Amazon, AT&T Limit 3G Browsing Via Kindle Browsing Via Older Models Now Capped at 50 MB Per Month Tuesday Jul 24 2012 18:49 EDT Several users have written in to note that Amazon has started imposing a cap on the amount of data users can consume while browsing using some Kindle models. If you recall, the Kindle initially launched with an experimental browser and unlimited 3G connectivity provided by Sprint. AT&T eventually took over that contract, and newer versions of the Kindle had increasingly locked down content availability options, with browsing on the Kindle Touch disabled entirely. Kindlle users over at the MobilleRead forums note they're now receiving warning messages warning them about data consumption and alerting them that they'll soon be unable to browse the Internet using 3G: quote:
I was using the browser when it popped up a message to say that I'd hit my 50 MB monthly limit of 3G Web access on my Kindle 3G. When I clicked the 'OK' button (which was my only choice, really), I got a second message saying that I'd have 24 hours of grace to continue to use 3G for Web browsing, but that after that I could use 3G only for visiting Amazon.com, Wikipedia, and the Kindle Store. Otherwise I will be obligated to use Wi-Fi.
The blockade reduces traffic on the AT&T network, and it helps Amazon nudge users to more expensive tablets should users want full browsing options -- so it's hard to know whether AT&T or Amazon pushed harder for this change. Some users had also figured out how to hack the Kindle and turn it into a mobile hotspot on AT&T and Amazon's dime, which could have also motivated the decision. |
 | |
InterestingWith the exception of those who wish to subject themselves to the horror of attempting to browse a website on an e-ink device, and those who have been (ab)using their Kindle's (and violating the EULA and TOS) for effectively free 3g tethering, I can't imagine who this might negatively affect.
That said, while I think 50MB is somewhat laughable, It was a service created with the intention of allowing users to download e-books. I'm guessing the e-ink compatible ones don't really go that high in size (maybe one megabyte max?). I'm also guessing that this cap only affects general browsing (as it says it doesn't affect the amazon website, wikipedia, or the kindle store), and doesn't limit the amount a user is able to download on a 3G connection.
So, considering the application, I'm oddly okay with this. | |
|  90115534Someone is sabotaging me.Finding out who
Premium Member
join:2001-06-03
Kenner, LA |
90115534
Premium Member
2012-Jul-24 7:23 pm
GoodGood there is no free lunch | |
|  | | |
Re: GoodNot free at all, it's supposed to be paid for by the stuff I buy on Amazon while using it. I'm a little ticked Amazon changed the rules of the game, but not surprised given the Kindle Touch has never allowed you to use the 3G for anything except Wikipedia and buying Amazon content... | |
|
| |
hahIt was a matter of time when someone would abuse it. | |
|  FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5 |
FFH5
Premium Member
2012-Jul-24 7:28 pm
Hackers killing off a nice feature - surprised??I owned an old Kindle and the experimental browser was so bad that reaching a 50MB cap would have been painful to do. But if people hacked it so that a laptop or smartphone browser could get 3G access, then that would make it much easier to use frequently. Amazon always had that 50MB cap, but if hackers were using it for large amounts of data transfer, then I can see why Amazon is capping and also getting rid of it. Their deal with Sprint & then AT&T makes them pay based on how much data is being used. Hackers would make those deals very unprofitable for Amazon to maintain 3G access without charging the Kindle users for the data used. | |
| |  r81984Fair and Balanced
Premium Member
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX ·AT&T U-Verse
|
r81984
Premium Member
2012-Jul-25 12:37 am
Re: Hackers killing off a nice feature - surprised??Charging by how much data you use makes no sense.
If they actually charged by data used then internet would cost pennies a month.
What they do is charge you a usage fee that is 1000s of times more than what your usage actually costs.
Because the way the costs are, internet should always be a per connection fee not a usage fee. It should always be unlimited. | |
| | |  michieruTrump is a terrorist
Premium Member
join:2009-07-25
Miami, FL |
michieru
Premium Member
2012-Jul-25 8:56 am
Re: Hackers killing off a nice feature - surprised??Although it makes no sense it is a for profit company so at the end of the day they should be allowed to charge you what ever they see fit. We are not forced to purchase any products (unlike healthcare) so let people speak with their wallets. | |
| | | | r81984Fair and Balanced
Premium Member
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX |
r81984
Premium Member
2012-Jul-25 10:53 pm
Re: Hackers killing off a nice feature - surprised??Broadband ISPs have been built off government subsidies.
In most places they are a monopoly or at most a duopoly.
The actively block competition into their market.
They dont get a right to take advantage and charge whatever they want. | |
| | | | | michieruTrump is a terrorist
Premium Member
join:2009-07-25
Miami, FL |
michieru
Premium Member
2012-Jul-26 2:14 pm
Re: Hackers killing off a nice feature - surprised??"Broadband ISPs have been built off government subsidies."
There is your problem. | |
|
| |
Hmmm...There goes one of my main uses for my Kindle, free international web browsing with no roaming charges... Or not, 50MB still is good to quickly get gmail when you land at an airport in a new country before you get a local SIM and the like... and given HOW PAINFUL it is to use, I doubt it'll ever get used for more.
Also, it seems unfair of Karl (who we well know hates AT&T) to pin this one at all on AT&T, Amazon is an MVNO, they decide what they'll pay for. AT&T has no involvement in that pricing decision at all. Unless they raised the rate they charge Amazon, forcing Amazon's hand on such a cap. | |
| |  intellerSociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK |
Re: Hmmm...no, ATT has been raising its wholesale rates against MVNOs so they are forced to do this. wholesale rates should be regulated, otherwise ATT will be a monopolistic kingmaker among the MVNOs. | |
| | |  MizzatWill post for thumbs
Premium Member
join:2003-05-03
Atlanta, GA
kudos:1 |
Mizzat
Premium Member
2012-Jul-25 11:52 am
Re: Hmmm...Really? You have a source for this? Amazon isn't an MVNO, either. | |
| | | | | |
Re: Hmmm...How the heck is Amazon not an MVNO by your logic? | |
| | | | | MizzatWill post for thumbs
Premium Member
join:2003-05-03
Atlanta, GA
kudos:1 |
Mizzat
Premium Member
2012-Jul-31 8:46 pm
Re: Hmmm...said by meowmeow:How the heck is Amazon not an MVNO by your logic?
MVNOs sell mobile service as their business. Amazon sells devices. Inside the carrier, they are two separate things, although similar. Amazon is an M2M operator. | |
| | | | | | | |
Re: Hmmm...Hmmm, I dunno what AT&T classifies them as internally, you may well be right, but to the user, they're functioning as an MVNO. They're selling AT&T service on the Kindle. M2M in my eyes is more like, say, a device to track a truck driver, or an alarm system - things with no user interaction. Not a device you use to browse the web and buy content on. But yes, I could see AT&T etc classifying it as M2M use, which is probably how Amazon can afford to offer it. | |
|
| |
|
How about .. |
·
