AT&T CEO Acknowledges Rumors of Cellular FaceTime Charges, Says 'Too Early' to Discuss

[Spicedham]

If I paid for 3GB a month for data I should be able to use it how I want to. AT&T doesn't have to do any more work if I use my data for video calls or for sending a simple email. Customers need to stand up against these kinds of business practices. They are only doing it because we haven't stood up to it.

 

[kdarling]

This is a new low for AT&T. They way they blame it on technological issues is really funny. Verizon and sprint aren't working with apple to get the "technology stabilized".

Actually, AT&T has different technology (UMTS-3G) with different issues.

With CDMA, Verizon and Sprint have traditionally kept voice separate from data. The downside was no easy simultanous voice+data. The upside was that they don't have to worry about a lot of data users negatively affecting voice users. That's why Verizon only throttles the highest users when necessary to share the data load.

Of course, LTE throws more variables into the equation.

If I paid for 3GB a month for data I should be able to use it how I want to. AT&T doesn't have to do any more work if I use my data for video calls or for sending a simple email.

Yes, you should be able to use the data how you wish. However, if everyone else has the same ability, then your video call might not work very well.

It's no different than paying a toll to go from Exit A to Exit B. You've paid for the distance (amount) but your speed is affected how many others are on the same road (cell).

Customers need to stand up against these kinds of business practices. They are only doing it because we haven't stood up to it.

They're doing it to protect their traditional voice customers, which is something that's deeply ingrained into phone companies.

 

[NeoMayhem]

Why do people continue to use these big carriers after they do crap like this year after year?

We have so many options to use smaller or prepaid carriers in this country, but people continue to hand their money to these guys.

In almost all cases, it is cheaper to buy an unlocked iPhone ($649) and pay less each month then to use a major carrier. As ATT and Verizon continue to raise their rates, the keeps getting larger.

Examples:
Cheapest new ATT Plan: $85*24 = $2040
Straight Talk: $45*24 + $649 = $1729

So if you go prepaid in this case, and buy a unlocked iPhone 4s, you would save $311 over 2 years, and have more data.

Look past the price of the phone before you sign a new contract guys. Buying an iPhone for $200 is just like putting a downpayment on in, and then paying $40 a month for it over 2 years.

 

[Navdakilla]

So, I don't for Skype video. But, I might have to pay for FaceTime. Seems like something is off here.

Quoted for TRUTH!!

 

[DJsteveSD]

the reply from AT&T when I inquired about Facetime/3g

Dear Mr. ____,
You corresponded previously with my colleague. I am happy to assist you further with your inquiry regarding an additional data plan with the release of i06.
When/if you update to i06 you will not be required to add an additional date plan. Should you choose to use FaceTime when you are not connected to Wi-Fi you will be using data from your current 4GB data plan.
If you have any additional questions about this issue, please respond to this email. Thank you for choosing AT&T; we appreciate your business.
Devina H.
eCare Customer Service Specialist
AT&T Business Solutions Customer Care

so I have it in writing!

 

[theelysium]

T-Mobile gets iPhone... bye AT&T

 

[petsounds]

Someone needs to start a Data Neutrality campaign, as these practices will only get worse as we use more and more data services through our smartphones. Personally, I think the FCC should get involved, but we all know they're in the pockets of the telcos.

 

[jmgregory1]

That's like saying we should be guaranteed a certain speed on the highway.

There is no such thing as infinite bandwidth, so restricting simultaneous users is the ONLY way to guarantee a certain speed (unless they set that speed so low as to be meaningless).

Is that really what people want? A limit on who gets to have wireless access? Perhaps a lottery as to who can own a smartphone? Perhaps a tiered speed rate, with a limited number of high priced slots?

There is no easy and fair answer when it comes to limited wireless broadband, except to make sure that everyone is allowed to share it (either equally or by speed tier). In other words, yes, people should be allowed to use whatever app they want, with the caveat that if a cell is crowded, that app might not work too well.

I am fully aware that they can't guarantee speed and there is only so much bandwidth to share. As our phones and devices get better at accessing and using data, it's clear that both the amount of data used by a single person AND the overall amount of users will continue to grow.

The issue is that ATT advertises one thing, but they don't really mean what they say - "the fastest network" (unless you read the small print that spells out all the caveats), is meaningless if you can't get on the network because it's overcrowded. And Verizon is no better - "the biggest network", again that's great, but a big network doesn't help if the network speed is reduced in order to offer greater coverage. Same thing with Sprint - unlimited data, except it's unlimited data at slow speeds that make unlimited meaningless.

So my point is all of the telcos should be forced to be honest in what they advertise and offer to consumers. And maybe, just maybe, the US needs to adopt (force) a system like Europe uses where we can choose providers based upon service and price where there can be (and are) real differences between carriers and their plans.

I know this will be fought tooth and nail, but I hope that at some point this will have to be the way it is. The same thing with cable providers. I don't want to have part of my monthly bill covering the NFL's or NBA's or MLB's licensing fees (which help fund player salaries) - if I don't care to watch any football, basketball or baseball on tv. Charge me for what I use and charge others for what they use. Those that dl 10gb of data a month will pay for 10gb of data. I don't want to have a portion of my bill covering their use, the way it is now.

 

[dcorban]

I don't understand. We pay for data, factime uses data. Why would they charge extra for the same thing? Where is the logic in that?

Data is not just data. People who currently use 100MB a month in data checking email and browsing the web could suddenly increase that exponentially by making video calls. It isn't a matter of the customers being able to pay for it, it's a matter of the network being able to handle it.

Combine this with the loss of revenue as people use less voice minutes, downgrading or completely eliminating their voice plan (it's possible here in Canada at least), it could severely hurt the company financially and operationally.

As for being able to currently use VOIP, there is a huge difference between a third-party app such as Skype and a native app pre-installed on every phone, and "Facetime with…" throughout the OS (in the messages app, in contacts, etc). People who would never think to use a third-party app quickly and easily become familiar with Facetime.

They need something to actively discourage people from using Facetime.

 

[davido242]

Has anyone tried FaceTime over 3G/4G on an iPad with iOS 6?

 

[JForestZ34]

I completely disagree. Certainly, AT&T is in business to make money. if they need to find more revenue then they should either increase prices or offer new services that add value.
That is very different than the concept of arbitrarily segmenting the data packets traveling over the network into different price buckets depending on what they are carrying or where they are headed. Especially so when customers are on a metered, pay per byte model.


This gets to the very essence of the fight over net neutrality and traffic discrimination. If they go through with this, what's to stop them from charging more for YouTube videos, twitter messages, Facebook posts, etc?

Imagine an AT&T competitor of iTunes where the movies being streamed don't count against your data plan. How is that not unfairly anti-competitive?

AT&T is in it to make money but they are charging you twice for the same data you already paid for.

That is like filling up your truck with gas and while at the gas station they ask you are you towing with the truck and they charge you more for te gas if you are. It's your gas you can use it as your see fit. You fill up your tank you can go where you want and use your car how you please. Should be the same for data.

Being charged twice for the same amount of data isnt right.


James

 

[laureniam]

Has anyone tried FaceTime over 3G/4G on an iPad with iOS 6?

I currently have an iPad 3 with iOS 6 Beta 2 installed. I am able to FaceTime on AT&T over cellular connection. I am also grandfathered into the unlimited plan. But I am hesitant to update to Beta 3 as I don't want to lose the feature. Has anyone with an iPad 3 on AT&T upgraded to beta 3 and retained the ability to FT over cellular?

 

[JForestZ34]

Data is not just data. People who currently use 100MB a month in data checking email and browsing the web could suddenly increase that exponentially by making video calls. It isn't a matter of the customers being able to pay for it, it's a matter of the network being able to handle it.

Combine this with the loss of revenue as people use less voice minutes, downgrading or completely eliminating their voice plan (it's possible here in Canada at least), it could severely hurt the company financially and operationally.

As for being able to currently use VOIP, there is a huge difference between a third-party app such as Skype and a native app pre-installed on every phone, and "Facetime with…" throughout the OS (in the messages app, in contacts, etc). People who would never think to use a third-party app quickly and easily become familiar with Facetime.

They need something to actively discourage people from using Facetime.

I hate to say this but if your network can't handle the strain it's time to upgrade. With the ridiculous prices AT&T has they should have no problem upgrading. I know they are in it for money too but if your service will strain cause of the new features don't offer it until you can



James

 

[petsounds]

I currently have an iPad 3 with iOS 6 Beta 2 installed. I am able to FaceTime on AT&T over cellular connection. I am also grandfathered into the unlimited plan. But I am hesitant to update to Beta 3 as I don't want to lose the feature. Has anyone with an iPad 3 on AT&T upgraded to beta 3 and retained the ability to FT over cellular?

You don't have much choice -- the betas expire, typically about a month after the next beta is released. They are meant for testing, not for general use.

 

[lowonthe456]

I think I have figured out what all this means.

I think maybe:

A. Apple did this knowing it would be a way for the masses to show their discontent for it. Knowing that if the carriers do charge, it looks bad on the carriers and not Apple.

B. Apple may prepay for x amount of FaceTime calls and wanted to get a feel for the response FaceTime over 3g would have.

C. ATT, knowing the iPhone 4 launch day people are coming up on the end of their contracts (and there were millions of them - remember this was pre-Verizon) and now that several regional and prepaid carriers now exist (and hopefully T-Mobile will be added), wanted to gauge the outrage. I don't think FaceTime was all that spectacular, neat yes, but it wasn't a super high feature on the list. I think maybe ATT thought this would be a ho-hum addition but wanted to see how people reacted.

Just my thoughts, ATT doesn't have the monopoly they once had, many more choices now than a year ago. I'm not saying they "care", but clearly charging gives Sprint and Verizon and x carriers a horn to toot and makes for bad publicity.

And, I laugh at this but,a couple of my co-workers are convinced Apple will buy T-Mobile's US operations and be the network they want the iPhone to be on. I remember talk about this back in 2000 or so. I just don't see Apple getting into the network business.

 

[laureniam]

You don't have much choice -- the betas expire, typically about a month after the next beta is released. They are meant for testing, not for general use.

I don't want to come across rudely, so this is my best attempt at a "nice" reply. I'm not some newb, or UDID registration purchasing, beta user. I'm a developer. My statement was only made because I am really enjoying using this feature currently. I KNOW that eventually I will have to upgrade to the final version when it is released. Your comment in no way addressed the question that I posed and so it could have been left unsaid. Now if there is anyone who is capable of answering my original question (with an iPad 3 on AT&T that is preferably grandfathered into the unlimited plan, did you lose the ability to make a FaceTime call over a cellular connection?) I would greatly appreciate your answer(s). Thanks!

 

[devilstrider]

Not if you're locked into a contract :\

That change maybe grounds for early termination without a ETF.

 

[tbrinkma]

Are you trying to make my point for me? Yes, if you pay for 1GB of data you should in fact get to freely use that 1GB of data as you please. When you get 1GB you are essentially locking into a fixed per MB rate up to 1GB.

If you pay for 1GB, but they exclude you from using it, or charging you extra for using it a certain way, then the example I used in my first post fits perfectly. Flat rate, fixed rate, variable rate, it doesn't matter.

Here's the entirety of your post, to which I responded:

I beg to differ. It's not really a flat rate. If it cost say 30 bucks for 1 GB of data, that equates to 30 bucks for 1024 MB or 3 cents per MB. Then, they usually adjust that to a higher rate once you go over your 1GB limit. Essentially your just getting a "tiered" per MB charge. A flat rate implies you pay one price and get full use of a product or service.

So in essence, the integrity of my first example remains fully in tact.

In it, you complain about overage fees. Please tell me where you even mention charging different rates depending on how you use your data allowance.