On 10/10/21 12:57 PM, Mark Tinka wrote:
On 10/10/21 21:33, Matthew Petach wrote:
If you sell a service for less than it costs to provide, simply
based on the hopes that people won't actually *use* it, that's
called "gambling", and I have very little sympathy for businesses
that gamble and lose.
You arrived at the crux of the issue, quickly, which was the basis of
my initial response last week - infrastructure is dying. And we simply
aren't motivated enough to figure it out.
When you spend 25+ years sitting in a chair waiting for the phone to
ring or the door to open, for someone to ask, "How much for 5Mbps?",
your misfortune will never be your own fault.
Isn't that what Erlang numbers are all about? My suspicion is that after
about 100Mbs most people wouldn't notice the difference in most cases.
My ISP is about 25Mbs on a good day (DSL) and it serves our needs fine
and have never run into bandwidth constraints. Maybe if we were
streaming 4k all of the time it might be different, but frankly the
difference for 4k isn't all that big. It's sort of like phone screen
resolution: at some point it just doesn't matter and becomes marketing hype.
Mike
