If the heavy data users cut back soon people that are using 5GB will be considered heavy users and be throttled. Keep in mind ATT said ' top five percent in their statement' so the rest of us are next
It still would ONLY be the top 5% so your 'the rest of us are next' comment is total BS meant to spread FUD.
You would like to think AT&T would help their customers by putting wifi everywhere in public spaces, trains, subways, malls etc. anywhere really. They need more than just a Barnes and Noble, McDonalds and Starbucks and where ever else it currently is.
I'm currently living in South Korea and Olleh, one of the carriers of the iPhone here has "Olleh Wifi" everywhere for their customers, street, bus, subways, trains. It's really nice.
Considering the United States is 92 times larger (land mass wise) and has almost five times more the population than South Korea, it isn't really feasible at all to expect a wireless carrier to cover the country in wifi "anywhere" or "everywhere" a person might be. Have a little common sense.
Couldn't this be considered a material breach of the contract with it's users and allow users to break their contract, to go with, say Sprint- who says they will not throttle users?
No, it's not. The contract allows them to make changes as long as they notify you. Furthermore, the contract specifically says that download speeds may vary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Mac
Wouldn't it be a good time for a hard hitting lawyer to step up to the plate. You have to figure that in order to claim excessive use the customer has the right to know what is the limit. The publicity fall out would certainly be equal to Netflix, if not worse since people just have a negative gut reaction to ATT. Any brave soul out here?
Nonsense. First, many other carriers do the same thing. Second, you already know what the limit is - the top 5% of downloaders. How much data is required to put you over the 5% limit will change month to month, but probably not that much. It really doesn't matter. Since the contract does not require them to provide you any given download speed, they are free to change it at will.
Flipping whiners....
The insurance one is a killer. I got insurance for my daughter's phone (not an iPhone) because I figured that there was a good chance she'd lose it (and she did). We paid $5 per month for insurance for 24 months ($120) plus a $50 deductible, so her replacement phone was $170. That was better than if I had to buy a phone without a contract, but not all that much. With the new rates ($7 per month plus deductible up to $199), it wouldn't make sense in many cases. For the iPhone (which is the $199 deductible), you'd pay $$367 if you lose or break your phone. Now, that's still cheaper than buying a new one if you lose the phone, but not much. But if you simply BREAK your iPhone, you can take it to an Apple Store and have it replaced for $199 - so the insurance wouldn't gain you anything (other than $7 per month added to your bill).
You would like to think AT&T would help their customers by putting wifi everywhere in public spaces, trains, subways, malls etc. anywhere really. They need more than just a Barnes and Noble, McDonalds and Starbucks and where ever else it currently is.
I'm currently living in South Korea and Olleh, one of the carriers of the iPhone here has "Olleh Wifi" everywhere for their customers, street, bus, subways, trains. It's really nice.
As we see here, virtually every mobile provider in the world throttles. And as far as "unlimited" data goes, there is virtually none that don't have a restrictive element to it. Just like the "all-you-can-eat" restaurants aren't.
Wouldn't it be a good time for a hard hitting lawyer to step up to the plate. You have to figure that in order to claim excessive use the customer has the right to know what is the limit. The publicity fall out would certainly be equal to Netflix, if not worse since people just have a negative gut reaction to ATT. Any brave soul out here?
Since they aren't charging you to go over a limit, it would be really hard to win a case along these lines.
If the heavy data users cut back soon people that are using 5GB will be considered heavy users and be throttled. Keep in mind ATT said ' top five percent in their statement' so the rest of us are next
My recollection is that's not exactly what AT&T said at the time. Wasn't it "top 5% of bandwidth users where it causes a problem for other users" or something like that? That seemed to leave the door open for them not to throttle anyone in areas where overall system performance wasn't affected by heavy usage from some users.
Wouldn't it be a good time for a hard hitting lawyer to step up to the plate. You have to figure that in order to claim excessive use the customer has the right to know what is the limit. The publicity fall out would certainly be equal to Netflix, if not worse since people just have a negative gut reaction to ATT. Any brave soul out here?
I have an unlimited plan, therefore I don't see how they can claim excessive use at all when unlimited speaks for itself. They just want to piss people off and make them cancel so they can get rid of all the unlimited plans. They've already tried to trick many of us out of our unlimited plans with that little stunt they pulled back around April.
And even on people with the 2GB plans....when they go over that they get charged so they are PAYING for what they use. In which case I don't see how you can charge someone for a service and then slow them down because they are in excess.
So in answer to your question, yes, I'm out here. But I see no reason to dwell on it until such time as they try and pull another trick or my service is negatively impacted.
If the heavy data users cut back soon people that are using 5GB will be considered heavy users and be throttled. Keep in mind ATT said ' top five percent in their statement' so the rest of us are next
And those heavy users will automatically cut back, if everything above the current monthly threshold is dog slow, they will consume very little above that limit. Which puts the monthly automatically lower the next month. And as soon as the limit has come down to below 2 GB, people will voluntarily switch to the 2 GB plan.
And those heavy users will automatically cut back, if everything above the current monthly threshold is dog slow, they will consume very little above that limit. Which puts the monthly automatically lower the next month. And as soon as the limit has come down to below 2 GB, people will voluntarily switch to the 2 GB plan.
Maybe you, too, missed the statement by AT&T where they claim the "top 5%" throttling will only take effect in areas where there's a network congestion problem. If everyone is below 2GB/month (the real number is likely far higher) then perhaps on one will be affected at all. Time will tell.
Of course our general inclination is to not let facts get in the way of a good rant.
Do you seriously believe they won't shaft users in any way possible? There's absolutely nothing conspiratorial about that.
My guess is they're quite happy for those using 100 GB/month to pick up their marbles and go elsewhere. Why not let those customers become someone else problem to deal with? They hardly lose any revenue and they rid themselves of the small handful of customers buggering up their network.
Do you seriously believe they won't shaft users in any way possible?
Yes, I do.
Ultimately, companies survive and thrive by having happy customers. Someone who arbitrarily shafts their users in any way possible won't be around long.
Maybe you, too, missed the statement by AT&T where they claim the "top 5%" throttling will only take effect in areas where there's a network congestion problem. If everyone is below 2GB/month (the real number is likely far higher) then perhaps on one will be affected at all. Time will tell.
Of course our general inclination is to not let facts get in the way of a good rant.
I think the fact is that we don't know where AT&T exactly will take this, their statements are too vague to know either way. And maybe AT&T doesn't itself know how far it wants to go. My only point was that this top 5% policy throttling is a policy that if followed to the letter will lead to a continuous downward trend, it is pure mathematics based on the undeniable fact that limiting speed will lead to less consumption by almost every user affected by it except maybe a few edge cases.
But maybe taking things to their ultimate logical conclusions is less of national pastime in the US than it is in my home country.
That said, since the iPhone came to my current country of residence, no carrier (out of three) has offered a data plan higher than 1 GB/month and strangely enough there have not been riots on the street about it. The overage charges are 10 cent/MB but limited to $5 per day (ie, if you burn through your limit on day 10, you can get up to $100 of overage charge). But then the plans start at $25/month with zero minutes.
Considering the United States is 92 times larger (land mass wise) and has almost five times more the population than South Korea, it isn't really feasible at all to expect a wireless carrier to cover the country in wifi "anywhere" or "everywhere" a person might be. Have a little common sense.
Ultimately, companies survive and thrive by having happy customers. Someone who arbitrarily shafts their users in any way possible won't be around long.
Could you please be CEO of most major companies? I'd say, all of the RIAA ones, for a start. I like the way you think rather than the way THEY think. By the way, you know, Steam, a program by Valve, prevents people who legally buy their games from playing without Internet.
companies survive and thrive by having happy customers. is false. Companies thrive by shafting customers as much as they can without losing them to a competitor. Let's take another example. Apple.
Apple makes notoriously shitty USB cables. Apple denies every single malfunction they can get away with. YES, MY IPHONE 4 HAS AN ANTENNA ISSUE. I have a case around it and I still love it (no, Solipsim, don't even try to make me get an Android ). Apple also denied the corrosion issues in its watercooled Macs a decade ago. Apple shafts its users anyway it can. Apple still is a hugely successful company, because it does what it does better than the other guys.
It's called business. Not gonna change anytime soon.
Comments
If the heavy data users cut back soon people that are using 5GB will be considered heavy users and be throttled. Keep in mind ATT said ' top five percent in their statement' so the rest of us are next
It still would ONLY be the top 5% so your 'the rest of us are next' comment is total BS meant to spread FUD.
Why am I paying for unlimited if it isn't AT&T?
You would like to think AT&T would help their customers by putting wifi everywhere in public spaces, trains, subways, malls etc. anywhere really. They need more than just a Barnes and Noble, McDonalds and Starbucks and where ever else it currently is.
I'm currently living in South Korea and Olleh, one of the carriers of the iPhone here has "Olleh Wifi" everywhere for their customers, street, bus, subways, trains. It's really nice.
Considering the United States is 92 times larger (land mass wise) and has almost five times more the population than South Korea, it isn't really feasible at all to expect a wireless carrier to cover the country in wifi "anywhere" or "everywhere" a person might be. Have a little common sense.
Couldn't this be considered a material breach of the contract with it's users and allow users to break their contract, to go with, say Sprint- who says they will not throttle users?
No, it's not. The contract allows them to make changes as long as they notify you. Furthermore, the contract specifically says that download speeds may vary.
Wouldn't it be a good time for a hard hitting lawyer to step up to the plate. You have to figure that in order to claim excessive use the customer has the right to know what is the limit. The publicity fall out would certainly be equal to Netflix, if not worse since people just have a negative gut reaction to ATT. Any brave soul out here?
Nonsense. First, many other carriers do the same thing. Second, you already know what the limit is - the top 5% of downloaders. How much data is required to put you over the 5% limit will change month to month, but probably not that much. It really doesn't matter. Since the contract does not require them to provide you any given download speed, they are free to change it at will.
Flipping whiners....
The insurance one is a killer. I got insurance for my daughter's phone (not an iPhone) because I figured that there was a good chance she'd lose it (and she did). We paid $5 per month for insurance for 24 months ($120) plus a $50 deductible, so her replacement phone was $170. That was better than if I had to buy a phone without a contract, but not all that much. With the new rates ($7 per month plus deductible up to $199), it wouldn't make sense in many cases. For the iPhone (which is the $199 deductible), you'd pay $$367 if you lose or break your phone. Now, that's still cheaper than buying a new one if you lose the phone, but not much. But if you simply BREAK your iPhone, you can take it to an Apple Store and have it replaced for $199 - so the insurance wouldn't gain you anything (other than $7 per month added to your bill).
You would like to think AT&T would help their customers by putting wifi everywhere in public spaces, trains, subways, malls etc. anywhere really. They need more than just a Barnes and Noble, McDonalds and Starbucks and where ever else it currently is.
I'm currently living in South Korea and Olleh, one of the carriers of the iPhone here has "Olleh Wifi" everywhere for their customers, street, bus, subways, trains. It's really nice.
Could you supply a cost breakdown?
Perhaps you could add it to Maemo Data Plan site. http://wiki.maemo.org/Data_plans
As we see here, virtually every mobile provider in the world throttles. And as far as "unlimited" data goes, there is virtually none that don't have a restrictive element to it. Just like the "all-you-can-eat" restaurants aren't.
Of course it didn't. This way it can claim any user is in the top 5%, thereby justifying throttle all users eventually.
Do you think they have their own fleet of black helicopters, too?
Wouldn't it be a good time for a hard hitting lawyer to step up to the plate. You have to figure that in order to claim excessive use the customer has the right to know what is the limit. The publicity fall out would certainly be equal to Netflix, if not worse since people just have a negative gut reaction to ATT. Any brave soul out here?
Since they aren't charging you to go over a limit, it would be really hard to win a case along these lines.
If the heavy data users cut back soon people that are using 5GB will be considered heavy users and be throttled. Keep in mind ATT said ' top five percent in their statement' so the rest of us are next
My recollection is that's not exactly what AT&T said at the time. Wasn't it "top 5% of bandwidth users where it causes a problem for other users" or something like that? That seemed to leave the door open for them not to throttle anyone in areas where overall system performance wasn't affected by heavy usage from some users.
Wouldn't it be a good time for a hard hitting lawyer to step up to the plate. You have to figure that in order to claim excessive use the customer has the right to know what is the limit. The publicity fall out would certainly be equal to Netflix, if not worse since people just have a negative gut reaction to ATT. Any brave soul out here?
I have an unlimited plan, therefore I don't see how they can claim excessive use at all when unlimited speaks for itself. They just want to piss people off and make them cancel so they can get rid of all the unlimited plans. They've already tried to trick many of us out of our unlimited plans with that little stunt they pulled back around April.
And even on people with the 2GB plans....when they go over that they get charged so they are PAYING for what they use. In which case I don't see how you can charge someone for a service and then slow them down because they are in excess.
So in answer to your question, yes, I'm out here. But I see no reason to dwell on it until such time as they try and pull another trick or my service is negatively impacted.
If the heavy data users cut back soon people that are using 5GB will be considered heavy users and be throttled. Keep in mind ATT said ' top five percent in their statement' so the rest of us are next
And those heavy users will automatically cut back, if everything above the current monthly threshold is dog slow, they will consume very little above that limit. Which puts the monthly automatically lower the next month. And as soon as the limit has come down to below 2 GB, people will voluntarily switch to the 2 GB plan.
Do you think they have their own fleet of black helicopters, too?
Do you seriously believe they won't shaft users in any way possible? There's absolutely nothing conspiratorial about that.
And those heavy users will automatically cut back, if everything above the current monthly threshold is dog slow, they will consume very little above that limit. Which puts the monthly automatically lower the next month. And as soon as the limit has come down to below 2 GB, people will voluntarily switch to the 2 GB plan.
Maybe you, too, missed the statement by AT&T where they claim the "top 5%" throttling will only take effect in areas where there's a network congestion problem. If everyone is below 2GB/month (the real number is likely far higher) then perhaps on one will be affected at all. Time will tell.
Of course our general inclination is to not let facts get in the way of a good rant.
Do you seriously believe they won't shaft users in any way possible? There's absolutely nothing conspiratorial about that.
My guess is they're quite happy for those using 100 GB/month to pick up their marbles and go elsewhere. Why not let those customers become someone else problem to deal with? They hardly lose any revenue and they rid themselves of the small handful of customers buggering up their network.
Do you seriously believe they won't shaft users in any way possible?
Yes, I do.
Ultimately, companies survive and thrive by having happy customers. Someone who arbitrarily shafts their users in any way possible won't be around long.
Maybe you, too, missed the statement by AT&T where they claim the "top 5%" throttling will only take effect in areas where there's a network congestion problem. If everyone is below 2GB/month (the real number is likely far higher) then perhaps on one will be affected at all. Time will tell.
Of course our general inclination is to not let facts get in the way of a good rant.
I think the fact is that we don't know where AT&T exactly will take this, their statements are too vague to know either way. And maybe AT&T doesn't itself know how far it wants to go. My only point was that this top 5% policy throttling is a policy that if followed to the letter will lead to a continuous downward trend, it is pure mathematics based on the undeniable fact that limiting speed will lead to less consumption by almost every user affected by it except maybe a few edge cases.
But maybe taking things to their ultimate logical conclusions is less of national pastime in the US than it is in my home country.
That said, since the iPhone came to my current country of residence, no carrier (out of three) has offered a data plan higher than 1 GB/month and strangely enough there have not been riots on the street about it. The overage charges are 10 cent/MB but limited to $5 per day (ie, if you burn through your limit on day 10, you can get up to $100 of overage charge). But then the plans start at $25/month with zero minutes.
Considering the United States is 92 times larger (land mass wise) and has almost five times more the population than South Korea, it isn't really feasible at all to expect a wireless carrier to cover the country in wifi "anywhere" or "everywhere" a person might be. Have a little common sense.
Agressive today?
Yes, I do.
Ultimately, companies survive and thrive by having happy customers. Someone who arbitrarily shafts their users in any way possible won't be around long.
Could you please be CEO of most major companies? I'd say, all of the RIAA ones, for a start. I like the way you think rather than the way THEY think. By the way, you know, Steam, a program by Valve, prevents people who legally buy their games from playing without Internet.
companies survive and thrive by having happy customers. is false. Companies thrive by shafting customers as much as they can without losing them to a competitor. Let's take another example. Apple.
Apple makes notoriously shitty USB cables. Apple denies every single malfunction they can get away with. YES, MY IPHONE 4 HAS AN ANTENNA ISSUE. I have a case around it and I still love it (no, Solipsim, don't even try to make me get an Android
It's called business. Not gonna change anytime soon.