Thing is, things like web browsing, email, etc. are bursty in nature. Bursts you can at least handle from more sources because they can be interspersed over time.
In contrast, streaming with any kind of high resolution is a fairly constant demand of resources over the course of the program, making it have more of an impact. Lower resolutions you at least have a chance to handle bursts that can be buffered to last for a period of time.
I just don't understand streaming HD on capped data. Especially the low satellite data caps. Have been accused of being too logical by the other half.
Honestly fine with lower definition. Maybe my TV interpolates better than others but it looks fine at lower def without HD. I'm talking a 55" TV. Then again it seems us older folks have lower standards when it comes to video quality.
Things change but satellite is still not at total cord cutter level.
I'm a little more pragmatic than that. If a video eats half a GB to watch, I see that as being better used for something more tangible and reusable, like software downloads/updates.
Occasionally (once, maybe twice a week as you say - more like once a month in my case if that) that's fine, but as a regular daily habit for hours per day... that's an instant budget buster in my mind, even in 320p.
What does my head in is people thinking that just because I run out of 'high speed data', I can continue that kind behavior as if nothing's changed and complain when it doesn't work. But, they do kind of market it in such a way to imply that's possible.
"I just don't understand streaming HD on capped data."
Ditto. Makes no sense(well, to me). And SD works perfectly fine, esp with Netflix (not so much with others).
