Don't be surprised once the new iPhone arrives in Oct if AT&T doesn't end unlimited contracts because it will be 4G LTE and not 3G anymore. I hope that prompts an exodus once and for all. The bastards!
The exodus will be Sprint customers to any carrier with LTE. Oh wait, Sprint has unlimited plans that are horribly slow but data hogs LOVE!. So why haven't folks flocked to Sprint? Because they want speed. And with speed, there is a premium to pay, not matter what LTE carrier you choose. So enjoy life with Sprint!
I'm surprised they haven't with thenewipad. Although for the case of the iPhone, until 5.1 my phone said 3G with HSPA+. More than a technicality. At&T can't have it both ways.
Word?
Was Apple legally bound to allow AT&T to display that bogus 4G symbol. SJ would have blocked it I would think because it's totally misleading and looks like T is calling the shots. If anything 3G+ would be more appropriate.
The exodus will be Sprint customers to any carrier with LTE. Oh wait, Sprint has unlimited plans that are horribly slow but data hogs LOVE!. So why haven't folks flocked to Sprint? Because they want speed. And with speed, there is a premium to pay, not matter what LTE carrier you choose. So enjoy life with Sprint!
Why would anyone stay if T breaks their unlimited contract? Masochism?
I think the pigs to which he is referring are those top 5% of the user, I mean abusers, of the service. That's your evidence.
How is that evidence? Think about it for a second. Where is the actual evidence you are talking about?
I mean- learning about how bandwidth actually works front end to end, and how it is used, and then on to the equipment that facilitates data transfer is a huge, very daunting subject to broach, much less learn about. You really kind of need to educate yourself about that first- or we won't even be able to talk about it in any productive way.
So here's a few facts that could help you out-
1) Bandwidth via radio waves is localized. some antennas will have more data traffic to process than others- think a freeway corridor on I80 in central NV vs lower east manhattan. yet- all of their users- no matte rid you live in Elko or San francisco, get penalized based on being in the top 5% of the user base for that localized area. Shouldn't it depend on their hardware being overtaxed? Can't you see how open ended their policy is and how ridiculous it becomes?
2) the amount of data- just like phone calls- has peak times based on areas- for example- downtown chicago consumers will be hammering att with traffic on a monday morning, but that same exact area will be dead from around 7PM to 7AM the next day. not to mention weekends.
3) All of the equipment, and every single data bit on each leg of equipment- from their cell tower antennas to the routers to the data pipes can be accounted for and viewed in near real time. All of it is logged. This is where evidence exists,and they could easily produce it in various formats that would offer EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE to state their case. Instead, they have redefined what bandwidth in a completelt self serving profit making scheme. And, their attempt to sell it is to appeal to the slow witted masses that buy into this simpleton analogy of their network being a cookie jar that some greedy boogie man is stealing from. Cookies right out of your mouth. With zero factual ACTUAL evidence whatsoever. Wouldn't you want to know the facts of what they are saying is true before you shilled for it? I would.
Was Apple legally bound to allow AT&T to display that bogus 4G symbol. SJ would have blocked it I would think because it's totally misleading and looks like T is calling the shots. If anything 3G+ would be more appropriate.
I don't think Apple was legally bound and I don't have a clue what SJ's moves and thoughts would be or I'd be a CEO of the 2nd most valuable PC company in the world. I think Apple is laughing their collective ass off at being the most popular 4G phone. You can't buy that kind of marketing.
I like Sol's idea to post the actual speed or some factor of a base, 1x, 2x, 3x. . . 10x speed. But that wouldn't play into marketing plans of any company. How would that have played with Verizon advertising 3G coverage that was as fast and feature-ful as Edge? Look, AT&T got the shaft for a while when Verizon called their slow crap 3G. Turnabout is fair play. I'd like to believe if I was the product manager for the iPhone 4S on AT&T Wireless that I'd play it straight up. But then I'd be unemployed.
Sprint doesn't seem to need help with the shaft. They do it to solo.
How is that evidence? Think about it for a second. Where is the actual evidence you are talking about?
I mean- learning about how bandwidth actually works front end to end, and how it is used, and then on to the equipment that facilitates data transfer is a huge, very daunting subject to broach, much less learn about. You really kind of need to educate yourself about that first- or we won't even be able to talk about it in any productive way.
So here's a few facts that could help you out-
1) Bandwidth via radio waves is localized. some antennas will have more data traffic to process than others- think a freeway corridor on I80 in central NV vs lower east manhattan. yet- all of their users- no matte rid you live in Elko or San francisco, get penalized based on being in the top 5% of the user base for that localized area. Shouldn't it depend on their hardware being overtaxed? Can't you see how open ended their policy is and how ridiculous it becomes?
2) the amount of data- just like phone calls- has peak times based on areas- for example- downtown chicago consumers will be hammering att with traffic on a monday morning, but that same exact area will be dead from around 7PM to 7AM the next day. not to mention weekends.
3) All of the equipment, and every single data bit on each leg of equipment- from their cell tower antennas to the routers to the data pipes can be accounted for and viewed in near real time. All of it is logged. This is where evidence exists,and they could easily produce it in various formats that would offer EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE to state their case. Instead, they have redefined what bandwidth in a completelt self serving profit making scheme. And, their attempt to sell it is to appeal to the slow witted masses that buy into this simpleton analogy of their network being a cookie jar that some greedy boogie man is stealing from. Cookies right out of your mouth. With zero factual ACTUAL evidence whatsoever. Wouldn't you want to know the facts of what they are saying is true before you shilled for it? I would.
So yes- think and stew upon that for awhile.
They don't owe you an explanation any more than a road crew owes you an explanation for putting out orange cones! Of course they make profit, that's the point and I'm sure they would like to make even MORE profit by selling more data to more users, but no carrier can support the growth that is happening. IF someone has abused their privileges - whether that be in NY, San Fran, or Chicago, then they should be limited. What I see happening is the elimination of this farce called, "unlimited". It makes not sense. No matter where people live, no matter how they use their smart phone or tablet, what we pay should only be based on what we use. Just like voice plans from a few years ago, long distance plans and on and on and on.
This guy was a data hog, pure and simple. Using 3G from his bed (Hello! WiFi anyone?) Anyway, AT&T is not to blame here. Lets face it, there is not enough bandwidth to go around and that means all carriers don't have enough. When continued investment by carriers and with more spectrum made available (I hope), things should improve within a few years. But don't whine and complain and support these data hogs who are causing these problems for moderate users.
You people that claim data hogs are the problem are just dumb... Yes, there is limited spectrum. However, they sold the limited spectrum as "unlimited". And, technology can find ways around limited spectrum. Take for instance moving to DTV. It compressed the actual amount of spectrum needed for the same service. They made a pact with you that you had unlimited usage. Now, they change the terms and claim it's not possible.
A very basic principle of economics is that a good or service will sell in the marketplace for whatever the market will bear, regardless of the cost to produce. That means if a good or service sells for $1 in the market, it doesn't matter if it costs the provider $1.10 to deliver the service, or $0.10 to deliver it, it's only worth $1 in the market. What does that have to do with this? Well, data hogs are accused of making the service more expensive to provide, and they make you BELIEVE this is why they want to limit you. No, they want to limit you because there are now only 3 major carriers, with only 2 of them actually being competitive. So, they've become greedy. They can now limit you, and try and charge you more for actually using what they sold you in the first place. They are squeezing you.
You buddy on the bed using his 3G, if he had an unlimited contract, is using the very product sold to him. They sold him an "unlimited" data plan, so he's using it. Where's the crime? I don't see it...
They don't owe you an explanation any more than a road crew owes you an explanation for putting out orange cones! Of course they make profit, that's the point and I'm sure they would like to make even MORE profit by selling more data to more users, but no carrier can support the growth that is happening. IF someone has abused their privileges - whether that be in NY, San Fran, or Chicago, then they should be limited. What I see happening is the elimination of this farce called, "unlimited". It makes not sense. No matter where people live, no matter how they use their smart phone or tablet, what we pay should only be based on what we use. Just like voice plans from a few years ago, long distance plans and on and on and on.
And this goes back to the very first thing I said to you- you need to take it upon yourself to learn what bandwidth actually is and how it really exists and how it is used.
There are many options available to them on their part to relieve traffic in densely populated areas at peak time.
And they don't owe me shit- you are right. but that's why they will lose in court every single time.
Dude- aren't you personally feeling shame that you are bought and sold to a companies manipulation of your naive understanding of the situation? The fact they have your mind front and center manipulated to their end with zero evidence?
They don't owe you an explanation any more than a road crew owes you an explanation for putting out orange cones! Of course they make profit, that's the point and I'm sure they would like to make even MORE profit by selling more data to more users, but no carrier can support the growth that is happening. IF someone has abused their privileges - whether that be in NY, San Fran, or Chicago, then they should be limited. What I see happening is the elimination of this farce called, "unlimited". It makes not sense. No matter where people live, no matter how they use their smart phone or tablet, what we pay should only be based on what we use. Just like voice plans from a few years ago, long distance plans and on and on and on.
So, you don't think they knew that selling unlimited plans was unsustainable? So, then, it's okay to sell them anyway? They sold "unlimited" data plans, knowing it wasn't a sustainable model. That sounds like fraud...
This IS the real problem. Their too greedy to expand the bandwidth. As why they offered unlimited in the first place. It's because they wanted to suck people like me dry while justifying why I should pay their extortive monthly prices in the first place. They knew they over-booked the seating at the show (Animal Farm playing).
They are all expanding their (note proper usage) networks and if we want speed, we will pay for it. It's a privilege. So ask your mom for some bucks and send it in.
So, you don't think they knew that selling unlimited plans was unsustainable? So, then, it's okay to sell them anyway? They sold "unlimited" data plans, knowing it wasn't a sustainable model. That sounds like fraud...
How did they know this in 2007? It is not sustainable for any company today, but I don't think carriers knew this almost 5 years ago. Companies can change plans based on needs, resources, etc. I would love unlimited to stick around, but with WiFi and hotspots, I don't see that it's needed any longer. And I don't think it's wrong to ask me to pay for what I use. I might actually save money, whereas the data hogs will pay more to feed at the trough.
You people that claim data hogs are the problem are just dumb... Yes, there is limited spectrum. However, they sold the limited spectrum as "unlimited". And, technology can find ways around limited spectrum. Take for instance moving to DTV. It compressed the actual amount of spectrum needed for the same service. They made a pact with you that you had unlimited usage. Now, they change the terms and claim it's not possible.
Where is this magical technology that produces bandwidth out of the blue? How do you know they aren't working to develop ways to improve efficiency? Both AT&T and Verizon changed the terms and Sprint will soon do the same. Unlimited is unsustainable because it costs money to fill the trough to feed the piggies!!!!!
If I'm paying for each GB of data then I shouldn't be throttled.
You signed terms allowing throttling so Att is within their rights and said agreement of those terms
That said I agree that throttling unlimited plans at under the not throttled tier plans is rank and I am pleased that they changed it after this pressure.
Tell that to the man who just successfully sued AT&T and won for them throttling him. now are you a lawyer if not shut the f*ck up dude.
If you are talking about Mr Spaccarelli he didn't really win because of speed and whether it was in the contract etc. He won based on the issue that the tier plans aren't throttled and he wasn't getting as much unthrottled use as another party paying the same data plan as he was. If you are playing the same amount, the argument goes, you should be getting the same service. It's fair and right and the court judged it that way.
It was implied that I was buying a 3G service. To me that means 3G speeds. If you purchased a house, wouldn't you consider the mortgage contract void if they later came and tore it down and put up a shed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by cameronj
They didn't throttle it to below 3G speeds.
What do you think we're talking about? People's iPhones are being throttled on their PHONE'S data connection after they fall into the top 5% of data users. That means slowing down their 3G data connection's speed. Doesn't your phone use the 3G network?
You signed terms allowing throttling so Att is within their rights and said agreement of those terms
That said I agree that throttling unlimited plans at under the not throttled tier plans is rank and I am pleased that they changed it after this pressure.
Actually I didn't sign anything. If I'm paying by the gig it will be for 4g/lte speeds. I'm not on an unlimited plan. I'm certainly willing to go to court as many times as I have to. Advertise 4g/lte and that's what I should get.
AT&T spends more money on advertising than other carriers when that money would've been better spent on getting their network up to snuff. Word of mouth is stronger than advertising.
What do you think we're talking about? People's iPhones are being throttled on their PHONE'S data connection after they fall into the top 5% of data users. That means slowing down their 3G data connection's speed. Doesn't your phone use the 3G network?
So yes it is below ATTs 3G speeds....because that's what you are paying for. Sprint users are paying only 70 bucks a month because their network is the shittiest when it comes to data.
Comments
Don't be surprised once the new iPhone arrives in Oct if AT&T doesn't end unlimited contracts because it will be 4G LTE and not 3G anymore. I hope that prompts an exodus once and for all. The bastards!
The exodus will be Sprint customers to any carrier with LTE. Oh wait, Sprint has unlimited plans that are horribly slow but data hogs LOVE!. So why haven't folks flocked to Sprint? Because they want speed. And with speed, there is a premium to pay, not matter what LTE carrier you choose. So enjoy life with Sprint!
They have the same rules, and they lie more then AT&T, that's why I dumped Verizon, and Sprint that like a abortion gone wrong.
That is exactly correct!
I'm surprised they haven't with thenewipad. Although for the case of the iPhone, until 5.1 my phone said 3G with HSPA+. More than a technicality. At&T can't have it both ways.
Word?
Was Apple legally bound to allow AT&T to display that bogus 4G symbol. SJ would have blocked it I would think because it's totally misleading and looks like T is calling the shots. If anything 3G+ would be more appropriate.
The exodus will be Sprint customers to any carrier with LTE. Oh wait, Sprint has unlimited plans that are horribly slow but data hogs LOVE!. So why haven't folks flocked to Sprint? Because they want speed. And with speed, there is a premium to pay, not matter what LTE carrier you choose. So enjoy life with Sprint!
Why would anyone stay if T breaks their unlimited contract? Masochism?
FALSE. There is no evidence whatsoever of that.
I think the pigs to which he is referring are those top 5% of the user, I mean abusers, of the service. That's your evidence.
Tell that to the man who just successfully sued AT&T and won for them throttling him. now are you a lawyer if not shut the f*ck up dude.
You should get out of your mom's basement a bit more, dumb ass.
And you are the one "throttling" stuff.
And unless your name is Matthew Spaccarelli, you should shut the f*ck up take your throttling from AT&T like a man.
I think the pigs to which he is referring are those top 5% of the user, I mean abusers, of the service. That's your evidence.
How is that evidence? Think about it for a second. Where is the actual evidence you are talking about?
I mean- learning about how bandwidth actually works front end to end, and how it is used, and then on to the equipment that facilitates data transfer is a huge, very daunting subject to broach, much less learn about. You really kind of need to educate yourself about that first- or we won't even be able to talk about it in any productive way.
So here's a few facts that could help you out-
1) Bandwidth via radio waves is localized. some antennas will have more data traffic to process than others- think a freeway corridor on I80 in central NV vs lower east manhattan. yet- all of their users- no matte rid you live in Elko or San francisco, get penalized based on being in the top 5% of the user base for that localized area. Shouldn't it depend on their hardware being overtaxed? Can't you see how open ended their policy is and how ridiculous it becomes?
2) the amount of data- just like phone calls- has peak times based on areas- for example- downtown chicago consumers will be hammering att with traffic on a monday morning, but that same exact area will be dead from around 7PM to 7AM the next day. not to mention weekends.
3) All of the equipment, and every single data bit on each leg of equipment- from their cell tower antennas to the routers to the data pipes can be accounted for and viewed in near real time. All of it is logged. This is where evidence exists,and they could easily produce it in various formats that would offer EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE to state their case. Instead, they have redefined what bandwidth in a completelt self serving profit making scheme. And, their attempt to sell it is to appeal to the slow witted masses that buy into this simpleton analogy of their network being a cookie jar that some greedy boogie man is stealing from. Cookies right out of your mouth. With zero factual ACTUAL evidence whatsoever. Wouldn't you want to know the facts of what they are saying is true before you shilled for it? I would.
So yes- think and stew upon that for awhile.
Word?
Was Apple legally bound to allow AT&T to display that bogus 4G symbol. SJ would have blocked it I would think because it's totally misleading and looks like T is calling the shots. If anything 3G+ would be more appropriate.
I don't think Apple was legally bound and I don't have a clue what SJ's moves and thoughts would be or I'd be a CEO of the 2nd most valuable PC company in the world. I think Apple is laughing their collective ass off at being the most popular 4G phone. You can't buy that kind of marketing.
I like Sol's idea to post the actual speed or some factor of a base, 1x, 2x, 3x. . . 10x speed. But that wouldn't play into marketing plans of any company. How would that have played with Verizon advertising 3G coverage that was as fast and feature-ful as Edge? Look, AT&T got the shaft for a while when Verizon called their slow crap 3G. Turnabout is fair play. I'd like to believe if I was the product manager for the iPhone 4S on AT&T Wireless that I'd play it straight up. But then I'd be unemployed.
Sprint doesn't seem to need help with the shaft. They do it to solo.
How is that evidence? Think about it for a second. Where is the actual evidence you are talking about?
I mean- learning about how bandwidth actually works front end to end, and how it is used, and then on to the equipment that facilitates data transfer is a huge, very daunting subject to broach, much less learn about. You really kind of need to educate yourself about that first- or we won't even be able to talk about it in any productive way.
So here's a few facts that could help you out-
1) Bandwidth via radio waves is localized. some antennas will have more data traffic to process than others- think a freeway corridor on I80 in central NV vs lower east manhattan. yet- all of their users- no matte rid you live in Elko or San francisco, get penalized based on being in the top 5% of the user base for that localized area. Shouldn't it depend on their hardware being overtaxed? Can't you see how open ended their policy is and how ridiculous it becomes?
2) the amount of data- just like phone calls- has peak times based on areas- for example- downtown chicago consumers will be hammering att with traffic on a monday morning, but that same exact area will be dead from around 7PM to 7AM the next day. not to mention weekends.
3) All of the equipment, and every single data bit on each leg of equipment- from their cell tower antennas to the routers to the data pipes can be accounted for and viewed in near real time. All of it is logged. This is where evidence exists,and they could easily produce it in various formats that would offer EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE to state their case. Instead, they have redefined what bandwidth in a completelt self serving profit making scheme. And, their attempt to sell it is to appeal to the slow witted masses that buy into this simpleton analogy of their network being a cookie jar that some greedy boogie man is stealing from. Cookies right out of your mouth. With zero factual ACTUAL evidence whatsoever. Wouldn't you want to know the facts of what they are saying is true before you shilled for it? I would.
So yes- think and stew upon that for awhile.
They don't owe you an explanation any more than a road crew owes you an explanation for putting out orange cones! Of course they make profit, that's the point and I'm sure they would like to make even MORE profit by selling more data to more users, but no carrier can support the growth that is happening. IF someone has abused their privileges - whether that be in NY, San Fran, or Chicago, then they should be limited. What I see happening is the elimination of this farce called, "unlimited". It makes not sense. No matter where people live, no matter how they use their smart phone or tablet, what we pay should only be based on what we use. Just like voice plans from a few years ago, long distance plans and on and on and on.
This guy was a data hog, pure and simple. Using 3G from his bed (Hello! WiFi anyone?) Anyway, AT&T is not to blame here. Lets face it, there is not enough bandwidth to go around and that means all carriers don't have enough. When continued investment by carriers and with more spectrum made available (I hope), things should improve within a few years. But don't whine and complain and support these data hogs who are causing these problems for moderate users.
You people that claim data hogs are the problem are just dumb... Yes, there is limited spectrum. However, they sold the limited spectrum as "unlimited". And, technology can find ways around limited spectrum. Take for instance moving to DTV. It compressed the actual amount of spectrum needed for the same service. They made a pact with you that you had unlimited usage. Now, they change the terms and claim it's not possible.
A very basic principle of economics is that a good or service will sell in the marketplace for whatever the market will bear, regardless of the cost to produce. That means if a good or service sells for $1 in the market, it doesn't matter if it costs the provider $1.10 to deliver the service, or $0.10 to deliver it, it's only worth $1 in the market. What does that have to do with this? Well, data hogs are accused of making the service more expensive to provide, and they make you BELIEVE this is why they want to limit you. No, they want to limit you because there are now only 3 major carriers, with only 2 of them actually being competitive. So, they've become greedy. They can now limit you, and try and charge you more for actually using what they sold you in the first place. They are squeezing you.
You buddy on the bed using his 3G, if he had an unlimited contract, is using the very product sold to him. They sold him an "unlimited" data plan, so he's using it. Where's the crime? I don't see it...
They don't owe you an explanation any more than a road crew owes you an explanation for putting out orange cones! Of course they make profit, that's the point and I'm sure they would like to make even MORE profit by selling more data to more users, but no carrier can support the growth that is happening. IF someone has abused their privileges - whether that be in NY, San Fran, or Chicago, then they should be limited. What I see happening is the elimination of this farce called, "unlimited". It makes not sense. No matter where people live, no matter how they use their smart phone or tablet, what we pay should only be based on what we use. Just like voice plans from a few years ago, long distance plans and on and on and on.
And this goes back to the very first thing I said to you- you need to take it upon yourself to learn what bandwidth actually is and how it really exists and how it is used.
There are many options available to them on their part to relieve traffic in densely populated areas at peak time.
And they don't owe me shit- you are right. but that's why they will lose in court every single time.
Dude- aren't you personally feeling shame that you are bought and sold to a companies manipulation of your naive understanding of the situation? The fact they have your mind front and center manipulated to their end with zero evidence?
They don't owe you an explanation any more than a road crew owes you an explanation for putting out orange cones! Of course they make profit, that's the point and I'm sure they would like to make even MORE profit by selling more data to more users, but no carrier can support the growth that is happening. IF someone has abused their privileges - whether that be in NY, San Fran, or Chicago, then they should be limited. What I see happening is the elimination of this farce called, "unlimited". It makes not sense. No matter where people live, no matter how they use their smart phone or tablet, what we pay should only be based on what we use. Just like voice plans from a few years ago, long distance plans and on and on and on.
So, you don't think they knew that selling unlimited plans was unsustainable? So, then, it's okay to sell them anyway? They sold "unlimited" data plans, knowing it wasn't a sustainable model. That sounds like fraud...
They are all expanding their (note proper usage) networks and if we want speed, we will pay for it. It's a privilege. So ask your mom for some bucks and send it in.
Originally Posted by ruel24
So, you don't think they knew that selling unlimited plans was unsustainable? So, then, it's okay to sell them anyway? They sold "unlimited" data plans, knowing it wasn't a sustainable model. That sounds like fraud...
How did they know this in 2007? It is not sustainable for any company today, but I don't think carriers knew this almost 5 years ago. Companies can change plans based on needs, resources, etc. I would love unlimited to stick around, but with WiFi and hotspots, I don't see that it's needed any longer. And I don't think it's wrong to ask me to pay for what I use. I might actually save money, whereas the data hogs will pay more to feed at the trough.
You people that claim data hogs are the problem are just dumb... Yes, there is limited spectrum. However, they sold the limited spectrum as "unlimited". And, technology can find ways around limited spectrum. Take for instance moving to DTV. It compressed the actual amount of spectrum needed for the same service. They made a pact with you that you had unlimited usage. Now, they change the terms and claim it's not possible.
Where is this magical technology that produces bandwidth out of the blue? How do you know they aren't working to develop ways to improve efficiency? Both AT&T and Verizon changed the terms and Sprint will soon do the same. Unlimited is unsustainable because it costs money to fill the trough to feed the piggies!!!!!
If I'm paying for each GB of data then I shouldn't be throttled.
You signed terms allowing throttling so Att is within their rights and said agreement of those terms
That said I agree that throttling unlimited plans at under the not throttled tier plans is rank and I am pleased that they changed it after this pressure.
Tell that to the man who just successfully sued AT&T and won for them throttling him. now are you a lawyer if not shut the f*ck up dude.
If you are talking about Mr Spaccarelli he didn't really win because of speed and whether it was in the contract etc. He won based on the issue that the tier plans aren't throttled and he wasn't getting as much unthrottled use as another party paying the same data plan as he was. If you are playing the same amount, the argument goes, you should be getting the same service. It's fair and right and the court judged it that way.
It was implied that I was buying a 3G service. To me that means 3G speeds. If you purchased a house, wouldn't you consider the mortgage contract void if they later came and tore it down and put up a shed?
They didn't throttle it to below 3G speeds.
What do you think we're talking about? People's iPhones are being throttled on their PHONE'S data connection after they fall into the top 5% of data users. That means slowing down their 3G data connection's speed. Doesn't your phone use the 3G network?
You signed terms allowing throttling so Att is within their rights and said agreement of those terms
That said I agree that throttling unlimited plans at under the not throttled tier plans is rank and I am pleased that they changed it after this pressure.
Actually I didn't sign anything. If I'm paying by the gig it will be for 4g/lte speeds. I'm not on an unlimited plan. I'm certainly willing to go to court as many times as I have to. Advertise 4g/lte and that's what I should get.
AT&T spends more money on advertising than other carriers when that money would've been better spent on getting their network up to snuff. Word of mouth is stronger than advertising.
What do you think we're talking about? People's iPhones are being throttled on their PHONE'S data connection after they fall into the top 5% of data users. That means slowing down their 3G data connection's speed. Doesn't your phone use the 3G network?
So yes it is below ATTs 3G speeds....because that's what you are paying for. Sprint users are paying only 70 bucks a month because their network is the shittiest when it comes to data.