Why Data Caps Suck: The Animated Examination

Blogphilo.com presents:
Why Data Caps Suck: The Animated Examination.
Same whiny, "Inconceivable!" voice, but it's only 11 minutes this time. Here, I talk about data caps, and why all the excuses that broadband and mobile providers use to put them in place don't hold water.
Special thanks to PowToon.com, Vint Cerf at Google, and the Continued Support of Viewers Like You.
If you'd like to create your own animated videos, check out PowToon at www.powtoon.com...
As always, comments and questions can be sent to [e-mail]

[@bielgaucho_real]

This video is 3 years old, and Brazil is facing this issue right now. We, as citizens, are fighting against it. For now, we are winning.

[@MrDreigon]

I feel like we need a kickstarter to get this message onto TV in the form of a 30 second ad, so more people know about this, and hopefully pressure ISPs to change their data cap policies

[@Dragonsamuari]

Except data caps hurt everyone, not just the casual user. Small businesses would suffer, students would be stuck with watching how they use their data when researching for classes, etc. Rather than taking advantage of the internet and the way people use it to offer goods and services, many companies are stuck in the past where they could control what content and offers they wanted you to see, so they are trying to impose all these restrictions just to get the consumer to buckle to their will.

[@EQuivalentTube2]

I love your rants. We need more of that.

[@rentacowisgoogle]

Get yourself an unlimited data plan on your cellphone while you still can, that allows at least 4G and no throttling. Keep it forever because soon no cell companies will provide unlimited data. You can keep a contract plan forever if you keep paying and they cant change your billing amount by much, you will get "grandfather" status when they stop offering the unlimited plan.

[@Yemto]

I couldn't pay my internet bill last month, so I needed to use what data cap I had left on my phone, and it sucked. I needed to be very selective what I watched on youtube, and what quality.

[@Knowbody42]

Fibre gives much better upload speeds than ADSL2+ (or even VDSL2). NBN Co (in Australia) is offering 100mbps down, 40mbps up in the areas where it's available now (which is not many areas yet). And in December, they'll start offering 1000mbps down, 400mbps up.

[@rockoviper592]

data caps defeat the whole purpose of modern internet service

[@chrischoy9]

They should take money using speed as a price factor. Can you imagine getting a 1 hour 7 day pass whereby the train goes full 200mph for one hour than slow down to 3mph walking paste for the remaining 7 days unless if more hours were bought? That to me is how illogical data caps are. Generally, long distance trains charge different price ranges for different speeds, like the time I was in Japan, it was either "standard", "semi-rapid", "rapid" - bullet train at 3 different price ranges.

[@chrischoy9]

***** That's what I said... They should price home broadband based on speed. Like; UNLIMITED 25Mbps, 50Mbps, 100Mbps, 250Mbps, 500Mbps, 1000Mbps with different prices depending on the speed you want. As for phone, I can agree with them putting a reasonable data cap on it and to prevent people from actually using their phone's internet as a standalone Wifi hotspot.

[@GioGarnada]

Evrybody should watch and share this and then complain to these companies.

[@irun_mon]

when someone says caps, comcast instantly come up in my mind

[@irun_mon]

***** I know right?!

[@axylorionfredrick]

Caps. AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! NOT AWFUL COMCAST!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@Crazytomm]

Cox is copy of Comcast but never one ever talks about them.

[@imjustsensitive-]

My isp's argument for data caps is "to ensure the best service possible..."

[@arch455]

Even tho we cant get the best service possible cus they limit our data usage Nice isp you have

[@WesllyOni]

Thank you Android Central for bringing me here.

[@omega727]

Great video. Interesting to watch after reading that Comcast is starting to roll-out data caps in test markets. Just had to address a couple corrections: GE doesn't own Comcast (they bought NBC/Universal from them) and Time Warner Cable is now an independent company after being spun off from Time Warner. The cable company kept the name, but they have no corporate ties to Warner Bros/HBO/CNN/etc anymore

[@Dirtbag359]

So does this mean that Grandpa casually browsing the web at around say 7PM is probably putting more stress the network than me downloading a Steam game at 5MBps (yes capital MB) at 3AM?

[@Krztoff09]

The bastards would charge us to breathe if they knew how.

[@fisshbone]

If Mr. Krabs owned verizon

[@adammoffett4029]

Nice video. disclosure: I am an administrator at an ISP (we don't have caps) If we get a cap at tier1 it's on ninety-fifth percentile usage, rather than bytes transferred, and that is more relevant and fair than bytes transferred. It's done as a transfer cap by ISPs because counting bytes is administratively easier to do on a large scale. Data caps are the wrong way to address the problem, but it is a way to address a real problem. Assertions that capacity problems do not exist are incorrect.

[@naycnay]

Sounds like Jersey, where I live... We have a few ISP's all competing, however the local "top-cat" JT are trying to steamroll out fiber optic and gigabit broadband. Being hugely ahead of the curve and very aggressive on the pricing, there are now data caps :( I mean, whats the point in 1Gbps connections with a 50GB/mo daytime data cap? Theoretically, you can munch through that in about 10mins if a service can give it to you and you PC can process that amount data... Still, do want.

[@Dragonsamuari]

OK then, explain to me the good sides of data caps.

[@KiwiPowerNZ]

In New Zealand I get just 7Mbps down (average of 7Mbps) and a 150GB data cap that costs $115 a month, no TV with it. But the thing that annoys me the most is the upload speed! 0.95Mbps upload! Takes a whole day to upload HD video and while its going the internet is painfully slow!

[@thebestofall007]

I loved your windows 8 evaluation video as well as this one.

[@trifontrifonov4827]

Great show, the jokes are funny, the narration is easy to understand and the information well translated to the viewer. You really should make more of those (and when enough of us watch it sign a contract with KZbin). Also maybe you should try to make a show explaining some basic tech stuff. Like a basic description of the different operating systems for P(god knows how many times I have been asked what Linux is) or how a router work - you know basic stuff.

[@BareFinn1986]

Here in Norway the telephone company that used to have monopoly tried using caps when broadband started, but the other ISP's had no caps so they had to give in. There's only caps on cellular data plans. :-)

[@sunnyd71]

And just to add in, many of these Canadian ISPs such as TekSavvy, Acanac and Electronic Box use peak hour limits to battle this. Also, Comcast is not owned by GE, they are in a partnership that owns NBCU.

[@MrDeadInMyPocket]

I logged in and thumbed this up. I did it with a very serious face on too.

[@AlexYapTheGreat]

In Singapore all home and fibre broadband plans are uncapped and they are quite fast although upload speeds tend to be slow at times. On the other hand mobile data caps there are too frigging low such that the cheapest mobile plans from all providers will generally have a a 1-2GB cap.

[@John_21601]

Nice presentation, dude!

[@Keksdt]

Here in Germany there are no caps on wired connection but on mobile connection, mean while ISPs using the tv cable start throttling the speed due to the shared medium kind of medium. Luckily we got a decent DSL infrastructure over the old telephone lines which got a lot of advantages. I am against it but it would cost a lot of more money to build a huge infrastructure for mobile networks.

[@adventuregeek5394]

Great video explaining something most people unfortunately take for granted. Although I understood that Comcast was trying to steer people to their TV offerings with caps I didn't think about that AT&T and Verizon also offer TV and that being a reason for their wireless data caps. Sort of explains why Sprint and T-Mobile who don't offer TV offer unlimited data. Also a great reason to be happy that Softbank not Dish bought Sprint. Now if Sprint could just get those 4G towers up faster ...

[@CloudchaserShaconag]

I know that with Comcast, the reason given for a 250G a month cap (the enforcement of which has been suspended for some time now) was because if you had a neighborhood full of people doing high bandwidth things all at once, that would slow down the internet for everyone. It used to be that in the last few weeks of summer vacation and the first few weeks after Christmas, the internet speed at my den was ridiculously slow, as slow as 0.5mbps due to people doing high bandwidth things.

[@jamescorrall6535]

Yeah as other people have said this kinda thing is a bit alien to use in Europe, most of our ISPs are owned by companies that only do telecoms (i.e. France Telecom owns EE). Here the "congestion" issue is dealt with differently, caps are only relevant to cheaper contracts and most contracts over say £15 a month have no capps. Here we have "throttling", basically if you constantly download large amounts of content at peak times your speed will be cut for a period of time

[@vonduwidow7115]

in our country we pay $25 (US current of yours)per month for speed of 1.70Mb/s and 0.30 Kb/s with a cap limit of 12Gb per month or 5Gb per day. if we consumed that limit our speed goes down to 0.20Kb/s downlink and same to uplink.

[@jadkhoriaty4692]

For the TCP part of this video, the information is accurate but is not complete. You have to consider that if a group of 10 people all download large files at the same time on a network of 50 Mb/s, yes the speed will be divided amongst them equally, i.e. each will get a speed of 5 Mb/s. Now imagine that same group of 10 people browsing normally, i.e. needing to send packets from time to time (e.g. facebook, instagram, google...). Because each activity (the browsing) is considered a random event that is independent from the other activities (since it is done by independent users), statistics dictate that they will rarely "collide" on the network, i.e. need to send/receive a packet at the same time. Meaning that instead of splitting the 50 Mb/s network speed into 10, maybe 3 people will have to send/receive a packet at the same time, so each one of them will have ~16 Mb/s and the next moment maybe 2 will send/receive a packet and each will get 25 Mb/s... So overall the users of the network will have better speed and experience. Also, you didn't account for UDP. In UDP the client or server does not care how congested the network is and just sends the packets no matter what. The bare UDP protocol does not expect an ACK for each packet thus it doesn't know when the network is congested and when it isn't. Video streaming is done using the UDP protocol because even if a frame sent in a packet is dropped/lost on the network, your eye won't notice that an image was skipped. So it is important to take UDP into account. I would safely assume that people that have unlimited data are streaming high definition videos/movies on their phones while commuting: Usually a video has a minimum of 24 frames per second (fps) but most of the time at least 30. Even if the frames are compressed when sent over the network (which they are), at 30 fps it's still a huge amount of data being transferred on the network for a movie that might occupy the network for minutes or even hours. Now imagine that those 10 people are streaming HD videos at the same time and you join this network, your tweet or Facebook status update will fail or will take a really long time before that TCP protocol realises that the network is HUGELY congested and will send and resend countless times bite-sized packets over the network until it eventually succeeds a few dozens of seconds late. So you're effective network speed might be 1 Mb/s which is very extremely sucky... I honestly didn't think I'd blabber for that long when I started writing this comment but I just wanted to prove that you haven't considered all the possibilities. Full disclosure: I can't justify the telecom companies not honering a contract they have with those unlimited data subscribers, god knows that if you don't honor your contract they'll skin you alive! However I do understand their rationale; their justification is not entirely rubbish... Cheers!

[@oizz]

I love these animated explanations of stuff, keep it up!

[@VargaBacsi]

In Canada, not only do we have outrageous Data caps but WE PAY SO MUCH TO THE TELECOM GIANTS. I've herd of Cell Phone plans in the US costing $45/month and you get unlimited everything, the same plan from Rogers Wireless here in Canada: $85.00 and I only got that plan after threatening to cancel my contract. Before that I was paying $150.00/month not including overage charges!!!! Majority of my friends, co workers and customers are all in the '$150.00' boat.

[@zachburke8906]

can we just get rid of throttling and data caps.

[@chrischoy9]

The worst is researching for an assignment under the influence of a datacap which not only slows down progress, but make you annoyed as heck when you want to find info immediately. Better yet trying to upload a image filled assignment on connection slower than dial up

[@SSGGUTS]

In New Zealand the highest speeds I can get is 12Mbps (average of about 6Mbps, like right now.), and I'm paying $130 a month for 100GB, and if I happen to get near that percentage of data usage, my internet slows dramatically, and then if I manage to go over that data, I have to pay something like 5 cents per MB over, we don't even have fibre here, and supposedly they're going to make us pay even more once it's implemented, in about 7 years.

[@builderk]

Nice... Btw, ISPs can easily scale back the speed of downloads without breaching contract. This would allows them to scale back those "couple of high-use users" even more.

[@tch0rt579]

Comcast Business Class has no caps. It costs more than residential at around $59.95/mo at the low end one but it's worth it for no cap, plus the support seems to be better when their service goes down. Just BS the rep if they ask about your business. I switched after getting harassed by the residential side for exceeding the 250gb cap 3 months in a row. Now no worries. :D

[@proberts42]

I would add something on how Most Cable/Phone/Internet Providers have local Franchises that guarantee them no competition. This local Franchise enticed them to build their network into an area but goes on forever. Local Franchise need to change. There should be a calculation to find a time limit for the local Franchise. The time limit should allow the service provider to recoup the cost of deployment and make a good profit then the local Franchise should end allowing a competitor to move in.

[@RUBYODOME]

9:58 this is exactly how I'm looking at my screen as I'm watching this video. I started dying laughing

[@tupchurch]

While a FCC bill might be helpful, the better alternative would be to get more competition in the ISP space. Articles I have read say it is very difficult to startup an ISP. I am guessing cable companies are buying off politicians to pass regulations making it more difficult for ISP startups. Much of this damage has already been done and I don't know if it can be reversed. Independent Fiber companies are the best chance of solving this problem. But when was the last time a bill passed lightening regulation in the country? I don't know if it will happen anytime soon. Glad I don't have kids.

[@saiful333]

TCP may be fair across all TCP virtual circuits, it doesn’t ensure fairness across all users of the network. This is because some applications employ more TCP virtual circuits than others. BitTorrent uses 20-40 TCP virtual circuits at a time for each download. TCP fairness ensures that each of these 20-40 VCs has a “fair” chunk of bandwidth, but it does nothing about the fact that the BitTorrent user is grabbing 20-40 times the bandwidth as the ftp user, who is only downloading on 1 VC.

[@KiwiPowerNZ]

They are building fibre services here. Only a few thousand have it so far. It's a 10 year project. It's gonna be 100/50. No plans for 1000/500 though. The fastest speeds I've got in NZ was 746.23Mbps/364.49Mbps 3ms ping. Can't link you the result in comment lol

[@sunnyd71]

More users means more traffic which could saturate data connections but proper investment should prevent this. Some congestion is real but might be created by artificial scarcity in the market place. Many Canadian ISPs are facing congestion issues at peak times. If there is a 1000Mbps interconnection and 300 customers are streaming Netflix at 3Mbps, the utilization is at 90%. If more do so, they need a bigger "pipe." Therefore added costs. It is therefore about how much data is being used.

[@bakadpotatis585]

The population and country of Sweden are also tiny :) But yeah I remember being 15k north of Örebro and having fiber internet in a tiny cabin...

[@dgxd4273]

Here in the Philippines, GLOBE DSL has just implemented its daily data cap usage and has created a huge protest within its subscribers. The new data policy by GLOBE company is under review by the National Telecommunications Commission but it seems to be going nowhere because of corruption. Subscribers are now afraid that other internet providers will follow the same direction as GLOBE. :(

[@joebayron]

+Edgar Ladringan SMART TELECOMS is no different and hell all other ISP's in PH, they're all in the same league. I just hope the new administration will thoroughly investigate these 'suckers' and give them a wake-up call.

[@mcaddy0]

you really need to do more of these videos they r ready cool

[@koreybray]

I don't think he's saying using 1 connection 100%, 100% of the time.. Most people won't. The point is ISP's need to upgrade as required, based on the amount of customers they have, and price their products to cover these upgrades. Cable can use Docsis 3, which uses many channels and split nodes to avoid any congestion issues. As well, if your network can't support to supply customers with 100mb service, why sell it? CAPS are not the answer..

[@SilencedMi5]

Wow, good video! I like that this is something I can send to people who might not otherwise understand the issue without a lot of explaining! Count me as subscribed~!

[@Knowbody42]

It would be good if the New Zealand government decided to build a FTTP network like what's being built in Australia (well, it should be built if the Liberal party doesn't scrap it). New Zealand is geographically much smaller, so it should cost a lot less to build there. I'm currently on ADSL2+ with about the same speed as you. Though I'm paying $62.80 per month for unlimited data (it's one of ~3 unlimited plans available in Australia) Fibre is scheduled to start building in my area within a year

[@ryanthomastew]

It's generally unlimited here as well but it will depend on your ISP and how much you're willing to spend. So it is "unlimited" but that will cost you.

[@blogphilofilms]

@AndrewIzBored Working on it! Spread this video to your friends!

[@blogphilofilms]

@scottgvd Your points are valid, but did you really want me to go into QoS policy, UDP, Dark Fiber, and Cisco Netflow in an 11 minute video?

[@harshwardhansinhsolanki9424]

Its been 6 years can you explain everything that you just said !

[@JZ6563]

Very, very well done. However I am not sure I agree with you statement of the ISPs hoping to drive back up TV viewing. I don't think that is possible (nor do I believe the ISPs think it is possible) by implementing data caps. The only way to do that is with better programming and that isn't as simple of a task compared to implementing an arbitrary data cap. I agree it is about protecting their historic revenue and business models, but I can't believe they actually believe that they can somehow

[@NoLoseJustLearn]

Most ISP's provide speeds instead of caps in my area (Kansas) but its still ridiculous because you only get your maximum speeds promised when the ISP has few people using it. ISP's in my area are about to be shit outta luck thanks to google fiber coming to Kansas City. I'll comment again if they start dropping prices, but as of now googles price to speed ratio is about... 60 times better then anything else in our area.

[@AndrewIzBored]

this channel needs to be expanded!

[@Stormaes]

Here in Australia, almost every ISP has data caps. Its a standard. Needs to stop. NOW!

[@HolographicLotus]

Sooner or later the caps will be removed through lobbying because there are many big businesses that rely upon users to use lots of bandwidth.

[@WarrenKLiu]

Confirmation on capacity problems do not exist are incorrect. The author has stated that tcp/ip will break the streams down to slower rates to account for congestion, do keep in mind that a lot of high bandwidth applications do not function that well or function at all at low rates, try streaming 1080p movie at 1mbps, be buffering for hours. I do agree that data caps are pure BS, I would suggest charging based on 95% usage like how most tier-1 contracts are done is the way to go.

[@tardedZnerfZgun]

I never knew about data caps on bandwidth until recently. In the UK internet is generally unlimited.

[@TG-yb9vv]

I am with sky I was under 1 MB so they took it of for my family

[@stg213]

As others metnioned, the main problem with the vid is that UDP not TCP makes up for over 90% of the data traffic regular users push over the internet... Otherwise i'm not sure TV is the only reason for caps... could be... but I think greed makes up for most of it. Instead of investing, as you say, in developing infrastructure to accomodate more users and more traffic they just use caps to grab more cash for lower investment.

[@the7observer]

loved the explanation u should do more videos like this, nice work

[@BillyWheeler]

Shared on my FB wall, You nailed it. Thanks!

[@fielious]

I have an Idea if they want caps, why not just charge for the amount we use. If they want to ack like a gas/electricy/utility company, fine then bill me a fair connection charge and a reasonable rate per GB. Simple right? So if I don't use the network for a month then my bill should be almost nothing, but if I torrent 1000's of err Linux ISOs then my bill should be higher. Then the speed at which they can provide me that service is just better for both parties if I can consume more, faster.

[@Macx204]

I have a 1TB data cap with 150Mbps download and 15Mbps upload, If I ever go over the 1TB limit which I definitely won't but still if it somehow happens, The cool thing is I won't get charged any additional fees for going over my limit, But unlimited data is obviously way better but 1TB is good.

[@Crazytomm]

I hit Cox 1TB with 13 days left after a series of Star Citizen 30-40GB patches, 3 Xboxs downloading game updates, Steam updates, my wife watching hulu 24/7 a day, who knows. Cox is going to laugh in my face when I go pay the bill.. Or just grin as a pay

[@jonathanreeve2715]

I agree with you, but I think what you're talking about is data transfer, not the data itself. If you say "how much data do I have left?" that means an entirely different thing from "how much more data will my ISP allow me to send and receive before I am charged more?".

[@blowupuate13]

So, does this mean when my road runner is around .98 MB/sec in the daytime and almost 3.50MB/sec after 11:00PM that there is a data cap or does that mean less congestion so the network collectively speeds up? Any replies are greatly appreciated!

[@ebonygentleman79]

Great video! Keep doing these!

[@hellotroggy]

I have had to cough up $150 a month to Suddenlink in order to get "cap-less" internet. I have to not allow many features on my Android so as not to go over on my family's SHARED Data allowance. The Data Cap BS is exactly that: bullshit. I'm tired of it.

[@blogphilofilms]

@DerpSquid Look up "Series of Tubes" on Wikipedia.

[@hpharold23]

AWESOME VIDEO! THANK YOU SIR! Very informative just back up my own claim!

[@BrokenAtari]

Bell and Rogers are trying to make it impossible to have unlimited data plans for internet connectivity. By forcing ISPs that use their lines to significantly pay more.

[@paulchops1964]

Hmmmm... I have operated a WISP for 10 years. Bandwidth (radio frequencies available to serve the public) have always been at a premium. We simply dont have enough bandwidth available to have an unlimited amount of data flow through it. To this point in our existence, we do NOT have data caps, but the last 6 months are now forcing us to do it, or I cannot break even, nonetheless make a profit. #1 priority is to provide a good, quality (fast) service for ALL my customers, not < 5% of them.

[@1234cm1]

Damn straight. But man have you looked at the profit percentage telecom companies make on data transfer? it's like anywhere from 1 million to 150 million percent, please correct me if I'm wrong but that what I heard.

[@axylorionfredrick]

Cable companies disliked this.

[@MayDayMei98]

I tend to watch programming on my PC. I watch TV if I can't sleep or the PC is unavailable (Both of which are rare)

[@mrlbattle1]

Did you see this Verizon?

[@Macieks300]

some people are saying that this is not true, maybe put some sources in the description

[@ABunchOfCrazyStuff]

According to your logic. I conclude: If a heavy data user is constantly using data they will slow down other users. Reason is they are always tying up that so call data channel and never allowing someone else to use it. Meaning there is one less Tube available for another packet.

[@superheromail]

I worked for hughesnet and this video is very true the model and practice is to make as much as possible off of the data caps. Most of the customers are scared that they will run out of data and not be able to use the internet when they really need it so they use the internet less and start watching tv more to make up the time so the advertising will make the tv networks money every meeting I went to talked about this the data caps are not needed just used for higher revenue. superheromail

[@chipethecat]

& This is one reason I love having WOW no caps and there will not be anytime soon in the future!

[@highlanderc]

Although I do NOT like caps and thank god my Cable TV removed the 40Gb/mo cap there is one flaw with this video.... Although the ISPs own end is revenue and data caps do provide that, ISPs do not have unlimited internet.They actually pay for actual data sent and received. Those interatlantic cables are all metered and ISPs pay for those meterings/overages/etc. Its not like the internet is 100% free for ISPs either. It does get to a point where the heavy users do consume a lot of $ for the ISP

[@subsynchronous]

Capping extremely high speeds will be the new money maker very soon.

[@DeborahSawyer]

Very well explain. You should produce more video and maybe things will change. Thanks!

[@madhamster]

I wanna see more of these!!111

[@Ireshine-shiney]

I will never go back to cap internet, broadcast TV or land-line/mobile services.

[@RoryMitchell]

Re mobile data caps.. Congestion is a real issue, there is far less bandwidth available if there were no caps everyone would watch netflix all the time.. And slow down the network big time.. Resulting in poorer overall service for everyone.. Yes caps is not an accurate way of addressing the real problem of congestion ok the air but I think they havn't found a better way.. It's all about making ppl not waste the bandwidth

[@loganhair]

I don't think offering slower data services is the right answer to data congestion. It's like making all cars go slower on all roads regardless of the road congestion. Why not just charge more for speed during congestion? Most of the time everyone gets fast speed and for people that want fast speed 99.9% of the time they pay more than those that want it 95% of the time.

[@CanItAlready]

Of course people are watching less tv. Look at what's on tv most of the time. The way to get people to watch more is not to limit their internet activity--lots of people do both at the same time anyway--it's to provide programs that people actually want to watch. I can't believe that American Idol, Survivor and The Bachelor, etc., are still on the air.

[@alexm6745]

8:54 comcast is not owned by general electric

[@CeruleanHalo]

After doing some searching I think you're right, but please comment with a source next time.

[@jmarx_live]

concast is owned by NBC television.

[@guslb12]

Even tho there's no duop in Mexico every Internet company works like this specially for mobile data and it sucks I pay $15us/2gb of data

[@noahdelatte7378]

Sprint has crappy coverage, but unlimited data for a good price. Most broadband providers I know don't have data caps, but data SPEED caps, which there is an argument for. (You mentioned it.) I pay more, I get a faster connection. Makes sense. There is some competition, but consumers must subscribe to that competition and show that they will not take data caps!

[@noahdelatte7378]

Congestion still doesn't occur based on the amount of data you use. It depends on how many people use a website or download a file. If you want less congestion, you have less subscribers or cap their speed based on price. Many broadband companies do this, and I agree with it. Sprint is a cell phone provider that offers unlimited data. It is competition to these other cell phone companies.

[@connorskudlarek3119]

***** You might consider MetroPCS or T-Mobile. Unlimited everything for cheaper. $60 for Metro, which includes taxes and fees; $80+taxes and fees for T-Mobile. They run on the same network, so if one or the other gives good coverage where you live then you might consider switching. T-Mobile will cover early termination fees with Sprint, too. You would have to get a new phone though, unless you already have a GSM ready phone.

[@noahdelatte7378]

I mean, yeah. It depends on your situation too. Sprint has a really nice family plan. Whereas metro or T-Mobile is better for the individual.

[@EQuivalentTube2]

Make more of these.

[@SaiprasadPrabhu]

Great Video Man Thanks !

[@jose45615]

Next video should be explaining the reason for lag compensation in video games, i still don't understand it:P

[@NinF37]

9:21 Minecraft and MLP... Love them :)

[@sisbrawny]

What about fiber optic internet?

[@Eisenbison]

+sisbrawny If Comcast could get away with it, they would GLADLY put data caps on your fiber opitics. Data caps have nothing to do with actual internet demands and constraints, and everything to do with trying to milk internet users for all they&#39;re worth since more and more customers are canceling their cable subscriptions. Comcast is just trying to compensate for the loss in revenue. They even sent out an email to their associates which admitted that data caps aren&#39;t about internet usage itself.

[@DerpSquid]

Oh and also. This is a really good video!