Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Did anyone buy the $99.99 voice & data plain from the holiday special last year ???


Thoughts how this would be effected ?
 
Nope, you won't be sure as you are using wifi. :rolleyes: Not everybody have free wifi available all the time.

I don't nearly have wifi everywhere, and everyone should have wifi at home. Or at least, if you don't have a wired internet connection at home that you can use for you most intensive data use, then its economically efficient for you to pay more for your 3G data usage. Yeah, with 2GB maybe you have to watch your streaming video use. Seems fair to me.
 
I think most people will use video chat at home, or places like an airport or cafe...where there is WiFi.
You know, in the past, you expect people to check their emails when there's wifi, not using data on their phones. :rolleyes: There's something called progress, and expectation through progress.
 
I have the Family Plan for myself, my wife and our daughter. Combined, we've rarely used over 100mb a month. So this new pricing structure could save me a ton of money.

But to me it's more of an issue of choice. Why can't AT&T allow for an unlimited plan for people who need it? Three years after Apple seemed to shift the balance of power in the mobile industry, the balance seems to be shifting back.

I'm betting it's because mobile data costs more to provide and the top 1 percent of users are choking the life out of the network. It's still pretty early in the mobile game, and now AT&T can reclaim a bit of life with this. It's a smart bet because you're going to get a lot more customers at the $15 level for limited usage than you are with the unlimited crowd at $x.

This battle has been waged on land Internet connections and lost by the providers. People who download HD videos all day at 5Mbps are paying the same as someone who checks e-mail twice a day at 5Mbps. But as the AP story I just read points out, customers have revolted at caps on landlines. I would unless there were better ways of checking data usage and the cap before some extra charge was WAY beyond what I use. It would also draw the wrath of Netflix, Hulu, etc.
 
Somehow it does make sense. AT&T is getting the blame for dropped calls & bad coverage, while it's manufacturers that make devices that uses more data in an increasing rate. At least faster than the network can keep up. (people buy new better state-of-the-art phones every year, while networkantennas and such are not updated in the same timespan.)

What if dropped calls are reduced almost to zero with this new plan?
 
I will never understand why they're charging $20 just for the ability to tether.

So you're given 2GB to play with for $25 a month — regardless of whether or not you want to use tethering. Pay an additional $20 a month, and they'll turn tethering on, but it comes out of the same 2GB you're given to use for when you're not tethering!

If it were $20 for unlimited tethering, that'd be a different story. But because it comes out of the same 2GB quota that's used for day-to-day use, that's ridiculous.
 
Thoughts

I will be able to reduce the plan cost on my wife and daughter's iPhones to the $25 price. Kind of disappointed with the tethering plan though. I would have like to see this add an additional 2GB of data. Relatively speaking though the data plan with tethering for Verizon is $60 ($44.99 data + $15 tethering) for 5GB data. Maybe AT&T will add another tier to it.
 
I don't nearly have wifi everywhere, and everyone should have wifi at home. Or at least, if you don't have a wired internet connection at home that you can use for you most intensive data use, then its economically efficient for you to pay more for your 3G data usage. Yeah, with 2GB maybe you have to watch your streaming video use. Seems fair to me.

Sounds about right to me as well. It's kind of like the difference between some health insurance paying 100 percent of any doctor visit versus you having to shell out a co-pay when you go. If you had 100 percent covered visits, you'd go to the doctor for the sniffles. But as most of us have now, we let the 24-hour bugs do their thing and save the doctor for when chicken soup doesn't work.

This won't immediately free up bandwidth in places like NY and SF, but as people upgrade phones it will probably keep the growth down. This will allow AT&T to catch up a lot quicker. With my unlimited plan, I really don't care how much data I'm downloading and in fact sometimes try to think of fun ways to use it. But now I can pay less, watch my usage and SAVE UP TO $15 PER MONTH, HALLELUJAH.
 
Based on that logic, then AT&T should eliminate any data plan and charge people by the byte then. I mean before iPhone, most people use zero data.

That's true, and would be the fairest. Before the iPhone, I had BB's, an HTC windows (briefly) and a couple Treo's. For unlimited data I was paying $50. I couldn't have used more than 10MB. Internet was essentially unable, and it was all BS WAP sites too, which are like 10K. Talk about a total ripoff. But, if you wanted email and limited web for times really need it, that's what you had to pay.

Charging use in large increments is always advantageous. There will always be unused portions left on the table, and times when use exceeds, charged for a whole another increment that much of will mostly likely not be used up
 
Well, now with these new caps, I don't think people would even think of doing video streaming in any way anymore. If the next iPhone has video chat, people would probably use it for the first month thinking it's cool, but once everybody receive their bills, nobody would use video chatting anymore. And there goes innovation.

I most likely won't use it anyway unless the wife wants to let me watch as she flicks the bean or something. I really can't see to much of a use for it for most adults except for the occasional business trip or to let granny see the kids.

"And there goes innovation.".... really? You really think this will "stop"innovation? A bit dramatic don't you think?
 
Not only that, we are being charged for incoming text. Nobody does this outside the US. That's how backwards we are.

Is that true? :eek: You get charged for someone sending you a text? :eek::eek:

Shocking to hear that. (Hence all of the :eek: smilies!) How much is the charge BTW?
 
Something tells me that I'm going to be seeing one of these more often:

Customer Text Notifications On Data Usage. When customers begin to approach their monthly usage limit, AT&T will send three text notifications – after they reach 65 percent, 90 percent and 100 percent of the threshold. Customers will also be sent emails if AT&T has their email address.
 
Personally I cant see all THAT many people using video chat on the iPhone on a regular basis....and those that do won't be doing it whilst walking the streets of their local city. :rolleyes:

I think most people will use video chat at home, or places like an airport or cafe...where there is WiFi.

Edit:

Thinking about it, the next iPhone will (supposedly) be running on 4g....has any carrier announced the pricing models for their 4g networks.
Its my understanding that 4g is an ALL data network...meaning voice will be over IP.

This 3g pricing model, in theory, will be of no interest to us if were going to be using a different type of networking standard.

There's been no rumor about the iPhone supporting LTE or WiMAX networks in the next revision. And it's doubtful as the only company with a 4G network laid out is Sprint.

Well, now with these new caps, I don't think people would even think of doing video streaming in any way anymore. If the next iPhone has video chat, people would probably use it for the first month thinking it's cool, but once everybody receive their bills, nobody would use video chatting anymore. And there goes innovation.

No, there will be people who buy an iPhone with no upgrade price and get their old plans. And even then people won't use video chat as much as everyone wishes to believe. People don't use their built-in cameras for anything but silly pictures.
 
I will never understand why they're charging $20 just for the ability to tether.

So you're given 2GB to play with for $25 a month — regardless of whether or not you want to use tethering. Pay an additional $20 a month, and they'll turn tethering on, but it comes out of the same 2GB you're given to use for when you're not tethering!

If it were $20 for unlimited tethering, that'd be a different story. But because it comes out of the same 2GB quota that's used for day-to-day use, that's ridiculous.

I see your point, but technically you're paying more because they assume -- probably rightly -- that with tethering you'll use more data. I agree with your sentiment but also agree with AT&T keeping tethering from clogging the network.

On a related note, I'm wondering when the caps on app and music download sizes over 3G will be upped or killed. There is an audio podcast that is about 50-60MB for an hour of audio. I can't download it except over WiFi. I'd like the option to do it if I switch, but I'd make darn sure to remember to download it much more often at home when I'm not unlimited.
 
I see your point, but technically you're paying more because they assume -- probably rightly -- that with tethering you'll use more data. I agree with your sentiment but also agree with AT&T keeping tethering from clogging the network.

On a related note, I'm wondering when the caps on app and music download sizes over 3G will be upped or killed. There is an audio podcast that is about 50-60MB for an hour of audio. I can't download it except over WiFi. I'd like the option to do it if I switch, but I'd make darn sure to remember to download it much more often at home when I'm not unlimited.

But technically you are already paying for the 2gb... so why charge $20 for another method to utilize it?
 
Is that true? :eek: You get charged for someone sending you a text? :eek::eek:

Shocking to hear that. (Hence all of the :eek: smilies!) How much is the charge BTW?
Yeah, shocking, I know. It's the same rate as outgoing. So basically we're paying double (1 for sending, 1 for receiving). If you have an allocated number of texts, it will be subtracted too for receiving.
 
But technically you are already paying for the 2gb... so why charge $20 for another method to utilize it?

It's a charge just based on the assumption that you'll use more. I'm pretty sure AT&T has a study somewhere that shows higher averages of data with tethering. I know it sounds wrong, but I get it from the AT&T standpoint. I'd be carrying my MBP to work EVERY DAY if I could use tethering at no extra charge. I guess you could just consider it like a cover charge for entering the VIP room.

I'm not saying it's 100 percent right for the customers, but I think part of it is to keep the non-tethering prices down.
 
"And there goes innovation.".... really? You really think this will "stop"innovation? A bit dramatic don't you think?
Do you think we would have services like Youtube or Hulu or Netflix streaming if regular internet was capped from the beginning instead of being "unlimited?" I don't think I said it will "stop" innovation, but definitely going to dampen and slow everything down.
 
AT&T would not be changing this unless it could make them MORE money. Seriously, I doubt their figures of 98% use < 2GB of data. Keep in mind usage is both sending and receiving.

My iphone indicates I've sent 211MB and received 1.7GB.

No thank you, I'll keep my unlimited plan for as long as I can.
 
I don't see ATT's angle on this they are going to lose more money from people going from $30/mo to $15/mo than they are ever going to make up from tethering/overages.

I suppose it will attract more customers since the base monthly plan will be cheaper.
 
So now we know how AT&T is going to improve network performance. Stop people from using it!
 
Wow that's a terrible deal. I currently pay 399 DKK (about 65 USD) for:

- 300 minutes per month (10 cents per min if used more)
- 20 GB data per month (if you pass the mark, they will not charge extra but reserve the right to throttle you)
- unlimited free calls to all phones on that network
- unlimited sms + mms
- tethering

The 300 minutes were a worry, but since I mostly receive calls I've yet to pass that mark anyway.

As far as I can tell, that would be around 100 USD on AT&T?
 
I will never understand why they're charging $20 just for the ability to tether.

So you're given 2GB to play with for $25 a month... Pay an additional $20 a month, and they'll turn tethering on, but it comes out of the same 2GB you're given to use for when you're not tethering!

I see your point, but technically you're paying more because they assume -- probably rightly -- that with tethering you'll use more data. I agree with your sentiment but also agree with AT&T keeping tethering from clogging the network.

Then here's how it should be:

$15/month: 200MB
$25/month: 2GB
$45/month: 4GB (including tethering)

People who tether use more data. So either give them double the space for the same price, or (more realistically) lower the price of the $25/2GB plan. Maybe make it $20 for 2GB or something. For most people, this will be fine (since 98% of people, myself included), use FAR below 2GB of data per month. But for those wanting to tether, they're getting screwed.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.