pianotech wrote:Look, as a consumer, I'm not saying I'm happy to pay more for things than I have to, because that's not the case. I do understand though that services we use cost money, and if I expect to use significantly more than someone else does, it follows that I'm going to be paying more than someone else does. I put 40K miles/year on my car in the course of my business. It follows that I spend more on gas/maintenance/tires/upkeep than someone putting 12K miles/year. I don't begrudge that. It's a circumstance of my choosing and I pay for it.
To me it is simple: if you sell something as "unlimited" you are retroactively obligated to stick to the original sales pitch, otherwise, don't sell it as unlimited. If your gasoline company decides to charge you double for gas because they also own a car company and you are not driving the model of car they are selling, is that really OK?
AT&T wants you to use U-Verse and Comcast wants you to watch their content, delivered to you the way they decide to deliver it, not the way you want to consume it. So they are limiting your bandwith usage to discourage you from consuming all your content on Roku/Boxee/WDTV etc. Of course, this isn't the only reason they are charging more, but it is a major one. I would be more comfortable paying more for a flat rate bandwidth plan than paying less for one where I have to check over my shoulder every time I watch a movie to make sure I haven't gone over the limit.
I'm also worried about all those senior citizens on limited retirement income who's children bought them Roku devices who are suddenly going to have a bill they don't understand when they have been paying a flat rate for 10 years. What if grandma starves to death because her automatic payment to AT&T just debited her account more than she expected just before she went to the grocery store?