> They'll find some way to cripple it for sure, like sticking a 200GB/month cap on it. Australia can't have nice things :/
If you look at many of the plans already offered by ISP's, you'll find that this isn't the case.[1]
Once more homes are connected, these limits are only likely to increase (as they have each year prior). Perhaps we shouldn't have limits at all, and just pay for a pipe of a certain bandwidth; but from an ISP's perspective they implement these caps to protect themselves from abuse by a small % of users.
Personally I'd rather know my cap is there, as opposed to the odd behavior of many US ISPs in targeting "high usage" users with what seems like little transparency.
> If you look at many of the plans already offered by ISP's, you'll find that this isn't the case.
The largest plan offered by iiNet has a quota of 1000GB. If you're on the 100Mbps plan, this can be consumed in less than 1 day. How is this not the case?
> Because you won't consume it in less than a day.
I would if I could…
> And iiNet overage at $0.10/GB is pretty favourable as well…
Well, I suppose it's reasonable. I don't think it's fair to compare it to business-grade services like AWS though; it would be more appropriate to compare the NBN to Google Fiber or one of the Japanese/Korean ISPs.
If you look at many of the plans already offered by ISP's, you'll find that this isn't the case.[1]
Once more homes are connected, these limits are only likely to increase (as they have each year prior). Perhaps we shouldn't have limits at all, and just pay for a pipe of a certain bandwidth; but from an ISP's perspective they implement these caps to protect themselves from abuse by a small % of users.
Personally I'd rather know my cap is there, as opposed to the odd behavior of many US ISPs in targeting "high usage" users with what seems like little transparency.
[1]: http://www.iinet.net.au/nbn/nbn-plan-residential.html