AT&T warns of coming clamp-down on iPhone data hogs - Page 5

Originally Posted by iGenius

I expect them to honor the contract they signed. If they cannot, I expect rescission and damages.

Originally Posted by Bretbenz

....unlimited not mean unlimited? Don't offer an unlimited plan and then cry when people use as much as they can. Fix your network AT&T, don't blame your customers for your own problem. We pay you a premium for our phone service and data use, you should give us a premium service, PERIOD.

Originally Posted by iGenius

I expect them to honor the contract they signed. If they cannot, I expect rescission and damages.

Originally Posted by stokessd

It's super easy to be a bandwidth hog. For example lets say you enjoy pandora while at work. Here's a simple scenario that involves nothing but pandora:

Streaming Pandora at: 128 kbps

16,000 bytes per second

960,000 bytes per minute

57,000,000 bytes per hour (~57meg)

Assuming that you listen when you are at work:

9,216,000,000 bytes per month (based on 160 hours of work per month)

So you have used almost 10 gig of your infinity of bandwidth your contract says you can have.
That's without a single e-mail, web page, youtube video etc.
5 gig a month is easy even without tethering. So don't blame the jailbroken.


Sheldon

Originally Posted by williado21

Tiered data pricing NOW! Tiered data pricing NOW! The $30 unlimited data plan is what is keeping me from getting an iPhone...Let ME be in control of how much bandwith I use and give me a fair price to reflect that...

Originally Posted by success

That's what Softbank is doing here in Japan. Basically you pay for what you use.

Originally Posted by S8ER01Z

Quad Cities (Davenport, IA Region).... If I was anywhere else in Iowa I wouldn't have 3G at all.

Can I give my 'unlimited' bandwidth to someone else? maybe they can use it?

Originally Posted by xgman

They pump all these services out and then they get upset when you use them. The tech industry is like no other in history. We basically pay to beta test their crappy half finished products and then they see how much they can bleed us on top of that.

Originally Posted by Hudson1

But isn't that only partially true? In some respects, this whole unlimited wireless issue is like saying we won't have a speed limit on go karts at the track. Next year someone shows up with a go kart that does 100 mph and the track says "well, we do need speed limits after all". It's not exactly bait-and-switch as some have suggested AT&T is threatening.

Originally Posted by DJRumpy

This doesn't really have anything to do with speed. It's about total usage (data consumed). AT&T's problem is that they sold an 'unlimited plan' and are now trying to place limits on it.

Originally Posted by digitalclips

Kind of like a restaurant with 'all you can eat ribs night' telling you half way through your meal they under estimated the demand so your were now going to get a bill for all the ribs you have had over the normal menu's four ribs.

Originally Posted by digitalclips

Kind of like a restaurant with 'all you can eat ribs night' telling you half way through your meal they under estimated the demand so your were now going to get a bill for all the ribs you have had over the normal menu's four ribs.

Originally Posted by Abster2core

And you have evidence that this has happened?

Originally Posted by DJRumpy

Actually I've heard news reports of restaurants asking people to leave when they 'abused' these 'all you can eat'.

http://www.mightybargainhunter.com/2...eat-yah-right/

I've heard of instances like this over the years. It's not unheard of.

Originally Posted by stokessd

It's super easy to be a bandwidth hog. For example lets say you enjoy pandora while at work. Here's a simple scenario that involves nothing but pandora:

Streaming Pandora at: 128 kbps

16,000 bytes per second

960,000 bytes per minute

57,000,000 bytes per hour (~57meg)

Assuming that you listen when you are at work:

9,216,000,000 bytes per month (based on 160 hours of work per month)

So you have used almost 10 gig of your infinity of bandwidth your contract says you can have.
That's without a single e-mail, web page, youtube video etc.
5 gig a month is easy even without tethering. So don't blame the jailbroken.


Sheldon

Originally Posted by DJRumpy

This doesn't really have anything to do with speed. It's about total usage (data consumed). AT&T's problem is that they sold an 'unlimited plan' and are now trying to place limits on it.

Originally Posted by Hudson1

Yes, I know and the go kart thing wasn't meant to mean "speed" in a literal sense but rather that technology advances, consequently the world changes and so do promises have to change along with that.

Moving to the parallel comments about restaurants: The "all you can eat" deals typically don't allow people to show up at 11AM and stay until 11PM, stuffing their faces all day long. "All" generally implies all one could eat for a meal with the knowledge that every person is going to want a different amount. So, yes, there are practical limits on things that are often advertised as unlimited with the understanding that it still provides everything 99+% of us could want (to eat in this case).

Originally Posted by DJRumpy

I've never seen an all you can eat that says you can only eat for X number of hours. About the only limit I have ever seen posted is that you cannot share your food with others. That's about it.

Originally Posted by Hudson1

Yes, there really are places that advertise "all you can eat" but don't let you feed yourself for 12 hours. Kinda makes sense, doesn't it?

Originally Posted by iReality85

To all those who are criticizing people here for "hogging" bandwidth, without bandwidth hogs, what incentive would there be for AT&T to improve its network? I'm sorry, but if you use less than 5GB/month, you don't actually use data, period. Quit griping and be thankful because you ultimately have a better network than if you didn't have people stressing the network. Companies improve their products or services for those who actually use said things, NOT for those who don't (the former actually get their money's worth from the network, the latter are poor saps who are being raped by AT&T because they are "sub-par" users). Sorry, but its true, and I know it hurts. And AT&T won't "throttle back" hogs, as that act has already been sternly condemned by the FCC when Comcast (most notably) did so to P2P clients not that long ago. It falls under net neutrality, and discrimination is bad- whatever form it may take. Also, the terms of the contract are UNLIMITED data usage for iPhone users. Not an iPhone user? Quit crying and get over it. AT&T has no right to be coming down on iPhone users for "hogging" bandwidth when they offer an unlimited service. This all sounds to me like AT&T is cracking under the heat from Verizon's flamethrower... AT&T, we know your network lacks infrastructure, but punishing users of the phone which has made your company prosper during the last few years is the wrong, wrong move. You can bet that if AT&T does implement such a data cap, Verizon will unmercifully have a field day with it. I'm also pretty sure Apple would be none too pleased with having its flagship product castrated.

Originally Posted by DJRumpy

At least you kept on topic for the first part, ranting though it may have been. The last part of your post is just flamebait and trolling.

Originally Posted by iReality85

To all those who are criticizing people here for "hogging" bandwidth, without bandwidth hogs, what incentive would there be for AT&T to improve its network? I'm sorry, but if you use less than 5GB/month, you don't actually use data, period. Quit griping and be thankful because you ultimately have a better network than if you didn't have people stressing the network. Companies improve their products or services for those who actually use said things, NOT for those who don't (the former actually get their money's worth from the network, the latter are poor saps who are being raped by AT&T because they are "sub-par" users). Sorry, but its true, and I know it hurts. And AT&T won't "throttle back" hogs, as that act has already been sternly condemned by the FCC when Comcast (most notably) did so to P2P clients not that long ago. It falls under net neutrality, and discrimination is bad- whatever form it may take. Also, the terms of the contract are UNLIMITED data usage for iPhone users. Not an iPhone user? Quit crying and get over it. AT&T has no right to be coming down on iPhone users for "hogging" bandwidth when they offer an unlimited service. This all sounds to me like AT&T is cracking under the heat from Verizon's flamethrower... AT&T, we know your network lacks infrastructure, but punishing users of the phone which has made your company prosper during the last few years is the wrong, wrong move. You can bet that if AT&T does implement such a data cap, Verizon will unmercifully have a field day with it. I'm also pretty sure Apple would be none too pleased with having its flagship product castrated.

Originally Posted by iReality85

Flamebait- perhaps (if others disagree)

Trolling- not in the least (I'm not a troll)

Accurate analogy- indisputable (no explanation needed)

Originally Posted by DJRumpy

It only makes sense if they state as much. That's the whole reason a business will post a 'we reserve the right' sign. If they don't post it, they put themselves in legal hot water. Just because something sounds right, doesn't mean it's legally sound.

Originally Posted by Hudson1

How many lawsuits have filed over what "all you can eat" means at some two-bit buffet? That 99% of customers have no problem with an eating limit ought to tell us something.

Originally Posted by John.B

LOL! Verizon invented the "unlimited" "capped" wireless data plan. Get your facts straight!

Originally Posted by iReality85

Of what relevance is Verizon's inventing of "unlimited capped" usage to what I was saying? The issue is that AT&T may change the data usage rates after the fact because their network can't handle the bandwidth load. Get my facts straight? Why don't you go read and understand the article first and then come back.

Then why did you choose to comment on it in the first place if you supposedly weren't interested. I was simply making a passing comment, as a side note no less. I couldn't give a rats ass if you care or don't care about my political beliefs, but I none the less have a right to express them anyway I choose, however I want to, without being called a troll. Please.

Originally Posted by DJRumpy

You a troll. Your post was off topic and irrelevant and we called it as such.

Originally Posted by DJRumpy

Then I have the sane right to express my beliefs.

You a troll. Your post was off topic and irrelevant and we called it as such.

Originally Posted by iReality85

Of what relevance is Verizon's inventing of "unlimited capped" usage to what I was saying? The issue is that AT&T may change the data usage rates after the fact because their network can't handle the bandwidth load. Get my facts straight? Why don't you go read and understand the article first and then come back.

Then why did you choose to comment on it in the first place if you supposedly weren't interested. I was simply making a passing comment, as a side note no less. I couldn't give a rats ass if you care or don't care about my political beliefs, but I none the less have a right to express them anyway I choose, however I want to, without being called a troll. Please.

Originally Posted by iReality85

Haha ok. Thanks for serving as the troll police. I'll be sure to look out for them too.

Originally Posted by DJRumpy

I would imagine because it would cost them more to get a lawyer and sue than to buy a meal.

Originally Posted by iReality85

Flamebait- perhaps (if others disagree)

Trolling- not in the least (I'm not a troll)

Accurate analogy- indisputable (no explanation needed)

Originally Posted by Abster2core

S8ER01Z

Why you selfish hog.

Declining crime. Clear blue skies. Canadian accent. And every year, you get to have your swimming pools filled with fresh spring water whether you like it or not.

But seriously, I empathize with your struggle with your iPhone.

It seems that there are a lot of cell towers to call from, but they are not AT&T's (or Verizon's at that matter) and 3G is just a promise in the wind.

Looking closely, but with limited information, it appears that population and more important, it in combination to which carrier got there first, has guided 'how important' Davenport is in the upgrade schedule.

Hopefully, you will get the service as you have been promised soon.

Note I have the luxury of being a Canadian (Toronto), having an iPhone via Rogers, high speed connections, virtually no dropped calls (which if any, a soft reset corrected) and a limited 6G data plan that more than covers my average 200-350 MBs usage a month. And because my plan is limited, it allows me to draw from my data plan to tether. And it cost $73 CDN a month.

May I suggest to everybody that comments on their service, to post their locale/provider. That way, it would help to identify and put the services, good or bad, in their proper perspective. Otherwise, it is like pissing in the wind.

iPhone 3G; Toronto; Rogers

Originally Posted by Hudson1

Yes, I know and the go kart thing wasn't meant to mean "speed" in a literal sense but rather that technology advances, consequently the world changes and so do promises have to change along with that.

Moving to the parallel comments about restaurants: The "all you can eat" deals typically don't allow people to show up at 11AM and stay until 11PM, stuffing their faces all day long. "All" generally implies all one could eat for a meal with the knowledge that every person is going to want a different amount. So, yes, there are practical limits on things that are often advertised as unlimited with the understanding that it still provides everything 99+% of us could want (to eat in this case).