AT&T pins neutered SlingPlayer on iPhone not being a phone
In a curiously worded statement, AT&T has claimed it prevented the iPhone version of SlingPlayer from using 3G because it would chew too much data -- and because the iPhone is, oddly, not considered a phone.
The short message justifies the decision to allow Sling Media's remote streaming only without 3G use by first noting that a Slingbox consumes a large amount of bandwidth on AT&T's cellular towers and could "prevent other customers from using the network."
However, it's here that the wireless provider's argument takes an unusual turn. As mentioned by Engadget, AT&T specifically cites its terms of service -- which have flip-flopped over the past several weeks -- as preventing users from re-routing a TV signal through the 3G connection to a personal computer. But rather than add smartphones to the clause, the company tries to fit the iPhone into this category by claiming that it's too powerful to be a regular smartphone.
"Applications like this, which redirect a TV signal to a personal computer, are specifically prohibited under our terms of service," AT&T claims. "We consider smartphones like the iPhone to be personal computers in that they have the same hardware and software attributes as PCs."
Instead, the carrier says, iPhone owners should be content to stream Slingbox video when away from home through the free Wi-Fi access they have at certain public locations, such as Starbucks coffee shops. Web video streams are also allowed.
The stance has already come under fire as evidence of a double standard at AT&T. Where the iPhone app is restricted to Wi-Fi, the BlackBerry Bold and several Windows Mobile phones are explicitly allowed to run their respective versions of SlingPlayer on the same 3G network in a compatibility list Sling maintains on its own. Some phones offered by AT&T outside of this list also run SlingPlayer and, again, aren't given the same restrictions.
Additionally, numerous iPhone apps like Joost or Ustream permit long, contiinuous video streams with bandwidth requirements not unlike those of SlingPlayer.
As such, many already view the seemingly arbitrary treatment of the iPhone as more a reflection of AT&T's ability to support an especially popular device with streaming video on its network than any actual concerns about the iPhone being too powerful to be counted among normal smartphones. The Dallas-based firm has been sued multiple times for allegedly overselling its iPhone 3G speeds and is frequently the subject of criticism in New York City and San Francisco, where the dense concentrations of iPhone users have in many cases made the 3G network all but unusable, dropping calls or reverting to 2G even in strong coverage.
For its part, AT&T has lately been promising significant upgrades to its 3G and is believed to be preparing a major, comprehensive speed upgrade on Apple's behest for May 31st -- just over a week before WWDC and before a new generation of iPhone is likely to push 3G usage even higher.
The short message justifies the decision to allow Sling Media's remote streaming only without 3G use by first noting that a Slingbox consumes a large amount of bandwidth on AT&T's cellular towers and could "prevent other customers from using the network."
However, it's here that the wireless provider's argument takes an unusual turn. As mentioned by Engadget, AT&T specifically cites its terms of service -- which have flip-flopped over the past several weeks -- as preventing users from re-routing a TV signal through the 3G connection to a personal computer. But rather than add smartphones to the clause, the company tries to fit the iPhone into this category by claiming that it's too powerful to be a regular smartphone.
"Applications like this, which redirect a TV signal to a personal computer, are specifically prohibited under our terms of service," AT&T claims. "We consider smartphones like the iPhone to be personal computers in that they have the same hardware and software attributes as PCs."
Instead, the carrier says, iPhone owners should be content to stream Slingbox video when away from home through the free Wi-Fi access they have at certain public locations, such as Starbucks coffee shops. Web video streams are also allowed.
The stance has already come under fire as evidence of a double standard at AT&T. Where the iPhone app is restricted to Wi-Fi, the BlackBerry Bold and several Windows Mobile phones are explicitly allowed to run their respective versions of SlingPlayer on the same 3G network in a compatibility list Sling maintains on its own. Some phones offered by AT&T outside of this list also run SlingPlayer and, again, aren't given the same restrictions.
Additionally, numerous iPhone apps like Joost or Ustream permit long, contiinuous video streams with bandwidth requirements not unlike those of SlingPlayer.
As such, many already view the seemingly arbitrary treatment of the iPhone as more a reflection of AT&T's ability to support an especially popular device with streaming video on its network than any actual concerns about the iPhone being too powerful to be counted among normal smartphones. The Dallas-based firm has been sued multiple times for allegedly overselling its iPhone 3G speeds and is frequently the subject of criticism in New York City and San Francisco, where the dense concentrations of iPhone users have in many cases made the 3G network all but unusable, dropping calls or reverting to 2G even in strong coverage.
For its part, AT&T has lately been promising significant upgrades to its 3G and is believed to be preparing a major, comprehensive speed upgrade on Apple's behest for May 31st -- just over a week before WWDC and before a new generation of iPhone is likely to push 3G usage even higher.
Comments
WIth its amazing amount of apps and horrible "phone" service in my area, the iPhone name is quickly becoming a unique single word oxymoron as you can do almost anything on it but make a decent f*cking call. I don't know whether to scream or continue to be mystified by Apple's clear leadership in this arena. I hate to continue to the AT&T sucks blathering, but a single carrier REALLY IS screwing the potential of this little device.
HEY GO OUT SIDE right now and buy a zune
FOLLOW THIS TWIT TO PROTEST AT&T'S TREATMENT OF IPHONE APPS!
What a bunch of bs!
AT&T (the patch network) sucks and is ripping off Apple customers..
I'm so glad I have an iPod Touch and don't have to put up with their BULL$H*T.
To limit my use of their data network from apps I want to use is unacceptable. I'd rather they cap my network usage to whatever amount they want for my $30/month than to restrict the type of applications I can use (and are available).
Apple needs to put its foot down on this one or they are going to have to not renew exclusivity with AT&T. We need some competition here so we can use our iPhones the way we want.
It's got to be a huge headache for AT&T, and Apple; I'm sure they've maxed out towers as it's probably more about the crowded frequency?
But I would imagine those problems would only be exacerbated magnitude fold with SlingPlayer over 3G on the iPhone.
BTW, this sounds like a great backhanded compliment/ad campaign?
Also, it should cause AT&T more worry...their public admission will help raise support for Apple to expand carriers.
For its part, AT&T has lately been promising significant upgrades to its 3G and is believed to be preparing a major, comprehensive speed upgrade on Apple's behest for May 31st -- just over a week before WWDC and before a new generation of iPhone is likely to push 3G usage even higher.
You forgot to add how much their usage keeps increasing with their relentless advertising of their 3G network along with other 3G phones - especially Blackberries, etc.
"We consider smartphones like the iPhone to be personal computers in that they have the same hardware and software attributes as PCs."
ok then why can't we tether to our laptops for free again?
What a bunch of bs!
http://twitter.com/IphonersHateATT
FOLLOW THIS TWIT TO PROTEST AT&T'S TREATMENT OF IPHONE APPS!
I'm done with AT&T as of this. Not only is the action pure hypocrisy , they now have the nerve to release a PR statement to shed light on it.
oh I can't wait to jump ship... screw att.
These responses are ridiculous.
AT&T says they can't handle the traffic and people are responding by saying that their network sucks, but that they don't believe them? What's not to believe? Sounds reasonable to me.
sure it's not fair that they allow other platforms to do it, but the reality is there are like three people who want to do it on those other platforms and it's not likely there will ever be more. They will allow it on the iPhone eventually, there's no reason to get so unreasonably upset over something that's fairly obvious like this. At least they are being honest with you by saying that they can't handle the traffic.
It's one thing for the carriers to advertise "unlimited data" when in reality it is limited to 5GB.
It's a whole other leap into idiocy for them to actually place restrictions on what you can do with that 5GB of data!
And then to use their partnership with Apple and Apple's monopoly on App sales to force Sling to modify their application? It is just lunacy!
It's time to break up the AT&T iPhone monopoly!
[email protected] (direct)
[email protected]
phone: 210-351-5401 (direct to his secretary)
fax 210-351-3553
alternate phone: 210-821-4105 (headquarters, press 3, ask for Mr. Stephenson's office)
175 E. Houston
San Antonio, TX 78205
Let him know how you feel.
"Unlimited" is not - cannot be - unlimited if everyone treats it like it's unlimited. There is no capacity for that in any system of any kind. It's like a restaurant that says "eat all you can for $5.95" and suddenly, busloads of very hungry, obese people show up for lunch.......
Capacity costs money to provide. And, there are externalities and spillover effects involved, since your downloads affect my speeds.
For anyone who wants to understand this better, I recommend the Econ 101 concept of the 'tragedy of the commons.' (For the short-attention-span version, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons; for the real thing, see http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/162/3859/1243.pdf).
http://twitter.com/IphonersHateATT
FOLLOW THIS TWIT TO PROTEST AT&T'S TREATMENT OF IPHONE APPS!
This protest will be immediately followed by a sit-in... in their basement.
I'm going into my AT&T store and complain about this. I will terminate my plan with them if nothing changes in the next week or two.
If you want to terminate plan, go right ahead and be sure to explain your reason for canceling when you're asked, but don't go bitching and whining at an $8/hr retail clerk.
Apple needs to stop restricting application features and aggressively upgrade their networks with those iPhone dollars. This is pure corporate greed at work here. AT&T will loose rights to the iPhone soon as Apple will only look foolish for so long. I have an iPhone 3G and live in Ohio. I get a great 3G signal in most places where I go. However, AT&T's network should have been built out quite some time ago once the first-gen iPhone came out. How will AT&T be able to support a 3rd gen iPhone that will increase 3G traffic many times over? Sounds like some poor business planning and modeling to me.
They have been building it up, but they've also been selling more iPhones and smartphones are becoming more popular in general. You say that if that won't be able to handle the next iPhone yet you still think that their decision to not further bog down their network is bogus. I'd rather have the app not work on 3G than have my AT&T connections stunted from the saturation. You fail to consider that AT&T has planned for the next iPhone with it's rampant upgrades costing billions, but just can't support streaming TV for now. It's not like the iPhone's YouTube app which are short and use a lower quality depending on the connection, with this you could potentially have it streaming from your home 24/7.
I found one person wondering why their SlingBox only streams out at 470kbps from their 6Mbps Comcast cable connection and that it was borderline watchable. I don't know, but that seems pretty watchable to me with a modern codec. 470kbps, if true, is way too much for AT&T to bare constantly. How many people using this app on one tower would it take to render checking your mail an ordeal. I don't expect everyone to be pragmatic, but don't you think it would be best to prepare their network for the upcoming iPhone, which you admit will tax their network simply because of the uptick in subscribers, instead of potentially crippling it before the launch?
I have an SlingBox that I'd love to use with my iPhone if it worked on 3G and if it would cache enough to allow for a decent bitrate for watching, but that doesn't mean I think it should appear simply because of a shortsided desire. I've tried CBS' app, it is unwatchable.
These responses are ridiculous.
How so?
ATT sold me an "Unlimited Data Plan"... those specific words are used in my CONTRACT.
So... is it unlimited or isn't it???
ATT knew the capabilities of the device when the signed on as the exclusive provider... then they advertised an UNLIMITED data plan... knowing full well what that would entail. People have every right to be pissed-off about these kinds of things. (limiting Apps, and poor network quality.)
The tethering I can understand... that "data" is being used by a device other than the iPhone.