Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

JoeG4

macrumors 68030
Jan 11, 2002
2,842
518
If you pay the $500 or whatever it is to get an unsubsidized (and unlocked) iPhone, you still have to pay for data service with most carriers in the US. That is also true with Android, WP7, and especially blackberry phones.

I also dislike the CEO's comment, however I doubt it'll cause the impact it should. It's kinda funny how many people here have sided with the CEO and seem to agree with his sentiment.
 

Chlloret

macrumors 6502
Mar 10, 2012
402
192
Barcelona, Spain
If you pay the $500 or whatever it is to get an unsubsidized (and unlocked) iPhone, you still have to pay for data service with most carriers in the US. That is also true with Android, WP7, and especially blackberry phones.

I also dislike the CEO's comment, however I doubt it'll cause the impact it should. It's kinda funny how many people here have sided with the CEO and seem to agree with his sentiment.

Strange, When I went to the States two month ago, I got a cheap prepaid card and stuck it into my iPhone. Worked a treat, I did not use data at all (except on Wifi, in every hotel, no problem) and made all international calls in the hotel or in a cafe on free wifi.
 

Gemütlichkeit

macrumors 65816
Nov 17, 2010
1,276
0
Why can't a company strive to providing an excellent product at an excellent price?

I could see them getting away with that comment if they had such great service across the board, yet they barely put enough money into their network.

They're doing this because they can, not because they want to provide a better service to the customer.
 

JoeG4

macrumors 68030
Jan 11, 2002
2,842
518
Strange, When I went to the States two month ago, I got a cheap prepaid card and stuck it into my iPhone. Worked a treat, I did not use data at all (except on Wifi, in every hotel, no problem) and made all international calls in the hotel or in a cafe on free wifi.

I was referring to postpaid plans. Prepaid plans are a different story, and I will agree with you there. However, cheap? Not really, they still average 10 cents a minute?
 

faroZ06

macrumors 68040
Apr 3, 2009
3,387
1
Apple might not, since their phones require data plans (something that used to not be true), and they only care about their users talking to other Apple owners.



An alternative would be great. However, please name another IM method besides SMS that:

1) Doesn't require a data plan at all (since it's not data).

2) Would work with virtually every phone in the world, smart or dumb.

AIM satisfies condition 2, but not condition 1. Think about it though. Every phone now has data, and the texting costs a $30/month alone! You could buy data for that much and also get to surf the web and stuff.

SMS is completely obsolete. It was really only useful back in the early 2000s, and it's become one of those bad standards that people are semi-forced to conform to. My dad was going to remove texting because he and I hate it, but our family plan includes our grandma, who uses it.
 
Last edited:

Cp96alumni

macrumors newbie
Jul 6, 2011
25
0
The carrier is greedy? Really? You only get "forced" into the data plan, when you want them to pay for your phone. You did not want to pay full price for your handset but expect to get cuts in the monthly bill as well?

I hope you do not believe in a free lunch as well?

Get your phone and nobody forces you to do anything. You can then decide what SIM to use, what plan to choose and how much you like to pay for the service.

Free lunch? I am not looking for free lunch or a discount. I want a no data 3G/LTE choice for phones.

Your point on SIM is incorrect for Verizon. Their iPhone doesn't use a SIM, so you can't move to another carrier. Full priced phone or not, you must carry a data plan (monthly or otherwise) to even use Verizon as a carrier when using a smart phone (and some dumb phones).

My point wasn't about getting discounts in my bill. It was being forced to carry data at all. I want to be able to select no data. I do not want to be forced to have 3G data simply because I have a smart phone. I rarely go where there no wifi. I like the phone and it's features. I do not need 100% connectivity. A no data feature would be nice, but they will not let you choose that option. Even though it would be relatively easy for them do this on the software or network side.
 

faroZ06

macrumors 68040
Apr 3, 2009
3,387
1
Why can't a company strive to providing an excellent product at an excellent price?

I could see them getting away with that comment if they had such great service across the board, yet they barely put enough money into their network.

They're doing this because they can, not because they want to provide a better service to the customer.

Unlimited data is not a good idea to have on a developing technology like this. It would clog it up and cause many problems.

But I do agree that the cellular companies are scammers, mostly because of SMS. IP makes the whole phone numbers idea obsolete! This isn't the 19th century!
 

andrewlgm

macrumors 6502
Feb 16, 2011
258
25
NYC
How can you have any regrets when you're making billions in profits even when you're offering unlimited 3G? Are the billions not enough? What about taking 1% of those billions in net profit and invest into infrastructure?

But that wouldn't make much sense would it? Why take money and invest into infrastructure when no other network is doing it. That way you can all offer less quality service, charge more money, and gain more costumers because at the end of the day there is no "other" service. They are all the same.

Poor ATT and their billions of $$.
 

NeroAZ

Suspended
Jun 23, 2009
168
13
Phoenx, AZ
i for one would pass on that. to many problems with letting strangers use your internet access. last summer here in buffalo, a couple had their wifi open, and a dumb ass a few doors down accessed child porn over it. before they knew what hit them, fbi and swat busted down their door in a raid, arrested them and processed them. the burden of proof fell on them to prove they were not the ones accessing the porn at their house. thankfully, they ended up getting their neighbor, but who would open their wifi up to a probelm or potential problem like that?

I used to keep my wifi open to, but then my ISP sent me the following email, and I dont even like that type of music, or use Gnutella.....


* *Dear Customer,

This message is to advise that Cox Communications has received a notice claiming that you are using your Cox High Speed Internet service to post or transmit material in violation of U.S. Copyright law. *We have included a copy of the complaint, which identifies the party raising it and the material claimed to be infringing. *

We ask that you review the complaint and, if it is valid, promptly remove or disable access to the infringing material. *If you disagree with the claims in the notice, you should contact the sender, and not Cox, to resolve the matter.

As an Internet Service Provider, Cox is responsible, under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"), to advise when we receive a notice asserting infringement by you. *We are also required to take appropriate action if further claims are received that you do not resolve. *
The material that you post or share online is your responsibility. *Cox encourages responsible Internet use, but we do not monitor nor control the information you share. *We have a duty, however, to take progressive steps when we received complaints of infringement.

If we continue to receive infringement claims such as this one, concerning your use of our service, we will suspend your account and disable your Internet connection until you confirm you have removed the infringing material.

To learn more about your responsibilities concerning copyrighted material, please refer to our help article at:
http://support.cox.com/sdccommon/as...sprt_cid=c2a30ae8-d706-4f6e-beb9-618ea54d1791

http://www.respectcopyrights.org/

Sincerely,

Cox Customer Security



* *
* *--- Original Message ---

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


November 25, 2009
Cox Communications Inc.
1400 Lake Hearn Drive
Atlanta, GA 30313

Sir or Madam:

I am contacting you on behalf of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) -- the trade association whose member music companies create, manufacture, and distribute approximately 85% of all legitimate music sold in the United States. *

If you are an Internet Service Provider (ISP), you have received this letter because we have identified a user on your network reproducing or distributing an unauthorized copy of a copyrighted sound recording. *This letter constitutes notice to you that this user may be liable for infringing activity occurring on your network.

If you are an Internet subscriber (user), you have received this letter because your Internet account was used to illegally copy and/or distribute copyrighted music over the Internet through a peer to peer application. *

Distributing copyrighted works on a peer to peer system is a public activity visible by other users on that network, including the RIAA. *An historic 2005 U.S. Supreme Court decision affirmed that uploading and downloading copyrighted works without the copyright owner's permission is clearly illegal. *You may be liable for the illegal activity occurring on your computer.

To avoid legal consequences, a user should immediately delete and disable access to the unauthorized music on your computer. *Learn how at the "About Music Copyright Notices" section of http://www.riaa.com. *That section also contains practical information about:

*- How you were identified and why illegal downloading is not anonymous
*- What next steps to take
*- Where to get legal music online

We encourage Internet subscribers to visit the website http://www.musicunited.org, which contains valuable information about what is legal and what is not when it comes to copying music. *It also links to some of the more popular online music services where fans can go to listen to and/or purchase their favorite songs.

We have attached below the details of the illegal file-sharing, including the time, date, and a sampling of the music shared. *We assert that the information in this notice is accurate, based upon the data available to us. *We have a good faith belief that this activity is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law. *Under penalty of perjury, we submit that the RIAA is authorized to act on behalf of its member companies in matters involving the infringement of their sound recordings, including enforcing their copyrights and common law rights on the Internet. *This letter does not constitute a waiver of any of our member's rights, and all such rights are expressly reserved.

Thank you in advance for your cooperation. *If you have any questions, please visit the "About Music Copyright Notices" section of http://www.riaa.com.

Sincerely,
Jeremy Landis
Recording Industry Association of America
1025 F Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, D.C., 20004
Email: ispnoticefaq@riaa.com
Ph: 1-800-838-9775



List of infringing content
- ------------------------------

Jay-Z Umbrella

- -------------------------

INFRINGEMENT DETAIL

- --------------------

Infringing Work : Jay-Z Umbrella

Filename : 01 Umbrella (Remix) (Feat. Jay-Z & Chris Brown).mp3

First found (UTC): 2009-11-24T08:12:42.51Z

Last found (UTC): 2009-11-24T08:12:42.51Z

Filesize *: 6119839 bytes

IP Address: 68.xxx.xx.xxx

IP Port: 48416

Network: Gnutella

Protocol: Gnutella




- ---Start ACNS XML
<?xml version="1.0" ?>
<Infringement xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
* *<Case>
* * * *<ID>2223005617</ID>
* * * *<Status>Open</Status>
* * * *<Severity>Normal</Severity>
* *</Case>
* *<Complainant>
* * * *<Entity>Recording Industry Association of America Inc</Entity>
* * * *<Contact>RIAA</Contact>
* * * *<Address>1025 F Street NW 10th Floor Washington DC 20004</Address>
* * * *<Phone>1-800-838-9775</Phone>
* * * *<Email>antipiracy2@riaa.com</Email>
* *</Complainant>
* *<Service_Provider>
* * * *<Entity>Cox Communications</Entity>
* * * *<Contact />
* * * *<Address>Cox Communications Inc. **1400 Lake Hearn Drive **Atlanta **GA **30313 **US **</Address>
* * * *<Phone />
* * * *<Email>abuse@cox.net</Email>
* *</Service_Provider>
* *<Source>
* * * *<TimeStamp>2009-11-24T08:12:42.51Z</TimeStamp>
* * * *<IP_Address>68.xxx.xx.xxx</IP_Address>
* * * *<Port>48416</Port>
* * * *<Type>Gnutella</Type>
* * * *<UserName />
* * * *<Number_Files>1</Number_Files>
* *</Source>
* *<Content>
* * * *<Item>
* * * * * *<Title>Umbrella</Title>
* * * * * *<Artist>Jay-Z</Artist>
* * * * * *<FileName>01 Umbrella (Remix) (Feat. Jay-Z & Chris Brown).mp3</FileName>
* * * * * *<FileSize>6119839</FileSize>
* * * * * *<Type>Song</Type>
* * * *</Item>
* *</Content>
* *<History />
* *<Notes />
</Infringement>
- ---End ACNS XML
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)

iEYEARECAAYFAksOR1kACgkQSq2vEtdJiDMSpQCguQyjPbcr6UZaHqbbWfx0wGrx
4skAnRmIFzuLm7YYg9tYpvqLKXoBIiR5
=usQw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 

Chlloret

macrumors 6502
Mar 10, 2012
402
192
Barcelona, Spain
I was referring to postpaid plans. Prepaid plans are a different story, and I will agree with you there. However, cheap? Not really, they still average 10 cents a minute?

No idea. There where $20 on the card and that lasted for my two weeks, any call would be only a couple of minutes, coordenating meetings ect.would I have used my spanish card the cost would have been close to $2 a minute.
Strange thing in the US is, that you have to pay for INCOMMING calls, something not known in the rest of the world. Why should I pay for someone trying to sell me insurance? That is a real ripoff in my eyes.
With wifi coverage I can call any phone in the US free, but it seems that the person I call has to pay for it. No wonder people still have landlines there, something everyone here gets rid off since it means standing monthly fees for an old service never used. Calls from a landline are generally way more expensive then from a cell and since you normally call another cell (nobody is at home with there landline but everyone and there dog got a mobile on them) you are sure to get the person you try to reach. And of course they do not pay for receiving your call.

----------

Free lunch? I am not looking for free lunch or a discount. I want a no data 3G/LTE choice for phones.

Your point on SIM is incorrect for Verizon. Their iPhone doesn't use a SIM, so you can't move to another carrier. Full priced phone or not, you must carry a data plan (monthly or otherwise) to even use Verizon as a carrier when using a smart phone (and some dumb phones).

My point wasn't about getting discounts in my bill. It was being forced to carry data at all. I want to be able to select no data. I do not want to be forced to have 3G data simply because I have a smart phone. I rarely go where there no wifi. I like the phone and it's features. I do not need 100% connectivity. A no data feature would be nice, but they will not let you choose that option. Even though it would be relatively easy for them do this on the software or network side.

And who is pointing the gun at you to use Verizon? Just choose another provider with a voice only SIM, pop it into your phone and away you go.
 

Myiphone7

macrumors 6502a
Nov 18, 2010
848
0
I support AT&T CEO

I agree with the CEO of AT&T. If I was him, I would also be upset I gave people unlimited data for $30. I would be upset my messaging is affected with iMessage. You know why? Because I'm the CEO. My job is to make money. More money. and More money. and More money. and YES, More money. It's not about you (unless I can make more money). It's about making the money.

That being said, I'm glad I still have unlimited data. Beat the system. So ha ATT CEO! Gotcha on that front!
 

ChrisA

macrumors G5
Jan 5, 2006
12,581
1,697
Redondo Beach, California
What we need is very good peer to peer networking. A "mesh" network. Then we can do VOIP. I can't see cell towers going away but we COIULD send more data around them.

The other way to kill off these cell companies is municipal WiFi. We need more of that.
 

Rodimus Prime

macrumors G4
Oct 9, 2006
10,136
4
If you pay the $500 or whatever it is to get an unsubsidized (and unlocked) iPhone, you still have to pay for data service with most carriers in the US. That is also true with Android, WP7, and especially blackberry phones.

I also dislike the CEO's comment, however I doubt it'll cause the impact it should. It's kinda funny how many people here have sided with the CEO and seem to agree with his sentiment.

Well while i dislike the CEO's comment he is right. AT&T screwed up offering unlimited data package. They should of never offered it. They were stupid to think that wireless data demand was not going to grow much like the land line data demands. That is where they screwed up. They got left with all that baggage. I sure as hell am not going to give up my unlimited data.

----------

AIM satisfies condition 2, but not condition 1. Think about it though. Every phone now has data, and the texting costs a $30/month alone! You could buy data for that much and also get to surf the web and stuff.

SMS is completely obsolete. It was really only useful back in the early 2000s, and it's become one of those bad standards that people are semi-forced to conform to. My dad was going to remove texting because he and I hate it, but our family plan includes our grandma, who uses it.

I have used AIM on phones. Dumb or smart it kind of sucks. It just is not good enough and has always been facky at best.

Should be find me something that works on every phone and does not require you sign into another service.
iMessage works to a point but in many ways it is limited by only being on iOS devices and even then it fails to play nice with any thing not iOS. Switch off of iOS to android and it is rather hard to get it all fixed and working correctly.
 

ChrisA

macrumors G5
Jan 5, 2006
12,581
1,697
Redondo Beach, California
I agree with the CEO of AT&T. If I was him, I would also be upset I gave people unlimited data for $30. I would be upset my messaging is affected with iMessage. You know why? Because I'm the CEO. My job is to make money. ....

These guys are good. When I was a kid we had pay phones. If you needed to call someone they were easy to find and it cost 25 cents. Now it cost $1,200 a year and we are not really $1,200 better off.
 

cocky jeremy

macrumors 603
Jul 12, 2008
6,130
6,401
.. and this is why i left these idiots for Sprint. Unlimited data AND i get much better service. From 0-2 bars in my house to 3-5 bars in my house by switching to Sprint. I worked for AT&T before, they're lying, sneaky bastards.
 

adrianweller

macrumors newbie
Jun 28, 2011
23
0
Suck it up

Well, he's right.
Would you think different if it was your company?

This is business. That's how it works.
Just because you've worked out a way to operate and extract money from people, doesn't mean you have a God-given right to that business.
If (and when) another business disrupts yours, you will put into practice your well thought out strategy to deal with it, and you will be able to adapt because your business has been grown on a solid financial base.
If you aren't able to do this, you haven't been running your business properly.
 

throAU

macrumors G3
Feb 13, 2012
8,827
6,987
Perth, Western Australia
now this wont be popular, but....

... i think the unfortunate fact that data infrastructure costs money is finally hitting home in the states.

having worked for an ISP in Australia, where we've had to deal with no-unlimited data from the outset, this is no surprise.

infrastructure costs money. anyone offering "unlimited" data will only be doing so at either a very poor quality of service, or has a new empty network and are trying to win market share (and service will degrade once the network is adequately subscribed).

the higher population density in the US has insulated your market from this for some time, but with the advent of high speed mobile data and faster broadband to the home, it is catching up with you.

data is not free. laying fibre costs money. frequency costs money, and is finite in the amount of data it can carry. high end network equipment costs money, and needs to be paid off. heavy users necessitate more and higher end equipment.


the unlimited, flat rate data model is broken. the fact that it has been "working" until recently in the states doesn't make it any less broken...
 

shinobi-81

macrumors 6502
Apr 11, 2012
341
1
data is not free. laying fibre costs money. frequency costs money, and is finite in the amount of data it can carry. high end network equipment costs money, and needs to be paid off. heavy users necessitate more and higher end equipment.

the unlimited, flat rate data model is broken. the fact that it has been "working" until recently in the states doesn't make it any less broken...

It will be sustainable once the customers are charged the actual costs. Right now, it seems like the service providers are underselling each other on unlimited data.
 

throAU

macrumors G3
Feb 13, 2012
8,827
6,987
Perth, Western Australia
It will be sustainable once the customers are charged the actual costs. Right now, it seems like the service providers are underselling each other on unlimited data.

Well yes, if they charge customers what the data actually costs, rather than relying on the fact that most haven't been using their fair share and thus they can oversubscribe their networks.

The advent of more data hungry apps like bit-torrent and mobile video have resulted in people actually using bandwidth they've been promised, and the over-subscription model doesn't work any more.


Here in AU where bandwidth has been about 10x more expensive than in the states, we've had to have caps and quotas from the outset. Either that or you get an "unlimited" ISP that just gives you slow, crappy service.
 

malexandria

Suspended
Mar 25, 2009
971
427
Not Much Difference Between Carriers

AT&T is evil, but then at this point what major company isn't? Apple certainly is. Verizon nickels and dimed me to death and to add insult to injury they never once got my bill correct in 2 years of service and the f'ers charged me a $400 ETF despite the fact that I completed my plan AND I used my own Damn equipment!

Despite all of AT&T's faults and their slow service (and unreliability at trade shows) they have always treated me decently, never got my bill wrong and I get a 27% corporate discount so I'm sticking with them for awhile.

Although, now that I'm out of contract, I really don't want to upgrade to an iPhone 4s since I hate my iPhone 4 so much. I really want to see what an iPhone 5 looks like, but since its not coming out until the end of the year and it'll probably be another 6 months after that before I can easily get one, I'll probably get an Android phone next month.

While I love iOS, I think the iPhone 4 is just such a crappy, ill conceived phone that has really awful call and sound quality. I don't use the phone a lot which is why I've put up with it for two years, but now I need something where people can actually hear me.
 

ptb42

macrumors 6502a
Oct 14, 2011
703
184
The point was SMS. If AT&T stops SMS tomorrow, they have the same 57 billion costs. If they give away SMS for free, they have the same 57 billion costs. Actually, they would save money by giving it away for free, because they would not have to meter it anymore.
SMS costs nothing either way.
Of course, they MAKE several billion with it, out of nothing, by charging people for a service, they themeselfs get for free (byproduct of the cell tower tech) that is what they are worrying about.

I agree that it is ridiculous to charge anything for SMS. Your phone exchanges control messages on a regular basis with the cell system, and each of those have effectively the same impact on the system as a text message.

But, AT&T no longer separates SMS from MMS. They haven't done so for a long time. When you pay for "messaging", you pay for both SMS and MMS. And MMS has a real impact on the network -- especially videos.

So, if you are saying that SMS alone should be free -- I agree. And, I'll go further and say that MMS should be included in your data plan, and decremented from your monthly allocation.

----------

charging 20 dollars US for maybe a megabyte of messaging a month is not a "small profit"

You aren't paying $20/month for text messaging.

You are paying $20/month for text messaging and "multimedia messaging".

Your usage pattern may be only a megabyte/month. But, someone that sends a lot of pictures and videos will use much more.

I agree that text messaging should be "free". However, unless they somehow "charge" the data transfers required for MMS against your data plan, you'll end up paying a separate charge for it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.