Caps do not equal service
One thing that really bothered me is when I had Uverse I ordered it (when I asked they told me no caps) I got the Max Turbo 25 down for $75 month. A week later they started caps. If you paid $75 for 25 Mbps you got 250GB. If you paid $15 (with tv special) for 3 Mbps down they gave you 250GB. You got no extra data for paying a lot more even though your speed can use it much faster. So if you used remote backups you could not buy up. Honestly I don't think they cared about remote backups more than they did not want someone on a $75 plan watching to much VOIP any more than someone paying $15.
As some scream that they are a private company should do with the entire country's ability to talk and communicate as they wish. If they do get to push that view we'll all be forced eventually onto something like Time Warners Internet Essentials (5GB cap 1$ GB over) as our allowance to use the internet will be caped by every provider we can buy from playing the same game (the greater shortage you create the more you can squeeze the market) blocking all major networking markets for the ISP providers to sell these services themselves (VOIP, cloud, etc).
said by whiteshp:When I signed up for U-Verse, I specifically asked about caps, since I'd heard that other ISPs were capping usage. I was told point-blank that AT&T had no need for caps because they were continuously upgrading their network and that they had plenty of bandwidth to handle any amount of usage.
One thing that really bothered me is when I had Uverse I ordered it (when I asked they told me no caps) I got the Max Turbo 25 down for $75 month.
When the caps were announced, I canceled my U-Verse account and switched to Cablevision. I now have service about 3x faster and (currently) no caps.