Not necessarily.
Skype won the issue in part because it has or at least had, a text feature and an audio call feature both of which directly compete with AT&T offerings. That you had to download it is moot.
The key feature of FaceTime is video chatting which AT&T doesn't offer, so the rule isn't immediately applicable. that is the issue with the argument. Positioning it as an later native to making voice calls plus a data is data argument might win but 'you allow Skype' not really
iMessages does text, and FaceTime does audio only and audio and video. So both those programs conflict with AT&T's offerings.
Does anyone know of a reputable pay for what you use cell phone company? There is NO WAY that I'll ever sign up for a Share Plan.
I don't know about 'pay for what you use', but straighttalk.com offers unlimited, calls, and data for $45 per month. They also have a less expensive plan for $35 that might suit you. Since they're using the AT&T network, your existing phone(s) should work - you just need a new SIM.
I don't think that's right… I think all multi-plans have to be share…
From their FAQ:
"You do not have to change your current data plan to a Mobile Share plan. Only Mobile Share plans allow sharing of unlimited talk, text AND data, so if you want to share data across devices you will need to change to a Mobile Share plan."
BUT, and to your point, we are yet to see what happens when we try to get a new phone after this is put into force as there is no mention on their site I can find. The wording above tends to say I can keep what I have.
My current AT&T plan: $40 (450 minutes + rollover) + $25 (2GB data) = $65 + taxes and such
With the New AT&T Share Plan: $40 (unlimited minutes and text) + $45 (unlimited data) = $85 + taxes and such
There are a lot of different user scenarios. I have a company iPhone so I don't personally pay for it but I have unlimited grandfathered.
I think I pay $75 for unlimited plus I pay another $20 for unlimited TXT = $95.
I never use very much data but I wanted to keep the unlimited plan anyway. I do use a lot of TXT messages so this new plan would actually be a net savings if I were to switch to 4GB data. Not very much savings so I probably won't bother. I don't think I'll be using FaceTime over the cell network anyway.
"You do not have to change your current data plan to a Mobile Share plan. Only Mobile Share plans allow sharing of unlimited talk, text AND data, so if you want to share data across devices you will need to change to a Mobile Share plan."
BUT, and to your point, we are yet to see what happens when we try to get a new phone after this is put into force as there is no mention on their site I can find. The wording above tends to say I can keep what I have.
Network: It's AT&T, right? Or do they supplement with other GSM providers, too? What sort of coverage/quality/dropped calls?
Data: It works on an iPhone, right? At what speeds? I know they don't have LTE access yet and we won't be able to use LTE on our LTE iPhones, sure, but is it at least HSPA+? There's probably no HSPA+ service through AT&T where we live though, anyway…
Can other users thereof comment specifically on that? I know jragosta has been able to do it, but he had trouble that I forget about.
Who knows, if it is more profitable for them, they will sunset Family Plans and force the new Shared Data plans. They start out with choice, then when into the plan, you find they won't subsidize your phone unless you switch. At that point, they have you hooked in.....
I don't think that's right… I think all multi-plans have to be share…
The AT&T plan does NOT require that the plan be shared, but it DOES require there to be at least ONE smartphone as defined by AT&T on the plan. An individual user can sign up for the new mobile share plan, but it may NOT make monetary sense. If an individual is on a grandfathered unlimited voice/text/data plan already, then the new plan makes dollar sense ($99voice + $30text + $30iphone old plan vs $70data + $40iphone new plan with 4GB data) plus the new plan picks up legal tethering and Facetime over AT&T. Comparing these two is pretty much apples to apples as each offers unlimited voice and text and under the current data throttling of the "unlimited data plan", the effective cap is 3GB before draconian throttling makes data usage almost worthless. Other plans change the picture, but again, trying to compare as similarly as possible with NO delusions as to what unlimited data REALLY means these days.
In our case, we have the grandfathered unlimited data (okay 3GB, then throttling) on two iphones ($30 each), one with 1000 texts ($10), the other 200 texts ($5) and one additional feature phone, no text plan (an old Siemens SX-66 PC-Phone smartphone that due to ONLY being GPRS has been downgraded to feature phone status by AT&T), ALL sharing 1400 minutes of talk time plus grandfathered A-List ($80voice + $9.99voice added line X 2). This results in a $175 monthly bill BEFORE taxes.
I am thinking about dropping the feature phone entirely as it was a backup, is never used, and I can put the SIM card from either iphone into it with a sim card adapter which I have and it goes live on that phone #, including texts (I have done this in the past when selling existing iphone just before getting newest model). Going with the 4GB shared data bucket on the two iPhones, no feature phone, results in a bill ($150) that will be almost $25 a month cheaper than what I am currently paying, again keeping applicable taxes out of the equation. Of course I could keep all three phones and pay about $5 a month MORE than current, but I have a lot of heartburn paying $30 a month to have the SX-66 stay live when it is simply never used anymore.
I have CONFIRMED all of the above with AT&T already.
As we loose nothing in the way of talk or text doing this, we currently consume at most 1.5GB a month combined (well inside the 4GB plan), we GAIN legal tethering (can use that with our wifi only ipad and MBP when traveling), we gain Facetime over AT&T, and we save $25/month, so in our case this is a winning combination. Yes, I anticipate that we will likely use more data than we presently consume on some months when we tether and from occasionally using facetime over AT&T, but I have the Dataman app running on both phones anyway so we can track our usage in realtime against what AT&T reports (that was why I installed Dataman in the first place).
I'd like to point out that facetime works on wifi... And that AT&T is not even that great... If people are going to buy the new iPhone they'll go with Verizon or Sprint. And Sprint has a pretty good deal. And this isn't because AT&T is blocking facetime... It's because AT&T doesn't work that great... I don't think they even thought of upgrading their networks to LTE like Tmobile did.
I'd like to point out that facetime works on wifi... And that AT&T is not even that great... If people are going to buy the new iPhone they'll go with Verizon or Sprint. And Sprint has a pretty good deal. And this isn't because AT&T is blocking facetime... It's because AT&T doesn't work that great... I don't think they even thought of upgrading their networks to LTE like Tmobile did.
What makes Verizon better than AT&T? Their shared plans are nearly identical. Also networks will be very different from one city to the next. Sprint is slow and drops calls or at least voice momentarily here in Louisville, but apparently is rock solid in DC. I actually was in Cincinatti over the weekend and everytime I used Siri it worked first try. It works about 1/3 of the time here in Louisville, usually giving me the "I'm really sorry.." message. AT&T sucks ass in NYC and San Fran, but from friends who have had them in Louisville for years says it has none of those problems here. It's all relative and careful research into where you live and will be traveling are needed
Page 19 of the FCC Open Internet Order in regards to broadband providers blocking applications -
"Moreover, if broadband providers could block specific content, applications, services, or devices, end users and edge providers would lose the control they currently have over whether other end users and edge providers can communicate with them through the Internet. Content, application, service, and device providers (and their investors) could no longer assume that the market for their offerings included all U.S. end users. And broadband providers might choose to implement undocumented practices for traffic differentiation that undermine the ability of developers to create generally usable applications without having to design to particular broadband providers’ unique practices or business arrangements."
There couldn't be a better example of the difference between actual high tech companies - which for the last umpteen years have been exploiting Moore's Law to continuously offer me dramatically increasing power and functionality for continuously declining costs - and pretend high tech companies like the telcos. AT&T could also choose to ride the wave and constantly upgrade its infrastructure but they don't! AT&T is a creature of the corridors of power, of the regulators and the courts. They fight tooth and nail to extract every last penny from yesterday's tech and only upgrade when shamed into action.
All of that is offensive enough, but I'm totally disgusted at AT&T's assumption that I am their customer whenever I use my iDevice. "To be clear, customers will continue to be able to use FaceTime over Wi-Fi irrespective of the data plan they choose," Quinn said. AT&T is thoroughly confused (or in total denial) on this issue. Their brand might be part of the descriptive name of my phone but they are an incidental part of my user experience. AT&T for me is just a data pipe; THAT'S ALL!! And the mediocre way they fulfill that role does not justify what they are charging.
I hate the telcos and can only hope someday that some enterprising, forceful entrepreneur whose mentality is grounded in the present/future will humiliate them in the marketplace.
Actually, given the glacial pace of AT&T's LTE network deployment I must question their resolve to building their own infrastructure.
Atlanta, Dallas/Fort Worth, Houston, Kansas City, San Antonio and Waco already have Sprint LTE. Apparently, Sprint expects to cover nearly 200 million potential subscribers by the end of 2014.
According to the American Customer Satisfaction Index, Sprint is the most improved company in customer satisfaction, across all industries, over the last three years.
My understanding is that Sprint's LTE is the slowest of the 4 major carriers. And in some areas of the country, their coverage is not good (in urban areas, not just rural)
I don't think any of your concerns are really issues at all.
First off, in my experience most people don't want to video chat except possibly with relatives and only then on rare occasion.
If you want to video chat more than likely you know the other person and know what kind of phone they have as it is probably your spouse.
We have had video chat on Skype for years. The current version works really well for video, but it is tiresome to hold the smartphone in position for very long and a regular audio only call is much more relaxed especially for extended time.
In which case, you just vacated AT&T's fear-mongering that too many FaceTime users will harm their network.
There couldn't be a better example of the difference between actual high tech companies - which for the last umpteen years have been exploiting Moore's Law to continuously offer me dramatically increasing power and functionality for continuously declining costs - and pretend high tech companies like the telcos. AT&T could also choose to ride the wave and constantly upgrade its infrastructure but they don't! AT&T is a creature of the corridors of power, of the regulators and the courts. They fight tooth and nail to extract every last penny from yesterday's tech and only upgrade when shamed into action.
All of that is offensive enough, but I'm totally disgusted at AT&T's assumption that I am their customer whenever I use my iDevice. "To be clear, customers will continue to be able to use FaceTime over Wi-Fi irrespective of the data plan they choose," Quinn said. AT&T is thoroughly confused (or in total denial) on this issue. Their brand might be part of the descriptive name of my phone but they are an incidental part of my user experience. AT&T for me is just a data pipe; THAT'S ALL!! And the mediocre way they fulfill that role does not justify what they are charging.
I hate the telcos and can only hope someday that some enterprising, forceful entrepreneur whose mentality is grounded in the present/future will humiliate them in the marketplace.
Moore's Law and costs? Never were they together. Declining or otherwise.
And just where would you find an entrepreneur who would be so philanthropic to build towers that cost $150 thousand apiece, have a range of 1/4 to 5 miles depending on what lies between them, or hang his hat on the technology of today that would not be circumvented by an advancement of tomorrow. Let alone, have the foresight that what is being propose now will in fact work, ever?
Perhaps a little due diligence is needed on your part. There is no standard when it comes to wireless technology. There is no standard data pipe that will fill all comers. Those towers you see on top of church steeples are sure to come down if or not sooner than the congregation that is leaving them.
I look at mobile services as I do on toll roads. I pay little towards its infrastructure. But for what little I do, I would hesitate to accept somebody pulling a 30 foot trailer for the same price as I do for my Bug.
And if you would like to take on the venture yourself, be prepared to pay Uncle Sam a couple of billion to boot. That's if the next bandwidth auction even starts at such a low bid.
My understanding is that Sprint's LTE is the slowest of the 4 major carriers. And in some areas of the country, their coverage is not good (in urban areas, not just rural)
Currently Sprint doesn't have LTE, unless their first test markets have rolled out. They have WiMax (not compatible w/LTE) currently.
Comments
iMessages does text, and FaceTime does audio only and audio and video. So both those programs conflict with AT&T's offerings.
I don't know about 'pay for what you use', but straighttalk.com offers unlimited, calls, and data for $45 per month. They also have a less expensive plan for $35 that might suit you. Since they're using the AT&T network, your existing phone(s) should work - you just need a new SIM.
I don't know about pergery, but perjury is a crime. However, unless the person was under oath when sending that letter, there's no perjury.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I don't think that's right… I think all multi-plans have to be share…
From their FAQ:
"You do not have to change your current data plan to a Mobile Share plan. Only Mobile Share plans allow sharing of unlimited talk, text AND data, so if you want to share data across devices you will need to change to a Mobile Share plan."
BUT, and to your point, we are yet to see what happens when we try to get a new phone after this is put into force as there is no mention on their site I can find. The wording above tends to say I can keep what I have.
Just sue in small claims. I pay for unlimited DATA, not unlimited DATA of AT&T's choosing.
There are a lot of different user scenarios. I have a company iPhone so I don't personally pay for it but I have unlimited grandfathered.
I think I pay $75 for unlimited plus I pay another $20 for unlimited TXT = $95.
I never use very much data but I wanted to keep the unlimited plan anyway. I do use a lot of TXT messages so this new plan would actually be a net savings if I were to switch to 4GB data. Not very much savings so I probably won't bother. I don't think I'll be using FaceTime over the cell network anyway.
Originally Posted by icoco3
From their FAQ:
"You do not have to change your current data plan to a Mobile Share plan. Only Mobile Share plans allow sharing of unlimited talk, text AND data, so if you want to share data across devices you will need to change to a Mobile Share plan."
BUT, and to your point, we are yet to see what happens when we try to get a new phone after this is put into force as there is no mention on their site I can find. The wording above tends to say I can keep what I have.
Thanks. Who am I thinking of, then? Verizon…?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Network: It's AT&T, right? Or do they supplement with other GSM providers, too? What sort of coverage/quality/dropped calls?
Data: It works on an iPhone, right? At what speeds? I know they don't have LTE access yet and we won't be able to use LTE on our LTE iPhones, sure, but is it at least HSPA+? There's probably no HSPA+ service through AT&T where we live though, anyway…
Can other users thereof comment specifically on that? I know jragosta has been able to do it, but he had trouble that I forget about.
It is AT&T 3G as far as I know.
Speedtest results were
Ping 86ms
Download 1.33Mbps
Upload 0.67Mbps
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Thanks. Who am I thinking of, then? Verizon…?
Who knows, if it is more profitable for them, they will sunset Family Plans and force the new Shared Data plans. They start out with choice, then when into the plan, you find they won't subsidize your phone unless you switch. At that point, they have you hooked in.....
I got:
Ping 119 ms
Download 1.54 Mbps
Upload 1.55 Mbps
Checking my results history, another time, I had:
Ping 120 ms
Download 5.24 Mbps
Upload 0.44 Mbps
I'm quite happy with the network performance, but the setup can be a pain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I don't think that's right… I think all multi-plans have to be share…
The AT&T plan does NOT require that the plan be shared, but it DOES require there to be at least ONE smartphone as defined by AT&T on the plan. An individual user can sign up for the new mobile share plan, but it may NOT make monetary sense. If an individual is on a grandfathered unlimited voice/text/data plan already, then the new plan makes dollar sense ($99voice + $30text + $30iphone old plan vs $70data + $40iphone new plan with 4GB data) plus the new plan picks up legal tethering and Facetime over AT&T. Comparing these two is pretty much apples to apples as each offers unlimited voice and text and under the current data throttling of the "unlimited data plan", the effective cap is 3GB before draconian throttling makes data usage almost worthless. Other plans change the picture, but again, trying to compare as similarly as possible with NO delusions as to what unlimited data REALLY means these days.
In our case, we have the grandfathered unlimited data (okay 3GB, then throttling) on two iphones ($30 each), one with 1000 texts ($10), the other 200 texts ($5) and one additional feature phone, no text plan (an old Siemens SX-66 PC-Phone smartphone that due to ONLY being GPRS has been downgraded to feature phone status by AT&T), ALL sharing 1400 minutes of talk time plus grandfathered A-List ($80voice + $9.99voice added line X 2). This results in a $175 monthly bill BEFORE taxes.
I am thinking about dropping the feature phone entirely as it was a backup, is never used, and I can put the SIM card from either iphone into it with a sim card adapter which I have and it goes live on that phone #, including texts (I have done this in the past when selling existing iphone just before getting newest model). Going with the 4GB shared data bucket on the two iPhones, no feature phone, results in a bill ($150) that will be almost $25 a month cheaper than what I am currently paying, again keeping applicable taxes out of the equation. Of course I could keep all three phones and pay about $5 a month MORE than current, but I have a lot of heartburn paying $30 a month to have the SX-66 stay live when it is simply never used anymore.
I have CONFIRMED all of the above with AT&T already.
As we loose nothing in the way of talk or text doing this, we currently consume at most 1.5GB a month combined (well inside the 4GB plan), we GAIN legal tethering (can use that with our wifi only ipad and MBP when traveling), we gain Facetime over AT&T, and we save $25/month, so in our case this is a winning combination. Yes, I anticipate that we will likely use more data than we presently consume on some months when we tether and from occasionally using facetime over AT&T, but I have the Dataman app running on both phones anyway so we can track our usage in realtime against what AT&T reports (that was why I installed Dataman in the first place).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strat09
I'd like to point out that facetime works on wifi... And that AT&T is not even that great... If people are going to buy the new iPhone they'll go with Verizon or Sprint. And Sprint has a pretty good deal. And this isn't because AT&T is blocking facetime... It's because AT&T doesn't work that great... I don't think they even thought of upgrading their networks to LTE like Tmobile did.
What makes Verizon better than AT&T? Their shared plans are nearly identical. Also networks will be very different from one city to the next. Sprint is slow and drops calls or at least voice momentarily here in Louisville, but apparently is rock solid in DC. I actually was in Cincinatti over the weekend and everytime I used Siri it worked first try. It works about 1/3 of the time here in Louisville, usually giving me the "I'm really sorry.." message. AT&T sucks ass in NYC and San Fran, but from friends who have had them in Louisville for years says it has none of those problems here. It's all relative and careful research into where you live and will be traveling are needed
For what it's worth:
Page 19 of the FCC Open Internet Order in regards to broadband providers blocking applications -
"Moreover, if broadband providers could block specific content, applications, services, or devices, end users and edge providers would lose the control they currently have over whether other end users and edge providers can communicate with them through the Internet. Content, application, service, and device providers (and their investors) could no longer assume that the market for their offerings included all U.S. end users. And broadband providers might choose to implement undocumented practices for traffic differentiation that undermine the ability of developers to create generally usable applications without having to design to particular broadband providers’ unique practices or business arrangements."
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-10-201A1_Rcd.pdf
There couldn't be a better example of the difference between actual high tech companies - which for the last umpteen years have been exploiting Moore's Law to continuously offer me dramatically increasing power and functionality for continuously declining costs - and pretend high tech companies like the telcos. AT&T could also choose to ride the wave and constantly upgrade its infrastructure but they don't! AT&T is a creature of the corridors of power, of the regulators and the courts. They fight tooth and nail to extract every last penny from yesterday's tech and only upgrade when shamed into action.
All of that is offensive enough, but I'm totally disgusted at AT&T's assumption that I am their customer whenever I use my iDevice. "To be clear, customers will continue to be able to use FaceTime over Wi-Fi irrespective of the data plan they choose," Quinn said. AT&T is thoroughly confused (or in total denial) on this issue. Their brand might be part of the descriptive name of my phone but they are an incidental part of my user experience. AT&T for me is just a data pipe; THAT'S ALL!! And the mediocre way they fulfill that role does not justify what they are charging.
I hate the telcos and can only hope someday that some enterprising, forceful entrepreneur whose mentality is grounded in the present/future will humiliate them in the marketplace.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro
Actually, given the glacial pace of AT&T's LTE network deployment I must question their resolve to building their own infrastructure.
Atlanta, Dallas/Fort Worth, Houston, Kansas City, San Antonio and Waco already have Sprint LTE. Apparently, Sprint expects to cover nearly 200 million potential subscribers by the end of 2014.
According to the American Customer Satisfaction Index, Sprint is the most improved company in customer satisfaction, across all industries, over the last three years.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
My understanding is that Sprint's LTE is the slowest of the 4 major carriers. And in some areas of the country, their coverage is not good (in urban areas, not just rural)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
I don't think any of your concerns are really issues at all.
First off, in my experience most people don't want to video chat except possibly with relatives and only then on rare occasion.
If you want to video chat more than likely you know the other person and know what kind of phone they have as it is probably your spouse.
We have had video chat on Skype for years. The current version works really well for video, but it is tiresome to hold the smartphone in position for very long and a regular audio only call is much more relaxed especially for extended time.
In which case, you just vacated AT&T's fear-mongering that too many FaceTime users will harm their network.
Quote:
Originally Posted by apersona
There couldn't be a better example of the difference between actual high tech companies - which for the last umpteen years have been exploiting Moore's Law to continuously offer me dramatically increasing power and functionality for continuously declining costs - and pretend high tech companies like the telcos. AT&T could also choose to ride the wave and constantly upgrade its infrastructure but they don't! AT&T is a creature of the corridors of power, of the regulators and the courts. They fight tooth and nail to extract every last penny from yesterday's tech and only upgrade when shamed into action.
All of that is offensive enough, but I'm totally disgusted at AT&T's assumption that I am their customer whenever I use my iDevice. "To be clear, customers will continue to be able to use FaceTime over Wi-Fi irrespective of the data plan they choose," Quinn said. AT&T is thoroughly confused (or in total denial) on this issue. Their brand might be part of the descriptive name of my phone but they are an incidental part of my user experience. AT&T for me is just a data pipe; THAT'S ALL!! And the mediocre way they fulfill that role does not justify what they are charging.
I hate the telcos and can only hope someday that some enterprising, forceful entrepreneur whose mentality is grounded in the present/future will humiliate them in the marketplace.
Moore's Law and costs? Never were they together. Declining or otherwise.
And just where would you find an entrepreneur who would be so philanthropic to build towers that cost $150 thousand apiece, have a range of 1/4 to 5 miles depending on what lies between them, or hang his hat on the technology of today that would not be circumvented by an advancement of tomorrow. Let alone, have the foresight that what is being propose now will in fact work, ever?
Perhaps a little due diligence is needed on your part. There is no standard when it comes to wireless technology. There is no standard data pipe that will fill all comers. Those towers you see on top of church steeples are sure to come down if or not sooner than the congregation that is leaving them.
I look at mobile services as I do on toll roads. I pay little towards its infrastructure. But for what little I do, I would hesitate to accept somebody pulling a 30 foot trailer for the same price as I do for my Bug.
And if you would like to take on the venture yourself, be prepared to pay Uncle Sam a couple of billion to boot. That's if the next bandwidth auction even starts at such a low bid.
Unlimited data, FaceTime, and operators that actually encourage data usage. Come to Finland and give AT&T the finger...
Quote:
Originally Posted by DamonF
My understanding is that Sprint's LTE is the slowest of the 4 major carriers. And in some areas of the country, their coverage is not good (in urban areas, not just rural)
Currently Sprint doesn't have LTE, unless their first test markets have rolled out. They have WiMax (not compatible w/LTE) currently.