said by Zenit:
Its purely profit is all it is. Comcasts 250gb Cap was reasonable by 2007 standards and they have suspended it in my area.
The 2007 part is hyperbole as most people still don't use near 100 GB. And the new cap is going to be between 300 and 600 GB depending what tier you have. I'm not saying I agree with their caps I'm merely pointing they are not 250 GB anymore so to use that as a point is moot.
However, caps can be totally unreasonable. Like on my smartphone. $15 a month with AT&T for data gets me...200MB.
That's mobile and that's different. Though their caps are crappy and are lower than they could be. People who think mobile should be able to offer unlimited data for $30 are obtuse though.
Also for $15 more you can get 3 GB. Yeah that sucks too but stating that you get 200 MB for $15 is a bit exaggeration because it infers $75 per GB.
I cant afford texting, so thats not there either. (Unlimted for $30?
It's $30 for unlimited family texting. Unless at&t does it differently.
I dont know anywhere in the world outside of North America (first-world mind you) that charges that much for so little. Its pathetic.
A) You could move. B) you could speak with your wallet and not pay those prices. No one is forcing you to stay with at&t.
The next step up? 2gb for $30something.
3 GB actually with at&t.
There really should not be caps on DSL or Cable, and there is zero excuse for a cap on a Fiber connection.
Unless it's FiOS no major ISP is 100% fiber. And even with fiber I doubt an ISP could have even 20% of their customers using 10 TB a month or more.
Caps dont solve congestion.
Just flat monthly caps, no of course not. Doesn't stop any possible congestion at the beginning of the month since no one has hit the cap yet.
Caps with a FAP free period from 12 Am - 6 Am to encourage people that download/upload large files to do it at night when the network isn't as heavily used WOULD solve any congestion issues if they actually existed.