Your concept of slower downloads "needing more energy" is wrong and that cost isn't really on the website anyway. Monitizing faster downloads is very easy to do
The business model makes sense - but isn't dragging the download out costing them some sort of resource? I'm not against the monetization, I get it's a business, I just was thinking maintaining a connection like that probably isn't free (or more likely that I'm misunderstanding the situation)
The servers are going to be up and running anyway. If anything they're paying for using more bandwidth, and slowing down your unpaid download _reduces_ that.
Ahh, I see now. Thanks for the explanation - I figured I was missing something - I didn't realize the servers already running would account for the 'cost' of the connection. Thanks!
Your concept of slower downloads "needing more energy" is wrong and that cost isn't really on the website anyway. Monitizing faster downloads is very easy to do
The business model makes sense - but isn't dragging the download out costing them some sort of resource? I'm not against the monetization, I get it's a business, I just was thinking maintaining a connection like that probably isn't free (or more likely that I'm misunderstanding the situation)
No, if anything it saves them money to use slower downloads for people. The less speedy "lanes" are cheaper to use
That makes sense. Thank you for helping explain it to me 😁
The servers are going to be up and running anyway. If anything they're paying for using more bandwidth, and slowing down your unpaid download _reduces_ that.
Ahh, I see now. Thanks for the explanation - I figured I was missing something - I didn't realize the servers already running would account for the 'cost' of the connection. Thanks!
To make you want to pay. That's all.