dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2011-03-22 16:29:15: While the consumer response to AT&T's T-Mobile is generally negative, AT&T's fortunate in that the deal at least has shifted media attention away from AT&T's recent decision to start charging DSL and U-Verse users overages. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next
Gami00
join:2010-03-11
Mississauga, ON

Gami00

Member

people can rest assured

that service/billing will be the same after the merger..

at&t levels of service/billing.
zed2608
Premium Member
join:2007-09-30
Cleveland, TN

zed2608

Premium Member

Re: people can rest assured

said by Gami00:

that service/billing will be the same after the merger..

at&t levels of service/billing.

correction service/billing will get worse making pre merger at&t look perfecft
gorehound
join:2009-06-19
Portland, ME

gorehound to Gami00

Member

to Gami00
someone should take them to court and sue them real big.so what if a lawyer gets the lion share at least it will make the news headlines and that is important.
prove that ATT is a piece of krap ripping consumers off.
then maybe other ISP's will think twice.
nnickn6
join:2011-03-22

nnickn6

Member

Re: people can rest assured

said by gorehound:

someone should take them to court and sue them real big.so what if a lawyer gets the lion share at least it will make the news headlines and that is important.
prove that ATT is a piece of krap ripping consumers off.
then maybe other ISP's will think twice.

I agree. I wonder how hard it would be to start a lawsuit? Maybe I will know soon....
DarnCrazy
join:2006-05-08
Castro Valley, CA

DarnCrazy

Member

Re: people can rest assured

Hopefully the lawsuit will be easy to get into, especially with large companies like Netflix and hulu which will be affected by the bandwidth caps.
ctggzg
Premium Member
join:2005-02-11
USA

ctggzg to gorehound

Premium Member

to gorehound
said by gorehound:

someone should take them to court and sue them real big.

On what legal grounds? What law did they break? Stuff that you don't like or don't believe is fair doesn't automatically merit a lawsuit.
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88

Member

Re: people can rest assured

You know there are laws.

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We ··· ures_Act

And state regulatory agencies. You should see a state inspection stamp on your supermarket checkout scales and at all gas pumps.

geoorge
@comcast.net

geoorge to ctggzg

Anon

to ctggzg
If you're using an ISP other than Yahoo, is the cap still enforced?

If not, this is a serious issue because only fairly recently were Internet DSL and Internet Cable services re-classified as an "information service." and are not subject to "Common Carrier" requirements of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

With no broadband telecommunications "carrier service" available, there are generally only two Internet broadband providers in a residential market: the cable Internet provider and the DSL.

Remember back in the day when you could call any local number on the phone for free? Basically, this is not the case anymore.

The old Adam Sandler sketch "Tollboth Willy" comes to mind.
Expand your moderator at work

anon77
@207.61.68.x

anon77 to ctggzg

Anon

to ctggzg
... How about billing for services not rendered (fraud)?

Courageous
@sbcglobal.net

Courageous to ctggzg

Anon

to ctggzg
Fraud. Not only will they have to pay up, they'll have to pay attorney's fees.

kaykim45
@bellsouth.net

kaykim45 to gorehound

Anon

to gorehound
Time Warner try this back in 2008 and found out customers was going leave the company so they back away from it. So if we all team up maybe ATT will do the same.

trainwreck6
join:2010-09-21
off track

trainwreck6 to Gami00

Member

to Gami00
AT&T used to be a respectable company worldwide, like GE or Coke or other companies that used to define a vibrant U.S.A. What happened?

Could corporate personhood have now run amok?
tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY

1 recommendation

tmc8080

Member

Re: people can rest assured

19 Hijackers provided Bush 2 the excuse he needed to make oil companies become mini standard oil's setting their own high prices on a whisper of any hint of a shortage of oil. Gasoline pushing $4-$5 a gallon... so no wonder AT&T wants their piece of the greed pie. I wonder what regulators will have to say now that they are also capping U-Verse.. how can AT&T-Mobile prove that prices will go lower when they are showing the opposite on U-Verse? Giver corporate USA an inch and they own the whole game. Companies used to actually care about their corporate image.. nowadays they do what they like and think they can pull the wool over a new generation's eyes. Most of us over the age of 30 remember what Ma-Bell was... the crap pulled today seems childish compared to how corporations run the government agenda now. By those old standards, lots of companies would have been broken up, censured or otherwise regulated to behave properly (banks & oil companies first and foremost).

Cynic99
@charter.com

Cynic99 to trainwreck6

Anon

to trainwreck6
This is southwest bell, not the real AT&T follow the history of mergers and acquisitions

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102

Premium Member

Lemme Guess

I'm willing to bet that in 100% of these cases, the meter claims the user always used more than he actually did use.
Chubbysumo
join:2009-12-01
Duluth, MN
Ubee E31U2V1
(Software) pfSense
Netgear WNR3500L

Chubbysumo

Member

Re: Lemme Guess

well, i can tell you this from experience.
I have charter, and they have so called "soft caps" on the ultra60 tier. I monitor my usage thru my router, and I average 2TB per month. When charter called after I had used over 4TB, and they had an accurate number(only a few GB off of mine, and in a lower direction), it shows that it is possible to monitor accurately. AT&T does not want to do this, as it can easily overbill users, and make more money. They probably aritifically inflate the data count with padding packets. A good test would be to have a service line with them, and then have nothing on it for several months, leaving only the DSL modem on, and nothing connected to it. I suspect that this is AT$T charging you for standard routing protocols and communications between the DSL modem and the DSLAM/headend. Any users of AT$T try this yet?
cramer
Premium Member
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC

cramer

Premium Member

Re: Lemme Guess

That's not going to work. If it has an IP address, there will be traffic hitting it. You cannot escape being scanned.

Cheese
Premium Member
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL

Cheese

Premium Member

Re: Lemme Guess

said by cramer:

That's not going to work. If it has an IP address, there will be traffic hitting it. You cannot escape being scanned.

I think his point is leave the service running without the customer using it and see what ATT says is being used. It's quite obvious it's going to get some data flow.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Netgear WNDR3700v2
Zoom 5341J

KrK

Premium Member

Re: Lemme Guess

That brings up another point. Where's the legality in charging people for unwanted traffic they did not originate and have zero interest in receiving? Since it costs them money, it immediately in legal terms equates damage.

You know, I really hope a whole host of lawsuits is filed over this type of crap.

rchandra
Stargate Universe fan
Premium Member
join:2000-11-09
14225-2105
ARRIS ONT1000GJ4
EnGenius EAP1250

rchandra

Premium Member

Re: unwanted traffic

That's been my opposition to UBB ever since it was conceived. The lartc.org site puts it well in that controlling (traffic shaping) an Internet connection is analogous to the postal services: you can influence but not control what's mailed to you, and one only controls how much one sends. One can attach a traffic policer to ingress queues so that applications only receive data at some rate, but that's not necessarily related to how much gets shoved down the line at you. So it is with all the potential traffic generators on the Internet. Suppose someone picks your address at pseudorandom and decides to flood ping you, or repeatedly tries to p0wn your computer...didn't ask for the traffic but I get it anyway, and no reasonable means to make the upstream stop.

It would also be interesting if a carrier (e.g. AT&T) ends up charging you for traffic the company itself generated, such as Web site ads or promotional emails.

pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium Member
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

pnh102 to KrK

Premium Member

to KrK

Re: Lemme Guess

said by KrK:

You know, I really hope a whole host of lawsuits is filed over this type of crap.

Agreed. If you're gonna pay by the bit, then there's no way people should be charged for bits they do not want.
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88

Member

Re: Lemme Guess

Good for you. Public IP address is now $12.95 per month with incoming traffic wavier. Otherwise you get a safe firewalled private IP that gets zero incoming traffic.

Gbcue
Premium Member
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA

Gbcue to KrK

Premium Member

to KrK
Yup, should be like cell-phone telemarketers. You don't get them because it's illegal. If you do, they have broken the law and you can sue.
cramer
Premium Member
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC

cramer

Premium Member

Re: Lemme Guess

That used to be true, but with all the number porting these days, it's next to impossible to tell a number is "cell" just by looking at it. In the old days, you could look at an NPANXX and know what CO it's going to.

Someone34987
@comcast.net

Someone34987

Anon

Re: Lemme Guess

said by cramer:

That used to be true, but with all the number porting these days, it's next to impossible to tell a number is "cell" just by looking at it. In the old days, you could look at an NPANXX and know what CO it's going to.

Iirc the FTC makes available a list of former landline numbers ported to wireless. There are other ways to make the determination as well using telco databases.
cramer
Premium Member
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC

cramer

Premium Member

Re: Lemme Guess

Like I thought but didn't type... "unless you have a live copy of the LNP database(s)." (and those are NOT free.)

shawnmb
@sbcglobal.net

shawnmb to KrK

Anon

to KrK
The same could be argued for mobile carriers who double dip on a text message fee charging both the sender and receiver, even if the message is unsolicited on the receiver's end... how long have they been getting away with that?
cramer
Premium Member
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
Westell 6100
Cisco PIX 501

cramer to Cheese

Premium Member

to Cheese
The point is, there will never be zero usage. And it only takes one byte to go over the limit.

150GB equates to 6.67% of the capacity of my DSL Extreme 6.0 DSL connection. I don't know where on Earth anyone would tolerate any company charging like that. Would you like to be charged for 100gal of gas for every gal you actually got from the pump? I don't f'ing think so. And that is why I will NEVER do business with AT&T EVER again.

Again, if it really were about network health and congestion, how the hell does charging people an extra fee anytime they cross an imaginary line (that they may not even be aware of, and may not know they're approaching) do anything to improve network health and/or reduce congestion? The answer is that it doesn't. An extra fee does nothing to improve the situation; we're still "f***ing up the network." They're just putting more money in their prockets -- to the tune of 2.5-5mil per year per million subscribers (assuming their 2% number is true.) Come Sept. when the first bills start being paid and they see just how much cash it's creating, the caps will drop; when people adjust their usage to avoid the caps, the caps, again, will drop.

(If they wanted to improve their network and fix these problems, they have the profits to do so (granted, that's all of AT&T) -- and have for many years. But that means they have to stop putting that money in their own executive pockets.)

Ref
@bellsouth.net

Ref

Anon

Re: Leemme Guess

LOL, in order:

1. You have to have 150Gb and 1 byte to go over the cap.
2. You are not paying for a 6Mb real time/ full time connection. You are paying for a consumer grade shared use service and thinking you get to hog the whole thing. You cost about 20 times the revenue you generate.
3. Buy a real 6 Gb connection and you won't have a cap. It will cost about $1250.
4. AT&T will not mourn the passing on of someone exceeding the cap. Do them a real favor and go to their competition, they will throw a party. Just don't come to my company, we are a couple of months away from implementing our caps and I don't want you messing up my network.
5. Did you even read what you said about their profit margins? If it is correct, that means they make less than $5 per year per customer. Less than a dollar a month is zero margin and you are costing them $1000 or so more than you generate ? Goodbye is a good turn of phrase for you.
6. 50% of cap affected users will adjust their usage patterns appropriately, the rest will leave. Only a few usage charges will be applied, but the management and cost control will help in the long term.
7. You will not see additional profits being plowed into wireline of any sort. It is also not possible to actually get 10 MB with wireless to every user. Physics doesn't really go there because of a variety of cost and bandwidth issues. Yes you can do it inside your home, but it is a big issue with doing it outside to individual users in a non shared setting.
8. Caps have already been litigated. You can litigate again and throw your money away, but the result will be the same.
cramer
Premium Member
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
Westell 6100
Cisco PIX 501

cramer

Premium Member

Re: Leemme Guess

2. You are not paying for a 6Mb real time/ full time connection. You are paying for a consumer grade shared use service and thinking you get to hog the whole thing. You cost about 20 times the revenue you generate.
3. Buy a real 6 Gb connection and you won't have a cap. It will cost about $1250.

No, it's not an SLA'd 6Mbps connection. It's "up to 6meg", which means AT&T has every right to make it slower. If there really were congestion issues, then charging people more money for crossing an imaginary line is a complete failure. It doesn't do jack for the their congestion issues; people can (and will) still use whatever is available to them. And they didn't tier the caps... it's the same 150GB line for 6meg as it is 768k customers. If there's no congestion (and there's no evidence that there is), then the network has the capacity to give people what they want to use.

Obviously, it's about money. And getting the sheep used to having caps with overage charges. Sure, it hits "2%" today -- which is a significant increase in revenue which is 100% profit -- but it will start hitting more and more people over time... network usage is going up, and those caps will be going down.

4. AT&T will not mourn the passing on of someone exceeding the cap. Do them a real favor and go to their competition, they will throw a party. Just don't come to my company, we are a couple of months away from implementing our caps and I don't want you messing up my network.

I'm not the only one pissed off by this. They will lose measurable amount of revenue because of this bullshit. I use next to nothing on my DSL line, yet due to this bullshit, they are losing me as a customer for everything. forever. (and I'm not the only one.)

5. Did you even read what you said about their profit margins? If it is correct, that means they make less than $5 per year per customer. Less than a dollar a month is zero margin and you are costing them $1000 or so more than you generate ? Goodbye is a good turn of phrase for you.

Yet another person who fails totally at math.

6. 50% of cap affected users will adjust their usage patterns appropriately, the rest will leave. Only a few usage charges will be applied, but the management and cost control will help in the long term.

I think this is going to backfire MASSIVELY. A lot of people are already leaving. Many who don't come anywhere near the (current) line are leaving. Those that cross the line will be searching for a different ISP, and failing that do what they can to reduce usage.

7. You will not see additional profits being plowed into wireline of any sort.

*cough*UVERSE*cough* Yes, as I've said many times, it's epicly stupid and shortsighted to invest in all that VDSL gear to keep using 3000 year old copper instead of working towards FTTH that actually has a long-term future.

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium Member
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

1 recommendation

dvd536 to pnh102

Premium Member

to pnh102
said by pnh102:

I'm willing to bet that in 100% of these cases, the meter claims the user always used more than he actually did use.

And the meters will ALWAYS count a kilobit as 1000 bits, not 1024 to get those overages rolling in faster!
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88 to pnh102

Member

to pnh102
said by pnh102:

I'm willing to bet that in 100% of these cases, the meter claims the user always used more than he actually did use.

The ATT meter is probably severely delayed. Its probably polled only a couple times a week or a couple times a month.

Gbcue
Premium Member
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA

Gbcue

Premium Member

Re: Lemme Guess

said by patcat88:

said by pnh102:

I'm willing to bet that in 100% of these cases, the meter claims the user always used more than he actually did use.

The ATT meter is probably severely delayed. Its probably polled only a couple times a week or a couple times a month.

Too slow for practical usage.

heat84
DSLR Influencer
join:2004-03-11
Delray Beach, FL

heat84

Member

Does TV count towards the cap for UVerse?

How are they gonna separate it if not?

Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02

Karl Bode

News Guy

Re: Does TV count towards the cap for UVerse?

No, U-Verse IPTV content is not included. That traffic is already managed separately.

jchambers28
Premium Member
join:2007-05-12
Peculiar, MO

jchambers28

Premium Member

cox internet

My cox internet is sounding better all the time. Even with their 250GB "soft" cap

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

KrK

Premium Member

Re: cox internet

Except the Soft Cap is 40GB. Or it was here, last time I checked.

jchambers28
Premium Member
join:2007-05-12
Peculiar, MO
·Comcast XFINITY

jchambers28

Premium Member

Re: cox internet

not any more

»ww2.cox.com/aboutus/poli ··· ons_0609

»Cox Raises Their Usage Caps [35] comments
sludgehound
join:2007-03-12
New York, NY

sludgehound

Member

Plug & Pay

He who has the gold makes the rules.....

••••
tim92078
join:2010-07-15
San Marcos, CA

3 recommendations

tim92078

Member

Relevant state department of weights and measures...

Every deathstar user that doesn't have the option to quit should all write the attorney general in their respective state pointing out this inaccuracy.

These meters tie directly to the bill. They should not be treated any differently from the scale in the deli (has a state certified sticker that its accurate) or a gas pump.

Every bill that's inaccurate should be disputed too. Not just through the deathstar's complaint channels, but through attornies general.

Every time. Every bill. Make UBB cost these greedy bloodsuckers more than they ever dreamed it could.

That's the way to nip this usage-based-billing BS in the bud. When the attorney general of every state afflicted with the AT&T cancer raises questions of whether their meter could be certified - I bet that's when some suit at AT&T realizes "Oh, wait a minute, this is going to be really expensive to implement."
nishiko7
Premium Member
join:2007-05-01
Pleasant Hill, CA

nishiko7

Premium Member

Re: Relevant state department of weights and measures...

"Every bill that's inaccurate should be disputed too. Not just through the deathstar's complaint channels, but through attornies general.

Every time. Every bill. Make UBB cost these greedy bloodsuckers more than they ever dreamed it could."
You said it Tim... I'm 100% aboard. We need to attack this on multiple fronts, and this is one of the best ways!

Gbcue
Premium Member
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA

Gbcue to tim92078

Premium Member

to tim92078
Is there a form letter? That way, it will be so easy.

I'm sure it'll come around from some saavy Web 2.0 company. One click, done.
chgo_man99
join:2010-01-01
Sunnyvale, CA

chgo_man99

Member

IPhone users...

Don't forget to reset your data counter in iPhone in next billing cycle. Then please report how much your data reports usage at the end of month and hoe much att wireless website. Those who already did that please share.

Comcast, att dsl or uverse users also welcome to post reports between their providers and statistics from broadband routers/firewalls.

•••
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx

Member

Points of clarification

U-Verse meters shouldn't be too screwed up...as long as video traffic isn't counted (it doesn't add incremental bandwidth costs like unicast data so it shouldn't be counted...and AT&T probably doesn't want it counted). PPPoE overhead means that, on a 1500 byte packet, you get 1492 bytes of data. So 0.5% inflated.

ATM OTOH is where all bets are off. 53 byte cells carrying 48 bytes of data is 10.4% worth of overhead. Add to PPPoE overhead and you get about 11% overhead. So your 150GB plan just became 135GB.

You can layer in TCP overhead and such beyond that if you really want to, resulting in 86% of the data being sent/received being the stuff you really want, instead of overhead/headers. This brings the overhead count up to 16.2%, giving you around 129GB for your 150GB package.

Which sucks.

Comcast's usage meter is much nicer. They filter out all of the multicast/ARP noise (a few GB per month) that happens on a cable system, plus other forms of overhead (Comcast doesn't use PPoE or ATM, so overhead is significantly lower) so you end up with a usage meter that reports LESS than what DD-WRT does. Plus it's a soft cap.

I would say "I hate to say it" but I don't, when you compare to AT&T...Comcast did their meter correctly, and AT&T is screwing theirs up, big time. Especially since the numbers I listed above don't even reflect the reality that people are seeing with the usage meter...the meter is all over the place!

formerccast
@bellsouth.net

formerccast

Anon

Re: Points of clarification

Don't give Comcast too much credit. They implemented their soft cap 10/2008, but could not get a usage meter going at the time of their cap launch. So, we cap you, but you have no idea how much you are using via our accounts page. More corp behemoth, eh we do whatever we want.
tivoboy
join:2004-05-10
Menlo Park, CA

tivoboy

Member

timing

I think one can really only compare these over greater periods of time. The AT&T usage meter MIGHT be using GMT for days, and depending on where one is their reported usage by 'their day' might be off by a lot. I know I setup large downloads for MY NIGHT, and it shows up in the later evening of the previous day. Whereas, that would be the FOLLOWING day in GMT terms

dmxrob
Premium Member
join:2005-06-24
Saint Peters, MO

dmxrob

Premium Member

So where is this meter?

I keep seeing people post about it, post snapshots, but I've yet to see any actual link to a meter!

••••••
Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL

Mr Matt

Member

Wait until subscriber goes on vacation.

Subscriber goes on vacation for a month and that month is the same as the measurement period. The customer finds that they have used 35GB of data when they were not even home. Of course AT&T-Mobile will claim that someone stole their bandwidth. Complaints will fall on deaf ears since the lawmakers ears will be filled with campaign contributions graciously provided by AT&T-Mobile. LOL Subscribers!

OSUGoose
join:2007-12-27
Columbus, OH
Apple AirPort Extreme (2013)

OSUGoose

Member

Re: Wait until subscriber goes on vacation.

First off its AT&T, Inc not your "clever" AT&T-Mobile.

Second, it's AT&T IS (Internet Services) who deals with DSL & Uverse.

Third, AT&T Mobility is the wireless/mobile phone divison, which has zero to do with this UBB issue.

Lastly, the company will never be called AT&T-Mobile, it will remain as AT&T, Inc a holding company of the affilated company's previously purchased/merged with.
Expand your moderator at work
bobbycito
join:2005-09-08
Pompano Beach, FL

bobbycito

Member

Caps

I would like to see the meters worling artleast at this point on the uverse accounts but when i login it stats
"The U-verse data measurement report is currently under construction. When completed, you will be notified if your usage exceeds the allowance. Until that time, U-verse customers should not be concerned about their usage patterns for billing purposes.

To learn more about how to manage your usage, please visit www.att.com/internet-usage"
if they are going active in May they should be working by now and what will happen if you ar midway thru your billing cycle?

•••
jjeffeory
jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04
Bloomington, IN

1 edit

jjeffeory

Member

One of the things that really gets me is...

at&t is trying this crap, then I read a story about how new mini-lasers could usher in a new internet age with even higher speeds and cheaper, for ISPs, to operate.

»www.tgdaily.com/hardware ··· internet

Shawn808
@rr.com

Shawn808

Anon

Re: One of the things that really gets me is...

Soooo if someone decides to send empty packets and "IP BOMB" someone 24/7 would that not count against the victims bandwidth allocation...
rmdir
join:2003-03-13
Chicago, IL

rmdir to jjeffeory

Member

to jjeffeory
I'm sure they will pass the cost savings on to subscribers, if they have any left by that time.

Morac
Cat god
join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ

Morac

Member

Not that unusual

I have Comcast and I've found that their usage meters never match what my router (running Tomato) reports. Though the difference is only about 20%, not 4000% like that one AT&T user is seeing.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

KrK

Premium Member

Figures....

And I'm sure they'll be no way to dispute it, other then a lawsuit.

NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
TP-Link TD-8616
Asus RT-AC66U B1
Netgear FR114P

NormanS

MVM

Re: Figures....

said by KrK:

And I'm sure they'll be no way to dispute it, other then a lawsuit.

You will need two lawsuits; the first will be necessary to kill their "binding arbitration" practice.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium Member
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Netgear WNDR3700v2
Zoom 5341J

KrK

Premium Member

What if you're one of the untold masses who gets THIS

Click for full size
How the hell AT&T plans to charge you for usage when they have no idea what you're actually using, I have no idea.

What a scam.

"Should not be concerned." Maybe that's the attitude consumers really should take about paying AT&T's bill.

en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

en102

Member

Its bad enough..

That you reduce speed for ATM overhead.. but having to pay for inefficient data that can't be 'consumed' as well.
moes
Premium Member
join:2009-11-15
Cedar City, UT

moes

Premium Member

Nice flaw

Nice flawed meter there they have.

Total usage according to my newest router purchased on the 15th is a total of 8.94gb total, but att shows

Usage for:
03-16-2011 to 03-22-2011 *25 GB total
22.02 GB download
2.30 GB upload

ERM. me thinks not
Bob61571
join:2008-08-08
Washington, IL

Bob61571

Member

Without a standardized, accurate, independent(of AT&T)

meter system, this whole AT&T usage plan falls apart.
BiggA
Premium Member
join:2005-11-23
Central CT
·Frontier FiberOp..
Asus RT-AC68

BiggA

Premium Member

DSLReports is becoming so biased

While this particular move is wrong on AT&T's part due to the technology that is being employed here, DSLR is becoming so biased in general (look at the first sentence).

AT&T introduced cheaper data plans, and DSLR complains, complains, complains.

AT&T has the overall fastest network in the US with coverage second only to Verizon. DSLR complains, complains, complains.

And now, with AT&T&T, DSLR complains, when this is going to be an incredible synergy of spectrum and technology, and is going to be great for the consumers of both companies, especially the coverage-disadvantaged T-Mobile. There are some whiners out there who are complaining about this, however, the VAST MAJORITY of both companies' customers are pleased about this acquisition, as all they are about is having good coverage, and a wide selection of cool phones, both of which will be unparalleled when AT&T&T is put together.

••••••••••••••••••
page: 1 · 2 · next