Wow...I think the waaah to reasonable level on this thread must be 9:1.
How many of you have managed capacity and dealt with a major backbone and edge network provider before? No, not this 'I read it somewhere' crap, real an accurate data.
I am a network engineer, and worked in a major broad band provider for 8 years, watching capacity grow from GigE's at POPs to multi-lambda backbones. I am not saying that to boast, only to provide some level of baseline that unlike a few folks here, I do know what I am talking about on this topic.
I never worked for ATT...I actually do not like them as a company, but I am a iPhone customer. Why? Because they sell a product that I like.
I don't need it. I choose to use it.
Unlimited is marketing...lets just stop hanging onto that word like it alone can win you a lawsuit (it can't). Oversubscription is a business model: been that way since switched voice became a reality. TELECOM uses it. Period.
Notice that wireless providers are not lumped into broadband providers (FIOS, Cable Broadband, DSL) from the FCC's perspective when it comes to network management practices? Why is that? Edge bandwidth is severely limited from a technology point of view, and that is understood. Don't expect the media to report this...the media is more interested in vapid rich idiots and what they wear then real technology or science reporting.
Broadband can install more physical media, split nodes, etc...but more towers are not going to help when your spectrum is *full*.
This provides wireless providers the flexibility to manage their network (and to a point I feel is wrong: broadband providers fight the same fight with abusive subscribers but that is a debate for another day).
Streaming media, like torrents, is an application that is and will continue to stress the network at the edge. Despite massive amounts of caching and CDNs, the edge technology is the problem and there is no easy solution.
If a provider can whack 5% of their subs and thus help the other 95% get better service levels, that is what they will do, and its the right business decision.
The analogy of an all you can eat buffet is a good one but it was not used correctly IMHO.
There is a finite limit to what you can eat. Your stomach will get full at some point, and yes different people's stomachs are different sizes.
There is not one person simply spooning the General Tso's chicken from the bin, into the garbage disposal 24/7/365, now is there? If there was, it would mean others would have a damn hard time getting a morsel of deep fried goodness with that person constantly consuming. And for what?
If it was YOUR business...how would you run it? And don't say you would expand the network...not until you have a bank account that can pay billions for more spectrum, coupled that with billions for a DWDM transport network (a 40G line module list price is 1MM...40G is not a lot when you have 20MM subs, let alone 100M...and think about how many nodes exist on the network).
I'm not saying cry a river for the mobility carriers; they are profitable. But most Americans are share holders (mutual funds, 401Ks, etc...) so don't forget that either. Its a business, albeit suspiciously collusive. How is this different then banks, mortgage companies, insurance carriers, etc....
- b
