• 0xD
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    God damn. In Austria I’m paying 35€ for 250/250, and am still looking over to the Romanians with longing eyes. Data caps are only on mobile - which is still questionable in my eyes.

    • Nick@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I pay $99 for 300/5 unlimited. I don’t mind it, but would much rather have 100/100 for that price.

    • pingveno
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Data caps on mobile makes more sense to me, simply because mobile data is so much more expensive.

      • Krik@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Is it?

        To me it seems it’s cheaper to build an antenna to serve 100-1000s of users than to dig and install cables to all of them.

        • pingveno
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It depends on what you’re trying to do. If you’re just trying to reach them and don’t care about bandwidth, wireless is the way to go. It’s why more developed countries lagged behind developing countries on the transition to wireless phones. But when you’re trying to deploy shear amounts of bandwidth, nothing beats fiber. It’s incredibly fast, has low latency, and doesn’t get interference.

          And I suppose I should say that I think unlimited is a bad idea in general. I favor paying for what I use. People who use expensive infrastructure sparingly should pay less than people use it a lot.