The need for speed is about data volumes. The big data Internet user is video, streaming, point-to-point, or downloading tv/movies. Next category is things like online games, voice, podcasts, software updates, etc. If you don't want to do these things (1) you are atypical, and (2) you don't need much grunt, the mobile phone network, or an ADSL would do it. Back in the normal world these "low" volume technologies don't cut it for the current crop Internet users.
Low quotas set by telcos aren't just a revenue maximising strategy. The average cell tower couldn't match a single fibre and there is no way that a the cell system could deliver on demand HD/3K/XX video to a suburb. Our household, admittedly with 4 kids, has 2 to 5 computers, 6 phones, 1 tv, and several other devices connected to the net. We currently have a 200Gb/month allowance which doubles periodically. Running this fleet through the cell system is not realistic both from a cost point of view and because we would need a $200K phone tower in our backyard. We also share a printer and a storage device. Students certainly need to print things and so do normal people from time to time. One reason you might want to subsidise our dedicated connection is the same reason that drivers benefit from public transport. Your cellular data will crap out if all the kids in the suburb start using it. There's also a larger issue of equity that might actually be worth paying for both for both for selfish and altruistic reasons. - Jim _______________________________________________ Link mailing list Link@mailman.anu.edu.au http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
