As a Canadian, it seems hysterical to me as well. If bandwidth concerns were in fact misleading than you would expect countries with a lot of competition (e.g. UK) to have ISPs all offering unlimited bandwidth at ultra low costs. The opposite seems to be the case.
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 10:00 PM, Jay dedman <jay.ded...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > OK $150 a month for 'virtually unlimited' seems a tad pricey. Maybe > > $75/month for 100GB is slightly more sane though, does anybody who uses a > > lot of video online monitor their bandwidth to see if they get anywhere > near > > 100GB a month? > > Its expensive enough to moan at the companies involved, but isnt extreme > > enough to confirm that 'they hope to kill Internet video before it's any > > more popular.' which is what that thing you pasted is trying to suggest > in a > > rather hysterical way. > > Hmmm....attention grabbing but not hysterical. > Currently....a single HD show is usually about 750MB. Almost a gig. > The size of files will only increase as quality gets better. > Start doing the math based on the things you watch. > > we arent even calculating the amount of bandwidth a person uses for > daily web use. > > If someone must think about every megabyte they download, this factor > weighs on the choice to download a video by some unknown. > > > If we are thinking that in the near future people will be watching many > > hours of high-def TV via the internet every day, then there are capacity > > issues which someone will have to pay for. I never heard what happened to > > the battle in the UK between the ISPs and the BBC who were using > peer2peer > > to make TV shows available to customers, thus saddling the ISPs with a > > greater bandwidth bill, causing them to moan, All I know is that viewers > > have certainly embraced downloading TV shows legitimately via the net > here, > > and so far there has not been any substantial change to ISP price > structure > > or quality of service as a result. > > Until broadband providers give proof that the networks are overloaded, > I think this argument is specious. > > The strategy is to squeeze more profit out of broadband, especially if > people continue to cancel their cable TV subscriptions because they > are just pulling down the shows they want to watch. Fair enough. These > companies are private and can charge 100000 per GB if they want. But > let's all be very aware of the truth behind the decisions, so > consumers can make clear choices. This also allows us as voters to > make sure government is not giving unfair monopolies to private > companies who are squeezing every cent out of their customers. > > Jay > > -- > http://ryanishungry.com > http://jaydedman.com > http://twitter.com/jaydedman > 917 371 6790 > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
