They had me as a customer since 2007. Average bill was $125/month. This was without a text messaging plan but with international calling (metered).
Well, they had their wish and had me cancel their unlimited data plan.
But then, when my iPhone4 contract expired, I had them unlock my phone and switched to T-mobile pre-paid. So instead of $125/month they get $0/month from me and will never get me back as a customer.
And I will badmouth them whenever this topic comes up because I was truly offended by their "you are abusing the data plan with your 2.5GB/month data gorging" SMSs after charging me $125/month.
Now I have $50 (unlimited voice, data (Edge - so it sucks), text) + $10 (unlimited international).
Data via Edge is horrid but not as bad as being ripped off by those ATT vultures. And T-mobile is supposed to make their network iPhone compatible in the near future.
Never again will I get a subsidized, locked phone. Ridiculous monthly charges and obscenely expensive international roaming when on vacation.
They had me as a customer since 2007. Average bill was $125/month. This was without a text messaging plan but with international calling (metered).
Well, they had their wish and had me cancel their unlimited data plan.
But then, when my iPhone4 contract expired, I had them unlock my phone and switched to T-mobile pre-paid. So instead of $125/month they get $0/month from me and will never get me back as a customer.
And I will badmouth them whenever this topic comes up because I was truly offended by their "you are abusing the data plan with your 2.5GB/month data gorging" SMSs after charging me $125/month.
Now I have $50 (unlimited voice, data (Edge - so it sucks), text) + $10 (unlimited international).
Data via Edge is horrid but not as bad as being ripped off by those ATT vultures. And T-mobile is supposed to make their network iPhone compatible in the near future.
Never again will I get a subsidized, locked phone. Ridiculous monthly charges and obscenely expensive international roaming when on vacation.
I wasn't aware that you could get unlimited international on T-mobile. If I start traveling internationally, again, I may switch to T-mobile just for that reason. I'll have to look into it.
Verizon just lost a case where they were sued for charging extra for tethering. Essentially the issue is the same: double charging clients for their data. Once you pay for a specified amount of data you then have the right to use it in any means as you wish. However, ATT will now force those who want to use their data via FaceTime to be in a particular plan that is more expensive for the consumer. Certainly, they are motivated by their desire to do away with customers who have unlimited plans. If there is a movement for a class action lawsuit then I would be a strong supporter. Tired of being bullied and strong armed by these companies.
There's a major difference. Verizon had to agree to allow tethering because of the terms of their purchase of the 700 MHz spectrum. That does not apply to AT&T or Sprint.
Of course, it may force AT&T and Sprint to follow due to competitive pressures, but they don't HAVE to.
Could someone inform me about the pros and cons of using the iPhone 4S on Straight Talk (other than price)? I did a little research and saw that MMS doesn't work the same (whatever that means... if someone could explain that, they would be great too). Will voice and data coverage be identical to what I get with AT&T right now? Better? Worse? I'm not overly pleased with AT&T coverage in Wisconsin but I want to make sure that Straight Talk will AT LEAST be at that level.
Configuration can be a bear. If you simply buy the Straight Talk SIM and insert it, your phone will work properly and you will have a working phone. Getting data or text messaging requires that you change the APN settings which is not trivial.
There are several options for changing apn settings:
1. There's an online app which allows you to do this (I don't remember where it is, but it involves going to a web page from the .nz domain). The advantage is that it's simple and doesn't require jailbreaking. Unfortunately, the disadvantage is that it doesn't always work. On my iPhone 4S, it didn't get me data or text messaging. Most other people say it works, so it's worth a try.
2. You can use the Apple iPhone Configuration utility to change settings. More complicated than #1, but also doesn't require jailbreaking. For me, it got my data and text messaging working, but not MMS. YMMV
3. You can jailbreak the phone and use third party apps to set the APN and other settings. Just search for information on line to get the settings required.
I spent hours on the phone with Straight Talk tech support to get #3 finally sorted out. They apparently don't have settings that always work. I kept getting "OK, that didn't work, so let's try this" and some new settings. It turned out that in the end, the problem was on their end and they had to reset my account to make it work. Eventually, I got it working. There is, however, one limitation. Straight Talk claims that you can not either send or receive MMS when your phone has WiFi turned on. Text works OK, but not MMS, so I was regularly turning off WiFi even at home just to see if anyone had sent me an MMS message and, of course, I had to turn WiFi off to send MMS. In the end, though, I was able to find one of the many APN settings that allowed MMS to work even if I had a WiFi connection active and everything works fine now.
So, the answer is that it may take some tweaking to try to get things working and Straight Talk's tech support isn't all that great (although they do answer the phone and TRY to help you about 10,000 times faster than AT&T). If you don't mind futzing around a bit and searching for APN settings or spending time on the phone with them, it's a good solution.
The only feature that you can't get working at all is visual voicemail. You'll be stuck with the old-fashioned "press 7 to delete this message" prompts.
This concerns me. What happens to video conferencing apps then? I'm developing one myself and don't want it rejected because of crap like this. Furthermore, how does Apple accept this crap? And why isn't the FCC preventing this kind of shit from happening?
I don't see the connection. Apple didn't stop allowing VC apps on the App Store after they released FaceTime. This is something completely different with at least one carrier. In fact, this helps your 3rd-party solution in many way.
There is a huge difference between Apple deliberately deciding that FaceTime is too heavy for a 3G network and carriers deciding to rule on apps that use their network for audio and video conferencing. If carriers demonstrate an interest in charging extra for audio and video conferencing data, then they will also be also likely to ask Apple to remove any apps which traffic they can't block or classify from the App Store (the case of the app that I'm developing, which uses an end-to-end encrypted NAT-piercing P2P protocol negotiated with random UDP ports that also change over time to thwart any QoS classification and quantification attempts).
Presumably, with the FaceTime feature on AT&T's network you get QoS that will put your FT traffic before all other traffic. Whether people want to believe it or not this does cost money and is needed for a quality realtime audio and/or video.
That said they should (at least) just let FT be the same FIFO as regular web traffic with no QoS for those that don't want to pay for it. FT may or may not always work well and they can offer the better plan as an option without making it a requirement for those that want it. By being the only carrier not offering this as part of your regular service they just make themselves look stingy. As I said, it costs money for QoS on equipment that can handle the load but it's not so much that they can't absorb the cost into their tiered plans they are charging for data. I expect them to drop this after they lose plenty of users. If the next iPhone has LTE I'll be switching to Verizon for the increased performance and simultaneous V&D option.
Well, they haven't made any commitments along those lines, so that would be, at this point, just a baseless speculation. The real problem is that AT&T simply doesn't want to invest in infrastructure, so they try to keep anything data intensive off their network and price data exorbitantly to discourage use. They do, however, want to milk their existing infrastructure to maximize profit without further investment.
Meanwhile, the carriers become an obstacle to technological advancement, which essentially means that they are working to stifle innovation by other companies. The only solution is for the government to step in and start forcing them to operate the public radio spectrum in the public interest. Otherwise, we'll always have a situation where the carriers decide which technologies will be allowed and which won't.
More likely, this might be the carrot to get you off your grandfathered unlimited data plan. Facetime didn't work when you signed your contract and it will continue to not work. Therefore, you are getting the service you signed up for. If you want Facetime, upgrade your plan (ie, drop your unlimited plan). Charging extra for a particular data service would likely land them in a lot of hot water with the regulators. But not giving you a service you never had would be very defendable by the carriers.
If ATT can convince regulators that FaceTime is a feature like voicemail and text messaging, as opposed to just another data using application that should be under net neutrality (which doesn't seem to completely apply to cell networks from some strange reason), then they might get away with it. Let's hope the regulators are smarter than that, or it will open the door for every new smartphone feature to be held as leverage to force people onto new service plans.
Well, they haven't made any commitments along those lines, so that would be, at this point, just a baseless speculation. The real problem is that AT&T simply doesn't want to invest in infrastructure, so they try to keep anything data intensive off their network and price data exorbitantly to discourage use. They do, however, want to milk their existing infrastructure to maximize profit without further investment.
Meanwhile, the carriers become an obstacle to technological advancement, which essentially means that they are working to stifle innovation by other companies. The only solution is for the government to step in and start forcing them to operate the public radio spectrum in the public interest. Otherwise, we'll always have a situation where the carriers decide which technologies will be allowed and which won't.
If the government isn't going to step in over SMS rate then I don't see how they will step in over a single VC solution where many are available to use. Of course, we have seen senators get all upset simply because it's a feature they use (talk about a lack of objectivity and working for the people) so maybe FT is important enough to one of them to make this happen. But I doubt it. I think the best bet is to simply force AT&T's hand financially by not using their service and when they ask why you are leaving when you close out your account you tell them why.
Again, there is a cost, same as with SMS, but it is minimal. On top of that, they could simply allow it to be used on metered data plans and make it FIFO with no QoS.
As for baseless speculation I have a lot of experience in this field to know what is and isn't possible. I also used the word presumably in my statement to refer to potential QoS. Is it really baseless to expect a paid service to have an additional benefit to it that an unpaid service does not? How is my presumption that is based on a long history of historical evidence baseless but saying AT&T doesn't want to invest in infrastructure and wants to keep anything data heavy off their network not baseless? In fact, it's axiomatically incorrect on both accounts. AT&T has invested billions upon billions of dollars in the infrastructure over the years (even more so than other US MNOs because they had the iPhone first). The also allow access to videos on their network. There is no agreeing to stop YouTube, which is considerably more data heavy. The difference between YT and FT is that YT can be queued up and FT needs to be real time for it to work.
That's a very different thing than saying AT&T doesn't want to invest enough and is hurting themselves by making their network look unattractive for not allowing FIFO FT on their metered data plans. Do we even know what that message means? Perhaps it's a limitation for those that still have unlimited data plans, and only those that have unlimited data plans. With AT&T's history I wouldn't presume that is the most likely answer but it's still something that shouldn't be overlooked as it's a reasonable provision for a reasonable MNO.
PS: Kernel-level ASLR is coming to iOS 6 so those that are expecting to JB their iDevice to use a workaround are likely going to have to wait longer than usual for a JB, at the very least.
Verizon just lost a case where they were sued for charging extra for tethering. Essentially the issue is the same: double charging clients for their data. Once you pay for a specified amount of data you then have the right to use it in any means as you wish. However, ATT will now force those who want to use their data via FaceTime to be in a particular plan that is more expensive for the consumer. Certainly, they are motivated by their desire to do away with customers who have unlimited plans. If there is a movement for a class action lawsuit then I would be a strong supporter. Tired of being bullied and strong armed by these companies.
The lawsuit against vzw wasn't because they were charging extra for tethering, it was because they blocked apps that just happened to be tethering apps. They agreed not to block software when they won the frequency auction that they use for LTE.
If the government isn't going to step in over SMS rate then I don't see how they will step in over a single VC solution where many are available to use. ...
I didn't say they would, I just said it's the only solution. The most reasonable inference is that nothing will change, any time soon.
But, let's not pretend AT&T is forcing people to shared plans so they can control QoS. They are doing it to force people off unlimited plans, and to make more money off them to be able to use features that AT&T really has nothing to do with other than being a dumb pipe.
It's unfortunate when commenters feel they need to invoke the "lazy Americans" stereotype. As far as I can tell, Europeans appear notoriously prone to demanding inordinate amounts of vacation and have tanking economies-often due to lack of worker productivity. Anyhow, did you ever think that some Americans simply cannot "afford" the total upfront cost of an unsubsidized phone? Or, that some Americans can afford to not care and just pay for the convenience of renewing legacy plans?
Configuration can be a bear. If you simply buy the Straight Talk SIM and insert it, your phone will work properly and you will have a working phone. Getting data or text messaging requires that you change the APN settings which is not trivial.
There are several options for changing apn settings:
1. There's an online app which allows you to do this (I don't remember where it is, but it involves going to a web page from the .nz domain). The advantage is that it's simple and doesn't require jailbreaking. Unfortunately, the disadvantage is that it doesn't always work. On my iPhone 4S, it didn't get me data or text messaging. Most other people say it works, so it's worth a try.
2. You can use the Apple iPhone Configuration utility to change settings. More complicated than #1, but also doesn't require jailbreaking. For me, it got my data and text messaging working, but not MMS. YMMV
3. You can jailbreak the phone and use third party apps to set the APN and other settings. Just search for information on line to get the settings required.
I spent hours on the phone with Straight Talk tech support to get #3 finally sorted out. They apparently don't have settings that always work. I kept getting "OK, that didn't work, so let's try this" and some new settings. It turned out that in the end, the problem was on their end and they had to reset my account to make it work. Eventually, I got it working. There is, however, one limitation. Straight Talk claims that you can not either send or receive MMS when your phone has WiFi turned on. Text works OK, but not MMS, so I was regularly turning off WiFi even at home just to see if anyone had sent me an MMS message and, of course, I had to turn WiFi off to send MMS. In the end, though, I was able to find one of the many APN settings that allowed MMS to work even if I had a WiFi connection active and everything works fine now.
So, the answer is that it may take some tweaking to try to get things working and Straight Talk's tech support isn't all that great (although they do answer the phone and TRY to help you about 10,000 times faster than AT&T). If you don't mind futzing around a bit and searching for APN settings or spending time on the phone with them, it's a good solution.
The only feature that you can't get working at all is visual voicemail. You'll be stuck with the old-fashioned "press 7 to delete this message" prompts.
This is a major negative for me. If there is a pet peeve that I have, it's when technology doesn't work when it's supposed to. I'm not going to admit that I'm completely technologically stupid but, when my computer gives me grief connecting to new Wi-Fi networks, when my phone stops working properly and has to be restarted, or I can't figure out how to set up something on the cloud, I'm ready to throw my stuff at the wall! I hate tinkering with electronics to get this to work properly.
So, as much as I'd love to switch TODAY to Straight Talk, I simply don't have the the time or patience to fidget with the different features to get them working properly and it's a trade off between getting raped by AT&T and having properly functioning phones. If that makes sense.
I'm guessing (not sure if I should be) that, as more and more people go this route, the technology will only become more seamless and THEN I'll more strongly consider a switch.
---------
On a side note, like many of you on this forum, I really feel that AT&T is overstepping its boundaries on this one and I have contacted the FCC and my congressman. I encourage those that feel similarly to do the same. You'd be surprised how quickly your voice can be heard even in a seemingly vast and oversized government.
But, let's not pretend AT&T is forcing people to shared plans so they can control QoS. They are doing it to force people off unlimited plans, and to make more money off them to be able to use features that AT&T really has nothing to do with other than being a dumb pipe.
You're conflating two different things. I mentioned both QoS as a "carrot" scenario as a method getting people to get a quality FT experience at a cost and unlimited data plans as a "stick" scenario as a method for getting more people off unlimited data plans if they want this feature.
But let's be honest, they don't really have to do the latter at all to get people off unlimited plans. If you are on contract they can end the contract (remember the contract is for them because they are giving you a phone at a reduced price, not for them), or once the contract runs out they can then say they won't keep it going, or once you try to get a new subsidized phone they will not let you keep your unlimited data plan. They only factor they have to consider is the turn over it could cause by doing this weighed against the cost of these unlimited data users.
Maybe they will charge for FT and yet still offer no QoS but, to me, that doesn't seem like something Apple would support. They typically want the user experience to be increased in some way if it's being hurt in another way. That said, even though Apple does have the carriers by their [insert comment that sounds like and/or refers to both gonads and the cellphone industry] they still work very closely with them, especially in the US, so I guess pretty much anything can happen. Still, I think Apple saying they can charge for FT for tiered data plans would likely come with an agreement for QoS as this would make FT considerably better than other VC options on even a moderately congested network, especially between users on the same network.
This is a major negative for me. If there is a pet peeve that I have, it's when technology doesn't work when it's supposed to. I'm not going to admit that I'm completely technologically stupid but, when my computer gives me grief connecting to new Wi-Fi networks, when my phone stops working properly and has to be restarted, or I can't figure out how to set up something on the cloud, I'm ready to throw my stuff at the wall! I hate tinkering with electronics to get this to work properly.
So, as much as I'd love to switch TODAY to Straight Talk, I simply don't have the the time or patience to fidget with the different features to get them working properly and it's a trade off between getting raped by AT&T and having properly functioning phones. If that makes sense.
I'm guessing (not sure if I should be) that, as more and more people go this route, the technology will only become more seamless and THEN I'll more strongly consider a switch.
There are lots of people in that position - which is why so many people buy phones that are locked to one carrier. The downside is that when you do that, your choices are very limited - and the carrier can implement terms that you don't like leaving you with no recourse.
Just for clarification (I think you get it, but others may not), with Straight Talk, many people had no trouble using the online app to set their APN. I don't know why it wouldn't work for me, but it may have to do with location.
Even for me, there as a good bit of futzing around at first, but it now works flawlessly. Considering how much I'm saving, I could have paid a neighbor teenager to do all the setup stuff and still come out way ahead.
Lazy Americans work a lot harder than Europeans who get 6 week vacations and 3 hour lunches.
Let's be fair. Not all Europeans get 6 weeks of vacation. Some get more. /s
As far as work hours, IIRC, France has the lowest number of work hours of any country. One site puts their annual work hours at 15% below the US: http://www.gaebler.com/Productivity-and-Vacation-Comparisons-by-Country.htm
The last time I looked, not a single European country had average annual work hours greater than the US.
Note, however, that the US figure is a minimum. In my experience (I've worked with partners in France for over 2 decades), it is very unusual for most French to work significantly beyond the minimum. In the US, it is very common for salaried personnel. In fact, 20-40% more than the minimum is quite common.
How can AT&T (legally) block one "brand" of video conferencing software, yet allow another brand to pass without issue?
I'm a bit surprised that Apple is letting them do this.
You could ask how AT&T can legally charge for phone minutes for voice calls but allow Skype et al. to allow voice calls for free, except people seem to have a basic understanding of why that would be considered different. We could take that even further by asking why I'm being "forced" to by phone minutes I don't want just to get data and why must I be forced to buy an excessive number of minutes per month.
You're conflating two different things. I mentioned both QoS as a "carrot" scenario as a method getting people to get a quality FT experience at a cost and unlimited data plans as a "stick" scenario as a method for getting more people off unlimited data plans if they want this feature.
But let's be honest, they don't really have to do the latter at all to get people off unlimited plans. If you are on contract they can end the contract (remember the contract is for them because they are giving you a phone at a reduced price, not for them), or once the contract runs out they can then say they won't keep it going, or once you try to get a new subsidized phone they will not let you keep your unlimited data plan. They only factor they have to consider is the turn over it could cause by doing this weighed against the cost of these unlimited data users.
Maybe they will charge for FT and yet still offer no QoS but, to me, that doesn't seem like something Apple would support. They typically want the user experience to be increased in some way if it's being hurt in another way. That said, even though Apple does have the carriers by their [insert comment that sounds like and/or refers to both gonads and the cellphone industry] they still work very closely with them, especially in the US, so I guess pretty much anything can happen. Still, I think Apple saying they can charge for FT for tiered data plans would likely come with an agreement for QoS as this would make FT considerably better than other VC options on even a moderately congested network, especially between users on the same network.
Well, all the QoS stuff is pure speculation, with no reason to expect it. AT&T can't even guaranty QoS for voice calls, so I don't see why we should expect it for FT. There just isn't any reason to think that they will, and they certainly haven't made any statements to indicate they would.
But, yes, they can force you off your unlimited plan any time they want. But, they'd rather avoid the negative publicity and pretend they are offering something fantastic in exchange, when all they are really doing is offering what you should have had in the first place. Net neutrality is definitely dead in the US, and we will all suffer for it.
Well, all the QoS stuff is pure speculation, with no reason to expect it. AT&T can't even guaranty QoS for voice calls, so I don't see why we should expect it for FT. There just isn't any reason to think that they will, and they certainly haven't made any statements to indicate they would.
But, yes, they can force you off your unlimited plan any time they want. But, they'd rather avoid the negative publicity and pretend they are offering something fantastic in exchange, when all they are really doing is offering what you should have had in the first place. Net neutrality is definitely dead in the US, and we will all suffer for it.
What?! They absolutely do guarantee QoS for voice calls. All the telcos put voice over data. That does means it'll be perfect every time but all the voice traffic does get the highest priority due to it's real time nature. Voice is technically just data but it's not sent FIFO like the data you buy for your phone. It has a higher priority that is called QoS.
What?! They absolutely do guarantee QoS for voice calls. All the telcos put voice over data. That does means it'll be perfect every time but all the voice traffic does get the highest priority due to it's real time nature. Voice is technically just data but it's not sent FIFO like the data you buy for your phone. It has a higher priority that is called QoS.
Are you actually on AT&T? Although, I was in fact being sarcastic, but quality and service are not words I'd use together in describing AT&T's voice traffic.
Comments
LOL ATT !
They had me as a customer since 2007. Average bill was $125/month. This was without a text messaging plan but with international calling (metered).
Well, they had their wish and had me cancel their unlimited data plan.
But then, when my iPhone4 contract expired, I had them unlock my phone and switched to T-mobile pre-paid. So instead of $125/month they get $0/month from me and will never get me back as a customer.
And I will badmouth them whenever this topic comes up because I was truly offended by their "you are abusing the data plan with your 2.5GB/month data gorging" SMSs after charging me $125/month.
Now I have $50 (unlimited voice, data (Edge - so it sucks), text) + $10 (unlimited international).
Data via Edge is horrid but not as bad as being ripped off by those ATT vultures. And T-mobile is supposed to make their network iPhone compatible in the near future.
Never again will I get a subsidized, locked phone. Ridiculous monthly charges and obscenely expensive international roaming when on vacation.
I wasn't aware that you could get unlimited international on T-mobile. If I start traveling internationally, again, I may switch to T-mobile just for that reason. I'll have to look into it.
There's a major difference. Verizon had to agree to allow tethering because of the terms of their purchase of the 700 MHz spectrum. That does not apply to AT&T or Sprint.
Of course, it may force AT&T and Sprint to follow due to competitive pressures, but they don't HAVE to.
Configuration can be a bear. If you simply buy the Straight Talk SIM and insert it, your phone will work properly and you will have a working phone. Getting data or text messaging requires that you change the APN settings which is not trivial.
There are several options for changing apn settings:
1. There's an online app which allows you to do this (I don't remember where it is, but it involves going to a web page from the .nz domain). The advantage is that it's simple and doesn't require jailbreaking. Unfortunately, the disadvantage is that it doesn't always work. On my iPhone 4S, it didn't get me data or text messaging. Most other people say it works, so it's worth a try.
2. You can use the Apple iPhone Configuration utility to change settings. More complicated than #1, but also doesn't require jailbreaking. For me, it got my data and text messaging working, but not MMS. YMMV
3. You can jailbreak the phone and use third party apps to set the APN and other settings. Just search for information on line to get the settings required.
I spent hours on the phone with Straight Talk tech support to get #3 finally sorted out. They apparently don't have settings that always work. I kept getting "OK, that didn't work, so let's try this" and some new settings. It turned out that in the end, the problem was on their end and they had to reset my account to make it work. Eventually, I got it working. There is, however, one limitation. Straight Talk claims that you can not either send or receive MMS when your phone has WiFi turned on. Text works OK, but not MMS, so I was regularly turning off WiFi even at home just to see if anyone had sent me an MMS message and, of course, I had to turn WiFi off to send MMS. In the end, though, I was able to find one of the many APN settings that allowed MMS to work even if I had a WiFi connection active and everything works fine now.
So, the answer is that it may take some tweaking to try to get things working and Straight Talk's tech support isn't all that great (although they do answer the phone and TRY to help you about 10,000 times faster than AT&T). If you don't mind futzing around a bit and searching for APN settings or spending time on the phone with them, it's a good solution.
The only feature that you can't get working at all is visual voicemail. You'll be stuck with the old-fashioned "press 7 to delete this message" prompts.
There is a huge difference between Apple deliberately deciding that FaceTime is too heavy for a 3G network and carriers deciding to rule on apps that use their network for audio and video conferencing. If carriers demonstrate an interest in charging extra for audio and video conferencing data, then they will also be also likely to ask Apple to remove any apps which traffic they can't block or classify from the App Store (the case of the app that I'm developing, which uses an end-to-end encrypted NAT-piercing P2P protocol negotiated with random UDP ports that also change over time to thwart any QoS classification and quantification attempts).
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Presumably, with the FaceTime feature on AT&T's network you get QoS that will put your FT traffic before all other traffic. Whether people want to believe it or not this does cost money and is needed for a quality realtime audio and/or video.
That said they should (at least) just let FT be the same FIFO as regular web traffic with no QoS for those that don't want to pay for it. FT may or may not always work well and they can offer the better plan as an option without making it a requirement for those that want it. By being the only carrier not offering this as part of your regular service they just make themselves look stingy. As I said, it costs money for QoS on equipment that can handle the load but it's not so much that they can't absorb the cost into their tiered plans they are charging for data. I expect them to drop this after they lose plenty of users. If the next iPhone has LTE I'll be switching to Verizon for the increased performance and simultaneous V&D option.
Well, they haven't made any commitments along those lines, so that would be, at this point, just a baseless speculation. The real problem is that AT&T simply doesn't want to invest in infrastructure, so they try to keep anything data intensive off their network and price data exorbitantly to discourage use. They do, however, want to milk their existing infrastructure to maximize profit without further investment.
Meanwhile, the carriers become an obstacle to technological advancement, which essentially means that they are working to stifle innovation by other companies. The only solution is for the government to step in and start forcing them to operate the public radio spectrum in the public interest. Otherwise, we'll always have a situation where the carriers decide which technologies will be allowed and which won't.
Not to be too self-congratulatory, but gotta say...nailed it. :-P
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/151328/ios-6-message-prompts-speculation-carriers-may-charge-for-3g-facetime/40#post_2148590
Quote:
More likely, this might be the carrot to get you off your grandfathered unlimited data plan. Facetime didn't work when you signed your contract and it will continue to not work. Therefore, you are getting the service you signed up for. If you want Facetime, upgrade your plan (ie, drop your unlimited plan). Charging extra for a particular data service would likely land them in a lot of hot water with the regulators. But not giving you a service you never had would be very defendable by the carriers.
If ATT can convince regulators that FaceTime is a feature like voicemail and text messaging, as opposed to just another data using application that should be under net neutrality (which doesn't seem to completely apply to cell networks from some strange reason), then they might get away with it. Let's hope the regulators are smarter than that, or it will open the door for every new smartphone feature to be held as leverage to force people onto new service plans.
If the government isn't going to step in over SMS rate then I don't see how they will step in over a single VC solution where many are available to use. Of course, we have seen senators get all upset simply because it's a feature they use (talk about a lack of objectivity and working for the people) so maybe FT is important enough to one of them to make this happen. But I doubt it. I think the best bet is to simply force AT&T's hand financially by not using their service and when they ask why you are leaving when you close out your account you tell them why.
Again, there is a cost, same as with SMS, but it is minimal. On top of that, they could simply allow it to be used on metered data plans and make it FIFO with no QoS.
As for baseless speculation I have a lot of experience in this field to know what is and isn't possible. I also used the word presumably in my statement to refer to potential QoS. Is it really baseless to expect a paid service to have an additional benefit to it that an unpaid service does not? How is my presumption that is based on a long history of historical evidence baseless but saying AT&T doesn't want to invest in infrastructure and wants to keep anything data heavy off their network not baseless? In fact, it's axiomatically incorrect on both accounts. AT&T has invested billions upon billions of dollars in the infrastructure over the years (even more so than other US MNOs because they had the iPhone first). The also allow access to videos on their network. There is no agreeing to stop YouTube, which is considerably more data heavy. The difference between YT and FT is that YT can be queued up and FT needs to be real time for it to work.
That's a very different thing than saying AT&T doesn't want to invest enough and is hurting themselves by making their network look unattractive for not allowing FIFO FT on their metered data plans. Do we even know what that message means? Perhaps it's a limitation for those that still have unlimited data plans, and only those that have unlimited data plans. With AT&T's history I wouldn't presume that is the most likely answer but it's still something that shouldn't be overlooked as it's a reasonable provision for a reasonable MNO.
PS: Kernel-level ASLR is coming to iOS 6 so those that are expecting to JB their iDevice to use a workaround are likely going to have to wait longer than usual for a JB, at the very least.
The lawsuit against vzw wasn't because they were charging extra for tethering, it was because they blocked apps that just happened to be tethering apps. They agreed not to block software when they won the frequency auction that they use for LTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
If the government isn't going to step in over SMS rate then I don't see how they will step in over a single VC solution where many are available to use. ...
I didn't say they would, I just said it's the only solution. The most reasonable inference is that nothing will change, any time soon.
But, let's not pretend AT&T is forcing people to shared plans so they can control QoS. They are doing it to force people off unlimited plans, and to make more money off them to be able to use features that AT&T really has nothing to do with other than being a dumb pipe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carthusia
It's unfortunate when commenters feel they need to invoke the "lazy Americans" stereotype. As far as I can tell, Europeans appear notoriously prone to demanding inordinate amounts of vacation and have tanking economies-often due to lack of worker productivity. Anyhow, did you ever think that some Americans simply cannot "afford" the total upfront cost of an unsubsidized phone? Or, that some Americans can afford to not care and just pay for the convenience of renewing legacy plans?
+1
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Configuration can be a bear. If you simply buy the Straight Talk SIM and insert it, your phone will work properly and you will have a working phone. Getting data or text messaging requires that you change the APN settings which is not trivial.
There are several options for changing apn settings:
1. There's an online app which allows you to do this (I don't remember where it is, but it involves going to a web page from the .nz domain). The advantage is that it's simple and doesn't require jailbreaking. Unfortunately, the disadvantage is that it doesn't always work. On my iPhone 4S, it didn't get me data or text messaging. Most other people say it works, so it's worth a try.
2. You can use the Apple iPhone Configuration utility to change settings. More complicated than #1, but also doesn't require jailbreaking. For me, it got my data and text messaging working, but not MMS. YMMV
3. You can jailbreak the phone and use third party apps to set the APN and other settings. Just search for information on line to get the settings required.
I spent hours on the phone with Straight Talk tech support to get #3 finally sorted out. They apparently don't have settings that always work. I kept getting "OK, that didn't work, so let's try this" and some new settings. It turned out that in the end, the problem was on their end and they had to reset my account to make it work. Eventually, I got it working. There is, however, one limitation. Straight Talk claims that you can not either send or receive MMS when your phone has WiFi turned on. Text works OK, but not MMS, so I was regularly turning off WiFi even at home just to see if anyone had sent me an MMS message and, of course, I had to turn WiFi off to send MMS. In the end, though, I was able to find one of the many APN settings that allowed MMS to work even if I had a WiFi connection active and everything works fine now.
So, the answer is that it may take some tweaking to try to get things working and Straight Talk's tech support isn't all that great (although they do answer the phone and TRY to help you about 10,000 times faster than AT&T). If you don't mind futzing around a bit and searching for APN settings or spending time on the phone with them, it's a good solution.
The only feature that you can't get working at all is visual voicemail. You'll be stuck with the old-fashioned "press 7 to delete this message" prompts.
This is a major negative for me. If there is a pet peeve that I have, it's when technology doesn't work when it's supposed to. I'm not going to admit that I'm completely technologically stupid but, when my computer gives me grief connecting to new Wi-Fi networks, when my phone stops working properly and has to be restarted, or I can't figure out how to set up something on the cloud, I'm ready to throw my stuff at the wall!
So, as much as I'd love to switch TODAY to Straight Talk, I simply don't have the the time or patience to fidget with the different features to get them working properly and it's a trade off between getting raped by AT&T and having properly functioning phones. If that makes sense.
I'm guessing (not sure if I should be) that, as more and more people go this route, the technology will only become more seamless and THEN I'll more strongly consider a switch.
---------
On a side note, like many of you on this forum, I really feel that AT&T is overstepping its boundaries on this one and I have contacted the FCC and my congressman. I encourage those that feel similarly to do the same. You'd be surprised how quickly your voice can be heard even in a seemingly vast and oversized government.
You're conflating two different things. I mentioned both QoS as a "carrot" scenario as a method getting people to get a quality FT experience at a cost and unlimited data plans as a "stick" scenario as a method for getting more people off unlimited data plans if they want this feature.
But let's be honest, they don't really have to do the latter at all to get people off unlimited plans. If you are on contract they can end the contract (remember the contract is for them because they are giving you a phone at a reduced price, not for them), or once the contract runs out they can then say they won't keep it going, or once you try to get a new subsidized phone they will not let you keep your unlimited data plan. They only factor they have to consider is the turn over it could cause by doing this weighed against the cost of these unlimited data users.
Maybe they will charge for FT and yet still offer no QoS but, to me, that doesn't seem like something Apple would support. They typically want the user experience to be increased in some way if it's being hurt in another way. That said, even though Apple does have the carriers by their [insert comment that sounds like and/or refers to both gonads and the cellphone industry] they still work very closely with them, especially in the US, so I guess pretty much anything can happen. Still, I think Apple saying they can charge for FT for tiered data plans would likely come with an agreement for QoS as this would make FT considerably better than other VC options on even a moderately congested network, especially between users on the same network.
Here's the link to contact the FCC and complain about AT&T's unfair control of data and trying to manipulate customers to there RIPOFF Shared plan.
I suggest everyone who doesn't like what AT&T has done should complain to the FCC.
http://www.fcc.gov/contact-us
There are lots of people in that position - which is why so many people buy phones that are locked to one carrier. The downside is that when you do that, your choices are very limited - and the carrier can implement terms that you don't like leaving you with no recourse.
Just for clarification (I think you get it, but others may not), with Straight Talk, many people had no trouble using the online app to set their APN. I don't know why it wouldn't work for me, but it may have to do with location.
Even for me, there as a good bit of futzing around at first, but it now works flawlessly. Considering how much I'm saving, I could have paid a neighbor teenager to do all the setup stuff and still come out way ahead.
Lazy Americans work a lot harder than Europeans who get 6 week vacations and 3 hour lunches.
Let's be fair. Not all Europeans get 6 weeks of vacation. Some get more. /s
As far as work hours, IIRC, France has the lowest number of work hours of any country. One site puts their annual work hours at 15% below the US:
http://www.gaebler.com/Productivity-and-Vacation-Comparisons-by-Country.htm
The last time I looked, not a single European country had average annual work hours greater than the US.
Note, however, that the US figure is a minimum. In my experience (I've worked with partners in France for over 2 decades), it is very unusual for most French to work significantly beyond the minimum. In the US, it is very common for salaried personnel. In fact, 20-40% more than the minimum is quite common.
Here are the statutory minimum numbers by country:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_statutory_minimum_employment_leave_by_country
Note that 4-6 weeks MINIMUM is quite common while the US has no statutory minimum vacation.
So much for the 'lazy American' theory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
"Skype, for example, works without anything special. It's just FaceTime that is blocked."
How can AT&T (legally) block one "brand" of video conferencing software, yet allow another brand to pass without issue?
I'm a bit surprised that Apple is letting them do this.
You could ask how AT&T can legally charge for phone minutes for voice calls but allow Skype et al. to allow voice calls for free, except people seem to have a basic understanding of why that would be considered different. We could take that even further by asking why I'm being "forced" to by phone minutes I don't want just to get data and why must I be forced to buy an excessive number of minutes per month.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
You're conflating two different things. I mentioned both QoS as a "carrot" scenario as a method getting people to get a quality FT experience at a cost and unlimited data plans as a "stick" scenario as a method for getting more people off unlimited data plans if they want this feature.
But let's be honest, they don't really have to do the latter at all to get people off unlimited plans. If you are on contract they can end the contract (remember the contract is for them because they are giving you a phone at a reduced price, not for them), or once the contract runs out they can then say they won't keep it going, or once you try to get a new subsidized phone they will not let you keep your unlimited data plan. They only factor they have to consider is the turn over it could cause by doing this weighed against the cost of these unlimited data users.
Maybe they will charge for FT and yet still offer no QoS but, to me, that doesn't seem like something Apple would support. They typically want the user experience to be increased in some way if it's being hurt in another way. That said, even though Apple does have the carriers by their [insert comment that sounds like and/or refers to both gonads and the cellphone industry] they still work very closely with them, especially in the US, so I guess pretty much anything can happen. Still, I think Apple saying they can charge for FT for tiered data plans would likely come with an agreement for QoS as this would make FT considerably better than other VC options on even a moderately congested network, especially between users on the same network.
Well, all the QoS stuff is pure speculation, with no reason to expect it. AT&T can't even guaranty QoS for voice calls, so I don't see why we should expect it for FT. There just isn't any reason to think that they will, and they certainly haven't made any statements to indicate they would.
But, yes, they can force you off your unlimited plan any time they want. But, they'd rather avoid the negative publicity and pretend they are offering something fantastic in exchange, when all they are really doing is offering what you should have had in the first place. Net neutrality is definitely dead in the US, and we will all suffer for it.
What?! They absolutely do guarantee QoS for voice calls. All the telcos put voice over data. That does means it'll be perfect every time but all the voice traffic does get the highest priority due to it's real time nature. Voice is technically just data but it's not sent FIFO like the data you buy for your phone. It has a higher priority that is called QoS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
What?! They absolutely do guarantee QoS for voice calls. All the telcos put voice over data. That does means it'll be perfect every time but all the voice traffic does get the highest priority due to it's real time nature. Voice is technically just data but it's not sent FIFO like the data you buy for your phone. It has a higher priority that is called QoS.
Are you actually on AT&T? Although, I was in fact being sarcastic, but quality and service are not words I'd use together in describing AT&T's voice traffic.