AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › iPhone data use measured, carriers want Apple to pay for network upgrades
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iPhone data use measured, carriers want Apple to pay for network upgrades - Page 2

post #41 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinney57 View Post

Except that Apple doesn't tell them what subsidy to give or data rate to charge. They tell them what the phone costs; so your analogy doesn't work either.

You must have some personal connection to a network provider since no sane person could possibly defend these douchebags*.




*Americanism used for the purposes of alliteration

I looked into it, and found why I was under the impression I was under:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...elecoms-iphone
"iPhone hype hides the heavy subsidies that operators have to pay to Apple, coupled with the company's replacement cycle and the revenue share it demands in some markets. This means it is not the money-spinner many assume."

So Apple demands heavy subsidies be paid by the carriers, along with a share in the revenue.

Looks like I wasn't entirely wrong, and the only insult that should be made right now should be directed at you.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

'Apple, you're making us rich with your revolutionary, insanely popular product. Please pay us.'

Sounds like the top 2% whining to retain their tax cuts over here. We are in our second Gilded Age, but they want more.

The issue however is that they aren't getting rich. I know AI has posted articles on this phenomenon. They sell millions of iphones, but don't see a profit like any of us would assume.

As to the taxes thing, there's no argument here. If the rich want lower taxes, we should find ways to pay for it first, like limiting military spending, BUT I DIGRESS
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

But you're paying for potential data, and from the carrier's standpoint, you WOULDN'T have used that data had you not tethered. So in their eyes, it's better that you only got to 1GB with a phone, rather than get to your cap with tethering. Getting to 2Gb with the phone is fair as it's part of the contract. Spread across millions of users, this way of thinking makes sense also.

Now a TRUE "don't care if you tether" scenario would be if you paid for the bandwidth based on how much you used. like $10 a GB for instance, broken down to pennies on the KB.

If you advertise X GB for Y dollars, you should be prepared to offer X GB for Y dollars. Period. Tethering isn't a feature the carriers provide, it is a feature inherent to the phone. Tethered data is still data consumed by the phone, so it should be part of that contract. It's no different from using a router at home. My ISP doesn't charge me an additional fee for me letting my laptop tap into my WiFi.

Consumers don't need to concern themselves with what usage models the carrier uses to determine how much data will actually be consumed. That is the carriers responsibility. They are responsible for delivering on what they promised to deliver. If they can't deliver, they shouldn't have offered it.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #44 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

If you advertise X GB for Y dollars, you should be prepared to offer X GB for Y dollars. Period. Tethering isn't a feature the carriers provide, it is a feature inherent to the phone. Tethered data is still data consumed by the phone, so it should be part of that contract. It's no different from using a router at home. My ISP doesn't charge me an additional fee for me letting my laptop tap into my WiFi.

Consumers don't need to concern themselves with what usage models the carrier uses to determine how much data will actually be consumed. That is the carriers responsibility. They are responsible for delivering on what they promised to deliver. If they can't deliver, they shouldn't have offered it.

So Unlimited data that specifically excluded tethering should allow all users the right to tether their phone to any number of household computers without the carrier being able to cancel your contract for misuse?

I wonder how your cable company would feel about running additional coax to connect the rest of your neighborhood for free. Hey, you already paid for the service and it’s not like it costs them anything else to push those analog channels to your home.

As much as I’d like to see tethering included in a capped plan, Chronster is correct, they probably would have to raise the monthly data rates to maintain the same profits. By disallowing tethering they can keep the cost down as most people simply aren’t going to use that service.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #45 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

So Apple demands heavy subsidies be paid by the carriers, along with a share in the revenue.

Proving something that is all wrong by quoting an article that is all wrong does not really work. Apple demanded revenue sharing instead of subsidies from AT&T for the original iPhone in 2007. This model was dropped in 2008 for the iPhone 3G.

Don't make it more difficult than needed: carriers buy iPhones at the price Apple is asking, some carriers may receive volume discounts or a rebate for providing first tier support. Apple has no influence on the price the carriers charge, they might enforce that at least one tariff has to match the $199/$299 US pricing though. But even that does not seem to be true in markets with more than one carrier. E.g. some carriers here do not subsidize the iPhone at all, you have to buy it unlocked at the full retail price (up front or in monthly installments).
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:19am
The people using the bandwidth should pay for the bandwidth, end of story.

If Apple makes devices that use more bandwidth, then the customers who use those devices on the network should pay more for their bandwidth usage, not Apple.

If it's legitimate bandwidth usage by the device, then then customer should expect to pay more. If Apple manufactured a faulty device that used more bandwidth than necessary to accomplish a task, then the free market will take care of the matterless customers will purchase that device, and Apple will have an incentive to improve its product.
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

If you advertise X GB for Y dollars, you should be prepared to offer X GB for Y dollars. Period. Tethering isn't a feature the carriers provide, it is a feature inherent to the phone. Tethered data is still data consumed by the phone, so it should be part of that contract. It's no different from using a router at home. My ISP doesn't charge me an additional fee for me letting my laptop tap into my WiFi.

Consumers don't need to concern themselves with what usage models the carrier uses to determine how much data will actually be consumed. That is the carriers responsibility. They are responsible for delivering on what they promised to deliver. If they can't deliver, they shouldn't have offered it.

(please keep in mind as you read my comment, I agree with you)

Think of it like this: A 2GB cap at a certain price might in reality actually cost more if every single person really did use 2GB each month. The reason the carriers put in stipulations about tethering is because they are taking a small gamble with that cost in order to stay competitive. The gamble is that every customer won't reach that cap with a just a phone, and therefore they can base their pricing on these predictions. When you add tethering, you're not only adding another method of consuming bandwidth, you're adding a method that will consume bandwidth more easily than a phone, and the chances of customers reaching that 2GB cap goes up.

So what I'm saying is, even though carriers sell data capped at 2GB, the cost doesn't reflect every customer using 100% of their data each month. The cost reflects projections made to keep the price competitive.
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:23am
... perhaps Apple will say, "We'll be happy to help you with the upgrade and maintenance of your infrastructure in return for a percentage of your subscription fees."

Thompson
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekmorr View Post

Wrong.

Actually, carriers can disable tethering on Android. Since Android is open, the carriers can change any part of it that they like (and the often do).

I think you are wrong. When an Android OS based smartphone is being used as an internet gateway for other devices, the cell phone carrier can not know it.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:26am
Maybe if the BODs cut the CEO's pay they'd have some left for upgrades to their systems.
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzeshan View Post

I think you are wrong. When an Android OS based smartphone is being used as an internet gateway for other devices, the cell phone carrier can not know it.

You're both right. Carriers by default disable tethering, but some add their own applications in that allow tethering depending on if your account information says you're paying for it, and these apps allow the carriers to track how much bandwidth you've moved with tethering alone.

However, when you root your phone, you gain access to system files that tethering apps need. This is when the carriers can't track if you're tethering or not (using a third party app) so they simply use common sense and look at your bandwidth usage, and browsing history.

If you go from 1GB on average a month to suddenly over 10gb, and they see that you've been transferring torrent files for instance, they'll flag the account.

The trick is to simply limit what you're doing when you tether and not do something stupid like use your phone to download movies over night.
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

If you advertise X GB for Y dollars, you should be prepared to offer X GB for Y dollars. Period. Tethering isn't a feature the carriers provide, it is a feature inherent to the phone. Tethered data is still data consumed by the phone, so it should be part of that contract. It's no different from using a router at home. My ISP doesn't charge me an additional fee for me letting my laptop tap into my WiFi.

I am the last one to defend the carriers, but that picture is not really complete. Volume is only one aspect, usage patterns are the other one. There are devices that are commonly using low amounts of data that accumulates over time (e.g. conventional mobiles) and there are devices that consume huge loads of data in no time (set-top boxes, computers). In other words: it makes a difference if I accumulate 2GB of email on a Blackberry over 30 days, or if I consume the same 2GB by downloading 4 issues of Wired to my iPad in one hour. Current mobile networks have not been designed to support the latter, and in several places phones like the iPhone (and others) have caused network management issues.

Still, instead of whining and begging for more money, the carriers should be transparent about these things first. If my contract says: 2GB/month with 100MB/day maximum (just an example), I might not like it, but at least I know what I am buying and might decide to buy a more expensive contract without such a limitation.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:31am


Maybe some of European carriers need to examine their business models?

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MC700LL/A MD481LL/A MD644LL/A MD388LL/A

Reply

  Google Maps: ("Directions may be inaccurate, incomplete, dangerous, or prohibited.")

 

  MA497LL/A FB463LL/A MC572LL/A FC060LL/A MC700LL/A MD481LL/A MD644LL/A MD388LL/A

Reply
post #54 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:41am
If that's their benchmark then DUH! Of course usage is up by a gajillion. Anyone on a 3G has surely become eligible and used the upgrade to a 3GS at the very least if not an iPhone 4. Another totally stupid "report" from so called 'analysts.'
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by John.B View Post



Maybe some of European carriers need to examine their business models?

I have to wonder how much longer smaller nations with full high-speed data cellular coverage keep offering unlimited data with all these newer smartphone OSes sucking more and more bandwidth. The US might have been the first nation to see their large networks strain under the under the growing number of smartphone users, but I dont anyone expected them to be the last.

The Malthusian growth model might be applicable here. If smartphone users are, say, doubling on a network every year, and the data usage is, say, doubling per user every year, that would be a 4x growth in data usage per year. Each of those single aspects seem reasonable to me, but a carrier quad-rupling their total bandwidth capacity every year doesnt seem feasible. Hopefully someone with more maths than me can break it down more accurately.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #56 of 136
12/8/10 at 9:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

So Unlimited data that specifically excluded tethering should allow all users the right to tether their phone to any number of household computers without the carrier being able to cancel your contract for misuse?

It's not the carriers responsibility to tell you how to use your* phone. Perhaps them offering unlimited data was the mistake. Even residential ISP's have methods to prevent abuse of "unlimited" data though. Perhaps they could try some of those (as long as they are clearly noted in the contract) instead of dictating how you use your phone, which isn't a valid method.

*The question of whether or not a subsidized phone is actually yours is really the only possible way to justify allowing carriers to dictate how a phone is used. If it's yours, they have no say. If it's theirs they may have a say. The simple solution would be to not subsidize phones that offered tethering. Carriers have done a few irresponsible things over the years to encourage sales, two of them would be subsidies and "unlimited" plans. If those things come back to bite them in the ass it's their own damn fault. They are responsible for delivering the product they advertised.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #57 of 136
12/8/10 at 10:02am
Let's see
- I have a product I want to sell.
- A third party comes along and provides a huge marketing boost so I can sell A LOT of my product
- I have a capacity problem therefore...
- I charge the third party for helping me out??????

This is the strangest business model I've ever seen. There are sooo many better solutions the easiest of which is tiered usage. If it really costs so much then charge more!!!!

I can see NO VALID argument against tiered usage if it costs more money to provide it. The carriers started with excess capacity and used a shortcut - give it away - to get customers. Now they have to change. Very very simple.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 136
12/8/10 at 10:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

Looks like I wasn't entirely wrong, and the only insult that should be made right now should be directed at you.

Oops!

The bottom line is this: AT&T profits up 25 percent on wireless growth

Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-10...#ixzz17Xo9DkTw

For every story there is another (and opposite) story

Newbee says:  Using a Mac "inspires" you, using all others just ... tires you.  

Reply

Newbee says:  Using a Mac "inspires" you, using all others just ... tires you.  

Reply
post #59 of 136
12/8/10 at 10:14am
Carriers are dipsh$ts. I'm already paying for data. Where I get my data is irrelevant. Sounds just like Comcast vs Netflix trying to double dip in order to deliver movies requested by Comcast's own paying customers
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 136
12/8/10 at 10:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreyfus2 View Post

I am the last one to defend the carriers, but that picture is not really complete. Volume is only one aspect, usage patterns are the other one. There are devices that are commonly using low amounts of data that accumulates over time (e.g. conventional mobiles) and there are devices that consume huge loads of data in no time (set-top boxes, computers). In other words: it makes a difference if I accumulate 2GB of email on a Blackberry over 30 days, or if I consume the same 2GB by downloading 4 issues of Wired to my iPad in one hour. Current mobile networks have not been designed to support the latter, and in several places phones like the iPhone (and others) have caused network management issues.

Still, instead of whining and begging for more money, the carriers should be transparent about these things first. If my contract says: 2GB/month with 100MB/day maximum (just an example), I might not like it, but at least I know what I am buying and might decide to buy a more expensive contract without such a limitation.

All I've been saying is that it's the carriers responsibility to deliver what they advertise. If that's what they advertised, I'd have no qualms with them delivering that to whomever chose to pay for such a plan.

It's not the consumers job to feel pity for the wireless carriers if they make some bad decisions, they definitely don't take pity on the consumer.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #61 of 136
12/8/10 at 10:31am
Why would Apple pay for carriers to upgrade their networks??? If The carriers were properly maintaining their networks they wouldn't have to worry about this new phase of Smartphones. Unfortunately, most carriers are playing catch up at a higher cost now than it would have been before.
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 136
12/8/10 at 10:36am
yeah, I'm sure Steve's ready to whip out the company checkbook to help other companies make money
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 136
12/8/10 at 10:52am
Well, this just proves that telecoms are dipshits across borders. So lame!
Reply
Reply
post #64 of 136
12/8/10 at 10:53am
Yo Momma!
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 136
12/8/10 at 10:58am
LOL, How about network operators join us in the 21st Century?
It's called meeting market demand.
"And just like that, everyone here realizes you're just another sweaty little Google licker with an axe to grind and no idea what he's talking about." --addabox
Reply
"And just like that, everyone here realizes you're just another sweaty little Google licker with an axe to grind and no idea what he's talking about." --addabox
Reply
post #66 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:03am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkJones View Post

If you really want to save on your phone bill and your not a high volume talker.

1: Google Voice
2: MagicJack
3: TracPhone: uses AT&T networks! (look for the special with free double minutes over the life of the phone)

Keep a netbook in your car or purse and a list of nearby wifi locations.

You only pay for what you use on the no contract phone, yearly fee for the MagicJack is $20. With the Magicjack hooked up like a regular phone to a desktop or stationary laptop machine it's rather easy to use than grabbing the cell every time, especially since you know it's a free call.

Slow months on the cell can be as low as $10, high use can be around $40

Some carriers are now offering Android phones with unlimited voice and limited data for only $45 a month. MetroPCS for one according to what I hear.

Google Voice gives you a number that calls all your phones, or customizable depending upon the callers.

There are plenty of prepaid carriers in the U.S. offering what I feel is quite the sweet spot for many people. It's 1200 minutes of talk/1200 texts and 50 megs of data for $30.

Also there is an app for iPhone called Free Wifi Finder which will save a database to the phone for use when you don't have data and need to find wifi.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmf2 View Post

Data caps exist for a reason. If you pay pay 2 GB, you should be able to use 2GB. Tethering should always be allowed and it should always be free on any plan that features a data cap.

Agreed 100%. This is like your television conent provider complaining that you access the HD on your DVR too much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

At 90GB over AT&Ts network last month I think I at least owe an apology to AT&T users. I cant help but think that us few users tethering despite their contract explicitly disallowing it is part of the reason for carriers dropping unlimited data plans.

The reality is that AT&T could easily do what Tmobile is now doing and that is slow the data rate at which you can access the network above 5 GB. You're plan would still be "unlimited" but now of course at the slower rate, you couldn't hog all the bandwidth. I'm really shocked AT&T hasn't done this since they are now at a competitive disadvantage compared to all other carriers.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #67 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

Apology accepted. It's about time someone took responsibility.

I'm sorry too......and I want General Motors to help pay for the gas in my gas guzzling car they built.
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:08am
As said in the article AT&T has capped the or even tiered the data plans so users who consume the most pay the most. If Apple or Google we taxed for data usage then all consumers would then have to bear the burden of the increased cost. This recommendation is like all gas stations having a weekly charge for gas so those of us who just drive around town would pay the same as the Hummer driving salesman, and everyone cries unfair!!! So who should our phone plans be based on that same logic. The Consumer uses it the consumer should pay for it.
As for comments about Android phones consuming way more bandwidth than even the iPhone 4, it's as Steve Jobs says welcome to the world where FLASH lives. If you have a CPU monitor on your desktop, activate it and watch how all your resources are consumed once you visit a site containing flash; processor load almost doubles, memory usage increases dramatically and the network activity pegs the meter. And you wonder why Apple kept flash from it's small footprint mobile devices. All that activity also translates into increased powerdrain and shorter battery uptime.
So Carriers modify your business model and cut executive bonuses this year and offer stock options instead and take that boatload of cash and invest in the infrastructure or if your can't take the heat get out of the kitchen.
KennDDS
Reply
KennDDS
Reply
post #69 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:19am
Dear auto industry:

We have built all the beautiful highways to connect us together. But now, there are so many cars on our highways, it has resulted in total gridlock.

Without you, our highways would never have been used. However, you'll have to pay us $100 for every car you build so we can continue to maintain our roads. We understand that it is not your fault. We also understand that it would make sense to not charge you for the mess, but perhaps the drivers that use the roads.

But we here at the executive branches march by the beat of our own drums!

Have a nice day!

U.S. Government.
Reply
Reply
post #70 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:21am
There should be no such thing as minutes. Just data.
Reply
Reply
post #71 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by randallking View Post

The people using the bandwidth should pay for the bandwidth, end of story.

If Apple makes devices that use more bandwidth, then the customers who use those devices on the network should pay more for their bandwidth usage, not Apple.

If it's legitimate bandwidth usage by the device, then then customer should expect to pay more. If Apple manufactured a faulty device that used more bandwidth than necessary to accomplish a task, then the free market will take care of the matterless customers will purchase that device, and Apple will have an incentive to improve its product.

QFT

Nice virgen post!
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
post #72 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:29am
More and more it looks like Apple is amassing its multi-billionn dollar cash hoard just in case it has to buy one of the wireless carriers. I'm betting it's AT&T.
Reply
Reply
post #73 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

Another load of BS from carriers.

All they have to do is charge customers by the megabyte of usage and consumers will adjust their usage. They can then fiddle around with the price until they get bandwidth supply and demand in equilibrium.

As soon as I switched to AT&T's $15, 200 MB data plan, I made big changes in my usage. Most significantly, I turned off push e-mail, and made sure to do most of my e-mail synching when in wi-fi areas. It turns out that there are a lot of things that I don't absolutely have to do RIGHT NOW that I can postpone until I have wi-fi (like take a picture and then send it later, rather than immediately).

Does nobody understand economics?

I am not going to limit the use of my phone so I can save $15 a month...

"Apple people have no objectivity when it comes to criticism of Apple.." Lenovo X1 Carbon is out..bye bye MBAir

Reply

"Apple people have no objectivity when it comes to criticism of Apple.." Lenovo X1 Carbon is out..bye bye MBAir

Reply
post #74 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

The reality is that AT&T could easily do what Tmobile is now doing and that is slow the data rate at which you can access the network above 5 GB. You're plan would still be "unlimited" but now of course at the slower rate, you couldn't hog all the bandwidth. I'm really shocked AT&T hasn't done this since they are now at a competitive disadvantage compared to all other carriers.

Your example is exactly what Im talking about. There are more than one way your data can be unlimited or limited. It can be the amount of data, the speed of the data compared to the networks capabilities, and the time when the data can be accessed. All three of these can be limited by the carrier.

If we want truly unlimited data that also makes no consideration for tethering, how much more are people willing to pay for that 2GB if the result is that more people will maximize their data usage per month? If a law was passed that made tethering a free requirement for all smartphones in the US carriers would people be happy paying $45 for that same 2GB?

Note that AT&Ts capped plans have made their monthly rates cheaper because they are paying for a lot less potential data usage. To have this price skyrocket past what it was for unlimited data with the iPhone 3G and 3GS just to get tethering that most probably wouldnt utilize seems counterproductive and bad for the consumer.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #75 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Im sorry.

Are these people [Telcos] full of brass balls or what?

They steal $200 Billion over decades from the Taxpayers on promises/assurances of full fiber build out and now they want Apple to foot the bill?
Reply
Reply
post #76 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:36am
I am just wondering would anyone else like to see Apple become a telecom.

I was just thinking provided that the network was great and coverage was good at the best of any out there today. I wouldnt mind if apple had its own network and if you wanted an iphone you get the apple phone service. And since Apple is in the business of selling hardware it would run the telecom as it runs iTunes which is charge people what it costs to maintain and upgrade the network. The only profit motivation would be to make money off selling iphones and ipads.

I guess the only realistic way of doing this is to buy AT&T, fix its network issues (and no dont tell me its not fixable. its just not fixable with the investment that AT&T is willing to put in it now vs moving to LTE), disallow any other new phones from the telecom, and slowly phase out anyone with contract that doesnt have an iphone to move to another network.

But then again you would have to do this on every market or every LARGE market where iphone sales numbers warrent a telecom otherwise keep working with the local company.



Quote:
Originally Posted by fabsgwu View Post

Someone needs to remind the carriers that they are now in the business of serving up data. Put up or shut up.
Reply
Reply
post #77 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Are these people [Telcos] full of brass balls or what?

They steal $200 Billion over decades from the Taxpayers on promises/assurances of full fiber build out and now they want Apple to foot the bill?

Unfortunately, in the US at least, there is a near duopoly on a supply constrained product in huge demand-- cellular bandwidth. That makes AT&T and Verizon into monsters, for the time being.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #78 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

Are these people [Telcos] full of brass balls or what?

They steal $200 Billion over decades from the Taxpayers on promises/assurances of full fiber build out and now they want Apple to foot the bill?

What are you talking about? The US is 4 years AHEAD of Europe in FTTH deployment.

http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=172028

You should get down on your knees and thank god that we are not Europe --- which their regulator just said it's perfectly ok if their carrier to block voip traffic.
Reply
Reply
post #79 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Unfortunately, in the US at least, there is a near duopoly on a supply constrained product in huge demand-- cellular bandwidth. That makes AT&T and Verizon into monsters, for the time being.

But it is still a thousand times better than the other countries.

Japan and South Korea --- their top wireless carriers own more than 50% of the market share.

You won't see a single industrialized country with a top carrier owning so little market share as Verizon Wireless. The top carriers in the industrialized world are mostly owning high 30's to low 40's in market share percentage. Verizon Wireless owns something like 32%.
Reply
Reply
post #80 of 136
12/8/10 at 11:45am
Thats kind of like thanking the rapist for using a condom. Unfortunately they have so much lobbying power that they will keep making laws that benefit them.

Quote:
You should get down on your knees and thank god that we are not Europe --- which their regulator just said it's perfectly ok if their carrier to block voip traffic.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • iPhone data use measured, carriers want Apple to pay for network upgrades
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › iPhone data use measured, carriers want Apple to pay for network upgrades