But the excitement back then was way more than what I feel today, what a crazy period.
Except Comcast and the other shitty ISPs (including mobile carriers) which implement data caps, despite there being no technical reason for it*. At least back in the day there was an actual limit to the number of active simultaneous connections an ISP can handle.
* even for mobile, data caps don't make much sense, as they are monthly and per-user while network congestion is temporary and local. Better sell unlimited data plans with different speeds (priced accordingly), and only apply those speed limits if the local cell becomes congested.
All mobile carriers are offering plans with soft caps, meaning you may be derated to a lower speed after a known amount of data and (usually) there are bandwidth limitations in your area.
The last mile is very local, limited to a single cell, whose size depends on the planned capacity (cells are smaller in cities). Congestion is therefore limited to specific cells. Furthermore, congestion is often very temporary, limited to peak hours or special events. A congestion event could last just minutes.
A global monthly data cap doesn't actually address congestion very well. You can still have a sudden influx of users with available quota overload a cell, meaning they aren't getting the service they paid for as they are getting degraded speeds. On the other hand, someone who used up all their monthly quota is still getting no or degraded service (or is charged overage fees) despite being on a cell with lots of available capacity - in this case both energy and spectrum is wasted because there is an idle cell that's not being used to its full capacity despite there being demand for it.
> soft caps
Soft caps are, at least in some carriers, either non-existent (you get a hard block or are charged insane overage fees) or are throttled to near-unusable speeds. Furthermore, even if soft caps are implemented, they are still global (and reset monthly) as opposed to being limited to congested areas.
The real reason for data caps isn't network congestion but to scare people into paying for more than they really need (which conveniently resets every month, so they can't accumulate their allowance either) and/or charge them huge overage fees if they dare exceed their allowance. If this was purely about congestion control and efficient spectrum usage, there are better ways such as the one I described in my original comment.
Unfortunately in an oligopoly controlled by a handful of equally-mediocre players who have no incentive (nor capability - there is no engineering culture to enable innovation) to compete with each other, there is no feasible way to fix this.
To play devil's advocate,
- With data plans based on minimum speed, there would still be a possibility of service being degraded below the paid-for minimum speed during times of high usage at a cell site. There would have to be an asterisk in the contract to the effect that minimum speeds would only be supplied while possible. And, ideally, some regulatory oversight to ensure sufficient cell site capacity is installed based on the cumulative speed of the plans sold, if that makes sense.
- I wonder, to what degree is the structure of cell phone data plans constrained by regulation and private agreements? IOW, are carriers allowed, under current regulation, to sell minimum-speed plans? How complicated and time-consuming would it be to unwind inter-carrier cell-site-sharing agreements?