dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
35
share rss forum feed


JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA
reply to haroldo

Re: [iPhone] AT&T customers surprised by 'unlimited data' limit

And AT&T announced this (with the attendant press coverage) in October - and put it on Mike's bill in December. Mike is NOW crying foul because poor mike can't watch Netflix over 3G all month.

Poor mike.

LOL
--
My place : »www.schettino.us



ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4

Here we go again. Please explain to me why this is a bad thing? Should I be able to consume more than 2-3 Gb and not get throttled? Yes.


witmer1
Premium
join:2002-09-23
Llewellyn, PA
reply to JohnInSJ

I'm still crying foul, especially if he's grandfathered unlimited. He signed up for unlimited and didn't get it. I also feel the 5% number is inaccurate. I know of a lot of people who it affects, so apparently I know too many of the minority as AT&T paints it.

I cut down on my 3G usage, and know a lot of people who use their phones a great deal more than I ever have. Even with not doing all that much, I was over the throttling cap.

I feel it's nonsense that when the iPhone 3G was released, unlimited data was a set price, not only can you not get truly unlimited data, but what you previously used costs a fortune. How is this progress?

Any time you start with unlimited anything, then cut it back, people will complain.



ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4

Because technically it is unlimited, they don't cut access. That being said it's a crappy money grabbing practice as we all know it's not about congestion, it's about cash. Just sickening how AT&T rewards it's loyal customers.



ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4
reply to JohnInSJ

said by JohnInSJ:

And AT&T announced this (with the attendant press coverage) in October - and put it on Mike's bill in December. Mike is NOW crying foul because poor mike can't watch Netflix over 3G all month.

Poor mike.

LOL

Imagine that....
»Cisco: Metered Users Consume More Data
--
"So, Lone Starr, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb."

Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org


MIABye
Premium
join:2001-10-28
united state

I understand the metered people use more phenomenon all too well. I have the attitude lately that if I don't use at least half of my alloted bandwidth every month then I'm wasting money.
--
iMac 2.5 Ghz i5 12 Gigs RAM 500 Gig 7200 RPM HD (Lion/Windows 7) - MacBook Air 13" 1.7 Ghz i5 128 Gig SSD (Lion) - iPhone 4 32 Gig ATT (iOS 5)



Thinkdiff
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-07
Bronx, NY
kudos:11

said by MIABye:

I understand the metered people use more phenomenon all too well. I have the attitude lately that if I don't use at least half of my alloted bandwidth every month then I'm wasting money.

Yep. I'll use Slingplayer or iTunes Match without wifi the last few days of my billing cycle just to feel like I got my money's worth. Especially on the iPad where I'm finding it harder to use in locations without WiFi.

Whereas if it was unlimited, I'd use it when I want to and not even care if I didn't use "enough".
--
University of Southern California - Fight On!


JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

said by Thinkdiff:

said by MIABye:

I understand the metered people use more phenomenon all too well. I have the attitude lately that if I don't use at least half of my alloted bandwidth every month then I'm wasting money.

Yep. I'll use Slingplayer or iTunes Match without wifi the last few days of my billing cycle just to feel like I got my money's worth. Especially on the iPad where I'm finding it harder to use in locations without WiFi.

Whereas if it was unlimited, I'd use it when I want to and not even care if I didn't use "enough".

That makes no sense - you pay $30 a month for "unlimited" so you use less than paying $30 a month for 3GB.

You paid $30 in either case.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


MIABye
Premium
join:2001-10-28
united state

Yes we paid the same, but when there's a limit to what we can use per month it compels some people like me to use as close to that limit every month to get our money's worth. We then use bandwidth even if wi-fi is available. It's a weird psychology thing.
--
iMac 2.5 Ghz i5 12 Gigs RAM 500 Gig 7200 RPM HD (Lion/Windows 7) - MacBook Air 13" 1.7 Ghz i5 128 Gig SSD (Lion) - iPhone 4 32 Gig ATT (iOS 5)



JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

said by MIABye:

It's a weird psychology thing.

yep. Because, by that logic, you would try to get your money's worth by using an unlimited amount of data, OR AT A MINIMUM the same 3GB you'd otherwise have "paid for" on the metered plan, every month. And yet, you don't follow your own logic.

Unless $30 is worth less if you're buying an unlimited amount of data with it?
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


MIABye
Premium
join:2001-10-28
united state

Alright I'll try explaining it this way. In a weird way it's a revenge type of reaction. ATT limits how much data I can user per month therefore I'm going to get as close as I can to the limit every month. If it was still unlimited I'd feel compelled not to use 3G unless I needed to. ATT is being generous to me so I'll use their resources only as needed. That's probably the better explanation.
--
iMac 2.5 Ghz i5 12 Gigs RAM 500 Gig 7200 RPM HD (Lion/Windows 7) - MacBook Air 13" 1.7 Ghz i5 128 Gig SSD (Lion) - iPhone 4 32 Gig ATT (iOS 5)



ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4

See what AT&T has done? They have taken loyal customers and nickeled and dime them so bad that customers feel they want to get every ounce of bandwidth they are paying for. They are shooting themselves in the foot but will probably charge us for the first aid.

It's all about the shareholders, we know that. This congestion excuse is just a smokescreen, that's all. Every week it seems you hear about something else AT&T is doing to bend us over even worse.
--
"So, Lone Starr, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb."

Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org



JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA
reply to MIABye

said by MIABye:

Alright I'll try explaining it this way. In a weird way it's a revenge type of reaction. ATT limits how much data I can user per month therefore I'm going to get as close as I can to the limit every month. If it was still unlimited I'd feel compelled not to use 3G unless I needed to. ATT is being generous to me so I'll use their resources only as needed. That's probably the better explanation.

So, in order to "get back" at at&t, you claim you're going to use every last byte of your metered pre-purchased data. However, if AT&T would just give you unlimited unthrottled data, in response to their love you'll use LESS that the 3GB of data you would have paid the exact same $30 to have access to, on the metered plan.

Ok, I understand.

No, not really.

Look, I don't care as long as AT&T pays out their dividends every year. They'll run their business such that it's competitive (which it is, their data offerings and costs are in near lockstep with the other major player, and the wannabe third place player is rapidly finding they'll have to do something before all those generous loving iPhone owners destroy their network) and it's profitable to the shareholders.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA
reply to ptrowski

said by ptrowski:

SThis congestion excuse is just a smokescreen, that's all.

It's not a smokescreen. 3G is designed for burst traffic, not streaming media. Consumers of large amounts of bandwidth are consuming it with long running streams. Which ties up resources on a tower. Which costs significant dollars to expand capacity on.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4

Let's preface this with as you mentioned as long as AT&T pays dividends you don't care. So it's painfully obvious the end game you desire.

That aside, one could have easily said that other carriers are dealing with the increase in traffic and do not have the same draconian throttling practices that AT&T has. One could also say that if it was designed for burst, not sustained use AT&T should have been much more aggressive in their LTE buildout. So if I hit my floating cap or whatever it may be 3 days into my billing cycle then that congestion which obviously AT&T says I cause magically disappears? No. Look at Verizon's policy, it makes more sense than AT&T's ever will. So all these people on tiered plans don't cause congestion? Hardly.
If I switch from an unlimited plan to a tiered plan this ap called congestion doesn't go away, just the $10 increments from my wallet.
--
"So, Lone Starr, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb."

Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org



JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

said by ptrowski:

Let's preface this with as you mentioned as long as AT&T pays dividends you don't care. So it's painfully obvious the end game you desire.

That aside, one could have easily said that other carriers are dealing with the increase in traffic and do not have the same draconian throttling practices that AT&T has. One could also say that if it was designed for burst, not sustained use AT&T should have been much more aggressive in their LTE buildout. So if I hit my floating cap or whatever it may be 3 days into my billing cycle then that congestion which obviously AT&T says I cause magically disappears? No. Look at Verizon's policy, it makes more sense than AT&T's ever will. So all these people on tiered plans don't cause congestion? Hardly.
If I switch from an unlimited plan to a tiered plan this ap called congestion doesn't go away, just the $10 increments from my wallet.

Look, the point here is that the carriers aren't in this business because they love us, or because wireless data is a fundamental human right, or any other BS. They are in this business to make money.

So, shockingly, if there is a business model that is not making money, they will not support that business model.

Unlimited data when phones were 2G wasn't much data. Unlimited data when devices were HVGA and there was no streaming video content to be had on the internet except for SD crap on youtube wasn't much data. Unlimited data on devices with HD displays and the hardware to effectively drive them, with access to large libraries of HD media to legally stream, is a crapload of data.

Wireless data is not an unlimited resource. It costs real dollars to expand capacity at the tower.

When a user does not pay for their usage, they use more data. When a user pays for their data, they self-limit. If they don't self-limit, they generate additional revenue, which can then be plowed back into expanding tower capacity.

If the extra cost of using additional data was NOT a self-limiting factor, why else would all those who used to consume much more than 2-3GB of data a month whine and complain about having to either pay more for it, or suffer much slower throttled speeds?

Anyway, you're free to choose whatever carrier you want. Vote with your money.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4

We just saw the report stating on average the tiered plan user actually consumes more bandwidth.



JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

said by ptrowski:

We just saw the report stating on average the tiered plan user actually consumes more bandwidth.

Link?
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4

Was earlier in the thread...
»Cisco: Metered Users Consume More Data



JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

said by ptrowski:

Was earlier in the thread...
»Cisco: Metered Users Consume More Data

Where does that show Metered users consume more data?

"Consumers on tiered data plans are using more data than those on unlimited plans, says Thomas Barnett, Cisco's senior manager of service provider marketing. "

The comment is offline from the report. Interestingly, the comment is about average use. Of 1GB. Which is below the throttle point for "unlimited"

If the throttle is at 5%, then 5% of all unlimited users are using far more than the average user. Which is the problem. The product pricing supports the average user, not the outliers. The low outliers are your friend. You want those. The high outliers are money sinks. You want to make those people pay, or drive them down towards the average.

Per the linked article »www.lightreading.com/document.as···edefault the top 1% account for 1/4 of all usage.

Read that again.

And again.

There you go.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4

Which is going down. It was 52%, now it is 24%. So it is going the opposite direction. It's the top 20 percent which is going to be the problem which represents the tiered users.

"Cisco has been studying tiered data plans at two global, Tier 1 wireless operators for the past 21 months. While at the beginning, the top 1 percent represented 52 percent of traffic on the networks, now that 1 percent only represents 24 percent of traffic, while the top 20 percent continues to grow in usage, Barnett says."
--
"So, Lone Starr, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb."

Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org



JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

said by ptrowski:

Which is going down. It was 52%, now it is 24%. So it is going the opposite direction. It's the top 20 percent which is going to be the problem which represents the tiered users.

"Cisco has been studying tiered data plans at two global, Tier 1 wireless operators for the past 21 months. While at the beginning, the top 1 percent represented 52 percent of traffic on the networks, now that 1 percent only represents 24 percent of traffic, while the top 20 percent continues to grow in usage, Barnett says."

That's much more due to the penetration of smartphones vs feature phones. »blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/con···by-2011/

Don't forget this is a cisco report. Which is going to support the thesis "you need to buy more cisco routers for your data centers"

Or, did you think cisco was just trying to help poor suffering unlimited data users on AT&T?

The MUCH more interesting statistic is that 1% of all data users drive any significant amount of data. 25% of all data. So, if the average is 1GB, and the sample size is 100, what is the median? Yeah, kinda hard to guess that one, but it's the one you really want to argue with me with.

Because the 1%ers drive the average WAY up.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4

Which again is going down. So they have seen the smartphone adoption rates explode, they try to buy T-mobile and fail. They fully admit that they could have expanded on their own.
Obviously I am not the only one who finds this practice ridiculous as it is being picked up on CNN, etc.



JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

said by ptrowski:

Which again is going down. So they have seen the smartphone adoption rates explode, they try to buy T-mobile and fail. They fully admit that they could have expanded on their own.
Obviously I am not the only one who finds this practice ridiculous as it is being picked up on CNN, etc.

Let's try this again
100 user sample size
100GB total use
Average use: 1GB
1 user accounts for 24% of that use
99 user sample size
76GB total use
Average use: .76GB

Question: if top 1% use 24% of data... how much does 2% use? 5%?

Answer: Most likely: ~ 95% of all data.

So,
95 user sample size
5GB total use
Average use: 0.052GB

Magic!

You complain that's too high? That somehow the dropoff from top 1 to top 5 is much sharper? Ok, let's say the total for top 5 is 80% (24 + 20 + 16 + 12 + 8%)

Average use: 210 MB... wow, where have I seen THAT number before?

How about 70% (carve up the remaining 50% however you like...)

Average use: 315 MB... wow, where have I seen THAT number before?

So, here's MY guess. On AT&T last year, the average use per sub was 200MB on all data plans. Now, it's closer to 300MB. That's why they have that bottom offering... because most people actually fall at or below that mark.

That's the point. The top users still use all the data. And if the top users have no reason to limit themselves, they won't. But you have to build out to support those users, who generate no additional revenue.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4

I didn't see it being a sample size of 100 people, maybe I missed that. The issues are they are blaming it on unlimited data account holders, and that number of top usage has gone down 25% while smartphone usage and adoption is exploding.

Understanding that obviously Cisco has an agenda as well, I understand you do as a stockholder to AT&T. But it's the top 20% that is growing and causing the issues, not that 5% that they blame. Their usage is going down.

To blame it on congestion is a smokescreen. You are right, us unlimited users are not as profitable. But to be told by an AT&T rep that congestion goes away when you move to a tiered plan made me laugh. Verizon's practice makes sense, AT&T's is ridiculous.

We will agree to disagree on this I guess.
--
"So, Lone Starr, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb."

Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org



trparky
Apple... YUM
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:2

I'm going to say this... AT&T doesn't care about you the customer, their network, or their employees. They have consistently shown to put their stockholders and executive bonuses before everything else.

It shows in everything they run, including their wireless and their absolutely pathetic excuse for a triple-play service called uHearse (that's uVerse for those that don't get the joke). Their "HDTV" service looks worse than a badly encoded YouTube video! I'm paying for HDTV, not YouTube!

They have neglected their wireless service to the point where I ran to Verizon Wireless because of the constant dropped calls I was getting in my area. What good is five bars of service when you can't place a damn phone call!

They have also neglected their copper line business to the point that more often than not the copper lines haven't been replaced in over 50 years. 50 years! This crap was installed when Franklin Delano Roosevelt was in office! And now they expect to shove VDSL down these crappy lines? I got news for you... it ain't going to happen.

This company is the worst run company I've ever seen. I lump these guys in with Enron, Freddie Mac, and the other various companies we blame for the economic mess we're in.



JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA
reply to ptrowski

said by ptrowski:

I didn't see it being a sample size of 100 people, maybe I missed that.

Add as many zeros as you want, the math is exactly the same. Thats how statistics works.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4

You can devise any numbers you so choose as long as it pays your dividends. The throttling practice of AT&T is the the worst out of the carriers.



JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA

said by ptrowski:

You can devise any numbers you so choose as long as it pays your dividends. The throttling practice of AT&T is the the worst out of the carriers.

That's the summation of your argument?
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4

For now yes. Why? Because I will continue to show it is a smokescreen to throttle under the guise of the 5%, and you will continue to show how we are not revenue producing and it's in AT&T's best fininacial interest. We will go back and forth not convincing either to change their mind.

I want speeds that are not throttled under false pretense, you want want maximum dividends paid to you. We can agree to disagree.
--
"So, Lone Starr, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb."

Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org