5 ms·
You think it's more cost effective for a company to artificially restructure itself into a obscured collage of vanishingly small cells than for them to offer a
by swatcoder 2y ago
You think it's more cost effective for a company to artificially restructure itself into a obscured collage of vanishingly small cells than for them to offer a fixed-price minimal-service tier to a specific set of low-opportunity customers who probably have high collections issues under normal circumstances?
- BugsJustFindMe 2y ago200Mbps isn't minimal service. It's more than most people need for anything they do online. Netflix suggests 25Mbps for 4K streaming.
- cbg0 2y agoThis assumes you only have one TV doing 4K streaming, but most households might have more devices consuming bandwidth. Also, between $15 for 25mbps and $20 for 200mbps, the telco is making more profit off the latter, because at that scale bandwidth is dirt cheap and most services like Netflix deploy servers on-premise inside the telco's network.
- BugsJustFindMe 2y ago> This assumes you only have one TV doing 4K streaming, but most households might have more devices consuming bandwidth But no households are doing 8 simultaneous 4K streams. The "but you might be doing more than one thing at a time" case is really uncompelling once you get up past 100Mbps, as much as ISPs want to make people believe otherwise in their marketing.
- hughesjj 2y agoI wanna live in this world where the advertised rate is the minimum and not the optimistic maximum.