dslreports logo
 story category
AT&T Confirms They'll Throttle Starting October 1
Again Insists T-Mobile Merger Necessary to Fix Spectrum Issues
AT&T has confirmed rumors from last week that the company would be throttling the heaviest mobile wireless users starting October 1. "Starting October 1, smartphone customers with unlimited data plans may experience reduced speeds once their usage in a billing cycle reaches the level that puts them among the top 5 percent of heaviest data users," the company says in a statement. "These customers can still use unlimited data and their speeds will be restored with the start of the next billing cycle." AT&T insists that these impacted heavy users on average consume twelve times more data than the average of all other smartphone data customers. The company also states that impacted users will receive multiple notices informing them to the changes made to their wireless connection, as well as a grace period -- though that period is not defined by AT&T. AT&T uses the release to play up their supposed capacity constraints (despite the fact Verizon has less spectrum and says they face no such issues), insisting that only the T-Mobile merger can fix the problem.
view:
topics flat nest 
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx

Member

Verizon throttles too

Verizon has said that they throttle their heaviest users on their EvDO network. I'll bet AT&T's throttling is going to affect a lot more people though.

iLive4Fusion
Premium Member
join:2006-07-13

iLive4Fusion

Premium Member

Re: Verizon throttles too

said by iansltx:

Verizon has said that they throttle their heaviest users on their EvDO network. I'll bet AT&T's throttling is going to affect a lot more people though.

They rarely do, if ever. I myself have used over 10GB with no effects whatsoever. Every carrier has throttling terms in their contract, doesn't mean they actively do it though. Even Sprint has it that they can throttle, but they don't.

AT&T will, and so does T-Mobile.

Veloslave
Geek For God
Premium Member
join:2003-07-11
Martinez, CA

Veloslave

Premium Member

Re: Verizon throttles too

Bringing up Verizon in a conversation about ATT is just wrong.

One is a near monopoly trying to get bigger that doesn't give a $hit about those pesky PITA customers.

The other is a Telecommunications company... very big but with EXCELLENT customer care (and retention.) Not without faults... but a company I am happy to do business with.

Unfortunately... I am required do business with both and IMHO... they do NOT compare.

DSLR from now on should just say

"8/1/2011, ATT's lips are moving again"

Then we will all know that higher prices and lower services are ahead so we can just bend over and skip the details.

ATT is so bad they make Comcast look good. I have taken the time to write to many members of congress to oppose the merger... now I just pray (against it)

nothing00
join:2001-06-10
Centereach, NY

nothing00

Member

There's ALWAYS a top 5% though!

Eventually the only way to avoid being throttled is to pay for a service and not be able to use it. There is ALWAYS a top 5% of users!

iLive4Fusion
Premium Member
join:2006-07-13

iLive4Fusion

Premium Member

Cop out much?

This furthers AT&Ts network is crap and they CAN'T provide quality service. They are little whiny b*^%%^%, they remind me of little kids.

Hey, here is an idea AT&Trash, Why don't you actually build your network out and invest something into it, and why don't you eliminate those PATHETIC EDGE only areas you still have masses of? Huh? Before moving into FauxG, try getting rid of 2G. SLOBS

fifty nine
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ

fifty nine

Member

Re: Cop out much?

Are you willing to pay more to fund network upgrades?

iLive4Fusion
Premium Member
join:2006-07-13

iLive4Fusion

Premium Member

Re: Cop out much?

said by fifty nine:

Are you willing to pay more to fund network upgrades?

No, we already have been paying too much, it shows if you read their quarterly financial report. Its funny how "other" providers seem to already be ahead of AT&T (LTE *cough* cough*) with an almost all 3G network to boot, while AT&T is busy trying to get people to believe they have 4G.

NOCTech75
Premium Member
join:2009-06-29
Marietta, GA

NOCTech75 to fifty nine

Premium Member

to fifty nine
said by fifty nine:

Are you willing to pay more to fund network upgrades?

AT&T is about to spend 39 billion, they don't need customers to pay more for network upgrades.

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium Member
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

dvd536 to fifty nine

Premium Member

to fifty nine
said by fifty nine:

Are you willing to pay more to fund network upgrades?

upgrades? don't you mean making the street happy and giving CxOs larger yachts!
daniel717
join:2003-12-19
Columbus, MS

daniel717 to fifty nine

Member

to fifty nine
How much more do you think we should pay? I already pay $180-190 too much for wireless service now. Its the same old thing as the BellSouth/Cingular merger cheat the customers with bad service. I remember talking to a BellSouth tech working on the DSL box on my property and he was telling me AT&T had told BellSouth they had to have 1 billion in cash reserves for the merger to go through and was complaining about the truck they made him drive (paint was pealing off in large areas and old) he also said they stopped spending money on network maintenance and upgrades to save money. We still have the old Cingular edge 2g networks from that merger, AT&T is still 80% 2g across the country, that never got upgraded but they loads of cash to buy other companies instead of improving service. AT&T has lots of money for buying sprees but not thinking to ever give customers value like 4G LTE across the country they started calling 3G in major cities with fiber backhual, usually it's T-1 lines 1.5 up and down backhaul, 4G when will they phase out the old 2G edge networks? Maybe when the buy Verizon and Sprint. Don't even get me started on how bad the dsl network got after the merger didn't say we would all have fiber to the home if we let that deal get approved maybe if we wished hard enough maybe they will upgrade the dsl networks with fiber!

Selenia
Gentoo Convert
Premium Member
join:2006-09-22
Fort Smith, AR

Selenia

Premium Member

Re: Cop out much?

AT&T is mostly 3G here. The only places I see 2G is in the mountains where VZW has large coverage gaps. VZW is almost all 3G, even in those mountains. But try actually connecting to the tower. Having an AT&T phone and VZW mifi with SIP has given me near 100% coverage, though. I originally bought the mifi for a Linux laptop(3/4G cards can still be a PITA in Linux), but ended up using it on my phone some. VZW=Most 3G areas AT&T=faster 3G in most areas within hours of here, better coverage as there is EDGE in many spots that have no usable signal from VZW. Though my phone does have HSUPA, which speeds up EDGE, too. I usually get 256-512k on EDGE.
tcope
Premium Member
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT

tcope to fifty nine

Premium Member

to fifty nine
No.. I think AT&T should use the profits they are already being paid to support what they offer. Call me funny but I think this is how a business should work.

Doctor Olds
I Need A Remedy For What's Ailing Me.
Premium Member
join:2001-04-19
1970 442 W30

Doctor Olds to fifty nine

Premium Member

to fifty nine
said by fifty nine:

Are you willing to pay more to fund network upgrades?

Why? So they can just give it to the CEO in a balloon package or pay it out to investors as they sure are not re-investing it in their own network to future proof it. Are you willing to admit that they are screwing the US customer base and that they already get more than enough money since they have no reason to compete.
bmialone
Premium Member
join:2009-08-15
Anchorage, AK

bmialone to fifty nine

Premium Member

to fifty nine


said by fifty nine:

"Are you willing to pay more to fund network upgrades?"
______________________________________________

Hogwash.

These companies do business in Europe where they are forced to charge less and provide decent service because they aren't allowed to gouge consumers like our government allows them to gouge us, yet they make very good profits and manage to deliver. It is just as possible to upgrade and maintain their systems here (to actually provide what they are advertising when we sign up) with the even Larger profits they are making off of us. They just don't because they know they don't have to.

We aren't going to give up our cell phones, internet, and WiFi no matter how frustrated or angry we are and they know it. Just more profit for the stockholders and humongous salaries and bonuses for top management. As the larger companies keep buying up the smaller or weaker, there is less choice, thus they Really don't have to deliver. Who are we going to turn to for better?

Now that we've evolved into an anti-government/anti-regulation populace for the most part, government isn't gong to do squat about it. Instead, government continues to ignore our own anti-monopoly laws. Except for a very few lone voices among them (like two or three), our self-serving, ineffectual legislators give them free merging and buy up passes. So much for competition.

EvelKub
Kitty is crazy
Premium Member
join:2002-03-17
Mesa, AZ

EvelKub to iLive4Fusion

Premium Member

to iLive4Fusion
They still sell 2G phones in stores... I don't get it.

ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Woodstock, CT

ptrowski

Premium Member

The last paragraph made me laugh...

So they are outright admitting their network stinks? Also I wonder how many people are still on the unlimited plan....

"But even as we pursue this additional measure, it will not solve our spectrum shortage and network capacity issues.  Nothing short of completing the T-Mobile merger will provide additional spectrum capacity to address these near term challenges."

atuarre
Here come the drums
Premium Member
join:2004-02-14
EC/SETX SWLA

atuarre

Premium Member

Re: The last paragraph made me laugh...

said by ptrowski:

So they are outright admitting their network stinks? Also I wonder how many people are still on the unlimited plan....

"But even as we pursue this additional measure, it will not solve our spectrum shortage and network capacity issues.  Nothing short of completing the T-Mobile merger will provide additional spectrum capacity to address these near term challenges."

They mean, they want more spectrum, and probably have spectrum for 4G already available, but want to have their spectrum and get some more also to sit on.

Veloslave
Geek For God
Premium Member
join:2003-07-11
Martinez, CA

1 recommendation

Veloslave to ptrowski

Premium Member

to ptrowski
I mean c'mon... how do you expect them to afford upgrades with all this nasty competition in the market?

(translation) Give us a near monopoly and then we will be able to afford upgrades... of course you will have no where else to go so... screw the upgrades, it's time for corporate bonuses! Gotta pat ourselves on the back for pulling the wool over BIG TIME!

Selenia
Gentoo Convert
Premium Member
join:2006-09-22
Fort Smith, AR

Selenia

Premium Member

AT&T already throttles here

Try pushing around heavy bandwidth for about 5 minutes and watch your speed drop from 3-6 megabits to less than 0.5(if you are lucky). Only happens when you actually use your connection for heavy apps like Youtube HD. That being said, they don't throttle in some of the surrounding counties, using the same phone. I have reproduced this result very reliably. Maybe this is now going nationwide. Upstream is not throttled. I can still get 1.2-1.5 megabits up while this is happening. With all this said about AT&T and knowing about Verizon's throttling, Verizon's throttling has never really affected me. Maybe VZ's threshold is above my typical usage.
willzzz
join:2007-05-23
NY

willzzz

Member

Re: AT&T already throttles here

It's dynamic UP AND DOWN depending on people around you using their mobile devices on the same network/cell site/BTS/nodeB/etc.

Wireless technology is INHERENTLY SHARED.

Surrounding counties probably have LESS POPULATION DENSITY and loading factor.

Go to a rural area upgraded with HSPA+ 21 and see how one can get 11Mbps down. Or test @ 3am.

The reason wired doesn't is because wired has enough capacity on the last mile to take all the demand (and upgrades /w IP-DSLAM, DOCSIS 3.0+, FTTH/GPON, etc/.)

Selenia
Gentoo Convert
Premium Member
join:2006-09-22
Fort Smith, AR

Selenia

Premium Member

Re: AT&T already throttles here

It is consistently when I use it heavily, then go back to normal use. I never have issues until a time when I did some heavier use. Rebooting the phone does no good, only time does. If I go to heavy use again, same thing. This does not happen when I travel, showing it's area-specific. They are using some traffic shaping measures, I am sure. I have observed this behavior on a few past ISPs for home, if I got throttled. Remember, I am from Canada.

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium Member
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

dvd536

Premium Member

Spectrum shortage?

What about all that spectrum you bought and are squatting on?
gorehound
join:2009-06-19
Portland, ME

gorehound

Member

Re: Spectrum shortage?

ATT are a bunch of asses.To bad their merger will go through so they can screw all of the cusotmers on T-Mobile when they get owned by ATT (Ass To Tits).

siouxmoux2
@sbcglobal.net

siouxmoux2

Anon

Re: Spectrum shortage?

ATT just wants to be The Worst Wireless Carrier USA let alone the Whole World

treich
join:2006-12-12

treich

Member

You know something

You know something I am getting sick and tired of everybody bitching and complaining that they want more bandwidth but not willing to pay for higher bandwidth. Just think these companys have to pay more and more money for equipment to handle the higher bandwidth. Yes it does cost alots of money for newer and faster technology to handle Larger Bandwidth and Users.

Also just think if they upgrade the equipment and bandwidth pipe how do you think they are going to get there ROI back? I dont care how much they have they would have to get it back some how that means they would charge more for higher bandwidth.

I dont blame these mobile carriers for throttling it just going to show if you want more bandwidth your just going to pay more for higher bandwidth end of story.
Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

1 recommendation

Skippy25

Member

Re: You know something

You know something I am getting sick and tired of all these people that have no clue about an argument and yet they spout off their nonsense as though they do. Let's try some education:

They have $39 billion to spend on T-Moble, yet they don't have money to invest in their backhaul? They made $3.6 billion this previous quarter, yet they don't have money to invest in their backhaul? They have more spectrum than Verizon and yet they are in a spectrum crunch and can't survive without T-Mobile?

All of that without them having to charge additional rates. But even then, they did just implement caps with overages so they can now have access to another revenue stream. So how is it they are giving up "all" their bandwidth and not making vast amounts of cash on it?
sparc
join:2006-05-06

sparc

Member

Re: You know something

They have $39 billion to spend on T-mobile because it's an enormous value to them. If T-mobile had to be replicated by AT&T, it would cost far far far more than $39 billion to do that. When the sale was first announced, there were many that indicated there could be somewhere near $40 billion in cost savings alone. i.e. AT&T basically gets T-mobile for free.

Plus they get all that done immediately without waiting years for a real build out.

If you were a business executive in AT&T, there's little alternative but buying T-mobile. Keeps the investors happy, your fat compensation keeps rolling in, compatible technologies, and the customers have little choice with only two other primary competitors.

iLive4Fusion
Premium Member
join:2006-07-13

iLive4Fusion

Premium Member

Re: You know something

said by sparc:

They have $39 billion to spend on T-mobile because it's an enormous value to them. If T-mobile had to be replicated by AT&T, it would cost far far far more than $39 billion to do that. When the sale was first announced, there were many that indicated there could be somewhere near $40 billion in cost savings alone. i.e. AT&T basically gets T-mobile for free.

Plus they get all that done immediately without waiting years for a real build out.

If you were a business executive in AT&T, there's little alternative but buying T-mobile. Keeps the investors happy, your fat compensation keeps rolling in, compatible technologies, and the customers have little choice with only two other primary competitors.

They could just buy Spectrum from one of the spectrum hoarding company. All they are going to do is turn around and shut down T-Mobiles HSPA+ infrastructure and migrate everyone over ASAP. They claim they are doing it for the AWS spectrum. But thats pathetic, its not like they are going to build out rural areas with AWS spectrum anyways. 700Mhz is needed, they are already behind Verizon and this isn't going to help.

tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium Member
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO

tiger72

Premium Member

Re: You know something

said by iLive4Fusion:

They could just buy Spectrum from one of the spectrum hoarding company.

Who would that be? Who would they buy from, and which spectrum is available?

All they are going to do is turn around and shut down T-Mobiles HSPA+ infrastructure and migrate everyone over ASAP.

Indeed they are.

They claim they are doing it for the AWS spectrum. But thats pathetic, its not like they are going to build out rural areas with AWS spectrum anyways. 700Mhz is needed, they are already behind Verizon and this isn't going to help.

Haha, right. Well, tell that to ATT. You can build out a good sized network with AWS. They'll use their 700mhz spectrum in some areas, but they have more AWS spectrum than 700 spectrum already. With T-Mobile they'll have even more in many markets, plus they'll have nationwide spectrum.

I'm always disappointed when I see people who equate poor network engineering (Clear/ATT), or business decisions (TMO/ATT/Sprint) with spectrum limitations.

Whatever the spectrum, so long as the network is properly engineered (with proper cell sizes, microcells/picocell deployments, and correct carrier-usage it doesn't matter what spectrum is used - all spectrum can be used for rural or urban deployments.

hoch51
@sunflowertelco.com

hoch51

Anon

Re: You know something

buying t-mobile will not accomplish any rural return for at&t. T-mobile is city oriented with contracts with rural carriers to suplement their lines. In eastern Colorado, we use a Cross-tie with Viaero for service. Their network is shakey at times and service goes from excelent to marginal in a heartbeat. spectrum has less to do with it than poor distribution oif towers and maintenance on that equipment. They just do not want anyone else getting their hands on the system as it will impact their size ratio to Sprint and Verizon. Both companies need t- mobile also. Their signal structure sucks out here. The viaero contract and many others like it are the pursued portions for these giants in communications.

tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium Member
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO

tiger72

Premium Member

Re: You know something

said by hoch51 :

buying t-mobile will not accomplish any rural return for at&t. T-mobile is city oriented with contracts with rural carriers to suplement their lines. In eastern Colorado, we use a Cross-tie with Viaero for service. Their network is shakey at times and service goes from excelent to marginal in a heartbeat. spectrum has less to do with it than poor distribution oif towers and maintenance on that equipment. They just do not want anyone else getting their hands on the system as it will impact their size ratio to Sprint and Verizon. Both companies need t- mobile also. Their signal structure sucks out here. The viaero contract and many others like it are the pursued portions for these giants in communications.

on an interesting note, I *just* went on another drive from St Louis to Denver and experienced precisely what you were referring to with Viaero. "Edge" data all the way, but not very reliable. Marginally faster than TMO's GPRS til Hayes, KS.

On a more interesting note, however, I of course have T-Mobile (and Sprint, but I didn't have it with me during that trip), while the other 2 people with me had an ATT iPhone and a Verizon iPhone. Logic would dictate that the cheap guy with T-Mobile would have the worst service, followed by the ATT customer, then the Verizon one. Especially in the Rocky Mountains, right?

Totally wrong.

The friend with the Verizon iPhone had to consistently switch to wifi for internet access, since cellular data continuously failed. The ATT iPhone fared far better, however it surprisingly lost data entirely while my little ol T-Mobile phone had 4 bars of fast HSPA+ available in multiple places south east of Estes Park, as well as north of Grand Lake into RMNP. In fact, a running theme for the trip was me making fun of their iPhones for not being able to access data, and them using my GalaxyS on T-Mobile to check their facebook pages, etc.

Go figure.

T-Mobile: Faster. More Bars. No dropped data.

And cheaper.

RiseAbove
Premium Member
join:2004-01-30

RiseAbove to treich

Premium Member

to treich
Do you know anything about high end optical switches or routers? Let me clue you in on them. I work for a company that does about 1billion dollars or more in sales to AT&T and Verizon in terms of upgrading their backhaul and wireless network. We have thousands and thousands of patents on this technology and continually improve and revolutionize this product to the point that data transmission costs are becoming insanely cheap. Also to power that equipment is getting cheaper and cheaper.

This metered billing and data scarcity crap that providers are pulling now is an utter joke and just like when text messaging first came out nothing but a money grab. Their costs for data transmission are dropping year after year, no data scarcity exists nor does it need to be metered to the levels it is now.

So basically what I am saying is when these companies control 80% of the market it's ridiculous to set such rules. Both you and them can shove it if you think it's fair by any stretch.
Cobra11M
join:2010-12-23
Mineral Wells, TX

Cobra11M

Member

Re: You know something

said by RiseAbove:

Do you know anything about high end optical switches or routers? Let me clue you in on them. I work for a company that does about 1billion dollars or more in sales to AT&T and Verizon in terms of upgrading their backhaul and wireless network. We have thousands and thousands of patents on this technology and continually improve and revolutionize this product to the point that data transmission costs are becoming insanely cheap. Also to power that equipment is getting cheaper and cheaper.

This metered billing and data scarcity crap that providers are pulling now is an utter joke and just like when text messaging first came out nothing but a money grab. Their costs for data transmission are dropping year after year, no data scarcity exists nor does it need to be metered to the levels it is now.

So basically what I am saying is when these companies control 80% of the market it's ridiculous to set such rules. Both you and them can shove it if you think it's fair by any stretch.

you are right to, man, i mean what has AT&T done in the last week.. they now offer unlimited minutes on family plans AS LONG AS you have family txtin...........um id rather txt threw data then give these people my money

ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium Member
join:2005-03-14
Woodstock, CT

ptrowski to treich

Premium Member

to treich
Wow, spoken just like someone who is trying to get a WISP off the ground...

treich
join:2006-12-12

treich

Member

Ok please tell me why in rural spots the bandwidth cost so freaking high then?

because for 10x10 meg line from cable company is freaking 1600 dollars.

for a full 45meg DS3 connection to me would cost me 5-6k so dont tell me me the crap is getting cheaper because its not!!!!

•••
Cobra11M
join:2010-12-23
Mineral Wells, TX

Cobra11M to treich

Member

to treich
said by treich:

You know something I am getting sick and tired of everybody bitching and complaining that they want more bandwidth but not willing to pay for higher bandwidth. Just think these companys have to pay more and more money for equipment to handle the higher bandwidth. Yes it does cost alots of money for newer and faster technology to handle Larger Bandwidth and Users.

Also just think if they upgrade the equipment and bandwidth pipe how do you think they are going to get there ROI back? I dont care how much they have they would have to get it back some how that means they would charge more for higher bandwidth.

I dont blame these mobile carriers for throttling it just going to show if you want more bandwidth your just going to pay more for higher bandwidth end of story.

Look dude, yes i agree in some ways people r gonna have to pay its not free nor cheap but what AT&T is doing is takin us back to the days of Ma-Bell, now the FCC broke them up just for the reason that they where chargin whatever they wanted, and where a monopoly, idc really if they did get T-Mobile and i think everyone agrees BUT that leaves us with VERIZION AND AT&T thats it, sprint wont last on its own, this is my concern and so is millions more, AT&T has a history that goes all the way back for 30 years of doing this kind of crap, NO I WILL NOT GIVE THEM THE CHANCE, customers have gave them the chance for the last 30 years and im gettin quite fed up with giving them chances, but its alright cause soon ill be a SPRINT customer just because of this merger, yes im a AT&T customer, after they said they wanted to buy T-Mobile i lost all trust in AT&T. Sure T-mobile should have the right to sell, i understand completely that its owned by a german company and they should be able to get out if they so do wish, but that doesnt mean they should sell to the most worse company, oh and the spectrum idea is completly lies, sure AT&T may not be liein that they need the spectrum but like Verizons CEO said THEY AT&T did not effectively put the spectrum to use in fact its a big mistake how they r using it on the towers..., but of course they believe that its not their fault and instead the gov, so in that case the gov should make more just for AT&T, and no one else.

AT&T if this merger does happen good luck to them, throttleing?? ha thats funny, caps (oh ya they where the ones that wrote the FCC Net Nuetrality)

People are willing to pay but people are tired of gettin screwed over and over and over, wall street is the only thing that AT&T looks to (thats fine i have no problem with that) but saying that our customers love caps is a complete lie, people r willing to pay 15 just to have a smartphone not 25-30.., i pay 15 for data just cause i have wi-fi, AT&T believes that they can walk over who ever, but karma is a ____ and it will only bite them and the stock holders when its said and done

PS: THIS ISNT CANADA!!

little video for yall
»www.hulu.com/watch/4163/ ··· rnestine

treich
join:2006-12-12

treich

Member

@ iLive4Fusion there is really no such things as unlimited data plans with any mobile carrier its all capped at 5GB that is something they dont tell you about intill you get your lovely phone bill.

megarock
join:2001-06-28
Fenton, MO

megarock

Member

"Necessary to Fix Spectrum Issues"

Translation: There's still some spectrum that we're not squatting on and that could allow a possible competitor to enter the field so we will use millions of dollars to pay lobbyists and donate millions of dollars to the campaigns of Congressmen (and women) to make sure that we control as much spectrum as possible even though we are using way less than half of what we control.

Side note: There is also some spectrum currently being wasted on free OTA television broadcasts. We see no need for broadcast television and believe that it should be ended in favor of giving us that spectrum as well so we can squat on it too because that would give us more possible customers for our overpriced U-Verse TV service.

End result: Check the donor information of possible politicians in upcoming elections. If they are heavily lobbied by or receive donations from AT & T - DON'T VOTE FOR THEM. CONSIDER ANY CONNECTIONS TO AT & T THE PLAGUE.

That's how things get fixed. Make sure politicians know if you side with AT & T (or any big Telco) that their job won't exist come next term. Isn't it time we end Corporate America's influence on US policies?
Cobra11M
join:2010-12-23
Mineral Wells, TX

Cobra11M

Member

Re: "Necessary to Fix Spectrum Issues"

said by megarock:

Translation: There's still some spectrum that we're not squatting on and that could allow a possible competitor to enter the field so we will use millions of dollars to pay lobbyists and donate millions of dollars to the campaigns of Congressmen (and women) to make sure that we control as much spectrum as possible even though we are using way less than half of what we control.

Side note: There is also some spectrum currently being wasted on free OTA television broadcasts. We see no need for broadcast television and believe that it should be ended in favor of giving us that spectrum as well so we can squat on it too because that would give us more possible customers for our overpriced U-Verse TV service.

End result: Check the donor information of possible politicians in upcoming elections. If they are heavily lobbied by or receive donations from AT & T - DON'T VOTE FOR THEM. CONSIDER ANY CONNECTIONS TO AT & T THE PLAGUE.

That's how things get fixed. Make sure politicians know if you side with AT & T (or any big Telco) that their job won't exist come next term. Isn't it time we end Corporate America's influence on US policies?

so correct, id like to see them try to take FM, or even AM (which AM i dont think will ever make it that far) and try to get the govement to sell it to them...

o wait our goverment will do anything!!

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC

IPPlanMan to megarock

Member

to megarock

Re: "Necessary to Fix Spectrum Issues"

That end "comment" by AT&T has to be one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.

It was obviously written my some policy drone inside the Beltway bubble...

Robert
Premium Member
join:2001-08-25
Miami, FL

Robert

Premium Member

How about tethering?

Hell, if they are going to throttle us unlimited users, then they should be offering us free tethering.

Twaddle
@sbcglobal.net

Twaddle

Anon

Pathetic money grab

It boggles the mind that a VERY SMALL minority of users somehow overload the entire AT&T wireless system and because of that overload EVERY wireless of AT&T is held accountable. They marketed and advertised their Wireless unlimited plans as "Unlimited" to get people to sign up and now that they signed up they come back and say Oh BTW stupid customer, our unlimited plan isn't unlimited, you can only use a max 5 GB of bandwidth -after that we throttle you till you give up in disgust. Personally, I hope this redefining of "unlimited" backfires and all those Smartphone users say screw it and go back to a simple cell phone leaving AT&T (and others) with a mountain of bandwidth/capacity and no one wanting it.

•••••
flyingjoey
join:2005-11-07
Jersey City, NJ

flyingjoey

Member

AT&T... BIAAATCH PLEASE!

They don't need to throttle anyone, their service is already slow.
Cobra11M
join:2010-12-23
Mineral Wells, TX

Cobra11M

Member

Re: AT&T... BIAAATCH PLEASE!

said by flyingjoey:

They don't need to throttle anyone, their service is already slow.

no kiddin, i just got 3g here in town in feb, now all the sudden this last month or so its slow like edge....., eh at least theres choice.......O WAIT NO THERES NOT

WiFiMe
@sbc.com

WiFiMe

Anon

Simple Solution

These high data users are using bandwidth because there is no WiFi available to them. Simple solution would be to find out where they are located and provide them with a WiFi signal. Problems Solved!
daniel717
join:2003-12-19
Columbus, MS

daniel717

Member

Re: Simple Solution

Have you ever tried to use Wi-Fi at an AT&T/McDonalds restaurant? If it is working a lot if those hot spots are running slower than dial-up speeds try sharing that
davidhoffman
Premium Member
join:2009-11-19
Warner Robins, GA

davidhoffman to WiFiMe

Premium Member

to WiFiMe
Some problems with your plan. If in a business area you have to convince businesses to provide public WiFi. That assumes AT&T has enough DSL capacity to do so. If there is no DSL capacity then you are stuck with cellular. In residential areas AT&T would entrust public WiFi to whom? AT&T does not want municipal fiber or WiFi networks, so that avenue is not available. Thus, stuck with cellular. If every business and dwelling in the country had at least the 24Mbps Uverse that AT&T promised it would deploy in its wireline telephone areas, then you could use WiFi to offload cellular traffic. If AT&T would have deployed bonded DSL to get 48 Mbps then that would have helped provide WiFi access. You cannot provide WiFi if there is no significant wired service to support it.
axiomatic
join:2006-08-23
Tomball, TX

axiomatic

Member

Again...

I want to see proof of the congestion that is the supposed need for the throttling.

I have two college friends who work fairly high up in AT&T and when we all get together for beers they claim there is no real congestion except for peak hours and only in the very largest cities and that minimal network upgrades to those towns could alleviate the problem.

This is ANOTHER cash grab, pure and simple.
Cobra11M
join:2010-12-23
Mineral Wells, TX

Cobra11M

Member

Re: Again...

said by axiomatic:

I want to see proof of the congestion that is the supposed need for the throttling.

I have two college friends who work fairly high up in AT&T and when we all get together for beers they claim there is no real congestion except for peak hours and only in the very largest cities and that minimal network upgrades to those towns could alleviate the problem.

This is ANOTHER cash grab, pure and simple.

So correct, AT&T prob sits back and shuts down servers or even makes it look like theres congestion all the time..., I keep wishin that the FCC would do their job and regulate (check AT&T and other companys all the time)

iLive4Fusion
Premium Member
join:2006-07-13

iLive4Fusion to axiomatic

Premium Member

to axiomatic
said by axiomatic:

I want to see proof of the congestion that is the supposed need for the throttling.

I have two college friends who work fairly high up in AT&T and when we all get together for beers they claim there is no real congestion except for peak hours and only in the very largest cities and that minimal network upgrades to those towns could alleviate the problem.

This is ANOTHER cash grab, pure and simple.

There are severe congestion problems with AT&T in MANY cities, but only because they are too cheap to add capacity/backhaul to existing towers.

rebus9
join:2002-03-26
Tampa Bay

rebus9

Member

Do the math

"AT&T insists that these impacted heavy users on average consume twelve times more data than the average of all other smartphone data customers."

Well.... looking at this article »www.cellular-news.com/st ··· 0253.php it would appear the "average" AT&T user consumes 360 MB per month.

The math suggests anyone consuming over 4.3 GB (360 MB * 12 = 4,320 MB) is a "heavy" user and will be subject to throttling.

Something tells me a lot of folks are in for a real surprise come October. (especially those who are only using single-digit GB... if the math holds true)

••••••
old_wiz_60
join:2005-06-03
Bedford, MA

old_wiz_60

Member

Customers..

will still get the shaft. They are just making up things so that the T-Mobile merger can go ahead so they can gobble up T-Mobile then slowly allow T-Mobile's system to go down the drain, forcing the customers to go to the Death Star and laying off all the T-Mobile people.

anon
@97.67.138.x

anon

Anon

5% bar will lower over time

As heavy users quit AT&T and as throttling limits usage, the threshold for the top 5% will be lower over time.

I may be using the same amount of data month after month, but since the bar is continually being lowered, I could find myself in the top 5% one day.

IPPlanMan
Holy Cable Modem Batman
join:2000-09-20
Washington, DC

IPPlanMan

Member

Unfazed in my plan....

If AT&T is really going to do this, I will let my iPhone 4 stream Netflix freely for the last few days of my Billing Cycle...

I see you and raise you AT&T... Bring it.

Bill Neilson
Premium Member
join:2009-07-08
Alexandria, VA

Bill Neilson

Premium Member

It wouldn't surprise me to see AT&T outright lie

about when they start throttling.

Lie in the sense that they actually throttle at a line that is lower than what they say publicly.

Why wouldnt they? Who will stop them?

ctceo
Premium Member
join:2001-04-26
South Bend, IN

ctceo

Premium Member

More of the same.

False Scarcity

EGeezer
Premium Member
join:2002-08-04
Midwest

EGeezer

Premium Member

Interesting wording - top 5%

I notice that they don't put a specific data quantity on the throttling threshold, but rather based it on a percentile.

So, as the top 5% reduce their usage, ATT lowers the throttling threshold.

Pretty ingenious, don't you think?

I gotta wonder if this is a sufficient change to the terms of service to give customers a legal reason to terminate their contracts early without the ripoff penalties.