For any new customers added to AT&T after June 2010, these changes are irrelevant anyway. They would be still perfectly able to download 10 GB in a month, and to do so at the fastest speed that can possibly be accommodated by the underlying network in light of all other users coexisting on the network at that point in time, by paying $105 for data that month.'Japanese blog Macotakara reports (via MacPost) that a China Unicom executive apparently confirmed during a presentation at this week's Macworld Asia that the "iPhone 5" set to be announced next week will indeed support HSPA+ "4G" technology, offering a maximum theoretical data speed of 21 Mbps.'
- per 'Macrumors'
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1236215/
So what if you have a theoretical maximum speed of 21 Mbps?
If with AT&T, you may be checking emails real fast, but will not use that speed to any effect in downloading many movies. For instance, say you wanted to take advantage of iTunes to download the HD version of 'Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides;' good thing it is released in October, because at 4.51 GB if you had downloaded two films of similar length in September, aside from any other data use, you might have already run afoul of AT&T in being in their 'top 5%.'
Many may ignore this in thinking, 'well, I'm not in the top 5% of anything,' but that would be a big mistake. Because by limiting the top AT&T is effectively saying no one can use much more than 10 GB in a month, not at any reasonable speed that is.
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.
AT&T Begins Warning High-Volume Data Users of Upcoming Throttling
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The point is that if they are capable of 4M/sec (purely fictitious number to make the point) but only allow you 3.6M/sec, they have limited you. If you're expecting 5M/sec, then that isn't their fault.
I don't think anyone here is arguing for infinite bandwidth, much as we would all enjoy it. And I think that at least most of us know that throughput = a portion of the avallable bandwidth. Max throughput = 100% of the available bandwidth. But a limit to 95% of what they can provide is a limit. It doesn't matter what the amount available is - if they give you access to all of it, they haven't limited you. If they "throttle" it, they are no longer giving you unlimited access. Just because you can still "eventually" get it is not a good enough argument.
Unlimited is absolute. Throttled is not unlimited.
How about this, if you are going to throttle down my data rates just because I'm on the unlimited plan and use it, do the same across the board for everyone. Once the 2gb users hit 1gb in a month, start throttling them also. Sounds very fair to me. Otherwise keep my speeds the same as they are without slowing it down.
I highly doubt AT&T is using this 5% thing to continuously push the bar lower and lower. This sounds like how Comcast was being very nebulous about data usage before they finally instituted a cap. AT&T is likely trying to avoid making a target for people to hit. Crappy, but it is what it is.
As for those claiming they aren't getting what they promised: last I checked, advertising is not a binding contract. Read your contracts. It's been a long time since I read mine, but I'm pretty sure there is language in there to the effect of you agreeing to AT&T reserving the right to use network management to limit excessive use. If you signed the contract, you can't legally say you aren't getting what was promised. Yes, the advertising IS stupid. With this I do agree. "Unlimited" is quite obviously not the right way to advertise the service. But before accepting the service, you all had the opportunity to understand what you were agreeing to. The whining in here comes off as unfounded entitlement, IMO.
----------
Except unlimited users aren't getting throttled at 1GB, and once they (capped users) hit 2GB, they start paying for each extra gigabyte, whereas unlimited users do not.
----------
"Unlimited" advertising was never based on data rate.
As for those claiming they aren't getting what they promised: last I checked, advertising is not a binding contract. Read your contracts. It's been a long time since I read mine, but I'm pretty sure there is language in there to the effect of you agreeing to AT&T reserving the right to use network management to limit excessive use. If you signed the contract, you can't legally say you aren't getting what was promised. Yes, the advertising IS stupid. With this I do agree. "Unlimited" is quite obviously not the right way to advertise the service. But before accepting the service, you all had the opportunity to understand what you were agreeing to. The whining in here comes off as unfounded entitlement, IMO.
----------
Except unlimited users aren't getting throttled at 1GB, and once they (capped users) hit 2GB, they start paying for each extra gigabyte, whereas unlimited users do not.
----------
"Unlimited" advertising was never based on data rate.
Yes, the slippery slope argument has been brought up, and it is a very valid point. I think we all need to keep a very careful eye on how AT&T deals with this.
It would have been better if they'd just bit the bullet and specified a number of gigabytes, reserving the right to increase the threshold as network capacity improves over time.
The lawsuit probably wouldn't fly for a couple of reasons.
First, the letter of the contract would come under close scrutiny, and it would probably be determined that there was never any guarantee that the pipe would have a particular size -- or even that the pipe's size wouldn't change obver time -- just that the pipe would never be shut off entirely.
But on an more fundamental level, if it were successfully argued that AT&T was actually going against the terms of the original contact, there's another point working against the customer: By signing the contract, customers have preemptively given AT&T permission to make unilateral changes to the contract at any time with 30 days' notice. Customers who don't like the new terms are permitted to terminate their contract and leave AT&T entirely, or else they can continue the contract under the revised terms.
Last edited:
You must be very disappointed at "All you can eat" restaurants as you begin to load your backpack up with food to take home because you can eat it eventually.
Seriously, under current technology, 10 GB of cell usage is a little out of control. People like that make my service worse. They should either pay more use less. It isn't unfair.
It's not false advertising. Nowhere in advertising the unlimited plan did they mention data throughput rate.
If anything, you expected too much.
And they do not currently ADVERTISE any plan that has the word "unlimited" in its name.
It's honestly both sides having problems.
I think AT&T is using this to not upgrade their network and just milk their current infrastructure.
That said, I live in America and like to know I get things I don't get else where. I mean why move to a place if they don't offer something you want. While I'm not saying I'm living here for unlimited data, I don't like the fact AT&T is trying to not stay on top and unique.
While I don't agree that one should use their mobile internet for home access, if one uses the data in any way that one can not break a warranty under their contract, the carrier shouldn't fuss that they can't keep up. I netflix, pandora, and GPS a lot as I'm on the road a lot. If I get hit with a letter, what did I do wrong?
AT&T needs to get their LTE network up, and bring back unlimited. Maybe they might get some good graces again, and then we might let them have t-mobile.
I think AT&T is using this to not upgrade their network and just milk their current infrastructure.
That said, I live in America and like to know I get things I don't get else where. I mean why move to a place if they don't offer something you want. While I'm not saying I'm living here for unlimited data, I don't like the fact AT&T is trying to not stay on top and unique.
While I don't agree that one should use their mobile internet for home access, if one uses the data in any way that one can not break a warranty under their contract, the carrier shouldn't fuss that they can't keep up. I netflix, pandora, and GPS a lot as I'm on the road a lot. If I get hit with a letter, what did I do wrong?
AT&T needs to get their LTE network up, and bring back unlimited. Maybe they might get some good graces again, and then we might let them have t-mobile.
Except that you were never promised to get 100% of the available bandwidth. You were promised to get as much data USAGE (bytes) as you want. They may be throttling the avaiable BW if you're an abuser, and you may not like it, but rate was never a part of your "unlimited" plan.
Most of you don't even understand what you are arguing.
I use on average 100 MB per month. I used to pay $10 for 1000 texts but I canceled the text feature when AT&T decided to go with unlimited texting plan only. I use google voice for all my texting needs now.
I learned to not expect much from AT&T.
Bummer. You got me. Except for this, from their Customer Agreement: "Pricing and data allowances for Data Services are device dependent and based on the transmit and receive capacity of each device."
Data allowanced are based on the capacity of the device. Throttling is contrary to this agreement. I'll keep digging through it looking for something saying the data rate can be throttled without it being construed a limit, but I don't expect to find it there.
And, yeah, my previous reply mentions MB/sec as speed. I know the difference. I also know that limiting either is still limiting. Unlimited works great for both, within the self imposed limits of the device and their towers, as the agreement above indicates.
There are limits to everything, except the concept of infinity
There are limits to everything, except the concept of infinity.
Can you even run BitTorrent on an iPhone over 3G?
There are limits to everything, except the concept of infinity.
Can you even run BitTorrent on an iPhone over 3G?
Would it be OK to advertise cable internet that has the download rate comparable to a 56k?
Data allowance -- not data speed.
The data allowance is defined as the point beyond which you are either shut off, or else you start paying overage fees. The data allowance of an unlimited plan is, and always has been, infinity GB -- in any given month while the plan continues to exist, you'll never reach a point beyond which you're either shut off or required to start paying overage fees.
Damn, now I remember why I stopped posting on MR...
Anyways, I'm on WIFI 90% of the time, I barely use 100MB per month, and personally I don't give a **** since this doesn't affect me, but what really gets to me is that AT&T over the years have grown strong thanks to the iPhone, but they're slowly crapping out on us customers by gradually restricting features and charging us more than they really should.
That would be all fine and dandy if they actually invested our money into improving the network and maybe finding ways to keep us happy.
I really do hope that T-Mobile one day gets the iPhone. That way if I want a new iPhone I can choose from any of the 4 major carriers rather than being stuck in a crappy contract with one.
This reeks of straw man.
Edit: nobody even knows what speed AT&T will throttle to anyway.
You could use the hdmi connector to stream Netflix and Hulu to your tv through your iPhone.