Both pages seem to talk about the change--one is a press release about it and the other one is the related FAQ page about it. Unless we are somehow talking about a different page here.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Verizon to Begin Spot Throttling of High-Usage Customers on Unlimited LTE Plans
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The FAQ is not about the press release.
The FAQ is about what is official policy right now.
If and when October comes and goes, and the unlimited user throttling goes into effect, and the FAQ is not updated at that time... THEN we can say that the FAQ is incorrect.
Otherwise, it's like asking Apple to update their iPhone FAQs, right now, to include the iPhone 6.
No one is saying it's incorrect just that there is potentially a difference. The article about the change makes a reference to the FAQ as a place where more details can be obtained about it all at least implying it's related to the change. Having FAQ for an announced upcoming change is nothing unusual and happens a lot--simply more information about what's coming. Now, yes, it could be interpreted the way you are talking about, but it could also be interpreted the other way just as easily/likely too.
I think you think you know what you are writing about. Read the note at the end of the PR, at the bottom of the web page. Given: the PR is the "heads-up". Given: the note at the bottom of the web page provides a link to the FAQs and terms and conditions. The changes - the ones that aren't "pretty" is that all references to "3G" relative to "network optimization" have been removed, therefore the linked-to document addresses all UL data users, other than those exempted. If the PR were to be believed, then I'd go use the Best Buy loophole to renew some of my expired contracts. If the FAQs are to be believed, we're already under the umbrella of "network optimization". That the PR cites the linked document leads me to believe that some yuck didn't proofread and align content in both documents.
There's no effective date. There's no delineation between types of UL data users. There's no delineation between in- or out-of-contract. In that context, if a person were to discover that page on its own - as the FAQ's - one would surmise that "network" optimization could be effected today.
As to the PR, in the past 3 days ALL of my LTE devices on UL data plans have tanked, no matter where they're at. EVDO speeds suck too. My two XLTE devices are screaming fast - my iPad Air is showing speedtest rates 7-15 times greater than an iPhone 5, with my billing period starting at the same time on all of my devices.
That, and most of the non-loophole new contracts expiring in the 2nd-3rd week of July, followed shortly thereafter with the new network optimization plans being announced, then becoming effective about a week before the new iPhone and iPads are rumored to be on the market - screams of scheming, not planning... /rant
There's no need for a carrier to announce an effective date for network optimization / management in general. That's a critical part of any network and has always been in effect. It's also a general exception that's consistently been allowed by the FCC, net neutrality or not.
The only effective date we're concerned with is the specific time that they plan to begin picking on certain users. That's what pricked up the FCC's ears. The Verizon PR announcement said around October.
If the proposed throttling was in place already, then it would only happen if the cell was congested.
Do you think you're in a congested usage area?
If not, perhaps another unlimited user or two has come into your area and now you're sharing bandwidth. (As I've mentioned, my LTE speed goes to pot every summer when all the kids with iPhones hit the local lake, watching videos and using Facetime.
Or, there's something gone wrong with the backhaul. You should alert your carrier so they can check it out.
Last edited:
I was thinking more along the lines of Apple buying a smaller cellular provider like T-Mobile, and building out the capability both in the U.S. and abroad. Yes, there is regulatory overhead, but Apple would be able to handle it. After all, Apple is going into healthcare, which is another regulated industry. Apple is losing control of the user experience by basically outsourcing connectivity to service providers, who are offering less and less service for more and more money. Apple can buy and build out a wireless network and offer a seamless connected experience to its customers
No they aren't. They aren't running hospitals, doctors offices, medical schools, insurance or anything else healthcare related. Their partners are but not Apple. And part of the partners job is to handle all the regulatory stuff.
Verizon really needs to have a good look in the mirror. Who is really calling the shots in the industry? It isn't them, AT&T, and it certainly isn't Sprint. T-Mobile is the most influential provider in the industry!
My problem with Verizon isn't the network, customer service, or their policies at all. I think the network is generally great, the customer service isn't the worst, and most of the policies make sense. The problem is that they sell you on one thing with agents saying that they grandfather, grandfather, grandfather when they will do anything to give you less and less under the same "grandfather" clause.
It it really that hard for Verizon to offer grandfathered unlimited data with new contracts? After all the people who had it have been customers for years and rather than offering a reward for paying them extraordinary amounts of money for years upon years they treat them like dirt and make AT&T and T-Mobile look great!
My problem with Verizon isn't the network, customer service, or their policies at all. I think the network is generally great, the customer service isn't the worst, and most of the policies make sense. The problem is that they sell you on one thing with agents saying that they grandfather, grandfather, grandfather when they will do anything to give you less and less under the same "grandfather" clause.
It it really that hard for Verizon to offer grandfathered unlimited data with new contracts? After all the people who had it have been customers for years and rather than offering a reward for paying them extraordinary amounts of money for years upon years they treat them like dirt and make AT&T and T-Mobile look great!
Too many points/questions, and it's officially my Friday!
About congestion, my home office is near two towers and we're all next to Interstate 5. It's a congested area, what with 80k Vancouverites driving to and from work. However, I find it odd that in the past voice and data quality were pretty good but on the 26th (that day after that PR hit the etherwebs) all of our LTE devices have muddy-sounding voice quality and data speeds in the 1-3.5Mb/s DL range, down from 5-8, and our XLTE devices sound better with data speeds that went from 5-8 down to 15-35 down in exactly the same spots).
I read your reply and grabbed an iPad Air and an iPhone 5, connected them to the same server in the Ookla app, and nothing's changed. And, the freeway, some 250 yards away, is packed with people heading home.
I have talked with VZW several times in the past, and they just play dumb. That four of our XLTE devices are working great and seven of our LTE devices are slower than usual for seven days straight now leads me to believe that the LTE devices are being de-prioritized. So, I swapped the two LTE SIM cards - the iPad Air (iPhone 5 SIM) saw 41 down and 14 up, and the iPhone 5 (iPad Air SIM) saw 4.3 down and 2.2 up. Same place, same time, same server, swapped SIMs. So, I'm likely not being throttled now - too many users on LTE, not so many users on XLTE - the latter of which will change with the iPhone 6..., but seeing those device speeds at 1 in the morning (working on billing
) leaves me wondering. I'm often up late, and sometimes chatting on the phone or tethering on my two iPads - my iPad 3 speeds have tanked while my iPad Air speeds have increased radically.Part of my rationale for being informed - regardless of VZW's scheming (my word, not theirs) is that I need to plan. If they're going to limit my work, I want to know when and where so my employees and I don't get stuck in the sticks with a product that doesn't work as it has for the past years. If VZW is going to cut me off, then I want to sell my VZW devices and I'll switch to unlocked devices (and find wifi) hotspots for business reasons. But that's just me.
Cheers!
Last edited:
Apple is not going into the hospital, medical school, or insurance businesses, but they are creating a cloud-based clearinghouse for health information that will be shared among doctors and patients. So yes, Apple will need to get regulatory approval for said cloud service, and we will see what the "iWatch" looks like when it is released, and whether it will be classified as a "medical device," due to its health-sensing abilities, thus requiring FDA approval of its own.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/27.16
Rules applied to the Block C Verizon spectrum by the FCC.
I section (b) it states that
"service on spectrum subject to this section shall not deny, limit, or restrict the ability of their customers to use the devices and applications of their choice on the licensee's C Block network, except: (1) Insofar as such use would not be compliant with published technical standards reasonably necessary for the management or protection of the licensee's network"
roughly translates that they are allowed to limit if the network is compromised.
BUT!!!!!!!
the technical standards specify that in (c) "For purposes of paragraph (b)(1) of this section:
(c2)To the extent a licensee relies on standards established by an INDEPENDENT STANDARDS-SETTING BODY which is open to participation by representatives of service providers, equipment manufacturers, application developers, consumer organizations, and other interested parties, the standards will carry a presumption of reasonableness."
roughly translates that the measures to which they limit customers MUST be carried about by an external organization and not by VERIZON's INTERNAL DIVISIONS.
Therefore, it is unlawful for Verizon to Self Regulate it's own bandwidth without consulting an INDEPENDENT and EXTERNAL source of measurement to VERIFY that a Customer is IN FACT causing a decrease in network performance per the amount of data used per tower by portions of customers subscriptions. In other words, Verizon needs to offer open access to all it's customers by and independent organization that discloses your subscriber data vs. all subscriber data including the percentage of your data that is affecting the performance of the tower's throughput. This is Verizon's attempt to place loose sanctions on customers unbeknownst to themselves that they have the right to know exactly why limits are being placed on them.
Following Tom Wheeler's letter to Mead, Verizon justified it's actions by stating "Verizon's network management practices are no different from the policies of other wireless operators."
THIS IS A LIE. Verizon is the only carrier that voraciously seeks to kill all unlimited data plans. Verizon is the only carrier that won't allow subscribers to get subsidized phones without loosing they're contract. This justifies the cost savings to the customer for having unlimited data on the part of the carrier. This stands as legal grounds for a class action lawsuit.
Sorry but other carriers have been doing this for ages. That and Verizon really doesn't have to grandfather anything and is only doing it as a favor essentially. They can just stop grandfathering anything and I'm sure everyone so upset about it will be much happier if that happens, right?
However you want to ante up this encapsulation process "grandfathering," the fact of the matter is verizon took up a CLAUSE separate unto itself on how it handles it's legacy cellular plans.
AT&T: Lets up upgrade your phone and keep unlimited data
Verizon: Makes you pay for the full cost of a phone upgrade (ONLY AT A VERIZON STORE MIGHT I ADD) and then lets you keep your legacy plan
But here's what I don't understand!
Why are you going on about grandfathering when the core of this debate dwells in the rules set by the FCC upon the purchase of the Block C spectrum?
Last edited by a moderator:
1) You ignored the "to the extent a licensee relies on". So they have to first rely on an independent standard related to bandwidth management. In other words, if they use their own instead, then all bets are off.
2) However, most cable and cell carriers are likely using third party network management software as defined by standards such as 3GPP PCC (Policy Control and Charging) and RFC 6057, which lay out methods for assuring quality of service for the majority of the users, by throttling a few.
They list these steps for a bandwidth sharing algorithm:
- Identify links experiencing congestion
- Identify the users on those links likely to cause disproportionate congestion in the next time interval
- Reduce the scheduling priority of those users until either a. Congestion disappears (with some hold-down time or hysteresis to prevent oscillation) or b. The user is no longer causing disproportionate congestion
Sound familiar? Following standards would allow throttling, not block it.
So...it seems like this might not actually be happening now: http://www.droid-life.com/2014/10/0...network-optimization-of-unlimited-data-users/