FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ
1 recommendation |
to pnh102
Re: Nosaid by pnh102:Low caps make LTE a totally useless technology. It isn't useless if you avoid watching video online. You will be able to do things the rural users really NEED - like banking, shopping, software updates, research, etc that is nearly impossible with dial-up. Watching online movies & TV is not something everyone(or anyone NEEDS). |
|
3 recommendations |
Software updates are huge. I can check my bank info on my phone. Shopping is just as important TV and Movies online, in other words it's not. It's great technology being crippled in order to line wallets. Quit defending bull shit for once |
|
pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty Premium Member join:2002-05-02 Mount Airy, MD
1 recommendation |
to FFH5
said by FFH5:It isn't useless if you avoid watching video online. You will be able to do things the rural users really NEED - like banking, shopping, software updates, research, etc that is nearly impossible with dial-up. Watching online movies & TV is not something everyone(or anyone NEEDS). Software updates can easily max out any uselessly low-capped Internet connection. I would imagine that the same thing could be said about game downloads too. But this just begs my original point, what's the point in paying for a very expensive Internet connection? This is the same reasoning behind the lack of buy-in with regards to 3G or 4G connected tablet devices. |
|
|
FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ
1 recommendation |
FFH5
Premium Member
2012-Apr-2 10:15 am
said by pnh102:But this just begs my original point, what's the point in paying for a very expensive Internet connection? Because nothing else but satellite & dial-up is available. One is too slow for today's Internet & the other is even more expensive. |
|
|
OJsDad to tman852
Anon
2012-Apr-2 11:10 am
to tman852
I live in a rural area of NW Ohio, and cannot get DSL or Cable. I have an Alltel card, plugged into a Cradlepoint router. This allows me to work from home, it allows my 11 year to access her math book and do other research for school. |
|
1 recommendation |
to FFH5
people getting plans with low caps would have to customize their browsers to not even load video ads. a task which a lot of customers probably will neglect doing. i browse websites and constantly see flash videos playing, and sometimes, actual embedded videos that auto play. |
|
|
to OJsDad
I hope you're able to keep it as long as possible. I assume you're in an area that was acquired by VZW (as I am) rather than divested and dumped on AT&T since your Alltel card still works.
Hang onto it. I let go of my unlimited plan earlier this month after years of wrangling and a speed of 40Kb (on a good day). We went without internet for a month last year and it was incredibly stressful, trying to find a free wifi spot in town for our daughter to do her homework, process her college information...and then risk paying a bill online and hope you don't get your account hacked.
In this day and age, it's next to impossible for kids to do well in school without reliable internet access. |
|
|
to FFH5
ThrowDemsOut.. Why in the hell would you need LTE if your not going to watch video or utilize the bandwidth? Seriously, wtf do you need it for.. 3g can handle surfing, and moderate downloads.. LTE has been abused by the greedy's S.O.B's known as Verizon and ATT. I'm hoping sprint doesn't join, but everyone seems to hold hands when it comes to orgy's against the consumer.. |
|
|
to tman852
said by tman852:Software updates are huge. I can bring a fresh Windows 7 install to current with about 400-600MB of downloads. Keep in mind that those downloads include large updates (Service Packs) that only happen RARELY. Software updates in of themselves are not enough to render capped LTE "useless". In any case, if you view the service as "useless" nobody is forcing you to sign up for it, are they? |
|
jjeffeoryjjeffeory join:2002-12-04 Bloomington, IN |
to FFH5
I'd be careful with a family full of software updates... |
|
1 recommendation |
to pnh102
said by pnh102:said by FFH5:It isn't useless if you avoid watching video online. You will be able to do things the rural users really NEED - like banking, shopping, software updates, research, etc that is nearly impossible with dial-up. Watching online movies & TV is not something everyone(or anyone NEEDS). Software updates can easily max out any uselessly low-capped Internet connection. I would imagine that the same thing could be said about game downloads too. What software updates are YOU doing? They don't come anywhere near maxing out a multi-gigabyte cap. If you need to download new distros often, like .iso files of Windows or Linux, you don't want to be on a cell connection anyway. You can always get the DVDs mailed to you for a fee. The average "heavy user" on cell networks uses 2-3GB/month AT MOST. pnh102 had it exactly right. Don't watch hours of video, or trade torrents of video or warez, over an LTE connection, and you'll be fine. Don't run streaming radio 24x7 either. You'll be able to do everything else -- email, websites, online transactions, shopping, research, ... just fine. I'm not a gamer but I hear tell of gigabyte updates online. Don't do these! Get yourself a game console and buy some freakin' games. You are not entitled to uncapped Internet video, or multi-gigabyte game downloads, nor are you entitled to call these wireless offerings "worthless" if you can't. If you have to have your video, get satellite TV, order DVDs and play them, or go to the movie theater. If you have to have your games, buy a console. |
|
|
to Crookshanks
Factor in anti virus updates (MSE for example?), Office product updates, and numerous other software packages besides the install itself and it adds up. It's not totally useless, but it's certainly crippled. |
|
1 recommendation |
Office updates amount to no more more than a few hundred MB and they only have to be performed ONCE. Virus definition files are usually measured in dozens of MB; program updates may be larger but those are infrequent.
I set up computers for a living and I've never seen "updates" on a brand new computer amount to more than a couple hundred MB. Even if you toss in Office and a handful of other programs you aren't going to reach more than one or two GB. Unless someone is trying to run a computer repair shop off their capped LTE connection I'm not seeing the problem. Even at that you could download some of the major updates (every MSFT service pack has standalone installers) beforehand and reuse them over and over again. |
|
elray join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA |
to ShellMMG
said by ShellMMG:In this day and age, it's next to impossible for kids to do well in school without reliable internet access. Complete, utter nonsense. » www.nytimes.com/2011/10/ ··· nted=all |
|
cramer Premium Member join:2007-04-10 Raleigh, NC Westell 6100 Cisco PIX 501
|
to MyDogHsFleas
When you measure "heavy use" at smartphones, maybe. When you look at the usage for a household, 10GB is very restrictive. Software updates for even a few computers can eat way into that limit. (remember, there's more to it than just the updates. there's the catalogs of what to update, anti-virus definititions, etc.) Also, "windows update" is not the only source of application updates. [google apps are very aggressive at keeping themselves updated.]
Games... sure, Steam is an easy target. However, most consoles these days download entire game titles and have sizable additional online content (including patches, which may not be optional.) Plus, the console itself requires frequent updates -- refusing to connect to their respective networks if you don't update them, and newer games may require the system updates. Not to forget, online multiplayer games. |
|
|
said by cramer:When you look at the usage for a household, 10GB is very restrictive. Software updates for even a few computers can eat way into that limit. (remember, there's more to it than just the updates. there's the catalogs of what to update, anti-virus definititions, etc.) Also, "windows update" is not the only source of application updates. [google apps are very aggressive at keeping themselves updated.] Based on what? How are you coming to the conclusion that 10GB is "restrictive" for more than a small percentage of the households? I will tell you that only around 10% of my customers (I run a small ISP, without caps, and most customers are on connections around 1 meg) go over 10 gigs in a month. That means that 90% use less than 10 gigs in a month. 95% use less than 20 gigs, and 98% use less than 100 gigs. |
|
jjeffeoryjjeffeory join:2002-12-04 Bloomington, IN |
to Crookshanks
What about for a family of 4 PCs, an Xbox, and several smart phone updates? Ooooops, we're over the cap this month kids! |
|
The Limit Premium Member join:2007-09-25 Denver, CO |
to FFH5
And since when did watching videos == movies and TV? Research falls under documentaries, movies etc. I don't think your judgement on what everyone "needs", is a fair judgement.
We don't need the Internet. We could do completely without. That's a straw man argument and you know it. That's quite a bit of bandwidth for just mundane tasks. Why not just cap all users at a certain level of bandwidth instead of giving users 5-12 megabits down, with stupid caps? |
|
88615298 (banned) join:2004-07-28 West Tenness |
to FFH5
said by FFH5:said by pnh102:Low caps make LTE a totally useless technology. It isn't useless if you avoid watching video online. You will be able to do things the rural users really NEED - like banking, shopping, software updates, research, etc that is nearly impossible with dial-up. Watching online movies & TV is not something everyone(or anyone NEEDS). you can bank, pay bills, check you e-mail, weather, sports scores etc etc from a smartphone. So basically yes $80 for 10 GB is useless for a PC. And $10 per GB overage is outrageous no matter how you slice it. when at&t and Verizon can show me that it even costs 1/10th that to provide an extra GB of data then I might see a need for such overages. Until then what they are charging for overage should be criminal. |
|
88615298 |
to The Limit
said by The Limit:We don't need the Internet. We could do completely without. That's a straw man argument and you know it. That's quite a bit of bandwidth for just mundane tasks. Why not just cap all users at a certain level of bandwidth instead of giving users 5-12 megabits down, with stupid caps? Well technically you don't need electricity or indoor plumbing or a car. We have Amish people in our area that have been living that way for 200 years. |
|
The Limit Premium Member join:2007-09-25 Denver, CO |
That's my point. "Don't need this" garbage needs to go. We don't need anything short of food, water, and shelter. Why is it that one person has define the "needs" of all? Some people make their livelihood on the net, and that's no one's business to judge who needs what. The people should decide for themselves, the problem is that we have allowed companies to make those decisions, for whatever reason, and now we are in the doodoo. |
|
|
to ShellMMG
Well, *I* was "dumped" on AT&T. Sure my *ALLTEL* card doesn't still work. I now have an HSPA+ card, on the same Alltel plan ($36/month unlimited), with speeds ranging from 2-6mbps. Sometimes a bit higher even. And with coverage far, far better than what Alltel ever had since AT&T has aggressively expanded the network in my area (western Montana).
Sounds like your experience with transition from Alltel sucked, and yet you still use words that imply "at least I didn't end up on AT&T". Why is this attitude so prevalent? AT&T's simply poured money into the Alltel divested markets, and greatly enhanced speeds, reliability, and coverage (though it was kinda bad at launch since there was no roaming and some capacity issues, that was all quickly resolved, and now they cover so many places in the state that have never seen a cell signal before).
Whereas Verizon basically integrated the Alltel gear, removed some redundancies (for some people this is better, some worse), and did not much else.
Why are you glad you ended up on Verizon? |
|
|
to elray
Uh no that's a Waldorf school. That's not a typical school. I gather you aren't familiar with their philosophy on teaching, children, and life. It is very relaxed, back to basics and back to nature, one might say hippy dippy style of teaching. They purposefully do not want technology in their schools. |
|
|
to meowmeow
AT&T hasn't deployed 3G in my area. We still get their EDGE network...and the signal is weak. In fact, the entire county didn't get 3G from AT&T until LAST YEAR. The had the gall to open a shiny new store in the mall selling smartphones people couldn't even use on 3G. |
|
|
OJsDad to ShellMMG
Anon
2012-Apr-3 9:24 pm
to ShellMMG
No, we're still on Alltell. Did not get switched to anyone. |
|
rawgerzThe hell was that? Premium Member join:2004-10-03 Grove City, PA |
to pnh102
It's interesting seeing your sig then reading your post. Shoring up wireless infrastructure to handle multiple users means adding towers and/or increasing backhauls. While wired, these days especially, is more along the lines of changing a card in a box.
I think you might be living in the 05 mindset still. Now everyone is using netflix, xbox, ect. and things are holding up. Cable providers still add HD channels to their lineups via aging copper. |
|
|
to ShellMMG
At first I thought you said entire country, LOL, it's amazing the difference an "r" makes . See, to me it appears you'd have been much better off if your Alltel account HAD ended up on AT&T. All of the Alltel coverage was converted to 3G+ (HSPA+, though not IP backhaul in most areas yet), and AT&T has been putting a lot of money into expansion in the former Alltel areas. So, I still don't really understand how your experience with AT&T as it is means that you're glad Verizon got Alltel in your area? AT&T probably would have been a much better experience, at least after a bit. When AT&T first took over Alltel, there were some major issues here. But Verizon (ex-Alltel) customers, like yourself, had very similar issues at first - and in many cases they're still ongoing. What's ironic in that, is Verizon had a much simpler transition. Oddly enough, Atlantic Tele-Network ("new Alltel") and Element Mobile customers have had the most problems of all - and they had almost no work to do as they were still a completely independent CDMA provider. Splitting one network into four parts (and converting AT&T's part to UMTS while also keeping CDMA up) wasn't an easy task. But, of the providers who got parts of Alltel, only AT&T has - as of yet - invested into network upgrades and massive expansions in former Alltel territory. |
|