I'm not making an argument about technical possibilities or limitations. It's not a physics discussion nor am I demanding we somehow break the laws of physics. What I am doing is poking fun at the concept of our "need" for faster data burn (LTE) clashing with hard caps set by the data tollmasters (AT&T, Verizon, etc). I'm finding fault with the system that is increasingly pinching the data we can use (through caps) while at the same time rolling out technology aimed at "helping" us burn through those caps faster than ever.
It's like opening up the nationwide speed limit to 100 miles per hour but then sticking toll booths closer and closer together on every road to charge us for traveling further. What good is 100 miles per hour speed limits if the toll booths keep tightening on trying to travel far? What's good in "helping" us burn cell data faster and faster with advancing technology while billing us tighter and tighter for blocks of data we use? And note I know what's good about it for AT&T, Verizon, Apple, etc. I'm asking about us consumers. What's in that for us (other than less money to have to lug around in our wallets)? (and it's a rhetorical question).
You are not thinking clearly, and so are making foolish statements.
(a) I have already explained to you the system-wide benefits of LTE. That explains why it makes sense for THE SYSTEM to switch to LTE: more people can be served in congested areas.
(b) The first personal benefit to LTE is the corollary to the above. You are substantially more likely to have useful service available in crowded areas (for example airports). I have certainly noticed this.
(c) The second personal benefit to LTE is that interaction (eg web browsing) is snappier. Clicking on a link gives a page that can be read in 1/3 of a sec, say, rather than in 1 or 2 sec. Again I find this difference very noticeable.
These benefits have NOTHING to do with data caps, and claiming that the only use for LTE is to engage in massive downloads that soon hit your data cap is simply wrong. You are doing yourself no favors by viewing the world through such obviously incorrect lenses.
Like most things, LTE costs money, and it's your choice as to whether it meets a cost-benefit analysis. I've explained the benefits.
My analysis at the time I bought my iPhone5 was that for the plan I cared about (no texts because I use iMessage, and only 200MB of data because I want data to work well, but I only use it for text and web, not for large downloads, and taking into account the subsidy of the iPhone) LTE cost me less than $5/month over a comparable plan with StraightTalk, and that was worth it for the increased snappiness and reliability.
You're welcome to conclude that LTE is not worth the cost for your particular circumstances, but don't turn that into foolish statements about how LTE is worthless generally. Snappiness (which is what LTE gives you) is worth a lot --- that's been a constant theme in mobile evolution, and the whole reason for Android's project butter. We reached the point where CPUs (and GPUs) on phones were fast enough for the bulk computation on phones many years ago --- but we continue to want phones with faster CPUs. The reason is snappiness. Snappiness may mean that extra boost of speed from the CPU is only ever active for a few minutes in total every day --- but it makes a substantial difference to how pleasant the phone is to use. Compare using an iPhone4 to an iPhone5.
Snappiness is not essential, sure. The iPhone4 was a very nice phone, and if you can't afford a 5, you'll be happy with a 4. But if you CAN afford the few extra dollars a month, you ARE getting something for your money --- a snappier phone AND snappier data.
