why streaming video is not going to work that well; it's not a technological issue, it's the cost of the streaming. With low caps, streaming is simply too expensive unless you are on wi-fi.
This is also going to hit people trying to use iCloud type services - too expensive to download.
That's why I will never give up my unlimited AT&T plan. Right now in the new iPad I have used up since Saturday "495m sent and 4.8g resieved" and since AT&T does not throttle the iPad I can only guess what my month usage will be. If I had to pay for the data on plans it will be useless and I would have gotten the wifi only to be honest...
I thought everyone wanted Apple to move to 4G LTE so they could get all these high-speed downloads and streaming. Now these same people are bitching about data costs. Any fool should have realized they'd run up data charges. I don't know why there is this huge push to 4G LTE when data costs are not dropping considerably. If Apple is being blamed for this then there is no hope of consumers having a tiny bit of common sense.
Is someone blaming Apple?
The article is simply meant to call attention to possible data usage issues and expenses. Some buyers might not understand how fast you can consume 2GB if they've only used 3G till now.
Apple should start to make the carriers don't count iCloud and video streaming on the data caps. That will make theolans useful again, web surfing and email is very login data usage IMHO...
It would be nice if the various video apps (netflix, hulu, youtube) would provide a configurable download rate control. These apps already adapt to varying network conditions. It is just that with a wide open spigot, they will consume it all in a short period. An optional "force low quality" setting would be quite useful.
This is also going to hit people trying to use iCloud type services - too expensive to download.[/QUOTE]
Actually, this is different. Using iCloud file services, you download the same material, just taking less time (although that might lead one to do more of that). Video streaming apps, OTOH, adapt the rate data is downloaded based upon network conditions. Typically, on 3G you will only consume a couple hundred megabytes per hour watching a video. Watch that same video on LTE, will easily consume 5 times that amount.
I'll guarantee the network providers know this. But most consumers do not.
A backlash over carrier pricing plans would be a very good thing. Let's hope it is a HUGE BACKLASH.
Sure the carriers have invested heavily in LTE. Their network capacities will be so much bigger that they can easily handle a whole lot more data. They should be giving price breaks. Instead they're installing caps. What they're not doing is giving light users a break. It's a one way deal --> Their way. They get to charge for overage but they don't kick back for under utilization.
I think most everyone hates the carriers. Deservedly so.
Wireless spectrum and bandwidth resources are finite. It's only going to get worse. This has been a known problem for several years that's starting to rear it's head now. Unlimited plans are not coming back, as much as I wish they would.
What is finite is the willingness to invest in networks. As capacity demands increase, more network hardware can be added. Smaller cells will reduce spectrum congestion. Unlimited plans will come back when they are introduced by competitive services and people leave the existing carriers.
"You can buy this car and use it anywhere, but don't take it to the grocery store or the movies or out to eat."
More like "You can buy this 6 litre V8 Truck but if you always put pedal to the metal and burn rubber, you'll go through tires and gasoline like nobody's business (which surprise, surprise, will cost'ya"
What is finite is the willingness to invest in networks. As capacity demands increase, more network hardware can be added. Smaller cells will reduce spectrum congestion.
This will only work to a point. There still can only be so much traffic in a given space. We're not there yet, but follow the exponential mobile bandwidth growth a little further down the line and you'll see. Have you ever tried to set up Wifi in a crowded apartment complex?
Quote:
Unlimited plans will come back when they are introduced by competitive services and people leave the existing carriers.
What competitive services with what army? Essentially 3 companies hold the vast majority of available spectrum in US. Everyone else just leases from them. Unless they are forced to split up, which probably is not going to happen, there's no room for anyone else. Lightsquared tried to work around it and failed.
Look I wish what you point out would happen, but at the moment, no dice.
why streaming video is not going to work that well; it's not a technological issue, it's the cost of the streaming. With low caps, streaming is simply too expensive unless you are on wi-fi.
This is also going to hit people trying to use iCloud type services - too expensive to download.
History repeats itself. Going from GPRS to Edge was the same, as was Edge to 3G.
I've actually disabled cellular data on my new iPad for the time being in protest. I'm willing to spend $25 per month for about 3-4GB. I'll likely never use the limit though, but I at least understand what it is there for...
The truths that carriers have to up the caps on mobile if 4g is 10 times faster than 3G and faster than most wired services they need to offer a more usable cap. Maybe instead of 2-5g that should be 10-20g.
Again if I didn't have unlimited no way I will pay for 4gon the iPad monthly plans won't last a week let alone a month. They should give a monthly plan with data that will last an entire month at those speeds IMHO...
I'm waiting for someone to post that this is all Apple's fault - "Datagate"
Well WSJ is putting that kind of tone on the piece.
forgetting that folks were told they were paying for X amount of data. So they shouldn't be shocked when they do something like watch streaming video for several hours on LTE/3g. It's a no duh.
Now if they are asking that apps put up warnings basically saying "you are currently connected via cellular data. Be aware that watching X amount of video can take up to X amount of data." Then that's a fair request to make. But as is they are setting up an implication that Apple is trying to assist the carriers in raking users over the coals by encouraging LTE use over wifi.
I think most everyone hates the carriers. Deservedly so.
Hmm...."everyone hates the carriers". Half the carriers aren't even making a profit (Sprint, T-Mobile) and the other half are just doing "OK" (Verizon, AT&T). Yet when the carriers want to raise more capital in order to invest in the infrastructure, all of us cry foul over the increase in our monthly bills. Yet Apple is able to earn 50% profit on every item they sell and we are OK with that. Strange world.
More like "You can buy this 6 litre V8 Truck but if you always put pedal to the metal and burn rubber, you'll go through tires and gasoline like nobody's business (which surprise, surprise, will cost'ya"
No, it's, "You can buy this vehicle, but don't expect to use it for any of the normal uses for which you'd use any other older, slower vehicle."
Comments
This is also going to hit people trying to use iCloud type services - too expensive to download.
I thought everyone wanted Apple to move to 4G LTE so they could get all these high-speed downloads and streaming. Now these same people are bitching about data costs. Any fool should have realized they'd run up data charges. I don't know why there is this huge push to 4G LTE when data costs are not dropping considerably. If Apple is being blamed for this then there is no hope of consumers having a tiny bit of common sense.
Is someone blaming Apple?
The article is simply meant to call attention to possible data usage issues and expenses. Some buyers might not understand how fast you can consume 2GB if they've only used 3G till now.
You can also disable 4g and only use 3G so you save on data...
Bottom line is Speed is great but don't use it to stream video except when absolutely required.
Bottom line is Speed is great but don't use it to stream video except when absolutely required.
"You can buy this car and use it anywhere, but don't take it to the grocery store or the movies or out to eat."
This is also going to hit people trying to use iCloud type services - too expensive to download.[/QUOTE]
Actually, this is different. Using iCloud file services, you download the same material, just taking less time (although that might lead one to do more of that). Video streaming apps, OTOH, adapt the rate data is downloaded based upon network conditions. Typically, on 3G you will only consume a couple hundred megabytes per hour watching a video. Watch that same video on LTE, will easily consume 5 times that amount.
I'll guarantee the network providers know this. But most consumers do not.
Sure the carriers have invested heavily in LTE. Their network capacities will be so much bigger that they can easily handle a whole lot more data. They should be giving price breaks. Instead they're installing caps. What they're not doing is giving light users a break. It's a one way deal --> Their way. They get to charge for overage but they don't kick back for under utilization.
I think most everyone hates the carriers. Deservedly so.
Wireless spectrum and bandwidth resources are finite. It's only going to get worse. This has been a known problem for several years that's starting to rear it's head now. Unlimited plans are not coming back, as much as I wish they would.
What is finite is the willingness to invest in networks. As capacity demands increase, more network hardware can be added. Smaller cells will reduce spectrum congestion. Unlimited plans will come back when they are introduced by competitive services and people leave the existing carriers.
"You can buy this car and use it anywhere, but don't take it to the grocery store or the movies or out to eat."
More like "You can buy this 6 litre V8 Truck but if you always put pedal to the metal and burn rubber, you'll go through tires and gasoline like nobody's business (which surprise, surprise, will cost'ya"
I think most everyone hates the carriers. Deservedly so.
Congress doesn't. They're paid off not to.
What is finite is the willingness to invest in networks. As capacity demands increase, more network hardware can be added. Smaller cells will reduce spectrum congestion.
This will only work to a point. There still can only be so much traffic in a given space. We're not there yet, but follow the exponential mobile bandwidth growth a little further down the line and you'll see. Have you ever tried to set up Wifi in a crowded apartment complex?
Unlimited plans will come back when they are introduced by competitive services and people leave the existing carriers.
What competitive services with what army? Essentially 3 companies hold the vast majority of available spectrum in US. Everyone else just leases from them. Unless they are forced to split up, which probably is not going to happen, there's no room for anyone else. Lightsquared tried to work around it and failed.
Look I wish what you point out would happen, but at the moment, no dice.
why streaming video is not going to work that well; it's not a technological issue, it's the cost of the streaming. With low caps, streaming is simply too expensive unless you are on wi-fi.
This is also going to hit people trying to use iCloud type services - too expensive to download.
History repeats itself. Going from GPRS to Edge was the same, as was Edge to 3G.
I've actually disabled cellular data on my new iPad for the time being in protest. I'm willing to spend $25 per month for about 3-4GB. I'll likely never use the limit though, but I at least understand what it is there for...
Again if I didn't have unlimited no way I will pay for 4gon the iPad monthly plans won't last a week let alone a month. They should give a monthly plan with data that will last an entire month at those speeds IMHO...
I'm waiting for someone to post that this is all Apple's fault - "Datagate"
Well WSJ is putting that kind of tone on the piece.
forgetting that folks were told they were paying for X amount of data. So they shouldn't be shocked when they do something like watch streaming video for several hours on LTE/3g. It's a no duh.
Now if they are asking that apps put up warnings basically saying "you are currently connected via cellular data. Be aware that watching X amount of video can take up to X amount of data." Then that's a fair request to make. But as is they are setting up an implication that Apple is trying to assist the carriers in raking users over the coals by encouraging LTE use over wifi.
I think most everyone hates the carriers. Deservedly so.
Hmm...."everyone hates the carriers". Half the carriers aren't even making a profit (Sprint, T-Mobile) and the other half are just doing "OK" (Verizon, AT&T). Yet when the carriers want to raise more capital in order to invest in the infrastructure, all of us cry foul over the increase in our monthly bills. Yet Apple is able to earn 50% profit on every item they sell and we are OK with that. Strange world.
More like "You can buy this 6 litre V8 Truck but if you always put pedal to the metal and burn rubber, you'll go through tires and gasoline like nobody's business (which surprise, surprise, will cost'ya"
No, it's, "You can buy this vehicle, but don't expect to use it for any of the normal uses for which you'd use any other older, slower vehicle."