Originally Posted by Charles R
1. Access speed has very little to do with viewing content as has been proven most aren't (very) concerned about quality... rather content.
I was responding to this:
I guess all of you think the Internet has unlimited bandwidth.
The ISPs have plenty of bandwidth, they just don't want you to use it. Now, whether people use it or not when given it is another issue. Most people don't, which is why these caps can exist.
2. Monthly caps have a tremendous affect on traffic usage. They shape how and when you use the service. As an example when I had AT&T I could easily exceed their monthly cap and as such I often didn't stream during the evening hours (when they are hit the heaviest). Just like the streets the Internet has to support peak usage times and caps (can and will) play a large role.]
That makes no sense. Why would time of day make a difference in how much of your monthly cap you use? Bits are bits. Whether you watch a movie at 3PM or 3AM makes no difference: it's the same amount of data at the end of the month. A monthly cap has nothing to do with congestion. The amount of bandwidth at any given moment does, which is why, if the ISPs were really interested in relieving this congestion they keep harping about, they would sell slower speeds and not worry about the amount used each month.
3. Increasing speed (offering tier services) allows them to charge more for different levels of service. Mostly a revenue producing tactic. Data caps are more a cost reducing tactic with the ability of increasing revenues. Much like the wireless providers charging for various tiers.
..and that's what they eventually will do in regards to caps. They set an artificially low one now, but then claim they somehow have the infrastructure later (without doing anything different) and charge more to get a larger cap.
It's always been and will always be about the money, not some actual shortage of bandwidth.
The wireless companies keep whining about bandwidth, too. So much so, they want the broadcasting spectrum. The problem is, unless they make a fundamental change in their technology, they'll burn through that in short order, too. What they have to do, but won't do because it costs money, is create more "micro cells" that can cover more people with the same frequencies. Instead of one tower for a given area, you get several lower power towers that can support many more people by allowing the same frequencies to be re-used in more areas.
Unfortunately, it's cheaper to buy more spectrum, then charge customers to not let them use it.