Net Neutrality Organization Accusing AT&T of Violating FCC Rules With FaceTime Data Plan Requirements

[®®®®®®]

AT&T's statement is kinda ugly.they are basically saying that you can either use FaceTime over wifi for free or subscribe to mobile share over cellular.


The thing is, apple said that it will be up to the carriers to decide whether they want to enable FaceTime over cellular or not.

AT&T should just let this thing go.i mean if people like me who has 2gb data and want to use FaceTime on cellular, it will only a matter of time before I allocate all my data space. I would avoid the FaceTime over cellular as much as possible anyway to save data.

I'm actually surprised that AT&T isn't promoting on this. It hasn't made them think that if people want to use this service on cellular, they are going to speed up their data usage and MIGHT actually subscribe to a more capacious data plan thus giving them more money.

 

[gregwyattjr]

Well. I hope at&t see a lot of their customers switch to other networks in the next couple years. Then I think they'll start feeling the heat.

 

[tigress666]

What worries me with all this fiasco is that if AT&T just decides FORCE me, instead of ASKING me, to switch plans from my unlimited data. At least right now I have a choice if I'm willing to trade my unlimited plan over facetime capability, which I would gladly choose the former. I understand those who are already paying a fixed amount of data every month because nobody should tell you how to use your data. But for me still on unlimited data plans, I don't want to rock the boat too much.

Finally some one in this thread/forum gets it!

This is exactly why I gripe at people who are bitching that AT&T isn't adding on functionality to their unlimited plan. I would rather keep my unlimited then get facetime over 3G or even tethering. Try to force AT&T to do either, AT&T can easily just say, "Fine, we can't afford the bandwidth for people to do that and have unlimited so we are sorry but we cannot offer unlimited anymore". And sorry, net neutrality won't save you there.

I personally am happy AT&T is trying to find ways to give people incentives to change, rather than feeling they have to just force them off the plan.

 

[charlituna]

Yep. AT&T finally decides to stop grandfathering the unlimited plan. Worse, they start only offering the shared plans (ok for some, but not for those with just a few devices/people or just one person on the plan).

That's basically what Verion is going to do. If you buy a phone with a subsidy good bye unlimited plan

 

[tigress666]

That's basically what Verion is going to do. If you buy a phone with a subsidy good bye unlimited plan

Yep, so there is very little incentive for AT&T to keep grandfathering. Do this, and the little incentive they had probably won't be enough for the incentive to just say no more.

 

[lowlymarine]

Can someone please remind me of the advantages/disadvantages if I was to switch to Verizon? They have a larger and faster LTE rollout, correct? I'm weighing my options.

Verizon hasn't even announced any plans to let you use Facetime over cellular data at all, as far as I can find. And if you already have unlimited data with AT&T, you'd be forced onto a metered plan when switching. And you'd have to buy a new phone, because lolCDMA.

I thought the whole thing with the iPhone was that it was supposed to be free from carrier shenanigans? Now it seems every bit as beholden to the whims of carriers (see also: '4G' BS on the AT&T 4s) as Android devices.

 

[tigress666]

Define greed? Profitable for their shareholders? or do you have a better definition genius?

I think Apple wins hands down for greed. Doubt AT&T is sitting on quite the amount of cash Apple is sitting on. But I get it.... Apple gets a pass and your money, AT&T should give you stuff for free....

Problem for AT&T is is that the "product" they are offering is not really tangible so people, especially young kids, think it can't be worth much or that AT&T is just getting free money. THey aren't seeing the backend that AT&T is paying to run the business, keep the lines working, etc.

Apple on the other hand they get a physical product in their hand so it's easier to see that that product cost money for the company to provide (Even if Apple is making more money from the difference it cost to make the product than AT&T, it makes it seem like it's worth more and that Apple is providing more).

 

[Zaphodsplanet]

"net neutrality" is an evil pandoras box

You fools that keep thinking because "net neutrality" sounds nice that it's a good thing are IDIOTS. Do a little research and you'll find out that it's just another commie tactic to CONTROL what you can access via the net. It's a way way bad idea. Please wake the hell up. Here's a little info:

http://www.wnd.com/2009/10/113605/

Try looking to this organization and see who funds it instead of just drinking the kool-aid, which may or may not be flavored with cyanide.

 

[tigress666]

You fools that keep thinking because "net neutrality" sounds nice that it's a good thing are IDIOTS. Do a little research and you'll find out that it's just another commie tactic to CONTROL what you can access via the net. It's a way way bad idea. Please wake the hell up. Here's a little info:

http://www.wnd.com/2009/10/113605/

Try looking to this organization and see who funds it instead of just drinking the kool-aid, which may or may not be flavored with cyanide.

That article is horrible. It doesn't actually say why net neutrality is bad, it just says "I don't trust the administration in charge so they must have some way of using it in a bad way." Ok, so how about explaining how it can be used in a bad way?

Just as the euphemistically named “Fairness Doctrine” would instead crush freedom of speech on the public airwaves, any net-neutrality regulations instituted by the Marxist drones of the Obama administration cannot be trusted to accomplish their stated goals without unintended consequences. The “Fairness Doctrine” perverts fairness; Obama’s idea of net neutrality may prove to be anything but neutral

Right there in the last paragraph is the author pretty much admitting he doesn't know why it's bad, he just doesn't trust the authors of the bill. If he knew why it was bad, he'd say so, not that the idea "may prove anything but nuetral."

Please try to find an article that actually explains why it is bad. Because I am curious what the downsides are (cause I have heard people expressing they don't like it) but that article is a bunch of FUD.

 

[lowlymarine]

<snipped paranoid rant>

The Soviet Union collapsed twenty years ago buddy, there are no communists hiding under your mattress any more trying to control your brain through your microwave or whatever. It's safe to take off the tinfoil hat.

 

[Compile 'em all]

"FaceTime is available to all of our customers today over Wi-Fi"


How nice of you. Next you would be saying "Email is available to all of our customers today over Wi-Fi".

 

[bommai]

its even more redic considering Skype etc work just fine

Apple is just as guilty. Guilty by being silent. If they wanted to protest, they could have protested long time ago since Skype works fine over 3G but Facetime does not. What makes facetime so special that it cannot work but Skype can? At my home, my 3G speed is faster than my broadband DSL speed.

Considering Apple is silent on this issue but they are not for other issues they care about, I just can infer that they don't care about this. Too bad.

 

[Chrisg2014]

AT&T is one of the greediest companies in the US. We should all report them to the BBB.

HAHAHAHA LOOK AT APPLE!!!!! The price for a compter vs this? Ah no Apple takes the cake

 

[chasemac]

Got get'em NNO!

 

[iMikeT]

Take that AT&T!

I can't wait until I leave AT&T.

 

[TsMkLg068426]

Apple seriously needs to get involved with this sort of problems or else sales for iPhones will start dropping. AT&T = TROLL.

 

[nia820]

ATT keeps digging their grave deeper and deeper.

 

[QuarterSwede]

AT&T's statement is kinda ugly.they are basically saying that you can either use FaceTime over wifi for free or subscribe to mobile share over cellular.


The thing is, apple said that it will be up to the carriers to decide whether they want to enable FaceTime over cellular or not.

AT&T should just let this thing go.i mean if people like me who has 2gb data and want to use FaceTime on cellular, it will only a matter of time before I allocate all my data space. I would avoid the FaceTime over cellular as much as possible anyway to save data.

I'm actually surprised that AT&T isn't promoting on this. It hasn't made them think that if people want to use this service on cellular, they are going to speed up their data usage and MIGHT actually subscribe to a more capacious data plan thus giving them more money.

I don't get that either. To me it's a no brainer way to increase profits. As the Ferengi say in rule #12 of the rules of acquisition, "anything worth selling is worth selling twice."

 

[elem2618]

It's just dreadful by design

The reason they are probably doing this is to get all of the AT&T users who are still "grandfathered" on the older unlimited plans to loose those plans by signing up for the new shared one.
That's just sneaky and it deserves to be fought off!
It's just plain rotten of them!

 

[icemanjc]

AT&T sucks. That is all.

 

[andalusia]

I'm from England, so AT&T's decisions don't really affect me at all.

But they still royally piss me off. They've got some nerve.

 

[ouimetnick]

AT&T's Randall Stephenson: We screwed up.

 

[Judas1]

Having to pay for tethering is bogus too. After they slam ATT for facetime, they should go after all carriers for tethering.

 

[RulinSmoove]

Except that AT&T can pull the plug on those plans unless you choose to stick with your current phone for the foreseeable future. They haven't yet, but don't hold your breath.

or buy one at no commitment pricing... we think? we'll have to wait and see.

----------

They'll just throttle you.

good point lol. but you know what i'm saying.

 

[Born Again]

this is apple discrimination plain and simple.