how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | reply to jjeffeory
Re: Exactly Why Capped Plans Suck said by jjeffeory:Bull$shit!
Utter nonesense! I mean, it doesn't affect me, but your threshold comment is just crap. The guys are in it to make money first and foremost. Social engineering is way down on the list...
You fail to understand the basic concept of goodwill.
It costs a lot to earn, but is easily burned.
Cellco would much rather sell you "unlimited" at a higher basic rent and enjoy the consistent, measurable contract income, and the average consumer will gladly pay the higher rate to lose meter-anxiety. But that model simply doesn't work with wireless broadband, where government administration of spectrum and pesky physics get in the way. | | |
|
Lamiel
join:2008-04-05
Saint Johns, MI Reviews:
 ·Skyweb Online
| said by elray:said by jjeffeory:Bull$shit!
Utter nonesense! I mean, it doesn't affect me, but your threshold comment is just crap. The guys are in it to make money first and foremost. Social engineering is way down on the list...
You fail to understand the basic concept of goodwill. It costs a lot to earn, but is easily burned. Cellco would much rather sell you "unlimited" at a higher basic rent and enjoy the consistent, measurable contract income, and the average consumer will gladly pay the higher rate to lose meter-anxiety. But that model simply doesn't work with wireless broadband, where government administration of spectrum and pesky physics get in the way. When you say "pesky physics" I assume you're reffering to the so-called "spectrum crisis", correct? There is no spectrum crisis. There is only a backhaul crisis, brought on by the carriers' reluctance to invest in network improvements. The fact that these carriers openly state that the vast majority of their users consume only a small amount of bandwidth per account is ample evidence of this. If caps were about protecting the network from congestion, throttling the top 2% of smartphone junkies would make far more sense than decreasing available bandwidth and increasing costs for the bulk of their customers. It's all a shell game. Don't be fooled.
--
Core2Quad Q9450 @ 3.4GHz, XFX 780i SLI mobo, MSI GTX 560 OC, 4GB Patriot Viper DDR2-1066, Samsung 20x optical, Samsung F3 1TB HDD, Antec TP3 650 watt PSU, CoolerMaster Centurion 5 case, Win7 Home Premium 64 bit... | |
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | said by Lamiel:When you say "pesky physics" I assume you're reffering to the so-called "spectrum crisis", correct? There is no spectrum crisis. There is only a backhaul crisis, brought on by the carriers' reluctance to invest in network improvements. The fact that these carriers openly state that the vast majority of their users consume only a small amount of bandwidth per account is ample evidence of this. If caps were about protecting the network from congestion, throttling the top 2% of smartphone junkies would make far more sense than decreasing available bandwidth and increasing costs for the bulk of their customers. It's all a shell game. Don't be fooled.
Haven't been fooled yet.
There are carriers that throttle instead of charging overages, which I agree with you is a better practice. I suggest you vote with your wallet and migrate to one of them.
There is most certainly a spectrum crisis. Backhaul upgrades are not without cost, but they are achievable. Squeezing 100x more data through the same local tower airwaves on a few 6 Mhz blocks... not likely. | |
Lamiel
join:2008-04-05
Saint Johns, MI Reviews:
·Skyweb Online
| 100x more data through the same local tower? Of course not. 100x more data through 100 more towers? Big difference. Now obviously, I don't expect the carriers to increase the number of their towers one hundred-fold. But we don't need that now anyway. Just doubling the number of towers with dedicated hardline backhaul would eliminate the congestion they're whining about right now. Too much investment? Okay. Just increasing the number of towers by one quarter would remove any logical defense for caps and overages (that's assuming they even have a logical defense now, which is highly suspect). The point is that there's no shortage of spectrum - there's just a shortage of towers with backhaul. If you and I are connecting on the same frequency, but to two different towers, ten miles apart, we are not congesting each other's bandwidth.
--
Core2Quad Q9450 @ 3.4GHz, XFX 780i SLI mobo, MSI GTX 560 OC, 4GB Patriot Viper DDR2-1066, Samsung 20x optical, Samsung F3 1TB HDD, Antec TP3 650 watt PSU, CoolerMaster Centurion 5 case, Win7 Home Premium 64 bit... | |
|
