Only to all you city folk. Here in the sticks we ain't got broadband and probably won't for the next 10 years or so. Streaming is out of the question for thousands of us. I love my DVD by mail, saves me the 50 mile round trip to the Redbox.
"Only to all you city folk. Here in the sticks we ain't got broadband and probably won't for the next 10 years or so. Streaming is out of the question for thousands of us. I love my DVD by mail, saves me the 50 mile round trip to the Redbox. "
Dittos: While I have the most expensive Time Warner Cable broadband service available to residential customers, living in the country, if too many of my neighbors are using data intensive applications like streaming or audio, my data hose just starts to dribble.
Donning my flame proof jacket, the stucture of the internet is not yet at a point where such huge k/m/g byte intensive applications can be used in any appreciable quantity without severely impacting those of us doing normal page searches and downloads.
There currently is no Fiber Optic service in my area and because of the small population per square mile (that's the only criteria) it is very unlikely it will ever come to this town.
As more and more people use the internet for their own movie theater on demand, the situation for non-Fiber Optic customers will continue to deteriorate regardless of how much they pay for residential service.
I admit to watching GBTV (and putting up with the occasional "Loading" crap) but ONLY because I cannot get it via TV (which of course shares the same hose as the internet but a different part of the spectrum).
I like my Blu-Ray player and see no reason to clog the internet with that traffic and I never get a "Loading" icon.
We also have broadband choices which are perfectly adequate for sending large chunks of data around the world and perfectly crappy for watching streaming on demand programs. See my post #78.