Quote:
Originally Posted by GlenBarrington
I don't see anything wrong with what they are doing. The limits seem reasonable. High volume users SHOULD pay more than me.
There is no shortage of ISPs, If you don't like it, don't buy it
|
Should high volume users really pay more than you, or should you be getting a refund? Sounds to me like you're part of the 98% that is over paying!
It seems that the US has some of the worst service and highest prices for internet services among developed nations. And "no shortage of ISPs" ... you're kidding right? We're talking about the US here. Perhaps your choices abound in Reading, PA, but my experience indicates not so much elsewhere outside of major metro areas.
It appears the marginal cost for one Gig of data over the Internet is 3 cents (
at least in Canada.) You would expect it to be about the same in the US, and yet AT&T is looking to charge 15x+ for going over the cap. At that rate, the first 150G cost them $4.50. Who has AT&T DSL and what are you paying per month?
This article has some detail on marginal costs and their decrease over time due to advances in technology. This coincides with what I've read about UK ISPs moving away from bandwidth caps because of upgrades they've made to their network.
Furthermore, whereas metered service is most commonly associated with Utililties, the telcos certainly do not want to be regulated as Utilities. They really don't want their "metering" procedures to undergo the scrutiny that traditional utility meters and measurements undergo, let alone seek approval for rate increases.
As others have suggested, I don't think this is about the network, but about control. This is why net neutrality is so important in the US and caps such as these are really only possible in anti-competitive environments.
Does anyone know of net neutrality problems in the UK, Europe, and Asia? I'm guessing this isn't an issue because of greater choice and vastly superior services.