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 Responds to Net Neutrality Concerns Regarding FaceTime Usage Policy
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ravenvii
macrumors 604
geez. You do realize that ATT(ASS) could say, "Uh..since there is a downloadable app, you guys will have to join share model to allow 3g access.."
You do know ATT can change anything, right? Are you really an ATT member?
tCdemon
macrumors regular
In other words...AT&T service SUCKS! Isn't this like a breech of privacy in the sense of AT&T can tell when your running FaceTime? I mean they don't care about other video chat programs but FaceTime. Seriously AT&T needs to stop acting like they are a superior cellular company, they just SUCK! I laugh every time I see the AT&T Commercial about it has over 2000 cities that support 4G than Verizon...Am like did you forget the LTE part? Exactly its not 4G if its not 4G LTE...I would like for AT&T to do a commercial about their 4G LTE service...and how the iPhone 4S doesn't support 4G LTE. AT&T a proud lying company!
JForestZ34
macrumors 6502a
But that's not fair to people with the unlimited data. If they had unlimited from day one AT&T can't penalize you for have a service that you want to keep. He's paying for data he should be able to use it how he sees fit. By AT&T saying that you have to pay more money by switching data plans SHOW it has nothing to do with their network handling the data. It's all about money!!!!!!!! PERIOD. How is paying more for data gonna ease the network congestion. It's not. People are using other methods of video calling and its not a problem now. Bottom line it's about money.
James
michaelsviews
macrumors 68000
Poorrrrr Network
AT&T's network can't handle the data demand its receiving and now your going to load it up with FaceTime usage. One word says it all for data network
CRASH
AT&T's network can't handle the data demand its receiving and now your going to load it up with FaceTime usage. One word says it all for data network
CRASH
To me, FaceTime seems like more of a functionality of the phone, not an "app" per se, but maybe that's just me. It's almost like calling the phone function an "app". FaceTime is pretty integrated into the phone functionality. I think they're stretching things a bit here.
They are buying Bentleys and jets and islands!
They are very cost effective as a company: 1) keep labor costs low by paying low salaries and understaffing their overseas call centers 2) charge exhorbitant rates and fees to customers for substandard service 3) keep infrastructure investment at the bare minimum that customers will tolerate, and 4) Reap the rewards in executive salaries and bonuses
AT&T paid CEO Randall Stephenson $18.7 million in 2011. According to Reuters:
"AT&T said in a statement its CEO's pay was closely tied to performance and was fair"
Corporations are focused on making money first and foremost, not necessarily on doing what's in the best interest of their customers.
cms2
macrumors 6502
Yeah, my dad has Verizon for work (he works out of state), but when he's home it has literally no service. If you call him, it will go straight to voicemail. DC and its environs are considerably different than Texas, and I've lived in both (love DC, btw!). Here there are pretty nasty holes in coverage for both networks; you have to pick what works where you live. A cursory glance at their map will show whole swaths of Texas not in the red.
I remember when he had a MiFi or whatever Verizon calls its hotspot setup. It was no go.
Hah hah... until like a year ago they had really atrocious dialup... I mean, just really crap. Now they have hughesnet... it's a step up. One step up. 😛
denaliOnDubs
macrumors regular
I couldn't disagree more. So I can stream Netflix or watch youtube but I can't use FaceTime? It's like the electric company charging extra for using exterior power outlets versus interior outlets in a home... It does not make sense. Props to anyone that DISAGREES with this. I'm tiring of being told how I can use my data plan. I have a life and find myself away from my home internet on occasion. I will continue using FaceTime over cellular on my FauxG wireless connection via jailbreak. At&t has already capped my data plan even though it's unlimited. Though I must say I very rarely hit the 3gb. It seems every few months they find a new way to screw the customers. If your going to limit my unlimited plan fine, but stop telling me how to use it.
----------
Hahaha
----------
Hahaha
Unlimited data provided AT&T consents to let you use it, apparently.
I wish they'd cut the bs and just say "hey, it's our network, you're on contract, and we can do whatever we want, and what we want is more money. Neener, neener."
AT&T is actually turning a profit. I would suggest they shore up the current network and add capacity. The issue here for AT&T is one of backhaul. The real problem is most of the sites carrying traffic for the so called 4G HSDPA+ network are older converted / upgraded 2g sites and only have bonded T1s for the primary backhaul service (roughly 10 megabits per bonded T1 group at the tower). This is opposed to newer built towers that are fiber connected and can scale easily to 10gig Ethernet services directly from the tower to the CO. If AT&T would do what Verizon has been doing and actually upgrade the backhaul capacity at the older towers they really wouldn't have an issue. It's not that AT&T doesn't have capacity in its backbone / peering points to support the additional bandwidth, it's simply a case of being overly stingy and not being willing to properly invest in its Infrastructure to grow while keeping its customers happy.
Oh and this idea of being able to single out pre-installed apps vs consumer downloaded apps is atrocious. I don't doubt this is how the law is written, I'm simply saddened that its so nearsighted.
Oh and this idea of being able to single out pre-installed apps vs consumer downloaded apps is atrocious. I don't doubt this is how the law is written, I'm simply saddened that its so nearsighted.
Imagine that, corporations are focused on making money. What a concept. 🙄
----------
Anyone with an IQ higher than a turnip, even the Occupy Wall Street Wannabees in this thread, has already figured out that's what they are saying.
powaking
macrumors 6502
So let me get this straight. The argument that Facetime won't be allowed on any other data plan than shared data plan is because of traffic congestion. Ok then what is going to happen if EVERYONE switched to shared data tomorrow and EVERYONE used Facetime as they would otherwise. What is that going to do to the bandwidth? It would do the same exact thing. This is nothing more than AT&T trying to make everyone drop unlimited/tiered and go with a shared plan.
If you think about it the people who you would probably Facetime the most with are the ones on your shared plan already so you would actually use twice your allowance of data in a month. Now if they make mobile to mobile facetime "free" with those on your shared plan then that would be interesting but most certainly will not happen.
If you think about it the people who you would probably Facetime the most with are the ones on your shared plan already so you would actually use twice your allowance of data in a month. Now if they make mobile to mobile facetime "free" with those on your shared plan then that would be interesting but most certainly will not happen.
Last edited:
ReallyBigFeet
macrumors 68030
I will never understand this deluded sense of "I have grandfathered unlimited."
While your contract may say so, with throttling and caps in place, that means absolutely nothing anymore.
I disagree. What does unlimited mean to me? A guaranteed bill with no overage charges. Fixed costs can be very attractive to some people.
I never even come close to throttle territory, but it's nice to know that if I ever did, I wouldn't be charged more - especially if the cause was a rogue app, email problem etc.
Do I expect to be able to use Facetime? Yes - because I assume at the throttle mark of 3GB, the speed hit would render it useless - protecting AT&T and their network. That's fine with me.
Unlimited is like the 3GB metered plan, except instead of being charged for another GB, you're throttled to make everything slow way down.
I'm okay with that. I think all carriers should make that an option on every plan.
Pick your data limit, and then choose whether to be charged for more, or throttled to speeds that basically hobble the phone but still let you get an iMessage or an email or two in and out. All data plans should let you choose what happens when you hit your limit.
And I agree with most people that data is data, and Facetime shouldn't be crippled on any plan.
Just a thought
If you have facetime on a share plan, Could you facetime your share plan members for free?
I doubt it but would be nice.
If you have facetime on a share plan, Could you facetime your share plan members for free?
I doubt it but would be nice.
Everyone should just jump ship and leave AT&T now!!! (this way the "highway" i drive on will be empty, LOL)
i <3 AT&T
i <3 AT&T
Seriously? Their argument is this is okay because the program is part of the OS, instead of installed separately? That's an absolutely hilarious attempt at trying to follow the letter of the law lol
Hey, AT&T? How about putting up about 90x more towers, so there's more than one spot in a 50 mile radius with voice coverage?
Hey, AT&T? How about putting up about 90x more towers, so there's more than one spot in a 50 mile radius with voice coverage?
marty1980
macrumors 6502a
So if everyone starts using Skype over cellular for video (since by AT&Ts definition it cannot block Skype) and the network gets bogged down, what are they going to do about that?
AT&T is creating a roadblock for the soul purpose of "upselling" customers to their new Mobile Share plans. They found a loophole in the law and are taking full advantage of it.
Listen AT&T.. If you cannot get your network together, get the flock out of the game. Maybe AT&T doesn't care about their consumer image because decisions like these get about the same reaction from people as Sony's PS Vita announcement regarding AT&T as the soul carrier for the PS Vita in the USA. Which if you didn't follow that was a room full of "Ugh's" and otherwise crickets. in other words - people weren't happy about it at all and people aren't going to be happy with this decision either. It's a slap in the face to both consumers and the FCC.
theelysium
Suspended
AT&T = Scumbags!
It is totally a net neutrality issue if they allow 3rd party video conferences over 3G on all data plans, but not FaceTime.
**** u AT&T... can't wait to switch!
It is totally a net neutrality issue if they allow 3rd party video conferences over 3G on all data plans, but not FaceTime.
**** u AT&T... can't wait to switch!
Uhhh....yes, because YOU and many others won't pay more, and therefore won't be over-taxing their network with facetime over cellular usage. Those that will switch to the share plan will have a better experience for it, as will you.
That said, I'm not happy either, and instead of just complaining about it here, I fired off a lengthy letter of disappointment to AT&T. For all the good it will do, though.
We can. In fact, there's about a dozen of them. It's been a low-enough priority for everyone that most of the video codecs being used could support 320x240 or so (at best) over common wireless data speeds until recently. Apple's introduction of FaceTime gave Skype and some others enough of a kick in the pants that they bothered to update their codec of choice.
Apple did say when they introduced it that they wanted to submit it to become a standard. There hasn't been any public status update on that though, so nobody knows if they've done it and it's hung in a committee somewhere, or if they haven't gotten around to it yet, or if they simply decided not to.
I imagine there might be some difficulties with the client-side certificate required for FaceTime, as it would require some updates to the protocol to allow multiple certificate providers, or for Apple to make the certificates available to other manufacturers. Is suspect they'd rather go with the former option, but haven't looked into things enough to have any realistic idea of what might have to change with the FaceTime protocol to allow for that capability.
