reply to Oh_No
Re: He forgot a level. Forest for the trees? I agree with you. I've been taking the other side only because true UBB would work better than the twisted hybrid UBB companies operate today. Whether either of these models vs. flat-rate all-you-can-eat models is better depends on who benefits. Clearly, today's UBB is better for ISPS. True UBB and flat-rate models are better for consumers (unless you are an egregious hog).
My main complaint is that we don't have either. My current cell plan charges me $45 for the first 4GB and then $10/GB over that. At this price, apparently $5 is the overhead they need to earn from me to cover their fixed costs.
Of course we know this isn't true but the math is there.
What I'd prefer is that AT&T just charge me $5 for the first byte and then another $10 each time I crest the next GB. My current usage for this month (last day of billing cycle) is 1.9GB. That means I would have paid $25 for my connection this month instead of $45. Of course many believe the extra $20 is a tethering fee but it doesn't matter when I hit my cap, from then on it's $10/GB. I can reduce that somewhat if I agree to an even higher plan (with a higher cap) and lower per GB charges.
What's BS is for $25 I get 2GB but I cannot tether. Why do they care how I use my GBs?
said by rradina:There is no such thing as a hog.
(unless you are an egregious hog).
Also you can always tether. ATT has no right to limit the features of your phone that you own.
If ATT wants to limit the phones/features you can use they should not use GSM where you connect any phone you want.
They dont care about how much GBs you use. All they care about is they set a price that they feel will give them way more money than the fixed rate billing, while letting them pretend they have lower prices up front and those that go over the limits are "hogs" and "evil" and deserve to pay more.