Nope, you won't be sure as you are using wifi.Not everybody have free wifi available all the time.
You know, in the past, you expect people to check their emails when there's wifi, not using data on their phones.I think most people will use video chat at home, or places like an airport or cafe...where there is WiFi.
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.
Not only that, we are being charged for incoming text. Nobody does this outside the US. That's how backwards we are.Why are TEXT messages still be charged at rate of 20c per message if you don't have a plan ?
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.
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.
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.
Not only that, we are being charged for incoming text. Nobody does this outside the US. That's how backwards we are.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.Is that true?You get charged for someone sending you a text?
Shocking to hear that. (Hence all of thesmilies!) How much is the charge BTW?
But technically you are already paying for the 2gb... so why charge $20 for another method to utilize it?
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."And there goes innovation.".... really? You really think this will "stop"innovation? A bit dramatic don't you think?
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.