When they use the following kind of argument, it's clear they haven't really thought things through:
"And to top it off, Cisco estimates that an average mobile user will consume 7 GB of data by 2014. For that, a "DataPlus" user would be charged $305 a month, and a "DataPro" user would owe $75."
By 2014, the telecoms networks could easily handle the load. It would be like arguing about phone bills a few years after we had dial-up but the networks moved on to give us affordable broadband. At the end of the day, the people working for the phone companies have to pay similar amounts of money for personal data usage so their business model progresses like everyone else's.
I reckon these charges are in place for people unlocking their phones and using tethering without paying for it (i.e the 2% of people it should affect). The arguments about video streaming are pretty weak too. If I want to watch Netflix, I'm not going to use a 3G connection for it because it downgrades the video quality as does Youtube.
Audio streaming is a valid point but 2GB would give you 17 hours of constant streaming at 256k. I think Pandora is lower at 128-160k or something so you could get up to 40 hours, which is enough for over an hour per day. At home, you'd be using wifi so it's the time you are out in the car or whatever. Most iPhone users will sync frequent music to the phone anyway at a higher bitrate and use Pandora to sample new music.
All in all, I don't think it's a big deal. Phone companies rip people off - that's not news. Most unlimited contracts are actually limited anyway and they all do it. False advertising.
I'd say the worst affected would be iPad users as it makes paying for the 3G model not such a good idea.
When they use the following kind of argument, it's clear they haven't really thought things through:
"And to top it off, Cisco estimates that an average mobile user will consume 7 GB of data by 2014. For that, a "DataPlus" user would be charged $305 a month, and a "DataPro" user would owe $75."
By 2014, the telecoms networks could easily handle the load. It would be like arguing about phone bills a few years after we had dial-up but the networks moved on to give us affordable broadband. At the end of the day, the people working for the phone companies have to pay similar amounts of money for personal data usage so their business model progresses like everyone else's.
I reckon these charges are in place for people unlocking their phones and using tethering without paying for it (i.e the 2% of people it should affect). The arguments about video streaming are pretty weak too. If I want to watch Netflix, I'm not going to use a 3G connection for it because it downgrades the video quality as does Youtube.
Audio streaming is a valid point but 2GB would give you 17 hours of constant streaming at 256k. I think Pandora is lower at 128-160k or something so you could get up to 40 hours, which is enough for over an hour per day. At home, you'd be using wifi so it's the time you are out in the car or whatever. Most iPhone users will sync frequent music to the phone anyway at a higher bitrate and use Pandora to sample new music.
All in all, I don't think it's a big deal. Phone companies rip people off - that's not news. Most unlimited contracts are actually limited anyway and they all do it. False advertising.
I'd say the worst affected would be iPad users as it makes paying for the 3G model not such a good idea.
The issue isn't what cell phone companies should be able to offer. The issue is their model and how they are reverting to the older model of forcing you to pick a limit and then charging massive overages if you guess wrong.
Telecomms easily handle the load of your text messaging right now yet still charge an arm and leg for what amounts to a dollars worth of data for the entire family at best for an entire month. This isn't about bandwidth limitations but about getting back to 4-500% markups on the products offered.
The issue isn't what cell phone companies should be able to offer. The issue is their model and how they are reverting to the older model of forcing you to pick a limit and then charging massive overages if you guess wrong.
I'd prefer unlimited too but if their network can't cope with it, the only way is to charge the small amount of people who are using excessive amounts, most likely via tethering they aren't paying for. Better options might be temporary blocked access to data or throttled data speeds if you go over instead of the instant $15 charge per 200MB that you probably won't be notified of before the bill hits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman
Telecomms easily handle the load of your text messaging right now
Text messages are only 140 bytes per message, slightly longer if concatenated but next to nothing mostly. MMS is charged for generally but it depends on the plan you use. Messaging is different from data access as it's usually not a constant stream of information.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman
This isn't about bandwidth limitations but about getting back to 4-500% markups on the products offered.
Yeah, the charges after the limit are pretty steep but it suggests that they simply don't want individuals using that much mobile data as they can't handle it. Again, the throttling or blocked access would be better for most people but business users who rely on it wouldn't want that.
Comments
Oh lordy..rant ahead
When they use the following kind of argument, it's clear they haven't really thought things through:
"And to top it off, Cisco estimates that an average mobile user will consume 7 GB of data by 2014. For that, a "DataPlus" user would be charged $305 a month, and a "DataPro" user would owe $75."
By 2014, the telecoms networks could easily handle the load. It would be like arguing about phone bills a few years after we had dial-up but the networks moved on to give us affordable broadband. At the end of the day, the people working for the phone companies have to pay similar amounts of money for personal data usage so their business model progresses like everyone else's.
I reckon these charges are in place for people unlocking their phones and using tethering without paying for it (i.e the 2% of people it should affect). The arguments about video streaming are pretty weak too. If I want to watch Netflix, I'm not going to use a 3G connection for it because it downgrades the video quality as does Youtube.
Audio streaming is a valid point but 2GB would give you 17 hours of constant streaming at 256k. I think Pandora is lower at 128-160k or something so you could get up to 40 hours, which is enough for over an hour per day. At home, you'd be using wifi so it's the time you are out in the car or whatever. Most iPhone users will sync frequent music to the phone anyway at a higher bitrate and use Pandora to sample new music.
All in all, I don't think it's a big deal. Phone companies rip people off - that's not news. Most unlimited contracts are actually limited anyway and they all do it. False advertising.
I'd say the worst affected would be iPad users as it makes paying for the 3G model not such a good idea.
When they use the following kind of argument, it's clear they haven't really thought things through:
"And to top it off, Cisco estimates that an average mobile user will consume 7 GB of data by 2014. For that, a "DataPlus" user would be charged $305 a month, and a "DataPro" user would owe $75."
By 2014, the telecoms networks could easily handle the load. It would be like arguing about phone bills a few years after we had dial-up but the networks moved on to give us affordable broadband. At the end of the day, the people working for the phone companies have to pay similar amounts of money for personal data usage so their business model progresses like everyone else's.
I reckon these charges are in place for people unlocking their phones and using tethering without paying for it (i.e the 2% of people it should affect). The arguments about video streaming are pretty weak too. If I want to watch Netflix, I'm not going to use a 3G connection for it because it downgrades the video quality as does Youtube.
Audio streaming is a valid point but 2GB would give you 17 hours of constant streaming at 256k. I think Pandora is lower at 128-160k or something so you could get up to 40 hours, which is enough for over an hour per day. At home, you'd be using wifi so it's the time you are out in the car or whatever. Most iPhone users will sync frequent music to the phone anyway at a higher bitrate and use Pandora to sample new music.
All in all, I don't think it's a big deal. Phone companies rip people off - that's not news. Most unlimited contracts are actually limited anyway and they all do it. False advertising.
I'd say the worst affected would be iPad users as it makes paying for the 3G model not such a good idea.
The issue isn't what cell phone companies should be able to offer. The issue is their model and how they are reverting to the older model of forcing you to pick a limit and then charging massive overages if you guess wrong.
Telecomms easily handle the load of your text messaging right now yet still charge an arm and leg for what amounts to a dollars worth of data for the entire family at best for an entire month. This isn't about bandwidth limitations but about getting back to 4-500% markups on the products offered.
The issue isn't what cell phone companies should be able to offer. The issue is their model and how they are reverting to the older model of forcing you to pick a limit and then charging massive overages if you guess wrong.
I'd prefer unlimited too but if their network can't cope with it, the only way is to charge the small amount of people who are using excessive amounts, most likely via tethering they aren't paying for. Better options might be temporary blocked access to data or throttled data speeds if you go over instead of the instant $15 charge per 200MB that you probably won't be notified of before the bill hits.
Telecomms easily handle the load of your text messaging right now
Text messages are only 140 bytes per message, slightly longer if concatenated but next to nothing mostly. MMS is charged for generally but it depends on the plan you use. Messaging is different from data access as it's usually not a constant stream of information.
This isn't about bandwidth limitations but about getting back to 4-500% markups on the products offered.
Yeah, the charges after the limit are pretty steep but it suggests that they simply don't want individuals using that much mobile data as they can't handle it. Again, the throttling or blocked access would be better for most people but business users who rely on it wouldn't want that.