On Nov 29, 2010, at 9:09 PM, Andrew Koch wrote: > On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 22:17, William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> wrote: > >> So you're saying: treat it like electrical service. I have a 200 amp >> electrical service at my house. But I don't pay for a 200 amp service, >> I pay for kilowatt-hours of usage. >> >> There are several problems transplanting that billing model to >> Internet service. The first you've already noticed - marketing >> activity has rendered it unsalable. But that's not the only problem. > > Not quite. Look at mobile data plans. A very few are unlimited, most > are per byte. > And I am on Sprint because they are one of the few.
>> Another problem is that the price of electricity has been very stable >> for a very long time, as has the general character of devices which >> consume it. Consumers have a gut understanding of the cost of leaving >> the light on. But what is a byte? How much to load that web page? >> Watch that movie? And doesn't Moore's Law mean that 18 months from now >> it should cost half as much? If I can't tell whether or not I'm being >> ripped off, I'm probably being ripped off. > > Yep, sure seems that way when I get my mobile bill with roaming data > charges. Consumers learn what it costs per byte, apps are created for > them to manage their download amounts. Carriers send messages > alerting consumers of their usage. > I simply avoid using roaming services. Frankly, my carrier could double their revenue from me and significantly increase their profits if they would offer me a global unlimited data/voice plan for twice what I currently pay for domestic. (If any of you cellular companies are listening, that's right, I'd be willing to pay ~$250/month for global unlimited voice/data and my usage would not increase very much above what you're already providing). I also happen to know that I'm not the only consumer that would very much like to be able to purchase this kind of service. Owen
