T-Mobile adds Amazon Video, other services to controversial Binge On program

Comments

• Reply 1 of 6

  jason98 Posts: 768member

  January 28, 2016 7:00PM

  How can something completely optional be controversial?
• Reply 2 of 6

  dws-2 Posts: 276member

  January 28, 2016 7:11PM

  The "controversy" surrounding this seems bizarre to me. First, it's optional. Second, it's opt-in, but that seems appropriate because almost everyone I know prefers to have the binge option. The people who don't like it tend to be computer geeks who are more than capable of opting out.
  
  I just don't understand the problem. This seems like a great way to handle mobile video for 95% of people.

  edited January 2016
• Reply 3 of 6

  malcolmtucker Posts: 84member

  January 28, 2016 9:40PM

  In general, it's very interesting to see the steps this global, european telecommunications company will take to prevent admitting it's underfunded network isn't scalable and can't compete without special rules. Perhaps they would have been more successful as a regional company. Still, companies that require a customer to change the way a service is consumed or the default way a service is billed might be ok in a socialist country in Europe, but in the US it's not competitive. If T-Mobile can't compete without special rules specific to themselves, including discounts on airwaves, being insubordinate to Judges orders following lawsuits filed in US Court, requiring T-Mobile employees to sign gag orders after being victims of sexual abuse, or inviting Wallstreet analysts to drink while on a conference calls with competitors, the company doesn't seem to manage itself very well. Good thing this company isn't in the home broadband business. It would be a field day if Verizon and AT&T did even one of these things.

  edited January 2016
• Reply 4 of 6

  trumptman Posts: 16,464member

  January 28, 2016 10:10PM

  malcolmtucker said:

  In general, it's very interesting to see the steps this global, european telecommunications company will take to prevent admitting it's underfunded network isn't scalable and can't compete without special rules. Perhaps they would have been more successful as a regional company. Still, companies that require a customer to change the way a service is consumed or the default way a service is billed might be ok in a socialist country in Europe, but in the US it's not competitive. If T-Mobile can't compete without special rules specific to themselves, including discounts on airwaves, being insubordinate to Judges orders following lawsuits filed in US Court, requiring T-Mobile employees to sign gag orders after being victims of sexual abuse, or inviting Wallstreet analysts to drink while on a conference calls with competitors, the company doesn't seem to manage itself very well. Good thing this company isn't in the home broadband business. It would be a field day if Verizon and AT&T did even one of these things.

  I can't believe this nonsense I'm reading. By definition telecom are not a true capitalistic endeavor. The bar to entry is too high and the entire enterprise is completely regulated with regard to spectrum. They have to be subject to the public interest because the public has granted certain companies near exclusive rights to a publicly shared and owned resource.
  
  U.S. cell rates have just started coming down to a reasonable level and a large part of that is due to T-mobile fighting the AT&T and Verizon duopoly with competitive rates and policies.
  
  

  edited January 2016
• Reply 5 of 6

  kiowawa Posts: 17member

  January 28, 2016 11:48PM

  Also find this bizarre and the service great! Not sure why one wants super quality, beyond the DVD quality offered, on a mobile device?? I just want to watch shows on elliptical in the gym and love this feature!!

  
• Reply 6 of 6

  bestkeptsecret Posts: 4,264member

  January 29, 2016 5:56AM

  trumptman said:

  malcolmtucker said:

  In general, it's very interesting to see the steps this global, european telecommunications company will take to prevent admitting it's underfunded network isn't scalable and can't compete without special rules. Perhaps they would have been more successful as a regional company. Still, companies that require a customer to change the way a service is consumed or the default way a service is billed might be ok in a socialist country in Europe, but in the US it's not competitive. If T-Mobile can't compete without special rules specific to themselves, including discounts on airwaves, being insubordinate to Judges orders following lawsuits filed in US Court, requiring T-Mobile employees to sign gag orders after being victims of sexual abuse, or inviting Wallstreet analysts to drink while on a conference calls with competitors, the company doesn't seem to manage itself very well. I suppose T-Mobile customers can take pride in choosing to do business with the phone company equivalent to a drunk version of the Special Olympics. Good thing this company isn't in the home broadband business. It would be a field day if Verizon and AT&T did even one of these things.

  I can't believe this nonsense I'm reading. 
  
  

  Wow! Your snark does go to 11!!

  edited January 2016