When you find a planet where things work this way, please let me know. I'll be on the next ship out.
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
When you find a planet where things work this way, please let me know. I'll be on the next ship out.
Paying per the GB every month doesn't make any sense to me. It should either be pay per GB, period, IE, you pay for a GB and you can use it now or next month or a year from now, or in 100 years (or maybe just make them expire after a year... keeping customer data for every historic customer might be burdensome) - or it should be unlimited data at a certain speed for a month.
As much as I hate all of the internet companies in the US, the later is how they operate and it makes a lot more sense to me. (I hate them because they each run local monopolies where they have no incentive to improve the plans they offer).
As much as I hate all of the internet companies in the US, the later is how they operate and it makes a lot more sense to me. (I hate them because they each run local monopolies where they have no incentive to improve the plans they offer).
Bvll5h|t. Unlimited = unlimited. When I hit 2GB on my unlimited plan with AT&T, I get warnings. WTF? I try to be courteous and use wifi whenever possible and I have never exceeded even 5GB yet, but if I were to use 200GB and they cut me off, I WILL be getting an attorney on their ass. Why is it I can pay for an unlimited plans for years, and then get warnings when I hit 2GB, which is exactly 0% of my plan's limit? (well, really the percentage is undefined, but in practice equivalent to 0%).
Now to your analogy: if restaurants don't want fatties mowing down on 15 lbs of lobster in a sitting, then maybe they should not be offering all-you-can-fat nights.
Unlimited use does not equal unlimited speed.
Shared airwaves are just as finite as roads. We have unlimited use of the streets and highways around us, but when the roads are congested, everyone has to slow down.
In this case, only those who are on month-to-month, grandfathered unlimited, and who have already downloaded a ton of data, are specifically pointed out to slow down.
It's like a trucker who's constantly using the roads, who gets put in the right hand lane when there's congestion.
The moment the congestion frees up, everyone is free to speed along again.
You act like data is some tangible, limited thing that has value, the more you use. It's not. It's bits. Bits should be free.
You didn't get unlimited everything or unlimited speed, you got unlimited data. There's a difference.
----------
It's still unlimited since you can still keep on getting it and won't be charged for any overages. That's what you were promised when you got unlimited. Not how fast or how easily you can keep getting it and using it. Again, there's a difference, even if you and others don't think there should be one (it's still there nonetheless).
----------
Its not imaginary. There's infrastructure there that's not unlimited and just magical, it has actual bandwidth and speed limits that factor into it all. Just because you can't see it and because you have a hard time imagining it doesn't mean it's just out there everywhere magically and for free.
Limited speed = Limited use. You can't possibly use as much data when throttled, so data speed is an actual barrier to data use. Not sure how that is even debatable.
You can't use up an unlimited amount of anything as that is not possible even theoretically. That makes this more of a philosophical argument at best. You are paying for not having any data overage charges not for actually using up an unlimited amount as that is not realistically or even theoretically possible.
Ok. I see what you are saying, but my point is that people who are throttled will be forced to use less data. If in a given time period an unlimited user is forced to use slower speeds, they will not be able to use their equivocal amount of data previously afforded to them under the agreement. So the "unlimited" data is now limited by using speed as a control.
Again the unlimited data that is provided is not based on using up that unlimited or some huge amount but on not having to pay any data overages. That part doesn't change. People are applying a theoretical or literal definition of unlimited rather than the one that was given to them when they got the unlimited data from the carrier, which was that there wouldn't be any overage charges for data no matter how much or little they use it. And again that part doesn't change and remains in effect.
Oh please. So is toggling an iPhone to a computer and sharing torrents. The most common activity of the "top 5%".
I totally disagree. It does change. Completely. I used over 20GB watching the World Cup. I was able to stream every match I wanted. If I was throttled, I wouldn't have been able to watch all the games. It's not an abstract thing. It's very tangible.
Would you be charged for any overages? That's what the unlimited data provides for when I comes to wireless carriers. Most people misinterpret that and think of something else, but it's simply about overage changes or not having them.
Ok. It's obvious now that you don't understand the practical application of cellular data or the implications imposed by throttling on that data. Thanks for clarifying.
What's obvious is that people misinterpret what they are supposed to be getting and think it's everything under the sun just because they got a plan that doesn't charge for overages.
I get that it might affect you and some others in one way or another, but what I'm saying is that the plan you got didn't somehow disallow for what they are doing simply because "unlimited" was used in its name. It might not be good for you and some others, but it's not illegal or against the rules or something like that.
Last edited:
So hear is how i see it. First I find it interesting that most of the people that bitch about heavy users are on metered plans. Who came up with what defines a "heavy user"? And did they start after the metered plans came out? Or after all these newer smartphones came out. It's hard to compare data from 2-3 yrs ago to today. Today there are so many data hungry app that were not around a couple years ago. Now for those of us still on unlimited plans just because we use it does not make us hogs. I happen to have a job where I sit sometimes for 10+ hrs in a day and so I watch lots of Netflix. I'm just using what I pay for. Now as it relates to the cell companies. This argument that the unlimited data users are clogging up the network is stupid and makes no sense. Data is data. Bytes are bytes. If I'm on unlimited and the guy next to me is on a metered data plan and we both are using Netflix for hours on end I am congesting the tower no more than he is. The only difference is that the carrier is making more profit on him than me. But the data is the same.
Not all of them. I'm lucky enough to live in a competitive zone where you can choose between Time Warner, Verizon, AT&T, and a few DSL companies, so all the plans are very good and reasonably priced. But my cousin is stuck with Time Warner where he is, and it's horrible. Either way, I'm glad the data is unlimited… except it's not for some DSL plans.
FiOS is really good where I am, but their cable TV service is the worst (I hardly care).
Last edited:
The difference is that the guy on the metered plan doesn't generally just sit around and use up tons of data, while some (not everyone) on unlimited end up doing so and this using up plenty more of the available bandwidth than the vast majority of metered users.
Throttling to specific sites should be illegal. Really, we're all throttled to whatever bitrate our plan is supposed to give us. But I have FiOS, and I've never had problems with using Netflix other than Netflix not having anything I want.
Here's another example. Right now, Verizon is touting their More Everything plans as have Unlimited Talk & Text. You seem to be arguing that if they limited the calls to 1 minute each or texts to 10 characters each they are well within their rights and the customers have no room to complain.
That wouldn't be an equivalent analogy right? Throttling speeds doesn't limit you to only getting a certain amount of data per session. You are just getting the data slower. There is a difference between the two. The only thing that this shows is that trying to use analogies to explain one side or another doesn't really get the job done as they don't really fit well (or sometimes at all).
I think it's perfectly equivalent. It's exactly what they are doing. By placing a throttle on the data it makes it's intended use nearly impossible.
Tou are still getting data just at slowe speed. Kind of a hyperbole to say that the intended use is nearly impossible. Like I said, weird analogies, unnecessary hyperbole, and all that just undermine the reality of any argument that might actually be had.