That I did not include all arguments against the change in each message I posted does not mean that I'm "changing [my] argument."
Oh, but you were. If you had simply posted that you *also* didn't like the bait and switch, that would have been one thing. But you didn't do that; instead you attacked me for purportedly supporting Apple's bait-and-switch, when your other post was entirely about the "hardship" of not being able to have unlimited data usage on an iPhone.
I stand by both arguments:
1. The unlimited plan was great and it's absurd to suggest that going from unlimited to 2GB for a measly $5 savings is a great deal. You don't really know what you'll need a year from now, data-wise (unless you're terminally ill). I like the unlimited plan -- which is why I bought the iPad. I don't want to have to watch the meter constantly, deciding whether it's economically rational to download some music or videos based on what time in the billing cycle it is. Peace of mind has value.
Since I've never gone over 320 MB in a month, I'm pretty confident I won't go over 2GB ever. And if I do, I'll pay for it. Meanwhile, I'll keep the $5.
2. I stand by my arguments about false and deceptive advertising.
Good.
Because you save a measly $5 per month while AT&T rolls in dough without the cost of building out the capacity that they sold? Sorry, but I don't think that capped data plans that stifle online commerce and discourage full use of the Internet are wonderful things for our society -- even if the capped data plans make AT&T executives even richer.
They're not "capped." You can use as much as you want. You just have to pay for it.
But if you're so concerned about making sure that no one gets a better deal than you,
And here comes the almost narcissistic self-centeredness from your other posts. I *don't* care if someone gets a better deal than me. I *do* care if I have to pay for it. I don't see why you can't pay for your own usage.
are you in favor of a metered service, where AT&T totals up the exact number of bytes sent and received, multiplies that by some dollar figure, and bills your credit card? If not, why? Why should you pay less per byte than some guy who uses 70% of what you do? Why should he be subsidizing you?
I would be thrilled with metered service, actually. If I were only charged $2.50 for using 1/10 of the 2GB that costs $25, I'd sign up for that plan in a heartbeat! But I somehow don't think that AT&T would offer it.
I am a superb writer, have been published in national magazines, and I express myself very clearly.
My compliments to your editor, then. Too bad he or she doesn't edit your posts.
I have noticed that books aimed at children use gigantic text, so it seemed appropriate in this setting.
Apparently the concept of analogies is lost on you. I can't believe I'm having to explain such basic concepts as analogies, but here I go: An analogy is defined as a "resemblance in some particulars between things otherwise unlike." Notice the "otherwise unlike" phrase. An analogy doesn't mean that the two things being compared are morally equivalent, equivalent in scope, or of equal weight in the scheme of things. If someone says that something is "like throwing out the baby with the bath water," they are not literally suggesting that some act is equivalent, morally and legally, to tossing a live baby into a sewage system with bathwater.
I know what an analogy is, but thank you for your research. I also know what a *bad* analogy is. And you made a bad analogy. A very bad analogy. A completely idiotic analogy, in fact. The voluntary act of, say, streaming Netflix, has almost nothing to do with the involuntary act of, say, contracting ovarian cancer. Even if you can draw some sort of strained connection between an insurance risk pool and AT&T's data plan.
You seem to believe that anything which benefits you monetarily at the expense of some other group is good.
Here you go again with the personal attacks because you can't make your own argument. I certainly do not believe that "anything" which benefits me monetarily at the expense of some other group is good. In fact, the only thing I've written about in my posts is my unwillingness to subsidize *your* (in the general sense) use of your 3G plan. It's fine with me if you stream Netflix all day on 3G. Just don't ask me to pay for it.
And, seriously, you should get over the entitlement mentality and recognize that you are whining precisely because the new plan no longer benefits *you* monetarily at the expense of others.
That's been the crux of your argument all along: You use less than 2GB of data per month, so you can save $5, meaning that the new plan is an "improvement," regardless of how it affects others.
Basically, yes, when those others are people who want me to pay their iPhone/iPad bills. Again, you are basically making the argument that, somehow, I'm selfish because I don't want to pay other people's phone bills, but they are somehow *not* selfish for insisting that I do.
I know the difference: You're not a netflix on society. But don't worry with typing slowly (unless that's all you can muster) because the chances that you're my equal or better intellectually is, based on statistics, *very* small.
I find it interesting how you seem to keep trying to bolster your argument with extrinsic factors, such as having being published in national magazines or being otherwise somehow demonstrably smart. I'm sure you know that the argument from authority is a logical fallacy, but you still insist on doing it. Perhaps because you recognize that your argument that other people should subsidize your phone bill is really pretty weak. But, hey, at least you're smart enough to recognize that point.
You're making up numbers again. AT&T has not released any numbers saying what percentage of iPad users were using, or were trending towards using, in excess of 2GB/month. They lumped Blackberry e-mail users, iPhone users, texting teenagers on Nokias, and iPad users all into one group.
Feel free to provide better numbers; these are AT&T's smartphone numbers. Although I'm not really sure why iPhones and iPads should be treated differently from other smartphones (maybe there is a reason); they are all using the same bandwidth. (I may be wrong, but I don't think that AT&T offers a Nokia smartphone).
