zuzu on 17 Oct 2007 20:38:03 -0000 |
On 10/17/07, Matt Ayres <matta@tektonic.net> wrote: > zuzu wrote: > > > > without citing artificial restrictions, _bandwidth is bandwidth_. > > really you're paying purely for Mbps with several "nines" of > > availability, that's it. > > > If bandwidth is bandwidth then Verizon should just give everyone a > 100/1000Mbit port and charge them 95th % usage on their circuit based on > a $/Mbit price that is based on how much they will commit to (ranging > from $30-125/Mbit). This is method how hosting companies pay for > transit. If this is how it worked for the consumer it'd be like going > back to paying per minute on the telephone and would reduce peoples time > spent online. you're assuming that the cost of bandwidth is fixed, when competition usually correlates to falling prices for all commodities -- bandwidth included. the problem with overbooking as a business model is alot like what airlines have floundered with -- that seats are really commodities, but the businesses want to fool people with phony differentiations into thinking they're not, because they don't want to compete purely on price/performance. or simply put, "last mile" ISPs dug their own graves with overbooking (aka underprovisioning) (on the heels of AOL) and now are suffering because it's unsustainable. this is where I lose my sympathy and those businesses should fail and better businesses would take their place. ___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|