the rural areas.

Because everyone in rural areas HAS to have streaming Internet video and online PC gaming with huge updates. In fact it should be a BASIC HUMAN RIGHT. And SOMEBODY ought to pay for it.

Yep, sounds good. Not.

jcremin

join:2009-12-22
Siren, WI
kudos:2
reply to jjeffeory

said by jjeffeory:

This is why we need a government option who will do it without regard to ROI. This needs to be done in the rural areas.

I hope you are joking! It doesn't matter if it is a private company or the government, if you want to build something, it has to be paid for. If you build it in an area that will never be profitable, or charge less than it costs, then where is that money coming from?
Businesses don't do it because it means bankruptcy.

The government does it all the time and look at the mess it has created. All it has done is created an entitlement society of people who think they deserve anything they want, without regards to cost, even it they obtain it by means of taking it from someone else (through taxes, of course).


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
reply to MyDogHsFleas

All they have to do is break the duopoly/monopoly mentality of current incumbents.

Allow true competition and the problem would resolve itself without needing the Government to actually provide service.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini


jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA
reply to MyDogHsFleas

Maybe rual areas do not the fastest connection, but they should have something better than dialup without ridiculous caps.

This is very similar to the electricity argument. 99% of everyone should be able to get it in this country...


jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA
reply to jcremin

So how did we end up with electricity over almost all of the country again?



FFH
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

said by jjeffeory:

So how did we end up with electricity over almost all of the country again?

T A X E S !!!!
And then having people in cities pay twice what it cost to deliver electricity so that rural users could pay 10% of what it cost. Guess what? People in cities won't do that anymore. They don't care about rural users anymore.

jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA

If they like food, maybe they should care about rural users...