 JohnInSJ
Premium Member
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA |
to ptrowski
Re: [iPhone] AT&T customers surprised by 'unlimited data' limitsaid by ptrowski:said by JohnInSJ:said by ptrowski:Increase capacity if there is an issue.
which costs money, which is raised by charging for use. We agree! You mean trying to push me to pay more for my use. Yep, exactly. Since unlimited use for fixed income doesn't scale, they switched to a metered billing system. Not unlike electricity. After all, all you need to do is built more power plants to supply more electricity, right? So I guess you're unhappy about that metered billing too? |
|
 MIABye
Premium Member
join:2001-10-28
united state |
MIABye
Premium Member
2012-Feb-19 10:26 am
I believe most people wouldn't have a problem with a pure metered system if the cost of the bandwidth was reasonable. Say 50 cents per Gig. The light users can save money without having to pay a minimum, and the heavy users won't get dragged over the coals with each bill. A win win. |
|
 NezmoThe name's Bond. James Bond.
MVM
join:2004-11-10
Coppell, TX |
to JohnInSJ
said by JohnInSJ:Yep, exactly. Since unlimited use for fixed income doesn't scale, they switched to a metered billing system. Not unlike electricity. After all, all you need to do is built more power plants to supply more electricity, right? So I guess you're unhappy about that metered billing too?
I'd have no problem if the amount charged for the metered/tiered billing wasn't a royal shafting. Like charging for individual texts, it's a cash cow. I think many more folks would feel a little less miffed if the data charges resembled something reasonable. |
|
 ptrowskiGot Helix?
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Woodstock, CT |
ptrowski
Premium Member
2012-Feb-19 3:03 pm
I agree. $10 a GB for overages on a tiered plan is robbery. |
|
JohnInSJ
Premium Member
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA |
JohnInSJ
Premium Member
2012-Feb-19 5:07 pm
said by ptrowski:I agree. $10 a GB for overages on a tiered plan is robbery.
So don't get service from them. Last I checked no one was holding any guns to anyone's head. |
|
ptrowskiGot Helix?
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Woodstock, CT |
ptrowski
Premium Member
2012-Feb-19 6:06 pm
said by JohnInSJ:said by ptrowski:I agree. $10 a GB for overages on a tiered plan is robbery.
So don't get service from them. Last I checked no one was holding any guns to anyone's head. Just in the form of increased ETF's. |
|
 trparky
Premium Member
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH ·AT&T U-Verse
|
trparky
Premium Member
2012-Feb-19 6:09 pm
said by ptrowski:said by JohnInSJ:said by ptrowski:I agree. $10 a GB for overages on a tiered plan is robbery.
So don't get service from them. Last I checked no one was holding any guns to anyone's head. Just in the form of increased ETF's. And in the form of no one else providing service of the same kind with the same coverage areas. Who else do you have? Verizon? |
|
|
JohnInSJ
Premium Member
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA |
to ptrowski
said by ptrowski:said by JohnInSJ:said by ptrowski:I agree. $10 a GB for overages on a tiered plan is robbery.
So don't get service from them. Last I checked no one was holding any guns to anyone's head. Just in the form of increased ETF's. Well, only if you buy a subsidized phone. Which was... uh... your choice, right? |
|
| JohnInSJ |
to trparky
said by trparky:And in the form of no one else providing service of the same kind with the same coverage areas. Who else do you have? Verizon?
So, wait, AT&T is the better provider? Or no worse than other providers? I thought AT&T was evil, and all other providers had excellent service with no caps. |
|
ptrowskiGot Helix?
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Woodstock, CT |
to JohnInSJ
said by JohnInSJ:Well, only if you buy a subsidized phone. Which was... uh... your choice, right?
Why yes it is. |
|
| ptrowski |
to JohnInSJ
said by JohnInSJ:said by trparky:And in the form of no one else providing service of the same kind with the same coverage areas. Who else do you have? Verizon?
So, wait, AT&T is the better provider? Or no worse than other providers? I thought AT&T was evil, and all other providers had excellent service with no caps. Was that ever stated? |
|
JohnInSJ
Premium Member
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA |
to ptrowski
said by ptrowski:said by JohnInSJ:Well, only if you buy a subsidized phone. Which was... uh... your choice, right?
Why yes it is. So we're still at the point where no one is robbing you - you choose to buy service from a for-profit company. And they act like a for profit company. Which you don't like. Or, to keep it on topic... AT&T Customers surprised by AT&T acting like a for-profit company, and by 'surprised' they mean they ignored numerous notifications of the policy change, going back as far as October of last year. Now they are stunned. This, to me, seems incredibly amazing - that anyone could be 'surprised' after all the coverage, the notice in their bill, and then the warning the month before... |
|
|
| JohnInSJ |
to ptrowski
said by ptrowski:said by JohnInSJ:said by trparky:And in the form of no one else providing service of the same kind with the same coverage areas. Who else do you have? Verizon?
So, wait, AT&T is the better provider? Or no worse than other providers? I thought AT&T was evil, and all other providers had excellent service with no caps. Was that ever stated? By the other poster? I don't know - ask him. That's what I was doing. |
|
MIABye
Premium Member
join:2001-10-28
united state |
to JohnInSJ
said by JohnInSJ:and all other providers had excellent service with no caps.
Sprint is the only one left that fits that description, and I will be voting with my wallet when I switch to Sprint. |
|
JohnInSJ
Premium Member
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA |
JohnInSJ
Premium Member
2012-Feb-19 11:15 pm
said by MIABye:said by JohnInSJ:and all other providers had excellent service with no caps.
Sprint is the only one left that fits that description, and I will be voting with my wallet when I switch to Sprint. Enjoy... Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Make sure you have coverage where you are. If you have coverage, it's not bad. If you don't it's not good. Kinda like T-Mobile. |
|
ptrowskiGot Helix?
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Woodstock, CT |
to JohnInSJ
said by JohnInSJ:said by ptrowski:said by JohnInSJ:Well, only if you buy a subsidized phone. Which was... uh... your choice, right?
Why yes it is. So we're still at the point where no one is robbing you - you choose to buy service from a for-profit company. And they act like a for profit company. Which you don't like. Or, to keep it on topic... AT&T Customers surprised by AT&T acting like a for-profit company, and by 'surprised' they mean they ignored numerous notifications of the policy change, going back as far as October of last year. Now they are stunned. This, to me, seems incredibly amazing - that anyone could be 'surprised' after all the coverage, the notice in their bill, and then the warning the month before... When it can be triggered for as little as 1.6 GB of usage I say they have every right to be surprised. |
|
trparky
Premium Member
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH ·AT&T U-Verse
|
trparky
Premium Member
2012-Feb-20 5:09 pm
I still like the idea that Verizon Wireless has. They only throttle you if you have gone over 2 GBs of data usage and the tower you're on is saturated. As soon as you move off of that saturated tower and on another tower that's not saturated, you go back to normal un-throttled speeds. Verizon's throttling policy isn't a blanket throttling policy, it only effects you if you're on a saturated tower which makes a lot more sense if you think about it. |
|
ptrowskiGot Helix?
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Woodstock, CT |
ptrowski
Premium Member
2012-Feb-20 5:26 pm
said by trparky:I still like the idea that Verizon Wireless has. They only throttle you if you have gone over 2 GBs of data usage and the tower you're on is saturated. As soon as you move off of that saturated tower and on another tower that's not saturated, you go back to normal un-throttled speeds. Verizon's throttling policy isn't a blanket throttling policy, it only effects you if you're on a saturated tower which makes a lot more sense if you think about it.
As do I. They don't nail you for the remainder of your billing period. |
|
JohnInSJ
Premium Member
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, CA |
to ptrowski
said by ptrowski:When it can be triggered for as little as 1.6 GB of usage I say they have every right to be surprised.
See the math earlier that shows the average use less the top 5% of all users is between 200-300MB, using the Cisco data. AT&T does not report actual data use, but given their "low cost" data allotment was 200 and is now 300MB, that is most likely the MEDIAN data use. For a detailed description of the difference between average and median (hint, average is meaningless when the curve is biased to one end or the other, as it is in this case) see » en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MedianThen recall that the throttling happens at "top 5%" Rinse. Repeat. |
|
 IPPlanManHoly Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC |
to ptrowski
Exactly. |
|
·